# Elements of Magic feat idea



## RangerWickett (Jan 11, 2005)

How does this feat sound?

*I Wish I Hadn't Multi-Classed*
Benefit:  You gain a bonus to your caster level.  The amount of this increase depends on how much lower than your character level your caster level would be otherwise.

Difference : Bonus

0 - 1 1/2 : +0
2 - 3 1/2 : +1/2
4 - 5 1/2 : +1
6 - 7 1/2 : +1 1/2
8+ : +2

So if you're a Fighter 1/Mageknight 1, this feat would not help you, since your caster level is 1/2, only 1 1/2 less than your character level.  If you were a Fighter 1/Mageknight 4, you caster level would be 2 less than your character level, so you'd get a +1/2 caster level boost.  If you're a Fighter 8/Mageknight 1, this feat would grant you a +2 caster level bonus.  

This feat does make feats like Extra Spell List and Extra MP only really useful for single-classed spellcasters, but if you're 9th level, caster level 1/2 just sucks, whereas caster level 2 1/2 might actually be useful for something.


Or what if, instead, the feat said you gain a bonus to your caster level equal to one-fourth the total number of class levels you have in classes that normally grant no spellcasting progression, and that the bonus can be no greater than the caster level you gain from actual spellcasting classes?

So, f'rinstance, you're a fighter 4/mage 4, this feat gets you a +1 caster level.  If you're a fighter 4/mageknight 1, you only get +1/2 caster level.  You could end up with a Fighter 14/Mageknight 6 with a caster level of 8.  Sort of like the Eldritch Knight class, helping make cross-classing not totally screw your magical abilities.


----------



## astriemer (Jan 12, 2005)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> How does this feat sound?
> 
> *I Wish I Hadn't Multi-Classed*
> Benefit:  You gain a bonus to your caster level.  Or what if, instead, the feat said you gain a bonus to your caster level equal to one-fourth the total number of class levels you have in classes that normally grant no spellcasting progression, and that the bonus can be no greater than the caster level you gain from actual spellcasting classes?
> ...




I like this version better. Easier math  Also more like an existing feat (stunning fist).

Not sure why you're saying that it makes Extra Spell List and Extra MP not useful anymore. It just makes them less necessary.


----------



## Verequus (Jan 12, 2005)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> How does this feat sound?
> 
> *I Wish I Hadn't Multi-Classed*
> Benefit: You gain a bonus to your caster level. The amount of this increase depends on how much lower than your character level your caster level would be otherwise.
> ...




 I'm not happy with it - it is relatively rules-intensive due to the table. I favour a flat bonus, if the increase is stopped anyway at some point. Also, it's a wasted feat. If your caster level is lower than 2, you don't have enough MP to cast something useful. Without the feat your Fighter 8/Mageknight 1 can cast 4 cantrips, with the feat 2 cantrips and either two 1 MP spells or one 2 MP spell. If Extra MP would give 1 MP per hit die, then two feats would be needed to make it barely worth it - through the synergy effect alone. If the flat bonus to the caster level would be +4 (with the same limitation to the hit dice), then it would be better, but you need at least an unchanged caster level of 1 or the (unchanged) Extra MP feat, because then you have 5 or 6 MP available.

 Actually, Practiced Spellcaster (which is increasing the MP limit in EoMR, too) isn't overpowered even for low levels, because unlike the core rules, there is no automatic improvement. You have still to pay for anything with MP (meaning only one or two spells with full MP use per day), and those are the true limitation of such a feat. Next to the fact, there is no limitation on the usable spells - while in the core rules, you can't access a higher-level spell, in EoMR, you have only to look at the MP limit and the used spell lists to know, what is castable. I believe, that this effect captures the true spirit - you are able to use your still limited resources better.

 To Extra Spell List: I'm beginning to wonder, what the true value of this feat is. Considering, that one true caster level with the full improvement is worth two feats, it is clear, that Extra Spell List isn't worth a full feat. Two gained spell lists seem to be still underpowered - but I have to look, how the ratio to the other parts is, before I can be sure of the true rating.



> Or what if, instead, the feat said you gain a bonus to your caster level equal to one-fourth the total number of class levels you have in classes that normally grant no spellcasting progression, and that the bonus can be no greater than the caster level you gain from actual spellcasting classes?
> 
> So, f'rinstance, you're a fighter 4/mage 4, this feat gets you a +1 caster level. If you're a fighter 4/mageknight 1, you only get +1/2 caster level. You could end up with a Fighter 14/Mageknight 6 with a caster level of 8. Sort of like the Eldritch Knight class, helping make cross-classing not totally screw your magical abilities.




 One-fourth? You've got to be kidding - your Fighter 14/Mageknight 6 has only 26 MP and can only cast three full-powered spells. This isn't really helping... The Eldritch Knight gives spell slots and new spell levels, too, so your comparison isn't really accurate.

 The more I think about it, the more I believe, that the MP limit should be always the character level. Like shown above, the true limit is the available MP pool. A secondary caster won't use spells which taps his MP limit often, and if he does, he can do it only a few times before exhausting himself, while a full caster would have after the same stunt a lot of MP left. Furthermore, with less spell lists than a full caster, the reportoire of spells is also more limited for a half-caster.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jan 12, 2005)

I kinda like the idea of having MP Limit be equal to character level.  That's actually a very good fix.  It's a little amusing to me that even just 8 months after EOM-R came out I'm looking back and seeing how to do things better.

MP Limit could be equal to character level, and every 4 levels of Mage could grant you a +1 increase to MP Limit.


----------



## torem13 (Jan 12, 2005)

I like the Idea of MP limit equal to character level. I'm not sure what you mean by  every 4 levels of Mage get a +1 to MP. 

We haven't had a multi-classed Mage character yet in our game, but it is an interesting modification if we did.


----------



## Verequus (Jan 13, 2005)

RangerWickett said:
			
		

> I kinda like the idea of having MP Limit be equal to character level. That's actually a very good fix. It's a little amusing to me that even just 8 months after EOM-R came out I'm looking back and seeing how to do things better.




 Thank you! In this case, the idea was half stolen, because someone does it already with the core rules, and half extrapolated from Practiced Spellcaster and its implications. Under EoMR, there aren't any benefits for a spell with a higher caster level, so having a higher MP limit isn't really benefitting without having more MP. Also I think, that this idea was clouded to the fact, that "class level = factor x caster level" has been a strong dogma around all the years, even if there have been a few "+1 to caster level" around. BTW, what is your opinion on my proposed rules changes on Extra Spell List? And why did delete your original comment, that you meant not only the MP limit, but true caster levels? The rest of my posts refers to this information.



			
				RangerWickett said:
			
		

> MP Limit could be equal to character level, and every 4 levels of Mage could grant you a +1 increase to MP Limit.




   (To torem13: The last rule means, that an 8th level Mage can cast 10 MP spells.)

 Does this mean, you are giving up your idea of "I wish I hadn't multiclassed"? There are more problems with this feat, than I thought yesterday.

 1. It isn't a mechanical clean solution like the combined caster level. This is one the third best reason, why I like the rules, after spell-points and the free spell creation. Having a feat doing the work of the actual multiclassing system is not a good design choice.
 2. I don't like it, that this feat gives you the equivalent of 8 feats. Your above example with the Fighter 14/Mageknight 6 is wrong and ineffective - the caster level would be only 7 1/2, not 8. Better choices are Fighter 16/Mage 4 for a caster level of 8 or Fighter 12/Mage 8 for a caster level of 12. If you look at it from a point-buy perspective, then someone gains points for free, just because he took a different route than a pure mage - it would be unfair, regardless if he pays a feat or not.
 3. Is someone at character level 20 effective with a caster level of 12 or 8. I don't know, because I haven't seen someone playing the above mentioned combinations, but regarding offensive capabilities it looks dark. Utility spells mostly, because buffs are dispelled easily. Not good, it seems.

 Another problem, which Archus mentioned to me: Metamagic is limited by the MP limit, which results in spells being weaker, because they utilize metamagic. His suggested fix of allowing metamagic going over the limit isn't good, because there is neither an in-game explanation, how MP used for metamagic differs from MP used for spells and nor are the metamagicked spells reduced in their spell DC, compared to other pure magic spells with the the same MP. Ryan, your +1 MP limit for every 4 Mage levels could take care of this problem - at least, it gives the Mage class an edge, which I missed. The other spellcasting classes seem only to be a Mage minus some caster levels in exchange for some abilities.

 But still a further problem isn't solved: Silent and stilled spells cost 4 MP and two feats, where the Psionic Mage needs only one feat and a bit of time, which results in more powerful stilled and silent spells. The skill check can be with Skill Mastery made to "Always Take 10" and then the few needed skill points are not much to invest. Skill Mastery is an option for Mages, right? As a solution I suggest to combine Silent Spell and Still Spell into one feat and for every used option the caster pays 1 MP.

 Another gripe, I have: Races with an supposed magical aptitude aren't superior compared to humans, when you are only giving them levels in a full caster class. A Mage 20 is nearly the same, if he is elf or not, even though elves should be powerful magic users. Only the Favorite Class is supporting this stance. Your +1 bonus isn't helping, because everyone gets them. I'm thinking of a spell power ability like of the archmage - +1 to MP limit and to caster level checks. Actually, this problem is related to the fact, that with "MP limit = hit dice" characters with ECL are at a disadvantage. In their case, a +4 bonus, but not higher than the ECL, similar to Practiced Spellcaster would be nice, but only for the MP limit, not for caster level checks.

 But I don't like two feats with similar effects - better is to use the broader feat. This would result in "Empowered Caster: You gain a +2 bonus to your MP limit and to your caster level checks.". Of course, such a member of such a race still needs MP and spell lists, but that could be provided in the package. The only problem, I see with this feat, is that it includes Spell Penetration - if Empowered Caster stacks, like it should do, then no one would take Spell Penetration. Hmm, maybe splitting the effects: One feat to raise the MP limit and one feat to raise the caster level regarding SR. Then we need only a feat for extra cantrips and everything is covered.  Would make a nice base for point-buy system, too...


----------



## RangerWickett (Jan 15, 2005)

Getting psionic focus takes a standard action, but I suppose you make a valid point about it being under-costed.  I still think metamagic should be limited by the same MP Limit as everything else, because you're still casting the same spell.  You're just doing something most people can't.  Of course, I am kind of fond of the psionic focus rules, and if I could find some way to incorporate the ability to cast still, silent, or quickened spells without having to spend MP by instead using some sort of focus rules, I'd like that.  I'm not quite sure how I'd do that, though.

I think the idea of a racial ability to increase MP Limit is intriguing.  Maybe an ECL +1 Elf race could get an automatic +2 MP Limit.  There's a lot of room in the rules to fiddle around and give extra abilities.  In my game Elves can use Spellcraft untrained, which means all Elves can detect magic.


----------

