Spellfire Wielder feat - usable?

[Tyrion]

Ah, my pet peeve resurfaces once more...

Why does everyone keep suggesting that FR = higher power level? AFAICT, every feat, PrC, and item in FR is balanced with the core rules, and other than the badly-worded spelldancing ability of the Spelldancer PrC, the FR rules create far less potential for abuse than do the splatbook or even core rules.

This, BTW, is not aimed at your particular comments, Humanophile, but more at the specter of FR-bashing that seems to haunt every D&D3e-related board. Sigh...

I have to disagree here. Unintentionally or not, FR does raise the power level...especially for spellcasters. Witness the Archmage, Incantantrix, or the Spellcaster Prodigy feat for some examples.

Less potential for abuse than the splatbooks? Perhaps. Certainly, the non-wizard PrCs don't compare to the best of Sword and Fist or Masters of the Wild...but I've yet to see anything in Tome and Blood that beats the Archmage for pure power.

 

[Warchild]

Well, speaking as a medium-level FR fan, it definitely ups the power level. The prestige classes in the FRCS pretty much prove that. Doesn't matter if you are having fun, though.

AS to the power of Spellfire:

The feat is incredibly powered, but the prestige class ends up quite weak compared to the other characters.
Not to mention the statement "all you need is a wizard in the group to pump you up".....well that works when all you have is the feat and it doesn't hurt to have a 1-2 shot burst of extra power. As a class, you will have a VERY hard time convincing other PC's to just walk around and constanly fill you up. Won't happen. Why would a wizard spend a 3rd level spell slot to memorize a spell that will give you 3 levels of spellfire (3D6 damage to one target), instead of just memorizing a fire ball that does 5-10 d6 damage to a handful of enemies?? He wouldn't. He didn't in my campaign. Even with levels of the prestige class, the character quickly ended up much weaker than the other classes. The ability to fire off a couple big blasts isn't a big deal when the wizard can already do it.

In Short...the Feat is way powerful and hard to swallow.
The prestige class is just the opposite, warn your player before she takes levels in it, it could turn out to be a big disappointment, mostly if she is expecting to kick a lot of butt. Not to mention the ability (though a touch attack) ends up using her poor base attack, which if it hits, still allows a saving throw to avoid half damage. Some ability , like the levels for healing is nice, but quite patheic compared to a cleric. The character becomes a utility character that can help out in some situations, deal a couple big punches or heal some wounds, then runs and hides.

 

[Tewligan]

Thanks for the input, all. It sounds like this may be okay at higher levels, but a bit too much early on. Also, someone mentioned that wizards wouldn't memorize spells specifically to power up the spellfire. What I meant was that they could dump spells that they memorized but turned out not to be useful. "Hmm, I didn't need speak with plants after all - guess I'll drop it into the healing pool."
Anyway, thanks to everyone who's seen this in action. I haven't used it, and was just curious how well it worked before I decided to okay it or not. I think I'm leaning toward "not."

 

[Renshai]

After running several games using the Core Splatbook and running several games using the Forgotten Realms Material I can say that there really isn't a difference in power level. Prestige Classes can really not be used to measure a power level comparison. Prestige Classes, by their own nature, are different. One might be very low powered while the next will offer more. It proves true with every Prestige Class I've ever seen.

The Feats are balanced with the Core game. I saw no differences in power levels between the core games and FR. I suppose a powergamer could find some way to bend the rules to his/her whims, but that is true with any game/setting/material.

Just my thoughts...

Ren

 

[jasamcarl]

Uh....

Ok, i am here to defend FR. I will not go into overt detail, but suffice it so say that with the exception of the Incanatrax, no one who has actually ever PLAYED these classes believes them to be grossly out of line...the Archmage gives up a gross amount of aggregate utility for that power, the same applys to the Red Wizard and any other dc-centered prestige class..and again not to get into an a debate on RP Game Theory, but this loss makes the prcs in question more 'passive' in their potential effectivness, i.e. subject to dm's fiat.

Now to Warchild and others, what prcs in MoF do you find to have unbalanced an actual game. And i might add that this applys to Spellfire as well, which has been the victim of overtly simplistic analysis from the outset...

 

[Humanophile]

Re: Uh....

Unbalanced MaoF PrC's? You mean other than the incantrix (I like where they were going with it in theory, but free metamagicing and +1/level spellcasting boosts were a little much). But I'll chalk that up as one mistake in a book and not hold it against the FR.

And as for the archmage, I don't have the book, but what are the prerequs on that? I'll be willing to buy that it's "just" powerful instead of overpowered, since high level characters are supposed to have more goodies at their disposal.

But all that aside, Forgotten Realms is balanced on a high power level. Not "It's balanced vs. the core books with high point buy and liberal magic". As a matter of fact, that's kind of the point. If you play high powered and cinematic, I've found that FR is right up your alley. And if you like those, you'll be inclined to see anything in that vein as more balanced than anything that isn't. Fans of anything tend to have that habit.

On the other hand, if you like grittier or lower powered, you're apt to see more cinematic or high powered skills as even more powerful than they really are, and certainly they'll disrupt your mood. And I've found that a base FR character in a basic, 25 pointbuy, straight outa the core books campaign is a head above the rest.

...And since this thread is degenerating, I may as well hijack it and ask; why do FR campaigns start at first level? Everything about the setting (kewl races, more background, starting more heroically) seems like it'd work better if you came in the door at 3rd-5th level.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Uh....

...And since this thread is degenerating, I may as well hijack it and ask; why do FR campaigns start at first level? Everything about the setting (kewl races, more background, starting more heroically) seems like it'd work better if you came in the door at 3rd-5th level.

IMO, _D&D_ works better if you come in the door at 3rd-5th level.

 

[Warchild]

Re: Uh....

Ok, i am here to defend FR. I will not go into overt detail, but suffice it so say that with the exception of the Incanatrax, no one who has actually ever PLAYED these classes believes them to be grossly out of line...the Archmage gives up a gross amount of aggregate utility for that power, the same applys to the Red Wizard and any other dc-centered prestige class..and again not to get into an a debate on RP Game Theory, but this loss makes the prcs in question more 'passive' in their potential effectivness, i.e. subject to dm's fiat.

Now to Warchild and others, what prcs in MoF do you find to have unbalanced an actual game. And i might add that this applys to Spellfire as well, which has been the victim of overtly simplistic analysis from the outset...

Well Firstly, you don't need to defend FR against me, i play the game every other week and i thinks its just fine. But i am alos being frank about it...FR is overpowered. Now to specifics

First Arch Mage..its only overpowered depending on how you look at things. It does give up some stuff, in order to gain other stuff. Some people just value utility over power. i don't have a major problem with it.

Divine Champion - overpowered. There is no reason a fighter shouldn't get this class (mechanically speaking of course). It requirements are quite weak and there is no draw back. You get 2 feats (don't lose anything there), full combat, D10 HD, TWO superior saves, Lay on hands, Smite Infidel, Sacred Defense, Divine wrath, and a better skill list(religion and the all mighty Spot). Overpowered. Its the sort of thing FR-bashers...well, bash.

Guild Thief...same thing, next to no significant requirements and its WAY better than actually being a rogue. It has 2 less skill points, but Leadership bonuses, FEATS, no loss in uncanny dodge, better sneak attack (almost certaintly), makes getting this class imperative for anyone wanting to keep up with other characters.

Heirophant....the Arch Mage divine counterpart.....except that is requirements are much weaker than the Arch Mage and they don't have to sacrifice spell slots to get their abilities. ouch.

Shadow Adept????!!!....come on. The only drawback to the TON of powerful abilities and spell boosts they get is the requirement is the lost of 2 Wisdom points, they can't cast spells with the LIGHT descriptor(oh darn), and their Caster level for Evocation and Transmutation is minus 1. Plus, they can get out of the Wisdom loss at that.

I could desrcibe more, but i don't have the time or energy.

I like the Forgotten Realms. I also am honest that it is a power gamers paradise. Not that they are alone are in this these days, i've never a more blantant power up book than Masters of The Wild, which is supposedly default Greyhawk. sheesh!

 

[jasamcarl]

The purpose of prcs.....

i will counter the others later, but conscerning the Shadow adept..one of the stated purposes of prcs is to provide a viable path for concepts which cannot be implemented in a balanced fashion using the core rules alone. The shadow adept is the answer for those who wish to (ultra)specialize in the weaker schools such as illusion and necromancy by paying a further penaly in the form of a Wis drop and Evocation/Trans caster level, two of the more potent schools.

Just to paint a broad swath over many of these arguments, IN PLAY and at the levels many of these 'wow' abilities become available, they do not present a significant factor in actual balance because (and this applys to the Spellfire feat as well) there is a significant OPPURTUNITY COST to their mere use, especially in combat, but even without at these levels their effect can barely be felt.....

 

[ruleslawyer]

Since I started this thread hijack: My apologies to those who want a discussion about spellfire.

To dive into the fray, however:

Archmage: Definitely not overpowered. Requires a "burn feat" (Skill Focus: Spellcraft), and you have to trade off spell slots for every ability you get in return. The advantage that a sorc has in having more spell slots to sacrifice is eroded by the entry requirement of knowing 5th- or higher-level spells from five schools.

Divine Champion & Guild Thief: OK, I haven't playtested these. But in all honesty, I see more fighters choosing butch classes like the OotBI, Weapon Master, or pretty much anything from OA (if they have access to it) over the Divine Champion.

Hierophant: This class is not the same as the archmage. It has NO SPELLCASTING PROGRESSION. Enough said.

Shadow adept: OK, I agree here, although I almost think the class needs to have its abilities for consistency of flavor. Moreover, having to make additional checks to counterspell and detect magic vs. pretty much every other spellcaster in the game IS a bit of drawback.

Incanatrix: I really loathe the amount of bashing this class gets on the boards. Unless you really love metamagic, this class gives pretty much no benefit over playing a straight wizard, AND requires the Iron Will feat. Moreover, the Incanatrix's Instant Metamagic ability was nerfed in errata to not allow metamagicking that would raise a spell's effective level above the maximum spell level that the character can cast. The Loremaster (DMG) is a substantively more powerful PrC.