Characters Developing Feats? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Characters Developing Feats? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
kyros_the_spawnslayer
07-11-07, 09:02 PM A player in a group I was a part of was a wizard who in his story was studying greatly the use of Metamagic, and even developing a new "feat" as a result of research and trial and error. I know the DMG provides what a person needs to develope new spells, so should I just apply something like that in this case or does anyone have a idea of working this out.
Kouk
07-11-07, 10:28 PM The best ideas I can give you is to evaluate it in comparison to other feats using the same general guidelines as for spells, considering the prerequisites, the effects, and whether or not a character would be "insane" not to take it.

Aside from that, it is probably a good idea to run it by the community in a post. The more people that look at it, the more points can be brought up about whether it is too strong or too weak.
JadeSpider9643
07-11-07, 11:09 PM feats arn't something a character can research and develop. Feats are a game-component that handles a special ability or talent, or some other special aspect of the character. If the DM chooses to run their campaign in such as way, a character can unlock the right to choose a certain feat, or the player can simply choose to roleplay how the character developed an ability. But "researching a new feat" isn't something you can do, espically in the sense of gaining additional feats just from in-game roleplaying.

All you need for a PLAYER to develop new feats for his character to take, is well...DM approval. hopefully, for the sake of the campaign, the DM is wise and will approve/reject feats appropiately. Since developing your own feats is a pure matter of homebrewing your own rules, there's nothing to stop you from going absolutely beserk if that's your choice.
kyros_the_spawnslayer
07-11-07, 11:24 PM I will keep this stuff in mind, thanks. As for the feat this guy was trying to create was taking energy subsitution to a new level, by subbing force for the energy damage done by a spell. He knew "developing" this feat would make all of his energy spells really powerful so he gave it a hefty spell slot increase, I think it was five levels higher than the spell being augumented or something, and the amount of damage you would normally do is halfed to balance it out. I don't know if he got the okay because I had a lot of school stuff to do and had to leave the group.
Sinweave
07-11-07, 11:40 PM Wow, to be honest the feat you spoke of would almost seem underpowered to me; mayhaps take the halved damage out of the equation and call it a day. Just my two cents.
Metafictional
07-12-07, 12:14 AM I don't know about the idea players can't develop Feats. NPC's can and do, so why not?

Take Robilar's Gambit for example. A named NPC in a gameworld dreamed this one up. Why is that possible for him, and not any other experienced character?
blowfish
07-12-07, 12:14 AM even the five extra levels is too much. really it should only be one more level than energy substitution, maybe two since it has no miss chance against incorporeal creatures, but definitely not 5 more. I also think the half damage is too much also.
kyros_the_spawnslayer
07-12-07, 12:33 PM well like I said I didn't get to see how this came out plus the guy didn't want to make a feat that is way over balanced. Just thing about a wizard fireball going of but instead its composed of only force and at a certain point that's 10d6 of force dmg done in a 20 ft burst, and the only thing I know that is immune to force dmg is the force dragon.
Thiez
07-12-07, 01:27 PM Fireball is max 10d6, so with the original feat it would be (10d6 >> 1) (avg 35) damage, and you get a reflex save for halve. For an 8th level spellslot...

So this feat does 2 things: It ignores energy resistance/immunity/vunerability, and it hits incorporeal and ethereal things. Feels like a +3 slot increase, but let's go +4 instead. Dividing damage by 2? Nah, let's forget about that.
Gnarl
07-12-07, 03:53 PM Fireball is max 10d6, so with the original feat it would be (10d6 >> 1) (avg 35) damage, and you get a reflex save for halve. For an 8th level spellslot...

So this feat does 2 things: It ignores energy resistance/immunity/vunerability, and it hits incorporeal and ethereal things. Feels like a +3 slot increase, but let's go +4 instead. Dividing damage by 2? Nah, let's forget about that.

IMHO, he's right on every point.

As a side note, Piercing Cold is 'only' a +1 adjustment as is Consecrate Spell.
kyros_the_spawnslayer
07-12-07, 05:09 PM alright then I guess this would be how the feat would look.

Forceful Magic
[Metamagic]

Prerequisites: Energy Substitution (any), knowledge of 3 force spells

Benefit: Any spell that can deal a type of energy damage now deals force damage. A forceful magic sepll uses a spell slot 4 levels higher than the level of the original spell. The spell's descriptor changes to force.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
kyros_the_spawnslayer 07-11-07, 09:02 PM	A player in a group I was a part of was a wizard who in his story was studying greatly the use of Metamagic, and even developing a new "feat" as a result of research and trial and error. I know the DMG provides what a person needs to develope new spells, so should I just apply something like that in this case or does anyone have a idea of working this out.
Kouk 07-11-07, 10:28 PM	The best ideas I can give you is to evaluate it in comparison to other feats using the same general guidelines as for spells, considering the prerequisites, the effects, and whether or not a character would be "insane" not to take it. Aside from that, it is probably a good idea to run it by the community in a post. The more people that look at it, the more points can be brought up about whether it is too strong or too weak.
JadeSpider9643 07-11-07, 11:09 PM	feats arn't something a character can research and develop. Feats are a game-component that handles a special ability or talent, or some other special aspect of the character. If the DM chooses to run their campaign in such as way, a character can unlock the right to choose a certain feat, or the player can simply choose to roleplay how the character developed an ability. But "researching a new feat" isn't something you can do, espically in the sense of gaining additional feats just from in-game roleplaying. All you need for a PLAYER to develop new feats for his character to take, is well...DM approval. hopefully, for the sake of the campaign, the DM is wise and will approve/reject feats appropiately. Since developing your own feats is a pure matter of homebrewing your own rules, there's nothing to stop you from going absolutely beserk if that's your choice.
kyros_the_spawnslayer 07-11-07, 11:24 PM	I will keep this stuff in mind, thanks. As for the feat this guy was trying to create was taking energy subsitution to a new level, by subbing force for the energy damage done by a spell. He knew "developing" this feat would make all of his energy spells really powerful so he gave it a hefty spell slot increase, I think it was five levels higher than the spell being augumented or something, and the amount of damage you would normally do is halfed to balance it out. I don't know if he got the okay because I had a lot of school stuff to do and had to leave the group.
Sinweave 07-11-07, 11:40 PM	Wow, to be honest the feat you spoke of would almost seem underpowered to me; mayhaps take the halved damage out of the equation and call it a day. Just my two cents.
Metafictional 07-12-07, 12:14 AM	I don't know about the idea players can't develop Feats. NPC's can and do, so why not? Take Robilar's Gambit for example. A named NPC in a gameworld dreamed this one up. Why is that possible for him, and not any other experienced character?
blowfish 07-12-07, 12:14 AM	even the five extra levels is too much. really it should only be one more level than energy substitution, maybe two since it has no miss chance against incorporeal creatures, but definitely not 5 more. I also think the half damage is too much also.
kyros_the_spawnslayer 07-12-07, 12:33 PM	well like I said I didn't get to see how this came out plus the guy didn't want to make a feat that is way over balanced. Just thing about a wizard fireball going of but instead its composed of only force and at a certain point that's 10d6 of force dmg done in a 20 ft burst, and the only thing I know that is immune to force dmg is the force dragon.
Thiez 07-12-07, 01:27 PM	Fireball is max 10d6, so with the original feat it would be (10d6 >> 1) (avg 35) damage, and you get a reflex save for halve. For an 8th level spellslot... So this feat does 2 things: It ignores energy resistance/immunity/vunerability, and it hits incorporeal and ethereal things. Feels like a +3 slot increase, but let's go +4 instead. Dividing damage by 2? Nah, let's forget about that.
Gnarl 07-12-07, 03:53 PM	Fireball is max 10d6, so with the original feat it would be (10d6 >> 1) (avg 35) damage, and you get a reflex save for halve. For an 8th level spellslot... So this feat does 2 things: It ignores energy resistance/immunity/vunerability, and it hits incorporeal and ethereal things. Feels like a +3 slot increase, but let's go +4 instead. Dividing damage by 2? Nah, let's forget about that. IMHO, he's right on every point. As a side note, Piercing Cold is 'only' a +1 adjustment as is Consecrate Spell.
kyros_the_spawnslayer 07-12-07, 05:09 PM	alright then I guess this would be how the feat would look. Forceful Magic [Metamagic] Prerequisites: Energy Substitution (any), knowledge of 3 force spells Benefit: Any spell that can deal a type of energy damage now deals force damage. A forceful magic sepll uses a spell slot 4 levels higher than the level of the original spell. The spell's descriptor changes to force.