Spell Thematics, I should have to pay a feat for this???

[Argus Decimus Mokira]

Hey

For the record, are we talkin about the Spell Thematics feat as it is presented in the book Magic of Faerun, or the more useful one in the errata of that book?

Thanks
-Matt

 

[Derulbaskul]

The post-errata version is OK as it allows a +1 caster level on the nine spells (one of each level) that you select. IIRC, it also allows you to change the appearance of your other spells.

IMC, spells cast by NPC clerics will have "special effects" based on the power that they worship even if they don't have the Spell Thematics feat. I have hated the concept of the generic cleric since the days of 1E so I try to always aim for maximum differentiation of clerics IMC.

Cheers
D

 

[Terath Ninir]

The post-errata version is OK as it allows a +1 caster level on the nine spells (one of each level) that you select. IIRC, it also allows you to change the appearance of your other spells.

Now that I hadn't heard about. (Not that anyone can keep up with everything going in the d20 world anymore. Well, maybe Colonel Hardison, but not much of anyone else.) That would make it a significant feat. Not the greatest, but a +1 caster level on your fireball when you're 5th level would be worth using a feat for.

 

[Ravellion]

Yes, the post errata version is also yet another way to boost your caster level check for Spell Resistance purposes.

Rav

 

[Spatzimaus]

The post-errata version is OK as it allows a +1 caster level on the nine spells (one of each level) that you select.

Not to nitpick to much, but you get a cantrip too, so it's 10 spells.

I wrote the post-errata Spell Thematics feat in its entirety in a thread just up from here:
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57506
if you're too lazy to download the errata.

It's still a weak feat, but it's now workable.

 

[Derulbaskul]

Not to nitpick to much, but you get a cantrip too, so it's 10 spells. (snip)

Oops, I hadn't read the errata for literally months... which explains the 10% decay in my memory.

I still think that divine spellcasters should cast spells that reflect their deity "for free" but without affecting the ability to identify and thus counterspell their spells. I try to do this with NPC spellcasters just to add flavour.

Cheers
D

 

[Spatzimaus]

I still think that divine spellcasters should cast spells that reflect their deity "for free" but without affecting the ability to identify and thus counterspell their spells. I try to do this with NPC spellcasters just to add flavour.

Changing the spell appearance without any actual game effect is already more or less allowed (see DMG pp. 94-95, the "Describing Spell Effects" section). But, these are only supposed to be minor cosmetic changes, not the complete overhaul Spell Thematics gives.
Especially for divine types, it makes sense to personalize spells to your deity.