Natural Spell [Archive] - Wizards Community

Natural Spell [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
nymdespana
08-22-07, 03:30 AM Hy guys, I'm pretty new here, even if I'm an "old" D&D player.
I've a question, and I didn't find the answer because I didn't fin the way to search into the forum.
I have a druid/sorcerer... I would like to take the feat "Natural Spell" that allows you to cast spells while in wild form. The feat doesn't say "only one kind of spell", so I think both druid and sorcerer spells, but my master says there must be an errata.
I read the errata and didn't find it.
Somebody can help me? Thank you!

Nym Despana
Tedronai
08-22-07, 03:44 AM Neither am I aware of any such errata. If your DM is ruling based on the existence of errata, I would ask him/her to point you in it's direction, as you have been unable to find it (make sure you mention that, too). If they cannot do so (which I assume will be the case), then ask them to reconsider the ruling. Otherwise you may end up wanting to rebuild your character to take this new information, essentially a house-rule at that point, into account. If they don't allow the feat to function as written, and don't allow you to rebuild your character around that ruling, I'd suggest retiring the character and starting from scratch.
nymdespana
08-22-07, 08:29 AM My master didn't rule "that is" and didn't say "there's an erratum".
He just said "it's too strange to me, there must be an erratum".
He hopes there is an erratum, I hope it doesn't... :D

Anyway, thank you

Nym Despana
Ovistavin
08-22-07, 10:22 AM There is a link to the Errata page in my sig. I don't remember any errata like this for Natural Spell.
tarkin
08-22-07, 10:31 AM I see no reason to limit it to just Druid spells.

Note, you are yourself fairly limited by making yourself a druid/sorceror multiclass (unless you are gestalting)

Without a PrC, those things are significantly weaker than a straight class.

Even with a PrC, often the PrC is not the most 'optimized'.

I see no reason to limit Natural Spell to just Druid spells. It is not overpowered and will not be abusive.

For example, it does not help you if you are grappled or in a silence spell area.
Kouk
08-22-07, 10:53 AM I see no reason to limit it to just Druid spells.

Note, you are yourself fairly limited by making yourself a druid/sorceror multiclass (unless you are gestalting)

Without a PrC, those things are significantly weaker than a straight class.

Even with a PrC, often the PrC is not the most 'optimized'.

I see no reason to limit Natural Spell to just Druid spells. It is not overpowered and will not be abusive.

For example, it does not help you if you are grappled or in a silence spell area.

I agree. If you are already a Druid/Sorcerer then the DM probably doesn't have to worry that you are too powerful.

Natural Spell is a feat some people have problems with (because they feel that the Druid is too powerful with it), but if the feat is allowed for pure Druids, I don't think it could have much of an impact on the game with a multiclass character.

EDIT: I will admit though, it does seem a little strange.
nymdespana
08-23-07, 02:45 AM Thank you very much guys for your answers!
You have been very helpful!

Nym
Karla
08-23-07, 06:12 AM The feat description says "spells", not "druid spells". My personal view would be if they'd meant the latter only then they would have said so. And I'm not aware of any errata on this either.

I'd also have to agree with others that multiclassing druid with sorcerer has already forfeited sufficient casting levels in each that no way is this going to result in an overpowered character.

If your DM does insist on an "official" word, you could try submitting the question to Wizards Customer Service - they're not necessarily always "right" and they always emphasise that the DM has the final say, but they could well reassure your DM that this is indeed how it is meant to work.
nymdespana
08-23-07, 08:20 AM Actually,
we are playing just a gesthalt campaign (because it's a bought module and we are less player than required, so the master decided to do this strange kind of characters (first time I've heard about it!).
I did druid/sorcerer because all the "standard" classes were gone with other players.
I didn't think very much about the power or the synergy.
It has been a friend (another player) that mentioned it as a good feat.
I agree, even if I think it's very strong.
We can use all the material from the 3 main books, and nothing else.

Next time I will see what the master will tell me...

bye guys, tnx!

Nym

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
nymdespana 08-22-07, 03:30 AM	Hy guys, I'm pretty new here, even if I'm an "old" D&D player. I've a question, and I didn't find the answer because I didn't fin the way to search into the forum. I have a druid/sorcerer... I would like to take the feat "Natural Spell" that allows you to cast spells while in wild form. The feat doesn't say "only one kind of spell", so I think both druid and sorcerer spells, but my master says there must be an errata. I read the errata and didn't find it. Somebody can help me? Thank you! Nym Despana
Tedronai 08-22-07, 03:44 AM	Neither am I aware of any such errata. If your DM is ruling based on the existence of errata, I would ask him/her to point you in it's direction, as you have been unable to find it (make sure you mention that, too). If they cannot do so (which I assume will be the case), then ask them to reconsider the ruling. Otherwise you may end up wanting to rebuild your character to take this new information, essentially a house-rule at that point, into account. If they don't allow the feat to function as written, and don't allow you to rebuild your character around that ruling, I'd suggest retiring the character and starting from scratch.
nymdespana 08-22-07, 08:29 AM	My master didn't rule "that is" and didn't say "there's an erratum". He just said "it's too strange to me, there must be an erratum". He hopes there is an erratum, I hope it doesn't... :D Anyway, thank you Nym Despana
Ovistavin 08-22-07, 10:22 AM	There is a link to the Errata page in my sig. I don't remember any errata like this for Natural Spell.
tarkin 08-22-07, 10:31 AM	I see no reason to limit it to just Druid spells. Note, you are yourself fairly limited by making yourself a druid/sorceror multiclass (unless you are gestalting) Without a PrC, those things are significantly weaker than a straight class. Even with a PrC, often the PrC is not the most 'optimized'. I see no reason to limit Natural Spell to just Druid spells. It is not overpowered and will not be abusive. For example, it does not help you if you are grappled or in a silence spell area.
Kouk 08-22-07, 10:53 AM	I see no reason to limit it to just Druid spells. Note, you are yourself fairly limited by making yourself a druid/sorceror multiclass (unless you are gestalting) Without a PrC, those things are significantly weaker than a straight class. Even with a PrC, often the PrC is not the most 'optimized'. I see no reason to limit Natural Spell to just Druid spells. It is not overpowered and will not be abusive. For example, it does not help you if you are grappled or in a silence spell area. I agree. If you are already a Druid/Sorcerer then the DM probably doesn't have to worry that you are too powerful. Natural Spell is a feat some people have problems with (because they feel that the Druid is too powerful with it), but if the feat is allowed for pure Druids, I don't think it could have much of an impact on the game with a multiclass character. EDIT: I will admit though, it does seem a little strange.
nymdespana 08-23-07, 02:45 AM	Thank you very much guys for your answers! You have been very helpful! Nym
Karla 08-23-07, 06:12 AM	The feat description says "spells", not "druid spells". My personal view would be if they'd meant the latter only then they would have said so. And I'm not aware of any errata on this either. I'd also have to agree with others that multiclassing druid with sorcerer has already forfeited sufficient casting levels in each that no way is this going to result in an overpowered character. If your DM does insist on an "official" word, you could try submitting the question to Wizards Customer Service - they're not necessarily always "right" and they always emphasise that the DM has the final say, but they could well reassure your DM that this is indeed how it is meant to work.
nymdespana 08-23-07, 08:20 AM	Actually, we are playing just a gesthalt campaign (because it's a bought module and we are less player than required, so the master decided to do this strange kind of characters (first time I've heard about it!). I did druid/sorcerer because all the "standard" classes were gone with other players. I didn't think very much about the power or the synergy. It has been a friend (another player) that mentioned it as a good feat. I agree, even if I think it's very strong. We can use all the material from the 3 main books, and nothing else. Next time I will see what the master will tell me... bye guys, tnx! Nym