PDA

View Full Version : The Spell Weaver[3.5 Base Class + Feat, PEACH]



Pyromancer999
2011-03-25, 08:03 PM
Background- Basically, just got inspired by this.

The Spellweaver

Most spell-users rely on parceling their energy out into packets, and only using one spell at a time. However, there is a group of spellcasters that uses their magical energy as they please, and mix and match them to meet their needs.

Class Skills
The Spell Weaver's class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Bluff (Cha), Concentration (Con), Craft (Int), Knowledge (arcana) (Int), Profession (Wis), and Spellcraft (Int).

Skill Points: 2 + Int modifier Skill levels

Hit dice: d6

The Spell Weaver
{table=head]Level|Base Attack Bonus|Fort Save|Ref Save|Will Save|Class Features|Spell Levels|Maximum Spell Level Per Casting

1st|
+0|
+0|
+0|
+2|Spellcasting, Spell Weaving|4 |1

2nd|
+1|
+0|
+0|
+3| |5 |1

3rd|
+1|
+1|
+1|
+3| |7 |1

4th|
+2|
+1|
+1|
+4| |12 |2

5th|
+2|
+1|
+1|
+4| |16 |2

6th|
+3|
+2|
+2|
+5| |25 |3

7th|
+3|
+2|
+2|
+5| |28 |3

8th|
+4|
+2|
+2|
+6| |40 |4

9th|
+4|
+3|
+3|
+6| |44 |4

10th|
+5|
+3|
+3|
+7| |59 |5

11th|
+5|
+3|
+3|
+7| |64 |5

12th|
+6/+1|
+4|
+4|
+8| |82 |6

13th|
+6/+1|
+4|
+4|
+8| |88 |6

14th|
+7/+2|
+4|
+4|
+9| |99 |7

15th|
+7/+2|
+5|
+5|
+9| |106 |7

16th|
+8/+3|
+5|
+5|
+10| |130 |8

17th|
+8/+3|
+5|
+5|
+10| |138 |8

18th|
+9/+4|
+6|
+6|
+11| |165 |9

19th|
+9/+4|
+6|
+6|
+11| |175 |9

20th|
+10/+5|
+6|
+6|
+12| |186 |9 [/table]

Class Features

Weapon Proficiencies: Spell Weavers are proficient with all simple weapons, and 1 martial weapons. Spell Weavers are proficient with leather armor, which does not interfere with their spellcasting.

Spellcasting: You may choose one mental ability score to serve as your casting ability score. The DCs of your spells are 10 + total spell levels in casting + your casting modifier. Spells are learned as a sorcerer, and are taken from any one spell list of your choice. You cast using spell levels. In this system, you lose 1 level per spell of level cast. Your total spell levels per day are given as on the table above.

Spellweaving: You may cast more than one spell in a casting. When this occurs, these rules apply:

You may not use more total spell levels in a casting than on the table above
When determining how long it takes to cast multiple spells at once, use the casting time of the spell with the longest casting time
The DC of all spell effects is as mentioned in Spellcasting(ex. a Magic Missile spell, as cast by a Spellweaver with a casting ability score modifier of 2, as part of casting 4 spell levels at once, would have a DC of 16 (10 + 4(total spells in casting) + 2 (from the ability modifier) = 16)
Spell Weaving has a DC of 10 + 2 times the total number of spells to be woven. Use 1d20 + 1/2 caster level + casting ability modifier for this.



New Feat

Apprentice Caster
Prerequisite: Positive modifier in any mental ability score, No spellcasting from any other source
Benefit: You gain 2 + your positive mental ability score modifier(if more than one, choose one) spell levels to cast with. Choose one spell list. You may select 4 0-level spells, and a number of 1st level spells equal to your positive mental ability score modifier from this list to cast with.
Special: You may select this feat multiple times. Each time, you gain an additional number of spell levels equal to your chosen ability score modifier, and an additional spell of each level you can cast. Every two times, you may gain access to your chosen ability score modifier in spells of 1 level higher than the highest level spell you could previously cast from the spell list you chose the first time you selected this feat.

Also, if you gain spellcasting after taking this feat, you may not take this any more times, but still retain the benefits of the previous times you have taken this feat.


Please PEACH and Comment.

Pyromancer999
2011-03-26, 03:29 PM
Anyone wish to comment?

Gideon Falcon
2011-03-29, 05:08 PM
So, technically they can't even spellweave until fourth level?

Pyromancer999
2011-03-29, 08:27 PM
So, technically they can't even spellweave until fourth level?

They can do it w/cantrips. Although I'm thinking of granting them 2 spell leves at a time at 3rd level or so, now that I think of it.

Welknair
2011-03-29, 09:32 PM
Very interesting! So this is abiding by something that I latched onto for my Magitech system: The Principle of Equivalence. I.E. Two second levels spells = 1 fourth level spell. I was actually about to brew a class a bit like this...


My one concern: Breaking the Action Economy/Nova. At 18th level, you could cast three Fireballs as a standard action. May I suggest that you add in a caveat saying that you must expend an additional number of spell levels equal to the number of additional spells being cast? This would at least mitigate this somewhat as well as encourage them to avoid Spellweaving unnecessarily. It also stops you from pumping out 9 Magic Missile spells in a round. 45d4+45 damage that never misses for 9 spell levels seems a bit overpowered...

Then again, adding the previously mentioned clause could discourage players from using one of the coolest features of this class...

RaginChangeling
2011-03-29, 09:36 PM
Technically from the text you can use any ability score to base your casting off of, but the feat implies you want it to be a mental ability score.

Seerow
2011-03-29, 09:52 PM
They can do it w/cantrips. Although I'm thinking of granting them 2 spell leves at a time at 3rd level or so, now that I think of it.

Wait... cantrips are a 0th level spell, so are free and unlimited use under this system (I don't see anything specifying they cost 1 point. And if they do cost 1 point, nobody will use them rather than a level 1 spell instead)... what's to stop somebody from launching some arbitrarily high number of cantrips?

They may be weak, but start launching a few hundred of them at once, and that damage adds up quick.

Welknair
2011-03-29, 10:18 PM
Wait... cantrips are a 0th level spell, so are free and unlimited use under this system (I don't see anything specifying they cost 1 point. And if they do cost 1 point, nobody will use them rather than a level 1 spell instead)... what's to stop somebody from launching some arbitrarily high number of cantrips?

They may be weak, but start launching a few hundred of them at once, and that damage adds up quick.

Uh... It's a well-known fact that 0-level spells are really 1/2 level. Just check the Rod of Absorption (off of which the Equivalence Principle is derived).

Pyromancer999
2011-03-30, 03:10 PM
Very interesting! So this is abiding by something that I latched onto for my Magitech system: The Principle of Equivalence. I.E. Two second levels spells = 1 fourth level spell. I was actually about to brew a class a bit like this...


My one concern: Breaking the Action Economy/Nova. At 18th level, you could cast three Fireballs as a standard action. May I suggest that you add in a caveat saying that you must expend an additional number of spell levels equal to the number of additional spells being cast? This would at least mitigate this somewhat as well as encourage them to avoid Spellweaving unnecessarily. It also stops you from pumping out 9 Magic Missile spells in a round. 45d4+45 damage that never misses for 9 spell levels seems a bit overpowered...

Then again, adding the previously mentioned clause could discourage players from using one of the coolest features of this class...

That IS a concern. And I think I know of a way to discourage the Nova Method: How about they have to divide their CL amongst the spells? I'm also open to other alternatives.

Welknair
2011-03-30, 06:06 PM
That IS a concern. And I think I know of a way to discourage the Nova Method: How about they have to divide their CL amongst the spells? I'm also open to other alternatives.

Ooh, that's an interesting idea. Hmm, I'd need to do a couple of mock-ups with casting 9 Magic Missiles each at CL 2, versus fewer at a higher... I'll get back to you on this.

After contemplation: Before you go too far into mitigating factors, consider how exactly you want this power to be used. Do you want it for the occasional dual spell? Do you want players pumping out large numbers of low level spells? Do you want this to be used often, or infrequently? These matters should be determined before you decide how to make it a bit less powerful as how you go about that will affect how the ability is used. The CL dividing idea is indeed valid, but means that most damage dealing spells wouldn't be worth Weaving as you'd end up with more targets but a lower total damage. Out of combat you'd have the time to cast spells on separate rounds for larger durations or greater effect. So the only time I'd see this being used with the split CL is when you absolutely have to cast a utilitarian spell as well as another, as when your ally is at -9 but there are a swarm of Tucker's Kobolds who are about to do the same to you. This would allow you to save both your hides, though with a lessened effect to each.

Alternative ideas:

Limit the number of additional spells allowed. This stops mass 1st level spell swarms, while not hindering dual-casting. Still a bit of a nova, just not near as bad.

As previously suggested, add an additional cost of some sort. Either an amount based upon the number of additional spells, or the level of them are both viable. Or perhaps doubling the cost entirely... Any of these would result in it being an option to mass-swarm or use other nova tactics, it just means that you'll get less bang for your buck and be useless the rest of the day.

Require some manner of Spellcraft Check to successfully link spells, with the DC increasing for more or more powerful spells. Failure indicates that the whole lot of them fail, yet the power is still expended. Adds the potential for some dramatic situations, allows for routine use of the ability, but dissuades players from gambling large numbers of levels each round.

Add limitations regarding the type of spells. Perhaps you can't cast the same spell more than once in a round. Perhaps you can't cast spells with opposing energy or alignment descriptors. Perhaps Summoning spells can't be Woven due to the amount of energy used to cast them (and hence the longer casting time). Any of these would add something interesting for players to have to work around. The first suggestion here stops some of the most obvious ploys.

Pyromancer999
2011-03-30, 08:58 PM
Alternative ideas:

Limit the number of additional spells allowed. This stops mass 1st level spell swarms, while not hindering dual-casting. Still a bit of a nova, just not near as bad.

Good, but I still want them to be able to do the mass-Magic Missile thing, just with not so many. A viable option.


As previously suggested, add an additional cost of some sort. Either an amount based upon the number of additional spells, or the level of them are both viable. Or perhaps doubling the cost entirely... Any of these would result in it being an option to mass-swarm or use other nova tactics, it just means that you'll get less bang for your buck and be useless the rest of the day.

Good idea, but this makes coupling spells less appealing.



Require some manner of Spellcraft Check to successfully link spells, with the DC increasing for more or more powerful spells. Failure indicates that the whole lot of them fail, yet the power is still expended. Adds the potential for some dramatic situations, allows for routine use of the ability, but dissuades players from gambling large numbers of levels each round.

Interesting, but not quite sure I get this.


Add limitations regarding the type of spells. Perhaps you can't cast the same spell more than once in a round. Perhaps you can't cast spells with opposing energy or alignment descriptors. Perhaps Summoning spells can't be Woven due to the amount of energy used to cast them (and hence the longer casting time). Any of these would add something interesting for players to have to work around. The first suggestion here stops some of the most obvious ploys.

Interesting, but I'm not too keen on this.

Welknair
2011-03-30, 09:56 PM
Interesting, but not quite sure I get this.

Example mechanic: Whenever you Weave spells, you must make a Spellcraft Check at DC 13+Total level of spells to be wovenX2. If you fail this check, the Weaving is ruined and the invested magic is wasted.

The Result: You can Weave spells who's levels total your max castable spell level with about a 50% chance of success (Not including Int Modifier), with increased chance of success for Weaving lower level spells. This means that weaving lower level spells is relatively easy, but the more you push things the greater the chance it'll go kaput. As such, constantly trying to use the maximum is likely going to be less efficient than doing something a bit more modest (whether that be not weaving or simply doing an easier weaving). Skill Focus (Spell Craft) suddenly starts lookin' good... You could also say that on a failure instead of losing the entire Weaving, you lose a number of spells in the weaving such that your roll could meet the DC.

Example of this additional mechanic: I was trying to Weave a Fireball, Scorching Ray, and Magic Missile (I'm an Evoker, can you tell?) all at once. This would be a DC 22 check. Let's say that I got only 21. Well... (21-10)/2=5.5. So I start checking what would happen if the lowest spell were removed, then second lowest, etc, always favoring elimination of lower level spells first. In this example, I'd successfully cast the Fireball and Scorching Ray, effectively losing the 1 spell level. Bit off more than I could chew. This addition is somewhat complicated, but means that Weaving isn't an all-or-nothing ordeal. Yet still overextending yourself will be a bad idea. Note: When trying decide between spells of the same level to eliminate, choose randomly.


Note: This is my favorite idea for mitigating your Weaving.

Edit: A simplification of the lose-some-but-not-all variant that reduces bookkeeping would be to simply eliminate lowest level spells until you could have made the check. Or you could say eliminate the highest, actually. This will take less time, but increase the amount of spell levels wasted on a failure.

Hmm. However, this would be a larger value on high Int, making Intelligence Spell Weavers the most common. You could always do what's suggested in the ELH and say that you can substitute Int for whatever your primary casting ability is...

Goonthegoof
2011-03-30, 10:10 PM
Won't everyone base the spells off constitution or strength?

Welknair
2011-03-30, 10:16 PM
Won't everyone base the spells off constitution or strength?

Oh yeah, he still needs to get around to fixing that. I assume he meant that you could only pick mental ability scores. Allowing physical ones makes absolutely no sense. Anywho, that's a minor error. The mitigating factors are far more interesting.

Pyromancer999
2011-03-31, 02:04 PM
Example mechanic: Whenever you Weave spells, you must make a Spellcraft Check at DC 13+Total level of spells to be wovenX2. If you fail this check, the Weaving is ruined and the invested magic is wasted.

The Result: You can Weave spells who's levels total your max castable spell level with about a 50% chance of success (Not including Int Modifier), with increased chance of success for Weaving lower level spells. This means that weaving lower level spells is relatively easy, but the more you push things the greater the chance it'll go kaput. As such, constantly trying to use the maximum is likely going to be less efficient than doing something a bit more modest (whether that be not weaving or simply doing an easier weaving). Skill Focus (Spell Craft) suddenly starts lookin' good... You could also say that on a failure instead of losing the entire Weaving, you lose a number of spells in the weaving such that your roll could meet the DC.

Example of this additional mechanic: I was trying to Weave a Fireball, Scorching Ray, and Magic Missile (I'm an Evoker, can you tell?) all at once. This would be a DC 22 check. Let's say that I got only 21. Well... (21-10)/2=5.5. So I start checking what would happen if the lowest spell were removed, then second lowest, etc, always favoring elimination of lower level spells first. In this example, I'd successfully cast the Fireball and Scorching Ray, effectively losing the 1 spell level. Bit off more than I could chew. This addition is somewhat complicated, but means that Weaving isn't an all-or-nothing ordeal. Yet still overextending yourself will be a bad idea. Note: When trying decide between spells of the same level to eliminate, choose randomly.


Note: This is my favorite idea for mitigating your Weaving.

Edit: A simplification of the lose-some-but-not-all variant that reduces bookkeeping would be to simply eliminate lowest level spells until you could have made the check. Or you could say eliminate the highest, actually. This will take less time, but increase the amount of spell levels wasted on a failure.

Hmm. However, this would be a larger value on high Int, making Intelligence Spell Weavers the most common. You could always do what's suggested in the ELH and say that you can substitute Int for whatever your primary casting ability is...

This is a good idea. Still, I'd probably make the Check be 10 or 11 + 2x the total number of spells to be woven, and allow the Spell Weaver's spellcasting score modifier to be added to it. This would make sure that Int-based Spell Weavers didn't have any special advantages.

Welknair
2011-03-31, 04:36 PM
This is a good idea. Still, I'd probably make the Check be 10 or 11 + 2x the total number of spells to be woven, and allow the Spell Weaver's spellcasting score modifier to be added to it. This would make sure that Int-based Spell Weavers didn't have any special advantages.

Glad I could be of assistance. :smallsmile:

It's a relatively flexible concept and you can pretty easily configure to how please. And how exactly you go about this will, as previously mentioned, affect how it is utilized.

You may also want to state that the spell lists available to your are only ones that encompass 0 through 9th level spells. An Assassin Spellweaver would be interesting, but wouldn't make much sense.

Pyromancer999
2011-04-04, 03:55 PM
You may also want to state that the spell lists available to your are only ones that encompass 0 through 9th level spells. An Assassin Spellweaver would be interesting, but wouldn't make much sense.

Actually, that's what I thought at first, but when I've had it playtested, it actually works out pretty well.

Also, DC for Spellweaving officially posted.

Welknair
2011-04-05, 11:04 AM
Lookin' good. I'm curious what Metamagics would work best to use up those higher-level slots... And what kind of role unorthodox Weavers such as the previously mentioned Assassin Weaver would fill when coupled with the classes that normally gain those spells. Actually, that'd be quite interesting... Maybe some sort of technique-based Assassin in that example.

Paladin Weaver... Huh. A person with paladin spells, who could potentially choose not to be LG. And without Smite. Man, that'd make for one nasty villain, impersonating a Paladin. Then again, he would still detect as Evil... I suspect that anything besides a LG Paladin Weaver would be accused as a Heretic and hunted by the actual Paladins. The ones who are LG would be an interesting, more cleric-y type of Paladin.

Ooh, ooh! What if you had it such that levels in Spell Weaver and levels in the class that grants the spells that the Weaver spells are being drawn from stack? Wait, no. That's a terrible idea. Who's progression would you use? Nevermind this.

A Bard Weaver would be a bit like a a Bard who skipped the music lessons and went straight for the enchanting and illusions. Would be interesting, but likely frowned upon by other Bards. Also wouldn't need need Perform... Heck, they couldn't even get Perform very high since it's CC.

Wu Jen Weavers wouldn't have any Taboos... That'd certainly confuse the actual versions. But besides that, Weavers of Full Casting classes would fit in pretty well, save for the odd fact that they can Weave and lack the other abilities of the given class.

Beguiler or Duskblade Weavers would be interesting... You take away their Skill-Monkey-ness and pump in Full Casting, and you end up with very specialized Wizards capable of Multitasking. Hm. Well, standard Wizard Weavers can't Specialize, so I guess to simulate that you would end up with Weavers for the various pre-specialized casting classes. Jiriku has a lot of homebrew ones filling in the gaps, I do believe.


I wonder which spell lists would be the best choices. The Wizard and Cleric lists make among the most sense, just due to their sheer size. But some of the casting classes have weaker lists that are made up for in their Class Abilities. For example, you'd likely never see a Warmage Weaver because all of their spells are on the Wizard lists, plus others. So why pick it? And the lists that don't go up to 9 would result in interesting Weavers, but they'd end up having to heavily rely on Metamagic to keep up with those Weavers that chose full-progression lists. The Partial Weavers also can't choose upper-level spells to learn, so they end up with complete mastery of their fewer number of spells. Metamagic Mastery (No casting time increase for Metamagic'd spells) would be a very useful ability for Partial Weavers to keep up with full ones. Perhaps you could state that only those who have four-level lists gain this? Bard Weavers get the short end up the stick, but I don't think that they're hurting as much given that they still have decently large spell lists to begin with. Edit: Actually, scratch the previous note about Metamagic. I forgot that we didn't have Spell Slots. Silly me. They would still be useful, but not as essential as if you would be wasting spell levels by not using them.

Re-reading through your DC for Spellweaving... You should mention what happens if you fail the check, whether that simply be a wasted actions, or wasted spell levels as well. For Weavings with casting times longer than one round, the check should be made at the end up the casting time.

And those are my two copper pieces.

Editedit: This could be interesting as an entry way and a way to make more synergystic mixes as you could make a Wis-based Wizard Caster, which is unseen outside of this.

Also, this would be interesting for Multiclassing. An Assassin Spellweaver/Rogue would be a particularly interesting combo, as would Paladin Weaver/Fighter. Both give you some neat-o bonuses without the trouble of the restrictions or qualifications.

Elfstone
2011-04-05, 04:05 PM
Just as a point of view from the class, as I love what you have done with the mechanics. You need to add in abilities, to keep people interested. Maybe small bonuses in weaving together spells? Perhaps make them "seamless" so you have to dispell them all at once (and you add the opposing checks for the dispell for all the spells. Perhaps divide them by 2?)

Welknair
2011-04-05, 04:35 PM
Just as a point of view from the class, as I love what you have done with the mechanics. You need to add in abilities, to keep people interested. Maybe small bonuses in weaving together spells? Perhaps make them "seamless" so you have to dispell them all at once (and you add the opposing checks for the dispell for all the spells. Perhaps divide them by 2?)

I considered suggesting this as well, but as it is this class is already a bit stronger the the typical Sorcerer who has no class abilities save for their familiar. Weaving is likely more powerful than a familiar and Weavers have even greater versatility in how they choose to allocate their daily allotment of spell levels than sorcerers do (They're even better at spamming the same spell over and over, as they can utilize their entire level reserve without having to worry about wasting upper-level slots). As such, adding more abilities without also adding more detriments would be a bad idea.

Edit: How would Weaving interact with the War Weaver's Eldritch Tapestry? Could you store entire Weavings as single spells? That would be interesting and synergistic...

Elfstone
2011-04-05, 07:47 PM
Then Id suggest dropping the number of spell levels, and adding in class abilities. You can only go so far with spells.

But thats just me.

slaydemons
2011-04-05, 07:59 PM
For some reason this sounds similar but not entirely like a class I was thinking about attempting to brew(as I am not good at brewing just yet), other then that these seem like beefed up sorcerers with access to any spell list they want. don't know if that was the intension

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-05, 10:14 PM
A balance question, what happens with an archivist weaver?

Private-Prinny
2011-04-05, 10:19 PM
A balance question, what happens with an archivist weaver?

He would get access to divine spells based on his Archivist level, and access to arcane (I'm assuming these are arcane) spells based on his Spellweaver level.

Or did you mean a Spellweaver who chose the Archivist spell list as the list to pick from? In that case, he would get no spells, since the Archivist spell list doesn't exist. Archivists simply borrow spells from the Cleric/Druid lists.

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-05, 10:54 PM
He would get access to divine spells based on his Archivist level, and access to arcane (I'm assuming these are arcane) spells based on his Spellweaver level.

Or did you mean a Spellweaver who chose the Archivist spell list as the list to pick from? In that case, he would get no spells, since the Archivist spell list doesn't exist. Archivists simply borrow spells from the Cleric/Druid lists.

I was under the impression there spell list was "all divine spells".

Private-Prinny
2011-04-05, 11:06 PM
I was under the impression there spell list was "all divine spells".

Not true. Compare the following.


Spells: A bard casts arcane spells (the same type of spells available to sorcerers and wizards), which are drawn from the bard spell list. He can cast any spell he knows without preparing it ahead of time, the way a wizard or cleric must (see below). Every bard spell has a verbal component (singing, reciting, or music).


Spells: A druid casts divine spells (the same type of spells available to the cleric, paladin, and ranger), which are drawn from the druid spell list (page 189). Her alignment may restrict her from casting certain spells opposed to her moral or ethical beliefs; see Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells, below. A druid must choose and prepare her spells in advance (see below).


Spells: A sorcerer casts arcane spells (the same type of spells available to bards and wizards), which are drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list (page 192). He can cast any spell he knows without preparing it ahead of time, the way a wizard or a cleric must (see below).


Spellcasting: An archivist casts divine spells, drawn primarily from the cleric spell list although he can eventually uncover, learn, and prepare non-cleric divine spells. Unlike clerics, archivists prepare spells from a prayerbook, a collection of copied divine spells. To learn, prepare, or cast a spell, an archivist must have an Intelligence score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against an archivistís spell is 10 + the spell level + the archivistís Int modifier.

See the difference? If you look in the Spell sections of the sourcebooks, not one of the headers will read "Archivist Spells", since Archivists do not have a spell list.

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-06, 12:33 AM
Uhh, that's a rather odd interpretation. They don't have a codified list because there "list" is everything and printing it would be redundant.

Pyromancer999
2011-04-06, 03:08 PM
Just as a point of view from the class, as I love what you have done with the mechanics. You need to add in abilities, to keep people interested. Maybe small bonuses in weaving together spells? Perhaps make them "seamless" so you have to dispell them all at once (and you add the opposing checks for the dispell for all the spells. Perhaps divide them by 2?)
Yeah, I'm not really into that. If you add up all the spell levels, you get roughly the total number of spells in terms of spell levels that are available to a Wizard. While this might make it appear less powerful than the Wizard, it has Spellweaving and can choose any 1 spell list and mental ability for its spellcasting. This grants it some nice versitality and useage of spells. Giving it more class features would probably make it pretty overpowered.




Edit: How would Weaving interact with the War Weaver's Eldritch Tapestry? Could you store entire Weavings as single spells? That would be interesting and synergistic...

What is a War Weaver? Just wondering, as I've never heard of it before.

Welknair
2011-04-06, 03:20 PM
What is a War Weaver? Just wondering, as I've never heard of it before.

It was one of the few PrCs in Heroes of Battle. They focus on making "Eldritch Tapestries" through which they connect a small number of people (Roughly one adventuring party) and by casting buff spells into this tapestry, it affects all connected for no additional cost. At upper levels they can store multiple spells in the weaving and activate them all at once. Or it was something like that. AFB at the moment.

And I concur about the class features. The Spell Weaver is quite potent enough as it is and adding more features would seem a bit... forced. I see no reason to do so.