WW's Sorcerous Pact feat -the new Spellcasting Prodigy, or not?
- Thread starter Kichwas
- Start date
For me, it isn't the issue of which spells can be added in, or whether the pact will be enforced or not, although these are considerations.
For me, it is "+freaking 4"!!!!
You should never balance out +4 feats with roleplaying elements. You should balance it out with -2 something else (and even then, +4 feats should almost never be possible).
+4 is just too huge.
For example, 14th level sorcerer one has a DC 23 save with Finger of Death. 14th level sorcerer two has a DC 27 save with Finger of Death because of this feat.
Opponent one has a +7 for Fort saves (which is not that bad for many 14th level characters, the same level as the Sorcerer). Against sorcerer one, he saves 25% of the time. Against sorcerer two, he saves 5% of the time. It's not just a matter of 20% difference, it is a matter of 5 times difference.
25% is a low chance of success, but 5% is practically non-existent.
And if you cast this spell against a same level opponent with a very good save (e.g. +13 at 14th level), the odds of dying move from 45% up to 65%. That's extremely significant. The Sorcerers CHA would have to increase by 8 with respect to these same spells and he would have to be somewhat demi-godlike to get this same effect (i.e. it would take 32 levels of increasing CHA every four levels to get this same level of effect).
Save or die type saves are hard enough to make due to level, caster ability score, ability score items that boost abilities, and feats like Spell Focus without additional feats that boost them by +4.
This feat is Broke with a capital B.
For me, it is "+freaking 4"!!!!
You should never balance out +4 feats with roleplaying elements. You should balance it out with -2 something else (and even then, +4 feats should almost never be possible).
+4 is just too huge.
For example, 14th level sorcerer one has a DC 23 save with Finger of Death. 14th level sorcerer two has a DC 27 save with Finger of Death because of this feat.
Opponent one has a +7 for Fort saves (which is not that bad for many 14th level characters, the same level as the Sorcerer). Against sorcerer one, he saves 25% of the time. Against sorcerer two, he saves 5% of the time. It's not just a matter of 20% difference, it is a matter of 5 times difference.
25% is a low chance of success, but 5% is practically non-existent.
And if you cast this spell against a same level opponent with a very good save (e.g. +13 at 14th level), the odds of dying move from 45% up to 65%. That's extremely significant. The Sorcerers CHA would have to increase by 8 with respect to these same spells and he would have to be somewhat demi-godlike to get this same effect (i.e. it would take 32 levels of increasing CHA every four levels to get this same level of effect).
Save or die type saves are hard enough to make due to level, caster ability score, ability score items that boost abilities, and feats like Spell Focus without additional feats that boost them by +4.
This feat is Broke with a capital B.
Last edited:
Gothmog
First Post
You know, I might just allow this feat, and I run a low-magic game. I like the flavor it provides- it seems very similar to the legends about witches and warlocks in our own world. Without a doubt, Spellcasting Prodigy is broken, and I would NEVER allow it in a game. Its the kind of feat a player looks at, and there is NO reason not to take it. This feat has a big benefit, true, but there is a downside to it as well. There isn't any good reason to NOT have a feat have a roleplaying disadvantage- the only reason some folks have claimed there shouldn't be a RPing disadvantage is because it is harder for the DM to adjudicate. So this one isn't nearly as broken as Spellcasting Prodigy or a dozen other WotC feats, and I'm the kind of rat bastardly DM who would have a LOT of fun with a character with this feat. 
Done correctly, the rest of the party never even has to know the character even has this feat.
Done correctly, the rest of the party never even has to know the character even has this feat.
BryonD
Hero
Nightfall said:
Yep, and if anyone ever challenges it, I'll be right here to support you.
Not clear on what this has to do with anything.........
You have now offered two thinly vieled implications that my rebuttal to your position is some form of attempt at censorship. Which forces me to conclude that you are more comfortable trying to put me on the defensive against absurdities than you are standing by your position on the topic. That's to bad.
ThirdWizard
First Post
But see, I consider the roleplaying penalty a benefit. Instant plot hook, patron that will look well on you if you fulfill your missions well, and adventure to be had. What's bad about it?Nightfall said:
Crothian
First Post
ThirdWizard said:
Yes, instant plot hooks, great adventures, but not of the players choosing.
Patron "Hey, go into Tomb of Horrors and see what's up."
Player "But I don't want to, we need to investigate the White Plume Mountain "
Patron "I don't care, do what I say or loose my patronage and abilities I grant you"
The player and patron should not always see eye to eye. Or maybe they do, but the other players don't agree with the demands the patron is making.
Don't even try to compare this feat to spellfire. Spellfire looks flashy, but its ingame potential is heavily restricted by a lot of of real ingame factors, most notably the oppurtunity cost it imposes at high-levels and its marginal impact at low-levels, where almost all enemies are brittle anyway....
This has zero oppurtunity cost as far as i can see and only a dubious roleplay requirement to balance it out...
This has zero oppurtunity cost as far as i can see and only a dubious roleplay requirement to balance it out...
A lot of people here seem to like the flavor and are ok with the power while many others hate the power but seem to be more ambivilant about the flavor. Assuming you want to keep the flavor what would you do to the power of the feat? or what other negatives would you introduce?
It seems to me that the character pays for this feat by spending a feat and putting a permanant geas on himself. Along with only getting the benefit from a few spells, plus the character not having full control over what those spells are.
I've seen a lot of posts like this one but I dont really understand. The only reason this is so powerful is because spell focus is so weak. It is a better feat for new players as it greatly simplifies what gets saves. Most of the time it will effect less than half of the spells a character has memorized at any one time.
::shrugs:: Its been offered in every campaign I have fun, only one character has taken it. Multiclass fighter/sorcerer who needed too many good stats so had to take it with his 14 charisma. Everyone else 'always' had better feats to choose for their character concept.
It seems to me that the character pays for this feat by spending a feat and putting a permanant geas on himself. Along with only getting the benefit from a few spells, plus the character not having full control over what those spells are.
Gothmog said:
I've seen a lot of posts like this one but I dont really understand. The only reason this is so powerful is because spell focus is so weak. It is a better feat for new players as it greatly simplifies what gets saves. Most of the time it will effect less than half of the spells a character has memorized at any one time.
::shrugs:: Its been offered in every campaign I have fun, only one character has taken it. Multiclass fighter/sorcerer who needed too many good stats so had to take it with his 14 charisma. Everyone else 'always' had better feats to choose for their character concept.
Similar Threads
