| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 30 Sep 2012 : 19:06:00
I can't believe I've never seen this come up before, but I started thinking about it whenever I was talking about Szass Tam having opposition schools. We all know the mechanic behind red wizard opposition schools (at first they have their normal opp. schools, then they pick a new one upon attaining the red wizard prestige class, at which point they quit learning new spells from said school but can still use items using magic from said school). So, from Lost Empires of Faerun, there's the feats "Spell Reprieve", "Item Reprieve", and the ultimate culmination "arcane transfiguration". For the school they give up upon entering red wizard, the red wizard can still cast previously learned and use items, so in effect they already have equivalency to the spell reprieve and item reprieve feats. It would make sense then that they could in theory take arcane transfiguration as if they qualified and be able to get that school back and not be as gimp (granted they'd still need the 10th lvl casting).
Anyone see any major flaws in house ruling that? |
| 7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 04 Oct 2012 : 21:17:11
Ok, that gives me a good idea of the feel of people. Most wouldn't allow it in their games unless explicitly allowed by the written rules. That's exactly the kind of feedback I was interested in. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 04 Oct 2012 : 17:07:50
Personally, if someone has an ability that functions the same as something that is a prerequisite, I'd allow it. Some classes even specify this, so I just extend it to all of them. I really don't think these sorts of things are game-breakers, IMHO.
However, according to RAW (srd) -
quote:
Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he or she gains the prerequisite.
That makes it appear that unless the class feature specifically states that the feature can be used as a prerequisite, it cannot.
But I still think its open to interpretation (in your game). |
| Eldacar |
Posted - 04 Oct 2012 : 11:01:17
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
...but then I always felt the red wizard prestige class was made more gimp in 3.5 whenever spell power no longer affected the DC's of spells and thereby the loss of another school of magic was just a bit much (granted previous editions had similiar issues, but the schools weren't as well defined in previous editions).
Actually, the Red Wizard class is one of the more powerful ones there is, thanks to Circle Magic. And remember that you only lose the ability to gain new spells. You can still keep spells from a prohibited school that you already have. Still, rather than typing it all out myself:
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19869014/Red_Wizard_Handbook
That link is basically a guide to how to best use the class. Hathrans are even better (especially when you combo it with a 2nd level arcane spell called Acorn of Far Travel). Red Wizard might not compare with something like Incantatrix, Dweomerkeeper or the dreaded Tainted Scholar, but it's nothing to sneer at, and definitely doesn't need to be given any breaks. |
| Razz |
Posted - 02 Oct 2012 : 11:13:07
The feat wasn't built just for those prestige classes, don't forget the Wizard class has specialists who lose access to two schools. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 01 Oct 2012 : 18:34:30
quote:
Originally posted by Eldacar
quote:
Originally posted by althen artren
No, I saw that a long time ago. I believe it is a role-playing cheat, because specializing in a school involves sacrifice. As you have written it, I don't see any big problems, since the class says so without the mechanics.
To get one school back, you're burning three feats, and wizard builds are often feat-starved. I wouldn't allow them to take Arcane Transfiguration immediately, myself. They'd still need the preceding two feats. Yes, they might have an ability that makes the feats redundant, but they still need them. There aren't many things I can recall offhand (if any) that explicitly allow an ability to replace an identical ability granted by a feat in terms of qualifying for future feats/prestige classes/whatever, and they'd explicitly call it out if they did.
That's cool, and that was the point of the question.. to get a feel for other people's feelings on the matter. As to why its not explicitly called out, I would point out that the red wizard is the ONLY prestige class I know of that takes on an additional opposition school that specifically allows you to continue using previously learned spells and items. The incantatrix is the only one I know of who even forces you to take a new opposition school (nightmare spinner gives you the equivalent of illusion specialization with no opposition school). So, I can see where this is a very unique case and the creators of those feats may not have thought about it when writing them up. To my view, if it were allowed, it'd definitely be somethng any red wizard would do... but then I always felt the red wizard prestige class was made more gimp in 3.5 whenever spell power no longer affected the DC's of spells and thereby the loss of another school of magic was just a bit much (granted previous editions had similiar issues, but the schools weren't as well defined in previous editions). |
| Eldacar |
Posted - 01 Oct 2012 : 05:55:02
quote:
Originally posted by althen artren
No, I saw that a long time ago. I believe it is a role-playing cheat, because specializing in a school involves sacrifice. As you have written it, I don't see any big problems, since the class says so without the mechanics.
To get one school back, you're burning three feats, and wizard builds are often feat-starved. I wouldn't allow them to take Arcane Transfiguration immediately, myself. They'd still need the preceding two feats. Yes, they might have an ability that makes the feats redundant, but they still need them. There aren't many things I can recall offhand (if any) that explicitly allow an ability to replace an identical ability granted by a feat in terms of qualifying for future feats/prestige classes/whatever, and they'd explicitly call it out if they did. |
| althen artren |
Posted - 30 Sep 2012 : 21:03:01
No, I saw that a long time ago. I believe it is a role-playing cheat, because specializing in a school involves sacrifice. As you have written it, I don't see any big problems, since the class says so without the mechanics.
|
|
|
