PDA

View Full Version : Martial study : Spells?



Quietus
2010-10-14, 08:27 AM
::Edit:: Due to the original discussion ending faster and with a lot less interest than I thought, I propose a change of focus for this thread, along the same topic lines -


Ah. Well, that makes a bit more sense, I suppose. So, slight focus shift, then - would allowing noncasters to pick up spells with feats, using the same outline as Martial Study (1/2 noncasting classes = caster level, so you're looking at 3rd level spells around level 10, 1/encounter) be terribly broken, in your opinion? I personally don't see a lot of issue with it, but I'm interested in hearing other people's thoughts.



Now, this may be a little off, given that I'm only familiar with the ToB through these forums, but I had an idea last night. It is my understanding that Martial Study can be taken (as a Fighter feat, no less), and gives you access to one maneuver, with an initiator level of 1/2 your non-initiator classes, plus your initiator classes themselves, yes?

Okay - and there is also the .. was it called Arcane Swordsage? The one that got to choose spells instead of maneuvers, which I know, it's kind of frowned upon in terms of balance. But is there anything stopping a player, in a game that allows the Arcane Swordsage, from taking Martial Study and learning spells, since the AS can learn them as maneuvers?

Morph Bark
2010-10-14, 08:29 AM
Now, this may be a little off, given that I'm only familiar with the ToB through these forums, but I had an idea last night. It is my understanding that Martial Study can be taken (as a Fighter feat, no less), and gives you access to one maneuver, with an initiator level of 1/2 your non-initiator classes, plus your initiator classes themselves, yes?

Okay - and there is also the .. was it called Arcane Swordsage? The one that got to choose spells instead of maneuvers, which I know, it's kind of frowned upon in terms of balance. But is there anything stopping a player, in a game that allows the Arcane Swordsage, from taking Martial Study and learning spells, since the AS can learn them as maneuvers?

The Arcane Swordsage does not learn them as maneuvers, he learns them in place of maneuvers. He just can refresh them like maneuvers, but they are not maneuvers.

Myth
2010-10-14, 08:33 AM
The Arcane Swordsage does not learn them as maneuvers, he learns them in place of maneuvers. He just can refresh them like maneuvers, but they are not maneuvers.

No he can't. He can learn x ammount of y level of spells based of his available maneuvers of that particular level (1 to 9, no 0 level maneuvers). They recover spells via the resting mechanic.

WinWin
2010-10-14, 08:36 AM
Hmm...No Heroism loops then. Too bad, using a fighter feat to aquire Martial Study, then resting and repeating is a great way to expand your repotoir for a time.

Probably a good thing they work like regular spells then.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 09:19 AM
Ah. Well, that makes a bit more sense, I suppose. So, slight focus shift, then - would allowing noncasters to pick up spells with feats, using the same outline as Martial Study (1/2 noncasting classes = caster level, so you're looking at 3rd level spells around level 10, 1/encounter) be terribly broken, in your opinion? I personally don't see a lot of issue with it, but I'm interested in hearing other people's thoughts.

Il_Vec
2010-10-14, 09:21 AM
Ah. Well, that makes a bit more sense, I suppose. So, slight focus shift, then - would allowing noncasters to pick up spells with feats, using the same outline as Martial Study (1/2 noncasting classes = caster level, so you're looking at 3rd level spells around level 10, 1/encounter) be terribly broken, in your opinion? I personally don't see a lot of issue with it, but I'm interested in hearing other people's thoughts.

I would allow that in my game, and would also allow the same with psionics.

Morph Bark
2010-10-14, 09:23 AM
Personally I wouldn't mind, as most non-casting classes are focused on physical attributes mostly anyway a little bit of mental stuff in there wouldn't be bad. A Fighter with Int 13 and a single 3rd-level spell 1/encounter would be a little refreshing.

...pun not(?) intended. :smalltongue:

Quietus
2010-10-14, 09:28 AM
Personally I wouldn't mind, as most non-casting classes are focused on physical attributes mostly anyway a little bit of mental stuff in there wouldn't be bad. A Fighter with Int 13 and a single 3rd-level spell 1/encounter would be a little refreshing.

...pun not(?) intended. :smalltongue:

What if it didn't require a certain mental capacity, or could be chosen by the player when they took the ability? Say, you could take a spell from any spell list, but you used that class's casting stat to determine if you could cast it, and how strong the DC was if applicable? Or even if it didn't rely on any mental capacity at all, since you're already spending a feat on it?

Alternatively, what about if you got half character level = caster level, unless you had the appropriate casting stat high enough to cast the spell normally, then got full caster level? There are quite a few spells that would be worthless if your caster level wasn't at least close to your character level.

Il_Vec
2010-10-14, 09:36 AM
There are quite a few spells that would be worthless if your caster level wasn't at least close to your character level.

As there are quite a few manuevers that are worthless if your ranks in concentration or jump or balance or tumble are low. It becomes a matter of selection.

Myself, I'd go with caster level = 1/2 character leve, any spell list, must have the appropriate casting stat, usable once per encounter or refreshed with 10 minutes rest. And I'd allow using practiced spellcaster along with the feat.

That would encourage people to get general utility spells and buffs.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 09:40 AM
As there are quite a few manuevers that are worthless if your ranks in concentration or jump or balance or tumble are low. It becomes a matter of selection.

Myself, I'd go with caster level = 1/2 character leve, any spell list, must have the appropriate casting stat, usable once per encounter or refreshed with 10 minutes rest. And I'd allow using practiced spellcaster along with the feat.

That would encourage people to get general utility spells and buffs.

Mm, true... I guess you wouldn't take that one where concentration check = damage if you didn't have a high concentration check. It would certainly be nice to be able to drop a feat - even a Fighter feat! - to pick up Fly at level 10, I'd think.

.. And people say ToB is too anime. XD

Godskook
2010-10-14, 09:59 AM
Ah. Well, that makes a bit more sense, I suppose. So, slight focus shift, then - would allowing noncasters to pick up spells with feats, using the same outline as Martial Study (1/2 noncasting classes = caster level, so you're looking at 3rd level spells around level 10, 1/encounter) be terribly broken, in your opinion? I personally don't see a lot of issue with it, but I'm interested in hearing other people's thoughts.

Terribly broken, sadly.

1.Giving all casters miracle 1/encounter for a feat-cost is ridiculous on an order of magnitude that *should* be visible to everyone reading this post.

2.Typically(I'll grant that you didn't specify this) when individual spells are handed out, they're spell-like abilities, and if that's how this is implemented, that's *ANOTHER* can of worms.

3.The balance on this just makes casters *more* powerful than melee, as melee will pick up 1/encounter emergency spells while casters will pick up a spammable spell and just prepare the emergency spell instead.


Okay - and there is also the .. was it called Arcane Swordsage? The one that got to choose spells instead of maneuvers, which I know, it's kind of frowned upon in terms of balance. But is there anything stopping a player, in a game that allows the Arcane Swordsage, from taking Martial Study and learning spells, since the AS can learn them as maneuvers?

Its frowned upon because:

1.It was poorly thought-out as printed.

2.It wasn't fleshed out, so its not even claimed as balanced in ToB.

3.It is *NOT* in the rules. Its in an adaptation section.

4.Ignoring all of the above, it is not balanced.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 10:02 AM
Terribly broken, sadly.

1.Giving all casters miracle 1/encounter for a feat-cost is ridiculous on an order of magnitude that *should* be visible to everyone reading this post.

2.Typically(I'll grant that you didn't specify this) when individual spells are handed out, they're spell-like abilities, and if that's how this is implemented, that's *ANOTHER* can of worms.

3.The balance on this just makes casters *more* powerful than melee, as melee will pick up 1/encounter emergency spells while casters will pick up a spammable spell and just prepare the emergency spell instead.



Its frowned upon because:

1.It was poorly thought-out as printed.

2.It wasn't fleshed out, so its not even claimed as balanced in ToB.

3.It is *NOT* in the rules. Its in an adaptation section.

4.Ignoring all of the above, it is not balanced.

I'm assuming that it's cast as a spell, so all relevant costs remain there. Also, if you're going with the 1/2 character level = caster level, you couldn't pick up Miracle with it till level 34. Those things taken into account, do you still think that would be broken?

Greenish
2010-10-14, 10:12 AM
Also, if you're going with the 1/2 character level = caster level, you couldn't pick up Miracle with it till level 34.Unless you're a caster. (If you meant these to work like ToB, where Initiator classes get full IL.)

Quietus
2010-10-14, 10:17 AM
Unless you're a caster. (If you meant these to work like ToB, where Initiator classes get full IL.)

*Shrugs* Perhaps. But casters can pick up the Extra Slot feat or whatever to be able to prepare another spell per day anyhow... so what would the difference be, exactly? Even if Extra Slot only allows one spell level below your max, it can be used for any spell; This is more limited in that you pick one. Admittedly it's per encounter, but casters will only get one chance, ever, to pick this up for a 9th level spell anyway.. or you could simply make it outright that the caster level for these is always 1/2 character level, period, keeping it balanced for everyone rather than making it "extra slot on steroids" for casters.

Godskook
2010-10-14, 10:54 AM
I'm assuming that it's cast as a spell, so all relevant costs remain there. Also, if you're going with the 1/2 character level = caster level, you couldn't pick up Miracle with it till level 34. Those things taken into account, do you still think that would be broken?

Yeah. Let's see:

3.The melee/caster issue in choices is still a problem.

4.Metamagic?!?

5.There's always the non-obvious that comes with giving carte blanche access to areas that were not meant to have such access in *ways* that people were not meant to have access to them.

Starbuck_II
2010-10-14, 11:10 AM
Fighting types take Wraithstrike (second level spell) at 6th level?

Not too bad.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 11:22 AM
Fighting types take Wraithstrike (second level spell) at 6th level?

Not too bad.

Possibly fourth, if we use Martial Study as the base, as it's a Fighter feat. Wraithstrike is a swift-cast, one-round duration right? I see no major issue with this, outside of possible ubercharger abuse.. but then the abuse is in the ubercharging, the spell is just a minor add-on to that.


Yeah. Let's see:

3.The melee/caster issue in choices is still a problem.

4.Metamagic?!?

5.There's always the non-obvious that comes with giving carte blanche access to areas that were not meant to have such access in *ways* that people were not meant to have access to them.

I'm not sure what you mean by 3).

4) If someone wants to pick up a Metamagic feat before learning a spell, so they can apply that feat to that spell... more power to them?

5) This I acknowledge, but that's the bane of new material everywhere.

Kylarra
2010-10-14, 11:26 AM
Casters will get more mileage out of this extra casting per/day slot by virtue of having a higher CL, much like ToB classes get some extra mileage out of martial study than non ToB classes. You could work around it-ish by simply globally declaring that the feat can only get you a spell as if your caster level were 1/2 your total level.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 11:29 AM
Casters will get more mileage out of this extra casting per/day slot by virtue of having a higher CL, much like ToB classes get some extra mileage out of martial study than non ToB classes. You could work around it-ish by simply globally declaring that the feat can only get you a spell as if your caster level were 1/2 your total level.

Yeah, that came up a bit earlier, and I agree - in this case, caster level = 1/2 character level globally is a better way to go about this. Otherwise you'd have every Wizard taking their level 18 feat as Martial Study : Time Stop, since that has a use in every encounter, ever. Or maybe Foresight, which would come in at level 15, 'cause "per encounter" is narrowed down to "every 5-10 minutes outside combat", and that's.. well, it's Foresight all day for one feat.

Seatbelt
2010-10-14, 11:31 AM
I think its cool. You avoid caster cheese by making CL = to 1/2 character level, irrespective of actual caster level. Or just put in a clause in the feat saying that any character with existing spellcaster levels cannot take the feat.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 11:39 AM
Actually, with regard to my last post there.. I'm starting to think. Any spell with a duration of 10 minutes/level could effectively be permanent with this feat, casting it every few minutes. Maybe a /day limit would be better, though it WOULD be nice for a Fighter at level 6 (and yes, I was mistaken earlier in correcting that to level 4) to be able to pick up See Invisibility, then Fly at level 10. The problem comes in that anything with a duration greater than a minute/level - and even those, after a certain point - become "Use one standard action every five minutes to keep permanent". Mage Armor, See Invisibility, Water Breathing, all would effectively become all-day, if they were per encounter. I'm thinking either a 1/day or 3/day limit would be better, in this case. If 1/day, it might be worthwhile to give full caster level, though, to make it have worthwhile oomph for that one time in a day you get to use it.

Starbuck_II
2010-10-14, 11:40 AM
Possibly fourth, if we use Martial Study as the base, as it's a Fighter feat. Wraithstrike is a swift-cast, one-round duration right? I see no major issue with this, outside of possible ubercharger abuse.. but then the abuse is in the ubercharging, the spell is just a minor add-on to that.

Your math doesn't hold. Only Martial adepts gain at 1:1, everyone one else is 1:2.
So you need to reach 3rd Initator level to qualify for a 2nd level maneuver/spell..
1/2x 6= 3 (3 is the minimum for 2nd level stuff).

So yes, Quietus, there is a Santa Claus...I mean it is 6th level to grab a 2nd level spell.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 11:41 AM
Your math doesn't hold.
1/2x 6= 3 (3 is the minimum for 2nd level stuff).

So yes, Quietus, there is a Santa Claus...I mean it is 6th level to grab a 2nd level spell.

Yup. Realized that I was using spell level, not caster level, in my post above you. So I ninja-corrected myself, huzzah!

::Edit:: for a guy doing trig homework right now, you'd think I'd be better at math, eh? :smalltongue:

kestrel404
2010-10-14, 02:49 PM
I see no problem at all with letting someone pick up an extra (fixed, static) spell per day, off any list, cast at 1/2 character level. That sounds like a fine homebrew feat.

Making it 1/encounter is ridiculously broken.

The difference between spells and maneuvers is that spells are balanced (poorly, but balanced) based on a per day availability. You only get so many per day. Maneuvers are balanced based on being able to be used once (or more) per encounter - literally the strongest maneuvers available - the ones that are only supposed to be available to 17th level characters of specific classes - are roughly as powerful as low-end 6th level spells - compare Harm with Strike of Perfect Clarity. Harm has a saving throw, Strike of Perfect Clarity has a to-hit roll, but they are effectively identical, except that the Maneuver will probably deal less damage on average. You can look at every 9th level maneuver (except Tornado Throw) and find a spell of 6th level or lower (sometimes much lower) that does the same thing.

But Maneuvers are considdered to be balanced and useful, because you can use them at least once per fight. And spells are considdered (on the whole) to be balanced and powerful while being used once per day.

Greenish
2010-10-14, 02:54 PM
The difference between spells and maneuvers is that spells are balanced (poorly, but balanced) based on a per day availability. You only get so many per day. Maneuvers are balanced based on being able to be used once (or more) per encounter - literally the strongest maneuvers available - the ones that are only supposed to be available to 17th level characters of specific classes - are roughly as powerful as low-end 6th level spells - compare Harm with Strike of Perfect Clarity. Harm has a saving throw, Strike of Perfect Clarity has a to-hit roll, but they are effectively identical, except that the Maneuver will probably deal less damage on average. You can look at every 9th level maneuver (except Tornado Throw) and find a spell of 6th level or lower (sometimes much lower) that does the same thing.To add another example, one already used: Emerald Razor (which requires you to have a maneuver from the same school to even pick up) is a 2nd level maneuver where you make a single melee attack as a touch attack with Standard Action.

Wraithstrike is swift action 2nd level spell that makes all your melee attacks touch attacks for the whole round.


So yeah, there's a difference.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 03:07 PM
And this is where my utter lack of detail-level knowledge with the ToB bites me in the ass. =P

Seems that allowing spells to be bought with feats the same way maneuvers are with Martial Study is fine; It's the per-encounter part that would be problematic, so per-day seems like it'd work out fine. You'd still have a few options that could be dangerous, but wraithstrike 1/day at level 6 ... would not break anything, IMO. Fly at level 10, likewise, isn't going to be a big deal; It's a "oh crap, something flying" button, that's all.

Then again, I'm the type of DM that would let a mage-slayer character take a feat to essentially ready a greater dispel (using BAB for caster level) against spells that affect him or the area he's in, which is COMPLETELY anime-style. Cutting through a fireball and taking no damage is awesome.. and I'm okay with awesome things :smalltongue:

Susano-wo
2010-10-14, 03:48 PM
And this is where my utter lack of detail-level knowledge with the ToB bites me in the ass. =P

Seems that allowing spells to be bought with feats the same way maneuvers are with Martial Study is fine; It's the per-encounter part that would be problematic, so per-day seems like it'd work out fine. You'd still have a few options that could be dangerous, but wraithstrike 1/day at level 6 ... would not break anything, IMO. Fly at level 10, likewise, isn't going to be a big deal; It's a "oh crap, something flying" button, that's all.

Then again, I'm the type of DM that would let a mage-slayer character take a feat to essentially ready a greater dispel (using BAB for caster level) against spells that affect him or the area he's in, which is COMPLETELY anime-style. Cutting through a fireball and taking no damage is awesome.. and I'm okay with awesome things :smalltongue:

I agree that the /encounter vs /day is probably the biggest issue. I would grant the spell only once a day. and probably based on Cha? Caster level would be like Initiator level, in other words 1/2 your class.
I'd probably keep casting classes totally seperate from this.
Also and issue is that you sitll have to meet prereqs for ToB maneuvers. YOu can take a 3rd level maneuver at charlvl 10, but unless its Stone Dragon, it pretty much will have prereqs that you need another maneuver of that school. So perhaps a similar system can be worked out for the spells?

HunterOfJello
2010-10-14, 04:09 PM
sounds like a dragonmark

Knaight
2010-10-14, 04:19 PM
Unless you're a caster. (If you meant these to work like ToB, where Initiator classes get full IL.)

If you don't give casters the ability to use their CL, and force 1/2 character level for them like everyone else, it might even be balanced. It is a powerful feat regardless though.

Endarire
2010-10-14, 06:06 PM
Do creatures need to have the requisite mental score, normally 10 + spell level?

Can I take Magic Study: grease at level 1?

How is the spell's DC calculated? Ideally, creatures could determine which stat to use, such as STR for melee guys.

Quietus
2010-10-14, 08:50 PM
Do creatures need to have the requisite mental score, normally 10 + spell level?

Can I take Magic Study: grease at level 1?

How is the spell's DC calculated? Ideally, creatures could determine which stat to use, such as STR for melee guys.

I'm thinking that you'd have to have the mental score, either in Wisdom (if it's a divine spell) or Charisma (if it's Arcane). DC is calculated off of that ability, and as for Grease, maybe.. I'm not sure if allowing a feat for first-level spells at level 1 would be too much or not. Then again, I have a feat for Dragonblooded (homebrew race) that gives them the ability to cast cantrips as a level 1 Sorcerer (meaning 4 known, 5 per day), so one first level spell once a day isn't so bad.

Kylarra
2010-10-14, 08:56 PM
Here's a thought, in the SlayersD20 system, the lowest tier of magic spells are called "common" spells and common spells can be learned by anyone and are cast using constitution as the source ability. Why not tie these "Arcane Study" spells to Con? It's already a secondary/tertiary stat for most characters and it keeps martial characters from needing to have a high mental stat in order to use the feat.