Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stalker0" data-source="post: 1400398" data-attributes="member: 5889">My problem with heighten spell without cap is that the following:I could enlarge a fireball, or I could raise its DC by 3, 4, as high as 6 in some cases. That's virtually 3 feats rolled into one (if you go by the old spell focus feat, including the epic one.... 6 if they increased by 1)In my mind, heighten is so much stronger than the other free feats as it is right now. I believe even caped at a +1 or +2 its still a good choice that people will take, because its useful for so many spells, and while there are days I can see a sorc not needing his enlarged virtual feat, what sorc wouldn't want to boost a few spell dcs by 1 or 2 everyday?As far as SR goes, Khaalis said: "The more magic they channel, the more magic they build up within themselves, the more resistant they become to magic from without."But that's not all, they become resistant to their own spells as well unless they take a standard action to lower their SR. Now that might not be a problem for some, but it doesn't sit right with me... I think we can do better.On that note, I still ike either the +2 metamagic for free or the quicken spell 1/day. I think getting one 5th level spell quickened for free once per day is not too bad, the medium quickened rod allows wizards to do it 3 times per day and the price is cheap for a 20th level caster.As far as quickening spells beyond 1 round casting times, I agree it looks really scary and powerful. But I'm curious, let's think about it a bit, would there be 5th level or lower spells that this would apply to that would be horribly overpowered for a 20th level caster? I'm honestly curious.For the gypsy curse, perhaps at 17th level they should get access to another curse, like at 20th they can do all those effects, perhaps at 17th they already get a few of them. Also, Khaalis your explanation of how the true curse works makes me even more certain that it needs for explanation. I didn't even know neutralize poison wouldn't help. I can see a lot of people being confused by the ability. The ability itself is great, it just needs some clarification.For teh 20th level, again I don't think they need to be made an outsider. They get true curse, legend lore x times per day (at no material cost), and timelessness. Heck, I would take it, that sounds really cool. No need to make them an outsider, the way its worded it just makes them immune to certain spells that only target persons, and I don't really see that as part of the epitomy of being a gypsy.Finally, on the issue of power, I'm with Khaalis that the sorc needs a definate boost in versatility. But I agree with most that the sorc will compete fine with other classes given this versatility. So I would say everytime we add something, we should at the same time look and say can we trim some power without loosing versatility? Can we expand but contract at the same time. Giving the sorc the lineage spells has done two huge things.1) Given sorcs more spells known. As # of sorc spells known starts to = number of wizard spells known, Spontaneous casting > prepared casting.2) Allowed the sorc those obscure spells that are really cool but most sorcs can never take. Leomund's secret chest, tenser's floating disk, leomund's secure shelter- spells that would be fun for a sorc to have on occasion but are generally too limited use for them to spend spells known on. Now with lineage spells we can give them some!! They can still get all the spells that will make them useful to the party, but we can throw in a few "pure fun" spells to let them go at it. That in itself is one of the things that excites me most about the lineages - and one of the things in my mind that has expanded the sorcs versatility more than anything else we've done.With all that said, that means at the same time we should be looking to tweak power elsewhere. I haven't mentioned that yet because I'm working on these lineages, but once those are good I think we will want to cut back in power at other places.</blockquote>

Verification