What's the equivalent of Practiced Spellcaster for fighters?

[Arkhandus]

Practiced Spellcaster is a feat ALL players -- and I mean all of them -- should be up in arms about. Players should demand that it be stricken from the rule books. At least, they should, if they knew what was good for them.

Monsters have the most to gain from this feat, rather than PCs. Dragons are but one of many examples that show this feat to be a huge powerup for the Bad Guys(tm).

Why is that, exactly? It doesn't give them access to higher-level spells, nor give them any more spells known or spell slots per day.

A dragon that normally casts as a Sorcerer 1 would still be casting as a Sorcerer 1, but his/her spells would be effectively CL 5 when cast (so 3d4+3 Magic Missiles, or 5d4 Burning Hands), which is still pretty poor compared to his/her Breath Weapon and such (and not really useable very often since they're only really 1st-level casters). Sure, the bigger, stronger dragons will get slightly more benefit out of it, but only because those MMs and BHs will be replaced with Fireballs or Cones of Cold or whatnot.

 

[rgard]

I don't think I know a rogue or cleric alive that wouldn't take that at least once. Which, IMO, makes it too powerful.

Not to mention that, if you can take it, it's better than Weapon Focus. By quite a bit.

Calypso

To fix that, make Weapon Specialization a pre-req for the feat and probably limit the BAB increase to chosen weapon. I'll get around to writing up my version probably tomorrow. Ran out of time tonight.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Victim]

Nothing. Base Attack already stacks between classes.

 

[Destil]

Now that you mention it, it is kindof unfair that the character has to spend a feat for one side of his build that the other side gets for free.

Maybe it should work more like Tome of Battle and all of your other classes should stack as half levels?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/magicRating.htm

Base spellcaster level is one thing I'm really hoping for in 4th Ed.

Powerful spells are way above attacks and BAB in worth.

Note that practiced spellcaster does not grant more powerful spells, it just lets a character keep up with the spells they already know. There's still a world of difference between produce flame and flamestrike.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Base spellcaster level is one thing I'm really hoping for in 4th Ed.

Arcana Unearthed simply sets the caster level to the character level/HD, for every spellcaster class. (There are no +LA races in Arcana Unearthed.)

And if you have multiple spellcaster classes, you may use only one key stat for all such classes.

I think that is closer to correct than vanilla D&D, as that multiclassing for spellcasting classes has great disadvantages (except for careful dipping).

 

[Darklone]

Note that practiced spellcaster does not grant more powerful spells, it just lets a character keep up with the spells they already know. There's still a world of difference between produce flame and flamestrike.

Yeah, a Rapid Shot hasted druid with Produce Flame can dish out a lot of damage with ranged touch attacks while a rogue just needs one Refl save to get away from Flamestrike.

Oh, you meant Flamestrike was stronger ?

 

[FatherTome]

Yeah, a Rapid Shot hasted druid with Produce Flame can dish out a lot of damage with ranged touch attacks while a rogue just needs one Refl save to get away from Flamestrike.

Oh, you meant Flamestrike was stronger ?

Sure, you can in theory do 5d6+25 damage in a round, assuming you've got your full iterative attacks from druid levels, and a friendly spellcaster has cast haste on you. Also assuming that you don't roll any 1s, don't miss due to concealment, and so forth.

Really, not a bad deal at all, doing that sort of damage starting from round two. Of course, if we're not talking epic levels you'll have to recast the spell after every four rounds of use. Keep in mind that the damage is only being dealt to a single target, too.

Sure, certain targets can avoid the flamestrike damage, but as it hits multiple targets, the odds of it dealing damage to at least one of them is pretty good. Or even better, Ice Storm. Guarenteed 5d6 damage to an area, no save. Not dealing quite as much as Produce Flame, but it hits multiple targets, requires no attack roll or feats to use effectively, and doesn't deal the damage type that is most common in spells and resistances (fire).

Or you can let the fighter-type slash dedicated ranged weapon-type do their thing and deal more damage while you worry about the things you can actually do better than them.

 

[Darklone]

...Or even better, Ice Storm. Guarenteed 5d6 damage to an area, no save. Not dealing quite as much as Produce Flame, but it hits multiple targets, requires no attack roll or feats to use effectively, and doesn't deal the damage type that is most common in spells and resistances (fire).

One of the best spells around to force concentration checks Not difficult ones, but it matters.

 

[brehobit]

A slight do-over of szilard's suggestion.
Practiced Warrior [General]

Prerequisites
Proficiency with martial weapons, weapon focus, at least 4 levels in a full-BAB class,

Benefit
Your base attack bonus increases by one, but cannot exceed your hit dice.

Special
You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.

A fighter may select Practiced Warrior as one of his fighter bonus feats.

====================

Now only warrior types can really take it. It is more powerful than weapon focus (or GWF) but generally less powerful than the mastery feats (at best you get an extra attack out of it at -5 in addition to the +1 overall). It's nice, if IMO, a little weak.

There is an argument for +2 BAB instead of +1, but that is a bit much. Humm, perhaps a follow-on feat that requires this one and gives a +2 BAB, that would be 2 feats for +3...

Mark

 

[Felon]

Oh it is. But that is because practiced spellcaster is the problem. Feats are not supposed to make up for weak characters or a bad builds.

How did you conclude that they're "not supposed to" do this?