Force Missile Mage meets Warlock - via arcane feats (P.E.A.C.H)

[nonsi]

1) Spellfire: As far as I understand, an antimagic field DOES suppress evocation (e.g. a fireball won't affect the creatures within the antimagic); similarly spell resistance IS effective against evocations. I think perhaps I'm misinterpreting you?

Yes, oops. I guess it's a combination of some evocation spells that ignore SR (e.g. Invisibility Purge, Sending and Burning Sword) with a discussion I might have encountered sometime in the past that had suggested this for evening Evocation with the other schools. IDK.
It seems weird to me that an energy effect, once triggered and released, would be susceptible to antimagic, since all you're left with once the effect goes off is heat/electricity/sound waves etc.

Also, you know that RAW, antimagic blocks breath-weapons, right? That never sat right with me.

Anyway, if I was to invest many feats into an attack mechanism, I wouldn't want a single 6^th level spell to render my entire investment moot.

Mages are usually fine with touch attacks (ray spells etc), they only have to go against touch AC.

You're probably right.
I guess this is only an issue under my system, where characters gain dodge AC improvement with BAB progression. It's easy to get confused sometimes.

2) Spellfire Missiles: Yeah, Spellfire Overload and the other "boosting" feats will need to be addressed, they make some combinations too crazy.

As you said, w/o Spellfire Overload it'll yield less damage output than Disintegrate on all scenarios, because the real problem is only the added CL per missile.
But now that I think of it, there's another problem. Empower/Maximize bring back the OP issue where Spellfire Overload is involved (suggestion below)

3) Spellfire Bolt: Yes, I suppose it does give a tactical advantage, it just feels "wrong" to have a bolt like that (except in cases where you call a bolt down from the sky, like call lightning)

This is how Lightning Bolt worked in BACMI D&D. I like that version better
I guess they changed it to even things out with line breath weapons, but I don't think it's necessary. If I'm putting feats into it, I wanna squeeze that lemon dry.

4) Spellfire Strike: As in, a melee feat is a weak base upon which you build the ability to make magical ranged/area attacks (always superior for a caster, except for gishes).

Logical enough, but it still feels complex/will slow combat down more.

I don't see why.
If a Regular hit: weapon damage + Spellfire damage
Else if a touch attack hit: Spellfire damage
Else: no damage

9) Spellfire Coversion/ Force Weaponry: No I get that, but I don't see anyone bothering to sacrifice a whole feat on these. If cosmic energy already overcomes damage reduction/hardness, you'd only take this feat to get +50% damage against energy-vulnerable creatures (and your other booster feats do a better job of that -compare how much extra damage you'll get from Intensify Spellfire by the end).

The option is there. Use it or skip it.
I could imagine taking Force Weaponry myself, if I went for a problem solver, and Energy Conversion stacks with any other damage enhancement.

10) Spellfire Carrier: Whoops, I totally missed the spellfire + actual spell level limit! My bad, not broken that way. I'd rewrite it as "Whenever you cast a spell, you may combine its effects with a spellfire attack. All creatures targeted by (or in the area of) the spell are affected by the spellfire. The total level of the spell you cast and the spell slot you expend to activate the spellfire may not exceed the level of the highest spell you can cast."

Very nice. Instead of dealing with different areas for Spellfire and the actual spell effects, you merge their AoE. A lot simpler.
Well, I guess that Spellfire Spell Rider is a more appropriate name then.

11) & 12) Again, these are very niche IMHO,but they may be more useful depending on a particular campaign.

As with almost everything else, I guess.

Re: Conclusions

A healthy design goal!

Fair point about planning for Epic Levels, but my point is that I think broken combos are achievable pre-Epic (human wizard 20 has 12 feats, can almost get full Intensify Spellfire effect by 17th level).

12 feats ==> a total potential of 16 SLs for Spellfire (with the mage taking 7d6 damage).
This generates max damage of 16d12 + CL + Int-bonus (or Emopwered Maximized 11d12 + CL + Int-bonus = 198 + 20 + Int-bonus = 218 + 7(?))
Nothing out of the ordinary for level 20 w/ no less than 5 dedicated feats (if one settles for nothing more than a single Spellfire ray attack).

It's only Spellfire Missiles that ends up broken.
Maybe I could solve this problem by keeping CL + Int-bonus for all other Spellfire variations and restrict CL addition to just one missile.

Spellfire Storm: I'm unconvinced the spread is that much more useful than a burst, but as you've reduced the prereqs it's probably more worthwhile now.

Spread effects seep everywhere. They're not blocked by obstacles like walls and turning corridors.

Re: Free metamagic - Spellfire has the clause "Special: You may apply the benefits of any metamagic feats you possess to Spellfire without penalty.", which I took to mean you could apply Empower etc effects to Spellfire for free. Some clarification is in order for how you apply Spellfire and metamagic together then (for both prepared and spontaneous casters).

Oops. I meant "without special penalties". Fixed.

Anyways, I think that's a wrap for now. It's a prodigious amount of feats so I'm going to lay off the critiques and rest for a bit, haha! Again, good work!

Indeed. You've been a tremendous help