Spell Mastery Feat Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Spell Mastery Feat Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
MasterArcanist
08-11-07, 04:02 PM Forgive me if the answer to this question is incredibly obvious, but is the only advantage of the Spell Mastery Feat that you can simply prepare the chosen spells without your Spellbook? I mean if thats the case than the only time that this feat would be useful would be if your Wizard happened to be in a situation when he/she didn't have his/her Spellbook. I know this could happen but It would be kind of a lame feat if thats really its only use. I can't help but think I'm missing something here, this doesn't make sence.
Mojo_Rat
08-11-07, 06:40 PM Pretty much being able to prepare spells without a spellbook is the point of the feat. Loosing your spellbook if it ever arises could be pretty debilitating. Although it depends alot on your DM
StevenO
08-11-07, 08:51 PM I'm not certain but I think it is also the start of a feat chain that eventually will let you use a spell as a spell like ability.

For the most part it is a wizard's backup plan if robbed of his spellbook. Although some consider it a mortal sin I think a wizard should be deprived of there spellbook for at least part of one adventure. Perhaps not always but if a wizard start going on about all the spells he knows and that he knows so many more than a sorcerer we may be seeing how he does without those precious spellbooks. It is a feat I'd suggest a wizard consider sometime later in his career (higher Int = more spells) just as a precaution against those desperate times.
zorgling25
08-11-07, 09:06 PM Spell Mastery in and of itself isn't very useful (particularly since IIRC there's a Wizard variant that drops the need for a spellbook entirely). However, it does qualify you for Signature Spell, which is useful for certain classes (such as Shadowcraft Mages).

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
MasterArcanist 08-11-07, 04:02 PM	Forgive me if the answer to this question is incredibly obvious, but is the only advantage of the Spell Mastery Feat that you can simply prepare the chosen spells without your Spellbook? I mean if thats the case than the only time that this feat would be useful would be if your Wizard happened to be in a situation when he/she didn't have his/her Spellbook. I know this could happen but It would be kind of a lame feat if thats really its only use. I can't help but think I'm missing something here, this doesn't make sence.
Mojo_Rat 08-11-07, 06:40 PM	Pretty much being able to prepare spells without a spellbook is the point of the feat. Loosing your spellbook if it ever arises could be pretty debilitating. Although it depends alot on your DM
StevenO 08-11-07, 08:51 PM	I'm not certain but I think it is also the start of a feat chain that eventually will let you use a spell as a spell like ability. For the most part it is a wizard's backup plan if robbed of his spellbook. Although some consider it a mortal sin I think a wizard should be deprived of there spellbook for at least part of one adventure. Perhaps not always but if a wizard start going on about all the spells he knows and that he knows so many more than a sorcerer we may be seeing how he does without those precious spellbooks. It is a feat I'd suggest a wizard consider sometime later in his career (higher Int = more spells) just as a precaution against those desperate times.
zorgling25 08-11-07, 09:06 PM	Spell Mastery in and of itself isn't very useful (particularly since IIRC there's a Wizard variant that drops the need for a spellbook entirely). However, it does qualify you for Signature Spell, which is useful for certain classes (such as Shadowcraft Mages).