Reserve Spell Feats, anyone heard of 'em? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Reserve Spell Feats, anyone heard of 'em? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
eis_helm
02-27-07, 06:13 PM Alright, I dunno if there has already been a post on this, but I'm going to make a new one. I recently started a campign and I was helping my players with their characters. If there are any any feats or rules they are planning to take from the newer expansion books, I make them okay it with me first. I don't know why, maybe I'm old fashioned, but some of the new things they put in these books just seem ridiculous to me. Here's an example: Reserve Feats from the Complete Mage. I looked over these, and some of them seem way too overpowered. For instance, the Clap of Thunder feat. If you refrain from casting a spell that does sonic damage, you can use this feat as many times per day as you want. Say if you decided to hold the spell Shout, every turn you don't cast that spell, you're able to do a touch attack that deals 4d6 damage and has a chance of deafening your opponent. You can do this as many times as you want, so long as you aren't casting Shout. The original spell only does 5d6 damage ONCE, so if you use the ability twice, you're already increasing the hurt by 3d6. If you decided to hold the spell longer, you could do it for 3 rounds or 4 rounds, combat after combat. What's worse is, you can still cast Shout if you want to after using the ability. I decided not to let him take it, deeming the feat extremely unbalanced.

Does anyone share my skepticism? Or am I just an old fashioned guy hindering his PCs?
Novabomb
02-27-07, 06:24 PM Sir, regardless of any opinions I may develop during the course of this thread, I would like to say that you are a very open minded individual. And I complement you for it.
Orcdoubleax
02-27-07, 06:31 PM what the real trade off is the wizard is giving up an round where he could do something else more powerful.

Yes if he did it 20 times a day his total damage would be massive, but most battles take 5-6 rounds max not 20.

I think the feats are fine and I am as much agaist power gaming as anyone on this board.
eis_helm
02-27-07, 06:33 PM I can't tell if that was sarcastic or not...
Vegepygmy
02-27-07, 06:37 PM The feats aren't overpowered per se, but they can be if you run an atypical D&D campaign. For example, if you normally have 10 combat encounters per day, rather than 2 or 3, reserve feats are going to seem very overpowered to you.

I've used Storm Bolt in play myself, and I'm convinced that at least that reserve feat isn't overpowered.
Ozzymandias
02-27-07, 06:47 PM One consideration with the example you're using is that the spell shout can target multiple opponents. Clap of Thunder only affects one person. Both allow for a save, but the deafening effect of the feat only lasts for 1 round. Shout lasts for at least twice as long. The damage of shout is 5d6, against multiple targets, vs. 4d6 against 1 target. The feat can be used over and over again, but the spell is better for dealing out a lot of hurt at a critical moment against a lot of people.

Basically, I feel that reserve feats provide spellcasters with an additional option; with them they have the choice of contributing in the same way that a fighter can, but without forcing them to use their spells at all times.

However, I can see how they could be viewed as overpowering. At the very least they bring up the utility of the spellcaster to that of a fighter; the problem then becomes that the fighter is being left further behind in the dust.
Matthew77
02-27-07, 06:48 PM So the feat allows the wizard to run into melee combat and make a single attack per round dealing an average of 14 points of damage with a chance at a status effect that doesn't do much?

That's about as effective as a low level fighter swinging a greatsword.

Personally, if I was a mid to high-level wizard, (since you need to be level 7 at least to do this) I'd rather be staying out of melee range and using save or die spells or area of effect damaging spells.

I don't see how this feat is overpowered at all. I haven't examined all the reserve feats, but most seem fine to me. The one that allows a short-range dimension door effect each round raised my eyebrows, but since it takes a standard action, it looks fine also.
Eragon_seer
02-27-07, 06:57 PM Well I believe that you have used a bad example where reserve feats are concerned. this feat requires sonic spells to be refrained and come on look at the sonic feats they deal little non scaling damage, so that feat is definitly a bonus. But lets look at another feat Fiery burst just like clap of thunder it deals 1d6 per spell lvl withheld. So do I a lvl 8 wizard use my fireball spell to deal 8d6 to all 20 of those goblins or do I use firy burst to deal 3d6 to only one of them. in the long run the damage potential of the reserve feat is larger but for instant gratification the fireball is better
eis_helm
02-27-07, 06:59 PM So, I guess it depends on the encounter to determine whether the fest is overpowered or not... Haha, and I'm still just as confused on what to do as when we began.
Vegepygmy
02-27-07, 07:05 PM So, I guess it depends on the encounter to determine whether the fest is overpowered or not...It doesn't really depend on the particular encounter; you have to look at your overall play style. A reserve feat might be extremely good in one encounter, and utterly sucktastic in another.

My advice: tell the player he can try the feat out, but reserve the right to ban it ex post facto if you later decide it's overpowered. I have a hunch that if you see it in actual play, you won't have any problem with it.
MagocracyForAll
02-27-07, 08:27 PM That feat in perticular is not overpowered when compared to such spells as magic missile. MM does, at 7th level, 3d4+3 untyped or an average of 12 damage at 680 ft with no miss chance. You have many magic missiles as you get to higher level if not a wand. Then take the feat, 4d6 sonic damage or an average of 14 damage at range touch, which is alway dangerous for most spellcasters, it does not auto-hit and requiring you to use one of your highest spell slot for a not so great spell.
Lord_Tirian
02-27-07, 08:45 PM The original spell only does 5d6 damage ONCE, so if you use the ability twice, you're already increasing the hurt by 3d6. If you decided to hold the spell longer, you could do it for 3 rounds or 4 rounds, combat after combat. What's worse is, you can still cast Shout if you want to after using the ability. I decided not to let him take it, deeming the feat extremely unbalanced.
Simple: Let's assume a standard encounter with roughly 4 opponents. A well placed shout deals a total of 20d6, spread over several creatures. In the same scenario, let's see the performance of Clap of Thunder: To do the same damage, you have to hit five rounds, you have to bear additional four rounds of getting into melee and risking being smashed up to do the same damage.

And I think that's the important part: You need much more time in melee to deal the same damage, therefore you and your allies will suffer more damage - but you save a spell slot.

Basically the reserve feats trade your time for spells - or:
You get a higher risk of being smashed up, but get more spells in exchange.

Now, another balancing thing is: If you use the feats instead of the spells, you can toss more spells around, but need more time to do so, risking more damage, which lowers your staying power - and retaining the spells is "gaining staying power", i.e. if you're using the reserve feat liberally, you'll hurt yourself, since you'll take more damage, but the only use of the feats is to stay longer - but you can't stay longer, since you take more damage.

The only thing with the feats is: They change RP. They change mook encounters. But, at least personally, I think a wizard who can threaten stupid low-level people all the day with incinerating them is far more "wizardly", then a wizard who always has to look for his "gosh, run out of spells again!" and therefore cannot even make a campfire with all his arcane power.
ClementWillowbreaker
02-27-07, 10:14 PM Reserve Spell feats definitely trigger one's twink-sense. While in general the effect isn't all that huge, the user gives up nothing to use it. Not casting your spell is not a penalty, because in the case where using the feat is a sound tactical choice, you weren't going to cast the spell anyways. So instead of firing your crossbow to "help" the fighter clean up the goblins (but really you are just wasting bolts), you keep on dealing noticeable damage. What it does it let a wizard be both the crazy tactical spelluser and a warlock at the same time. The situation is worse when it is a sorcerer- he can use the feat as long as he has a spell known that qualifies in a level in which he has spell slots- which is almost always. While Eldritch Blast isn't broken like a lot of people claimed when CA came out, it relies on the very limited range of the Warlock's more useful abilities to be fair.

The best of both worlds is something that Wizards have been giving to wizards for far too long, and RSFs just go too far for my tastes. Oh, don't forget that continuous benefit they grant, too (generally +1 CL to the type or so- a weak Domain ability, but still useful). Personally, I would reverse the feats, and give the special attack for a certain number of rounds after casting a qualifying spell (1 per 4CL as a first guess). Call them Residual Spell Feats.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
eis_helm 02-27-07, 06:13 PM	Alright, I dunno if there has already been a post on this, but I'm going to make a new one. I recently started a campign and I was helping my players with their characters. If there are any any feats or rules they are planning to take from the newer expansion books, I make them okay it with me first. I don't know why, maybe I'm old fashioned, but some of the new things they put in these books just seem ridiculous to me. Here's an example: Reserve Feats from the Complete Mage. I looked over these, and some of them seem way too overpowered. For instance, the Clap of Thunder feat. If you refrain from casting a spell that does sonic damage, you can use this feat as many times per day as you want. Say if you decided to hold the spell Shout, every turn you don't cast that spell, you're able to do a touch attack that deals 4d6 damage and has a chance of deafening your opponent. You can do this as many times as you want, so long as you aren't casting Shout. The original spell only does 5d6 damage ONCE, so if you use the ability twice, you're already increasing the hurt by 3d6. If you decided to hold the spell longer, you could do it for 3 rounds or 4 rounds, combat after combat. What's worse is, you can still cast Shout if you want to after using the ability. I decided not to let him take it, deeming the feat extremely unbalanced. Does anyone share my skepticism? Or am I just an old fashioned guy hindering his PCs?
Novabomb 02-27-07, 06:24 PM	Sir, regardless of any opinions I may develop during the course of this thread, I would like to say that you are a very open minded individual. And I complement you for it.
Orcdoubleax 02-27-07, 06:31 PM	what the real trade off is the wizard is giving up an round where he could do something else more powerful. Yes if he did it 20 times a day his total damage would be massive, but most battles take 5-6 rounds max not 20. I think the feats are fine and I am as much agaist power gaming as anyone on this board.
eis_helm 02-27-07, 06:33 PM	I can't tell if that was sarcastic or not...
Vegepygmy 02-27-07, 06:37 PM	The feats aren't overpowered per se, but they can be if you run an atypical D&D campaign. For example, if you normally have 10 combat encounters per day, rather than 2 or 3, reserve feats are going to seem very overpowered to you. I've used Storm Bolt in play myself, and I'm convinced that at least that reserve feat isn't overpowered.
Ozzymandias 02-27-07, 06:47 PM	One consideration with the example you're using is that the spell shout can target multiple opponents. Clap of Thunder only affects one person. Both allow for a save, but the deafening effect of the feat only lasts for 1 round. Shout lasts for at least twice as long. The damage of shout is 5d6, against multiple targets, vs. 4d6 against 1 target. The feat can be used over and over again, but the spell is better for dealing out a lot of hurt at a critical moment against a lot of people. Basically, I feel that reserve feats provide spellcasters with an additional option; with them they have the choice of contributing in the same way that a fighter can, but without forcing them to use their spells at all times. However, I can see how they could be viewed as overpowering. At the very least they bring up the utility of the spellcaster to that of a fighter; the problem then becomes that the fighter is being left further behind in the dust.
Matthew77 02-27-07, 06:48 PM	So the feat allows the wizard to run into melee combat and make a single attack per round dealing an average of 14 points of damage with a chance at a status effect that doesn't do much? That's about as effective as a low level fighter swinging a greatsword. Personally, if I was a mid to high-level wizard, (since you need to be level 7 at least to do this) I'd rather be staying out of melee range and using save or die spells or area of effect damaging spells. I don't see how this feat is overpowered at all. I haven't examined all the reserve feats, but most seem fine to me. The one that allows a short-range dimension door effect each round raised my eyebrows, but since it takes a standard action, it looks fine also.
Eragon_seer 02-27-07, 06:57 PM	Well I believe that you have used a bad example where reserve feats are concerned. this feat requires sonic spells to be refrained and come on look at the sonic feats they deal little non scaling damage, so that feat is definitly a bonus. But lets look at another feat Fiery burst just like clap of thunder it deals 1d6 per spell lvl withheld. So do I a lvl 8 wizard use my fireball spell to deal 8d6 to all 20 of those goblins or do I use firy burst to deal 3d6 to only one of them. in the long run the damage potential of the reserve feat is larger but for instant gratification the fireball is better
eis_helm 02-27-07, 06:59 PM	So, I guess it depends on the encounter to determine whether the fest is overpowered or not... Haha, and I'm still just as confused on what to do as when we began.
Vegepygmy 02-27-07, 07:05 PM	So, I guess it depends on the encounter to determine whether the fest is overpowered or not...It doesn't really depend on the particular encounter; you have to look at your overall play style. A reserve feat might be extremely good in one encounter, and utterly sucktastic in another. My advice: tell the player he can try the feat out, but reserve the right to ban it ex post facto if you later decide it's overpowered. I have a hunch that if you see it in actual play, you won't have any problem with it.
MagocracyForAll 02-27-07, 08:27 PM	That feat in perticular is not overpowered when compared to such spells as magic missile. MM does, at 7th level, 3d4+3 untyped or an average of 12 damage at 680 ft with no miss chance. You have many magic missiles as you get to higher level if not a wand. Then take the feat, 4d6 sonic damage or an average of 14 damage at range touch, which is alway dangerous for most spellcasters, it does not auto-hit and requiring you to use one of your highest spell slot for a not so great spell.
Lord_Tirian 02-27-07, 08:45 PM	The original spell only does 5d6 damage ONCE, so if you use the ability twice, you're already increasing the hurt by 3d6. If you decided to hold the spell longer, you could do it for 3 rounds or 4 rounds, combat after combat. What's worse is, you can still cast Shout if you want to after using the ability. I decided not to let him take it, deeming the feat extremely unbalanced. Simple: Let's assume a standard encounter with roughly 4 opponents. A well placed shout deals a total of 20d6, spread over several creatures. In the same scenario, let's see the performance of Clap of Thunder: To do the same damage, you have to hit five rounds, you have to bear additional four rounds of getting into melee and risking being smashed up to do the same damage. And I think that's the important part: You need much more time in melee to deal the same damage, therefore you and your allies will suffer more damage - but you save a spell slot. Basically the reserve feats trade your time for spells - or: You get a higher risk of being smashed up, but get more spells in exchange. Now, another balancing thing is: If you use the feats instead of the spells, you can toss more spells around, but need more time to do so, risking more damage, which lowers your staying power - and retaining the spells is "gaining staying power", i.e. if you're using the reserve feat liberally, you'll hurt yourself, since you'll take more damage, but the only use of the feats is to stay longer - but you can't stay longer, since you take more damage. The only thing with the feats is: They change RP. They change mook encounters. But, at least personally, I think a wizard who can threaten stupid low-level people all the day with incinerating them is far more "wizardly", then a wizard who always has to look for his "gosh, run out of spells again!" and therefore cannot even make a campfire with all his arcane power.
ClementWillowbreaker 02-27-07, 10:14 PM	Reserve Spell feats definitely trigger one's twink-sense. While in general the effect isn't all that huge, the user gives up nothing to use it. Not casting your spell is not a penalty, because in the case where using the feat is a sound tactical choice, you weren't going to cast the spell anyways. So instead of firing your crossbow to "help" the fighter clean up the goblins (but really you are just wasting bolts), you keep on dealing noticeable damage. What it does it let a wizard be both the crazy tactical spelluser and a warlock at the same time. The situation is worse when it is a sorcerer- he can use the feat as long as he has a spell known that qualifies in a level in which he has spell slots- which is almost always. While Eldritch Blast isn't broken like a lot of people claimed when CA came out, it relies on the very limited range of the Warlock's more useful abilities to be fair. The best of both worlds is something that Wizards have been giving to wizards for far too long, and RSFs just go too far for my tastes. Oh, don't forget that continuous benefit they grant, too (generally +1 CL to the type or so- a weak Domain ability, but still useful). Personally, I would reverse the feats, and give the special attack for a certain number of rounds after casting a qualifying spell (1 per 4CL as a first guess). Call them Residual Spell Feats.