How radical is this and what would the implications be ?

[nonsi]

.
I was thinking of this unorthodox option that might allow the creation of custom-made gishes (far from optimized gishes, but gishes nonetheless).

The idea is to allow all characters, starting from 3HD and on, to trade general feats and only general feats (levels 3, 6, 9, . . . ) for gaining caster levels in any of the primary spellcasting classes (cleric / druid / sorcerer / wizard / fav. Soul . . .)
To avoid abuse, this will be capped to not allow using a feat to push CL beyond 1/3 the character’s HD.


I’m not even sure if it’s worth it, but if someone so wishes . . .


So, what do you think ?



EDIT:
I forgot to post the final result.
Here it is . . .

Spellcasting Progression Via Feats:

Spell Apprentice [General]
Requirements: 3rd character level, 11+ in either Int/Wis/Cha (see below), Knowledge (arcana/nature/religion) 3
Benefits: You gain all the spellcasting knowledge (spells known, spellcasting capacity, CL etc) of a 1st-level full spellcasting class of your choice (Wizard/Cleric/Druid).
When you gain 5th level (or If you already have 5 levels or more) in any class-combination, then every time thereafter, when you gain a level, up to a maximum of 1/3 your total class-levels (rounded down), you also gain all the spellcasting knowledge of the next level of the class you chose for this feat.
Special: In order to advance one’s spellcasting to the next level, another point in the appropriate Knowledge skill must be purchased (4 for 2nd CL, 5 for 3rd and so on).
Special: Caster-levels gained via this feat NEVER stack with real levels in a spellcasting class. They always overlap.

Devoted Adept [General]
Requirements: Spell Apprentice, 6th character level
Benefits: Your spellcasting knowledge advances to the next level, capped by your character level. This feat may be applied to the spellcasting progression of your chosen class, or to enhance the CL reached via Spell Apprentice feat.
Special: This feat may be taken multiple times. The benefits stack. But you cannot retake this feat for the same type of magic (arcane/divine/nature) before at least 3 levels have passed since the previous time you took it, even if your DM allows retraining, or if you have bonus class feats that would allow you to take this feat.
.

[Morcleon]

It's an interesting idea, but it's not particularly powerful... I suppose you could take a single level to qualify for some PrC, but there's not really much advantage to taking more.

[wayfare]

Nonsi, do you mind if I steal this and warp it a bit. I think its exactly whats needed for my low magic setting!

[nonsi]

Nonsi, do you mind if I steal this and warp it a bit. I think its exactly whats needed for my low magic setting!

Go right ahead. Everything I publish is free for everyone's use.
Just share your improvements so that we can all enjoy them.
I myself am curious how this could be improved without leaving room for abuse.

[Morcleon]

My first improvement thought was to make each feat give 2 CL, which effectively is 1 spell level per feat. However, in the hands of, say, a fighter, that would get him an almost- gestalt.

Also, you may want to have some prereqs. Ranks in Spellcraft and/or Knowledge (arcana) seem appropriate.

[wayfare]

Go right ahead. Everything I publish is free for everyone's use.
Just share your improvements so that we can all enjoy them.
I myself am curious how this could be improved without leaving room for abuse.

It's not an improvement, per-se. I've been trying to put together a world with low magic that is easy to learn. Instead of classes dedicated to magic, you get folks who pick up a bit at a time. More powerful magic is handled via dangerous ritual, rather than Vancian casting.

Basically, my take is to give folks access to one spell every 3 levels (two if they give up their feat). You can learn a level 1 spell at character level 3, a level two spell at character level 6, etc, etc.

There will be a list of spells that any class can take, and then each class will have a separate list of learnable spells -- Rogues get access to Illusions, a few weaker Enchantments, and some spells like Fog Cloud that allow for better sneaking. Fighters get buffs, defensive wards, and status effect elimination. Rangers get minor healing, shapeshifting, and animal summoning.

etc.

EDIT: this isn't really supposed to be an improvement, its pretty setting specific. I just want magic in a game without having Wizards/Clerics. Those folks who adventure and study magic are ritual casters with class levels. in something like expert.

[dspeyer]

A level of spellcasting is a bit strong for a feat. Feats usually give one new ability, or three if they're very specialized. First level casters usually know several spells.

Still, it won't break the game world, and it won't unbalance things badly so long as everyone gets it.

It does shift balance some, by making feats more precious. I think fighters would become stronger than barbarians, because they could afford to spend all their non-bonus feats on spellcasting.

[nonsi]

My first improvement thought was to make each feat give 2 CL, which effectively is 1 spell level per feat. However, in the hands of, say, a fighter, that would get him an almost- gestalt.

Then how about a midway.
Taking the feat for the 4th time and on (capped by a total of 6 times) grants 2 spellcaster levels.
This will grant caster levels: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9.
So the end result will be somewhere between Paladin and Duskblade (closer to the Paladin) and without specialized lists.



Also, you may want to have some prereqs. Ranks in Spellcraft and/or Knowledge (arcana) seem appropriate.

I think starting at 3 ranks and requiring +1 rank for each additional taking of the feat should just cover it.
The selected Knowledge skill should be appropriate for the magical category: arcana / nature / religion.




Basically, my take is to give folks access to one spell every 3 levels (two if they give up their feat). You can learn a level 1 spell at character level 3, a level two spell at character level 6, etc, etc.

There will be a list of spells that any class can take, and then each class will have a separate list of learnable spells -- Rogues get access to Illusions, a few weaker Enchantments, and some spells like Fog Cloud that allow for better sneaking. Fighters get buffs, defensive wards, and status effect elimination. Rangers get minor healing, shapeshifting, and animal summoning.

A different take than mine, but could definitely also work.
What about cantrips/orisons? you could grant one every time a new spell is learned, I guess.




EDIT: this isn't really supposed to be an improvement, its pretty setting specific. I just want magic in a game without having Wizards/Clerics. Those folks who adventure and study magic are ritual casters with class levels. in something like expert.

Count me curious - both for the spell-lists split and for ritual casters.






It does shift balance some, by making feats more precious. I think fighters would become stronger than barbarians, because they could afford to spend all their non-bonus feats on spellcasting.

My heart won't bleed for the Barb.
My view was always that the Barb, Fighter, Knight, Marshal, Samurai, Swash and all other purely melee classes should've been a single effective class from the get go.

[Kane0]

One question: how would the practiced spellcaster feat interact with this?

[nonsi]

One question: how would the practiced spellcaster feat interact with this?

Normally, I guess.
Given how many levels the character is gonna be behind the curve, I see no problem that they'd interact.

But now that I think of it, wayfare's approach is better, because then you gain higher spell levels and automatically cast your chosen spells as a caster of a level equal to your HD (or at least of the minimum possible level at which they're accessible to regular casters - in which case I'd like to hear other's views regarding Practiced Spellcaster).

[Veklim]

I kinda like both nonsi's and wayfare's ideas. I personally feel a merging of the two would make a lot of sense. Start with a 1st level only feat perhaps, which gives you access to (chosen casting stat modifier) worth of cantrips OR orisons, maybe 3/day total use. Then present the gain a spell (two if you pay feat tax) rule using the 1st level feat as a requirement for the feat taxing... just a thought.

[nonsi]

I kinda like both nonsi's and wayfare's ideas. I personally feel a merging of the two would make a lot of sense. Start with a 1st level only feat perhaps, which gives you access to (chosen casting stat modifier) worth of cantrips OR orisons, maybe 3/day total use. Then present the gain a spell (two if you pay feat tax) rule using the 1st level feat as a requirement for the feat taxing... just a thought.

If one can become a 1st level Wiz any time s/he's entitled to a level progression, I see no reason to limit this to 1st character level only.
What you could do to "encourage" taking it at 1st level, is to dictate that a character only gains 1st/2nd/3rd/4th/5th/6th level spells only 2/5/8/11/14/17 levels after taking this feat.
Instead of the "gain a spell (two if you pay feat tax)" rule, allow using a general feat to take a single spell of a level you already have or lower (some 2nd level spells are better than some 3rd level spells you know).
And don't neglect the proper Knowledge requirement.

[Veklim]

Aye, makes a lot of sense that way. So the earlier you take it, the higher the level of spells you can access right? Sounds pretty reasonable on a balance front too. Just have to be cautious about making it useful without being too abusable. Maybe stipulate no fullcaster levels, and perhaps restrict school access to only 2 or 3 schools when the feat is taken.

[nonsi]

Aye, makes a lot of sense that way. So the earlier you take it, the higher the level of spells you can access right? Sounds pretty reasonable on a balance front too. Just have to be cautious about making it useful without being too abusable. Maybe stipulate no fullcaster levels, and perhaps restrict school access to only 2 or 3 schools when the feat is taken.

Pointless restriction (http://dndtools.eu/feats/complete-arcane--55/collegiate-wizard--382/).

Spellcasters have much better things to do with their feats.
If you're really against a player just taking a fighter with spells, tell them that it's only viable for players who actually start out at level 1 - that way they'll really feel the feat toll at the beginning.
I'm still waiting for wayfare to introduce his classes-associated spell lists. Maybe they'll be compatible enough so that you wouldn't mind that a certain character came with 2 or 3 appropriate magical effects.

School restriction is also something that I don't find to have an added value. With 6 spells over 20 levels, it'll take 12 levels before a player even has a chance of taking more than 3 - and by then, spellcasters already rule.
And again, wayfare's lists might make this issue moot.

[nonsi]

Ok, the result gained so far doesn’t sit well with me at all.
1. A single feat granting 6 magical powers (up to 6th level effects) + cantrips seems way excessive. Show me the idiot that wouldn’t take it (so suddenly everybody’s a spellcaster).
2. Requiring a number of feats equal to 1/3 your character level for doubling what the 1st feat granted (not including cantrips) is impressively underwhelming.
3. Gaining a single spell per SL is something that doesn’t exist in any official material and I don’t find any justification for adding this mechanic.

Therefore, I tried to find something that wouldn’t make melee/skillmonkey casters an obvious choice, but if someone wanted to go that route, it would definitely be viable – and the power scale would be gradual – according to how many feats you put into it.
I also wanted to allow players who took this feat at a later stage of their character development to eventually catch up.

Magical Apprentice [general]
Requirements: 3 levels in any class or class-combo, 10+ in the appropriate spellcasting ability score (see below).
Benefit: You gain all the spellcasting knowledge of a 1st-level full spellcasting class of your choice.
If you have 6 levels or more in any class-combination, then every time thereafter, when you gain a level, you also gain all the spellcasting knowledge of the next level of the class you chose for this feat - up to a maximum of 1/3 your total class-levels.
Your CL equals your magical knowledge.
Special: a character that took this feat will benefit from Practiced Spellcaster feat, just like any full spellcaster.

Devoted Magical Apprentice [general]
Requirements: Magical Apprentice
Benefit: Your spellcasting knowledge gained as a Magical Apprentice advances to the next level. This benefit persists every time you're to gain a virtual spellcaster level as per Magical Apprentice feat.
Special: This feat may be taken multiple times. The benefits stack.


So what was accomplished by this change?
1. With a single feat, you eventually gain all the spellcasting capabilities of a full spellcaster of 1/3 your character level (rounded down). Not that impressive, but useful if you go for buffs & utility.
2. Putting all your [post-1st-level HD-feats] into your chosen apprenticeship can push you as far as 11th level by character level 18 – for the price of 6 feats, of course. It’s not OP, but it’s not negligible either.
3. The power/utility progression is steady and balanced.
4. This could make a decent alternative to multiclassing, for a player that so wishes.
5. You wouldn’t need additional rules to decide which class can take which spells.
6. This makes countless of character archetypes viable without inventing more rules/feats/features/classes.
7. This gives, a GM who so desires, the option of doing away with PrCs. Any archetype that suddenly became unobtainable due to the loss of PrCs can be made obtainable via specialized feats.
8. This gives, a group that so desires, the option of reducing the number of base classes dramatically.


So, what do you think ?
.

[Morph Bark]

My first improvement thought was to make each feat give 2 CL, which effectively is 1 spell level per feat. However, in the hands of, say, a fighter, that would get him an almost- gestalt.

Also, you may want to have some prereqs. Ranks in Spellcraft and/or Knowledge (arcana) seem appropriate.

It should be noted though that nearly all Fighter feats are never General feats. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they are probably few and far between.

Then again, I never paid much attention to Feats in general other than prerequisites and feats that are necessary to make certain classes truly work.

If you simply keep it to the standard feats you gain at levels 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 and 18 though, with 2 CL per feat the max spell level you could get would be 6, so on par with the Bard and just above the Duskblade, which is borderline Tier 3-4.

[Veklim]

So, now theurging is just a feat or three away, with no need to multiclass except for non-spell requirements...interesting.

[nonsi]

So, now theurging is just a feat or three away, with no need to multiclass except for non-spell requirements...interesting.

Yes. if you let it stack with actual caster levels.
Then you could enter MT as Wis 5/Cl 1 (which would be virtually Wis 5/Cl 3), but I'm not sure you'd wanna go that way.

My bad. Lack of concentration.
Yes. This is indeed somewhat problematic, because with 6 Wiz levels and 2 feats, you'd also be Divine CL 3.
Going Full Wiz and trading 2 feats for [Arcane = HD and Divine = HD-3] is crazy OP.

This is why I believe you should do one of the following:
1. Ban stacking Magical Apprentice / Devoted Magical Apprentice on top of true caster levels (if you don't, then Devoted Adept would be a more appropriate name than Devoted Magical Apprentice).
2. Dictate that only true caster levels count for PrCs.
3. Ban PrCs altogether (most wouldn't wanna do that).
4. Another thought that just came to mind is not to allow Magical Apprentice to stack with true caster levels. A level + 2 general feats is something that's worth consideration if reasonable for going MT.

[Ziegander]

Basically these feats amount to:

Minor Spell Gestalting
Prerequisites: Character Level 3rd, Int/Wis/Cha 11
Benefit: You gain a gestalt level in your choice of Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, or Wizard. This gestalt level does not increase your character level and follows all of the normal rules for gestalt characters (found here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm)).
Special: You may take this feat multiple times. Each time you choose the same class beyond the first you must possess 3 additional character levels and you must have an Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma score that is 1 point higher.

Which, is pretty radical. You're giving out gestalt levels for feats. I'm not sure that it's actually broken mind you, it's just... a lot different than how character level, class level, and multiclassing traditionally works in D&D 3.5.

[Veklim]

@Nonsi, I'd simply state that any levels in spellcasting classes do not count towards the HD requirement for the feat, that way you could still have caster levels on top of this feat, but you still need 3HD from non-caster levels to meet feat requirements.

Beyond this one abuse, I think the feats are actually pretty balanced/fair for the investment you're making. Fighters won't be able to buy these feats with their bonus feats, so they don't actually get any more out of this than the other classes, and even if they could buy these feats with their bonus feats, it wouldn't be that big a deal, since you're essentially swapping out a class feature (albeit a really crappy one) for one level of spellcasting (a better class feature, but still just that).

@Ziegander, whereas I see what you're angling at, it's not a gestalt by any stretch. You don't get the better of skills, saves, BAB or HD, you don't get the class skill list added, and you don't count as a member of that class for any benefit at all, other than the spells themselves. If these feats were worded the way you're suggesting they may as well be, I would have some more serious issues with them. As they are, they seem pretty reasonable, since at the very least, they're levelling the playing field at least a little bit.

[toapat]

Path of Spell and Sword [General]
You know both the Martial and the Mystical.
Prerequisites: Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma of at least 11
Benefits: Each day, you may study the arcane, the primal, or the divine for a number of hours. For each hour spent, you gain +2 caster level and +1 spell level, but loose out +1 base attack bonus for each hour spent.
If you study the arcane, you are treated as a Wizard of hitdice equal to twice the number of hours you spent studying, and must have an Intelligence equal to 10+spell level in order to prepare spells.
Primal studies grant casting as a druid, and require a Wisdom of 10+spell level.
Divine studies grant casting as a Cleric, while requiring a wisdom of 10+spell level.
The Charismatic study both the arcane, the divine, and the primal, and may prepare spells from the cleric, wizard, and druid spell list as a Sorcerer of level equal to twice the number of hours studied.

Alternatively, you may spend hours studying the art of war and combat. for each hour studied, you gain +1 base attack bonus, at the price of 2 caster levels and 1 spell level.

If your study would lower your base attack bonus below a number equal to Half your hitdice rounded down, or raise it higher then your total hitdice, you learn nothing from your studies.
Special: Tenser's Transformation and Divine Power are removed from all spell lists. Clerics and druids receive 1/2 BAB progression.


Quick Study [General]
You absorb more in less time.
Prerequisites: Path of Spell and Sword, BAB +8
Benefits: For every four hours you study, you are treated as instead to have studied for 5.
Normal: You must study for hours.

[Ziegander]

@Ziegander, whereas I see what you're angling at, it's not a gestalt by any stretch. You don't get the better of skills, saves, BAB or HD, you don't get the class skill list added, and you don't count as a member of that class for any benefit at all, other than the spells themselves. If these feats were worded the way you're suggesting they may as well be, I would have some more serious issues with them. As they are, they seem pretty reasonable, since at the very least, they're levelling the playing field at least a little bit.

His first feat grants six levels of caster level, spell slots per day, and spells known. With Devoted Magical Apprentice you could pick up 11th level spellcasting using 5 feats. Honestly, that's probably worth it for almost any non-caster and even maybe for some casters.

His feats compared to mine are different, certainly, but his Magical Apprentice feat actually tends to grant a lot more power in one go than my Minor Spell Gestalting feat. Compare taking Magical Apprentice (Wizard) + Devoted Magical Apprentice at 6th level to taking Minor Spell Gestalting (Druid) twice.

Using Nonsi's feats, I have caster level 3rd, access to and knowledge of 2nd level Wizard spells. Eventually, I would have caster level 7th, and access to and knowledge of 4th level Wizard spells (including Polymorph). Seems a bargain for two feats.

Using my feats, I have caster level 2nd, access to and knowledge of 1st level Druid spells, an effective Druid level 2 Animal Companion (at Character Level 6), Nature Sense, Wild Empathy, Woodland Stride, maybe some new skills, maybe a slight boost to hit points and/or saving throws. Unfortunately, to improve my caster level and gain access to higher level spells, I must continue to taking the gestalting feats, and I'll never reach caster level 7th or 4th level spells. Though, I will eventually pick up Wild Shape (small or medium animal only) 2/day.

Honestly, I think Nonsi's feats are much more powerful than my version.

[Veklim]

You're telling me that gaining all of a druid's class abilities INCLUDING wildshape is less broken than gaining only druid spells at a slightly higher level...?

[nonsi]

Using Nonsi's feats, I have caster level 3rd, access to and knowledge of 2nd level Wizard spells. Eventually, I would have caster level 7th, and access to and knowledge of 4th level Wizard spells (including Polymorph). Seems a bargain for two feats.


2 feats will get you there no sooner than level 18.
A single 4th level spell per day at character level 18 is hardly impressive. With a small investments of coins you'd get much more for your money's worth.
Even at level 6, with decent Cha you can get more out of Leadership than with those 2 feats, and level 6 is the greatest level-relative benefit you're gonna get out of these two feats pre-epic (unless you're actually use epic rules, which would make it [EVER]).
The main incentives I see for taking these feats are:
1. To gain a certain degree of gear-independence.
2. If you have a certain character vision that you wish to role.
3. If your GM allows stacking Devoted Magical Apprentice on top of true caster levels, then you can enter MT by going Wiz 4 / Cl 2 + Magical Apprentice + Devoted Magical Apprentice (supposing you can't stack Magical Apprentice with true caster-class levels).
That way at least your arcane side will only suffer a loss of 2 CL and your divine side will suffer the usual 3 CL loss (2 feats for 1 CL - debatable if the trade is worth it).

[nonsi]

His first feat grants six levels of caster level, spell slots per day, and spells known. With Devoted Magical Apprentice you could pick up 11th level spellcasting using 5 feats. Honestly, that's probably worth it for almost any non-caster and even maybe for some casters.

Actually, that's 6.
As a full spellcaster, no way I'd trade 6 feats to gain 11 levels worth of another class' spellcasting by level 20.
There's just too much to do with 6 feats that you'd be spending them just for the sake of telling everybody that you can also heal.

[Seerow]

What if you used a progression where caster level gained from the feat increased every other time you gained the feat? Ie something like:

1) 1
2) 2
3) 4
4) 6
5) 9
6) 12


Letting you end with 6th level casting for 6 feats.



You may also want to consider something to make the caster level higher than the level of casting available. Casting as a 12th level character at level 18 is all well and good, but being 8 caster levels behind really hurts for stuff like buff durations, spell effects, etc. Since these feats need to be taken as general feats, you could probably get away with making caster level equal to character level. So you spend 6 feats, you cast as a 12th level druid, but have a CL of 20.

Just a thought.

[nonsi]

What if you used a progression where caster level gained from the feat increased every other time you gained the feat? Ie something like:

1) 1
2) 2
3) 4
4) 6
5) 9
6) 12


Letting you end with 6th level casting for 6 feats.

Notice that just by taking Magical Apprentice, you gain CL 1/2/3/4/5/6 at levels 3/6/9/12/15/18 respectively.
Each time you take Devoted Magical Apprentice, your CL increases for all intents and purposes, so by putting all 6 feats into it, you become CL 1/3/5/7/9/11 at levels 3/6/9/12/15/18 - without tweaking any rules.




You may also want to consider something to make the caster level higher than the level of casting available. Casting as a 12th level character at level 18 is all well and good, but being 8 caster levels behind really hurts for stuff like buff durations, spell effects, etc.

Anyone who suffers too badly from the CL delay, should be allowed to retrain his/her 1st level feat and take Practiced Spellcaster.
Some might settle for lesser investment and putting their feats to other uses.
Some might go for utility, so the CL diff will not be too badly felt.




Since these feats need to be taken as general feats, you could probably get away with making caster level equal to character level. So you spend 6 feats, you cast as a 12th level druid, but have a CL of 20.

I don't think that someone who took shortcuts should enjoy full caster potency.

[toapat]

i dont get why people didnt start arguing over my feat to do what the others do in 1 slot what others are having take 6

[nonsi]

i dont get why people didnt start arguing over my feat to do what the others do in 1 slot what others are having take 6

Because it makes no sense.
Analogous to your suggestion is the thought that a software genius would wake up one day and with a few hours of practice become a soccer superstar. Then the next day he'd suddenly decide to become a rocket scientist. Then . . .

Do you now see the problem ?

[toapat]

Because it makes no sense.
Analogous to your suggestion is the thought that a software genius would wake up one day and with a few hours of practice become a soccer superstar. Then the next day he'd suddenly decide to become a rocket scientist. Then . . .

Do you now see the problem ?

Nonsensical but hilarious