PDA

View Full Version : Arcane Caster [new feat & class revision]



Altair_the_Vexed
2006-12-05, 08:38 AM
Quite a few people have mentioned the issue of being able to multi-class into Wizard and Sorcerer, and that the "fluff" doesn't add up. As V said (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0126.html)"I studied for a century before I even mastered my first 1st level spell!"

So - because I sort of agree with V, and because it'll add flavour to another homebrew idea I have, I've invented a new feat - which almost certainly needs examination and critique.


ARCANE CASTER


Benefit: You can cast arcane spells (within your ability limits).


Normal: You can't cast arcane spells.


Special: Characters starting out at 1st level as Wizards, Sorcerers, Bards (and other arcane base classes used in your campaign) get ARCANE CASTER for free in addition to their normal 1st level feat selection. Characters without ARCANE CASTER cannot take levels in classes that cast arcane spells as a class ability.
This feat would mean that one couldn't suddenly take an arcane class, one would have to spend a feat before hand, and then spend at least one level "learning" the ways. Interestingly, it means that Elan would be able to multi-class into Wizard...

I'm just thinking "out loud"... What are the flaws in the plan?

Dausuul
2006-12-05, 08:49 AM
The main flaw that I see is that it further cripples arcane caster multi-classing, which is painful enough to begin with. If you don't want people to multi into arcane caster classes, just forbid it outright. Or require that anyone who intends to multi-class into wizard announce the intention to do so upon character creation, and actually carry through on that intention within 3 levels.

Alternatively, you could add some sort of benefit to the feat beyond "you gain back the ability I took away." Maybe combine it with Practiced Spellcaster.

If you implement the feat as written, all that will happen is that anyone who wants to multi-class as an arcane caster will take their first level in the caster class rather than the non-caster, thereby avoiding the necessity for taking the feat.

Altair_the_Vexed
2006-12-05, 08:56 AM
The main flaw that I see is that it further cripples arcane caster multi-classing, which is painful enough to begin with. If you don't want people to multi into arcane caster classes, just forbid it outright. Or require that anyone who intends to multi-class into wizard announce the intention to do so upon character creation, and actually carry through on that intention within 3 levels.

Alternatively, you could add some sort of benefit to the feat beyond "you gain back the ability I took away." Maybe combine it with Practiced Spellcaster.

The whole purpose of the feat is to take away an ability.

I don't want to forbid multi-classing into arcane classes outright, I just want to make it a little harder, for entirely flavouring reasons.

The alternative you suggested is rather arbitary - it doesn't fit with the WotC rules format. Inventing a feat requires no additional rules other than the feat.

You get the feat free if you start out as an arcane caster, and it carries over to other arcane classes, so it makes no difference to anyone starting out as an arcane caster.

ChaosStorm
2006-12-05, 06:44 PM
The whole purpose of the feat is to take away an ability.

I don't want to forbid multi-classing into arcane classes outright, I just want to make it a little harder, for entirely flavouring reasons.

The alternative you suggested is rather arbitary - it doesn't fit with the WotC rules format. Inventing a feat requires no additional rules other than the feat.

You get the feat free if you start out as an arcane caster, and it carries over to other arcane classes, so it makes no difference to anyone starting out as an arcane caster.

I believe what Dausuul is getting at is that since Arcane spell casters get the feat for free, then anyone who is thinking about multi-classing will start as Arcane casters at first level and then move on to whatever other class they have in mind. It is a minor thing players can use to get around the rule.

The whole thing is a bit harsh. It makes people who consider multi-classing to think twice, but I believe that's the whole point of the feat. So in the end it boils down to preference. For your purposes it's a good feat and makes a lot of sense.

And Dausuul's declaration idea doesn't sound too bad to me, if a DM doesn't want to create quite as strict rules against multi-classing. It'll probably happen anyways, though. Due to penalties for class levels being too far apart most people would probably take a secondary arcane caster level around level 3 anyways. so the only difference in this rule is that they have to actually vocalize the idea to the DM during character creation.

icke
2006-12-06, 08:09 AM
The problem I see is Sorcerers: They don't study excessively to get their power, it just falls into their lap somehow. So how do You explain the fighter or cleric not being able to be multiclass sorcerers - or bards, for that matter? And on the other side, what do You do with clerics and druids. Who also have to spend years of devotion to gain spellcasting abilities?

Thistle
2006-12-06, 08:50 AM
Using V as an example is a bad idea. While s/he takes a century to learn the arcane art, a human can do it in 17 years (at most 27). And not all classes take the same amount of time to train. According to random the random age chart it takes just as long to become a cleric, druid or monk as a wizard. It takes half as much time to learn the trade of a bard, fighter, paladin, or ranger. One third for a rogue, barbarian or sorcerer. (Statistics for humans at least)

Creating a new feat that needs to be taken punishes multi-classers, forcing them to waste a feat. It doesn't accurately portray the training anyway as each arcane class takes a different time to master.

If you feel it should take more time to learn a new class emphasize down time and roleplaying. Don't allow leveling up until they have spent one month at some training center. Have them talk about spending nights pouring over a burrowed spell book and trying to make sense of the mystic diagrams. Have the character try to pronounce a word of power only to have the emphasis on the second "i" and because of that have their hair turn black and finger nails grow an inch. Maybe they spend a round during combat making futile complicated hand gestures in an attempt to copy the resident mage.
Meditating for a week, fasting, practicing hours on end, encouraging the new found power developing within in them. You don't need a new feat or set of rules. Have them play it out.

If you do feel it necessary, I suggest required down time. 1d4 months for Barbarian, Rogue, and Sorcerer. 1d6 for Bard, Fighter, Paladin, and Ranger. 2d6 for Cleric, Druid, Monk, and Wizard. If you feel it is too short or long adjust the dice or times.

Altair_the_Vexed
2006-12-06, 10:14 AM
Like I mentioned above, in the SW d20 RPG, you have to take the feat "Force Sensitive" before taking any Force Using class, except at 1st level.
In Star Wars that partly represents a latent ability manifesting at a later age... Um...

Hold on! Did I not mention this already? NO! It was in another thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1641585#post1641585). Sorry. Take a look over there if you want my reasoning on that.

magic8BALL
2006-12-07, 03:20 AM
...instead of choosing the class you take when you level up, you can stipulate that you choose the next class you take. That way, when you earn the XP, you already know it was for another Fighter class, or whatever.

eg. I am a Barbarian, say. I start on 0 XP. Right now, I need to say "when I level up, I'm going to be a fighter". At this stage, I control my anger in combat a bit, I experiment with heavier armours. When I get my 1000 XP I have earnt my d10 hit die, my bonus feat and my heavy armour profficiency. At this stage I choose to take on the arcane arts. I choose to be a sorcceror now (at 1001XP, not 3000 XP). My next 2000 XP go into learning how to manipulate the multiverse. If by this stage I've done too much hack and chop, my DM can say "nah, u did bugger all to be an arcanist, take another level in barbarian or fighter".

This system also solves the "i want to be a (any other role than what i am at the moment)", as you need to actually role-play to get there, as well as use game mechanics! Its making sure the fighter tries to cast spells before her first level of wizard, she's reading scrolls, making use magic device checks (untrained even), spend a few months in Wizard school, spend some gold, scribe some spells, resite some chants, learn to be a wizard. Role play this. Thats what D&D is, after all.

Altair_the_Vexed
2006-12-07, 05:46 AM
The role playing is assumed to be taking place - but we can't rely on role play alone to police munchining, can we?

The reasoning for the feat is to have a way within the existing SRD rules to ensure that some sort of preparation for an arcane class takes place prior to taking a level in that class. When using this feat in a campaign setting, arcane spellcasters are somewhat restricted in numbers, and the role-playing of choosing an arcane class at least one level before becomes embedded in the game mechanics.
By making a binary absolute rule within the existing rules structure, fairness and impartiality is retained - one can't accuse the GM of being biased, whereas with a judgement based solely on role playing, that becomes far too easy to do.

Sure, this feat is not for all games - I'd even say it's not for MOST games. But does it work as described? Chaos Storm (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1643920#post1643920)says yes.