A couple of questions on the Dwarf Savant

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

true_blue

Sep 24, 2004 14:42:58
hmm I was looking over the prestige classes in the ToHS because I am statting out the current members on the Conclave in my campaign. Wanted one of two dwarves on there, with maybe one of them using this prestige class.

My first question is what happens when a Dwarf Savant uses a healing potion? Will it not work if the caster level is too low? My first instinct would be it won't work, but I figured I'd ask.

My second question.. is what is the point of Innate Magic? It lets you use one of your slots to instead make it a spell-like ability. The archmage gets to get rid of a slot to make one spell usable as a spell-like ability twice a day. While I don't think the Dwarf Savant should be the equal of the Archmage, I find this ability useless for the Dwarf Savant. So instead of preparing the spell, I automatically know it, but it can never be changed? Yes now I don't need the material component for it (unless the spell requires one, then you use XP's), but I'd still rather have the slot so that I can change it if I want. The archmage's ability to me is something neat because then you can cast it twice. You are actually gaining something. Maybe I'm missing something, if so let me know.

The third thing is why are there so many PrC's without full casting ability, or loss of only one level. I guess this is more of a rant than a question. Half of the classes in ToHS have less than full spellcasting ability. This has made me dislike the Renegade Hunter and Griffon Wizard, although they do only lose 2 levels, but still thats annoying. I like to see one less of spellcasting level in a 5 level PrC, and maybe 2 in a 10 level PrC. I understand things don't always conform to what I like, it just irks me if I see wizards who have to sacrifice a lot of spells to be in the PrC they want. And yes I understand a wizard doesn't have to take them. I just would rather the loss of spellcasting levels were to a minimum. I understand the Dwarf Savant gets bonuses to abilities, but they also have a loss to physical appearance and they have a lot more trouble with healing, which really hurts. I think one caster level (maybe 2 I guess) would be sufficient. But I guess 3 isn't horrible, I just don't like it.

Welp thats about it, sorry for the rant, was just wondering some of these things.
#2

cam_banks

Sep 24, 2004 15:13:57
The dark dwarf savant's restriction regarding healing magic also applies to potions, which are really just spells in a bottle.

Innate magic is still useful for the reasons you have suggested. If you turn one of your spells known into a spell-like ability, you no longer need any components to use it (somatic, verbal, material, XP, or focus). That's pretty potent, and you never have to prepare it. It's a little like having it permanently Stilled, Silent and benefiting from Eschew Materials without affecting the spell level. Yes, it's not as good as the archmage's version, but that's because the dark dwarf savant isn't an archmage.

Spell progression is a tricky thing. I made a conscious choice to limit some of these prestige classes' bonus spell progression in order to balance out what were some fairly beneficial class features, and make sure that they weren't all much better than the wizard of High Sorcery (or the standard wizard). Adding in additional bonus spell progression levels is always your choice, and if you don't think it would throw the game off, go ahead and do that.

Glad you liked the class, at any rate. It does make a better villain NPC than a player character, but your mileage may vary!

Cheers,
Cam
#3

true_blue

Sep 24, 2004 15:26:10
Ahh well I had forgotten about not needing the Somatic or Verbal components either. I guess that isn't as bad as I thought, which is why I try to post my questions here heh. Not bad for a class ability I guess then.

The healing thing I understand, kind of sucks, but its still nifty to get the bonuses to stats. Was hoping maybe potions circumvented it, but as you said, its a spell in a bottle.

The caster level thing I don't think I'll ever be happy with. I don't think the designers of 3e realized how things exactly would be. I was the first one to advocate the loss of spellcasting levels when I saw PrC's because I wanted a reason why people would stay in the core wizard/sorceror class. But then as I watched my PC's develop and lose out on those spells, I realized it did hurt them a little. I don't say a lot because I don't think its the "end all" of the game". But it did suck not getting spells. I think in 4e(hopefully not anytime soon) they really need to make the spellcasting classes worth staying in and have bonuses, but also have PrC's that have different types of bonuses, all while everyone keeping full spellcasting privilages. But as this is 3.5, I guess there needs to be sometime a decision by the designers. It still irks me about the Renegade Hunter the most. I just don't see any kind of reason why they shouldn't have full spellcasting.

heh sorry if this seemed like a diss toward the book or designers. My biggest problem is I almost only post when I have a gripe on something, and very rarely just to say "hey I like this". So most of my posts come off as negative unfornutely. I'm happy with over 75% of the stuff in the books I have bought, probably more, just when things come off as "wrong" I usually post and see whats up. For some reason I don't like little posts that just say "I like it" or "good job", even though I guess they do reinforce the designers.
#4

Mortepierre

Sep 24, 2004 16:36:31
Spell progression is a tricky thing. I made a conscious choice to limit some of these prestige classes' bonus spell progression in order to balance out what were some fairly beneficial class features, and make sure that they weren't all much better than the wizard of High Sorcery (or the standard wizard).

Cam,

I think it was a good decision, not to mention a courageous one given the many spellcasting PrC out there which not only allow one to keep full spellcasting benefits but also hand out quite a few powerful abilities.

Finally a designer taking "balance" into account! I wish more followed your example
#5

quentingeorge

Sep 24, 2004 16:51:18
I know Willim the Black, but was the other dwarf in Wizard's Conclave named? I think he was a black robe too, though...
#6

true_blue

Sep 24, 2004 16:52:47
Maybe it is a "courageous" or "balanced" decision, but I feel that PrC's that have less than full spellcasting progression get taken a lot less. And the PrC's are there for the wizards/sorcerors. That means the people whoa re supposed to take the prestige class usually don't because they don't want to lose their precious spells.

I would rather see more PrC's not have lots of neat abilities, or several powerful abilities, but maybe a few smaller abilities that don't make the class much more powerful than if they went up full in sorceror/wizard. My PC's take wizard/sorceror classes because they want the spells. They choose PrC's so that they can more narrow their character and give it more of a "theme" if you will. I understand a lot of people aren't PrC heavy, so it doesn't matter much to them. I just feel in the end a lot of PrC's aren't takena lot because they do give less than full spellcasting progression. And I personally think that's a shame because they are made to be taken. Losing spells is a very big thing and I think only the best of abilities should result in a slower progression.

Me personally, I don't see really any awesome powers on the ToHS that should result in slower progression. The Renegade Hunter I see maybe missing one level in the middle. The Dwarf Savant shouldnt lose any really, maybe one at the beginning because while a boost to Intelligence is phenominal, a bonus to Dex and Con is nice, and a bonus to Wis, Int, and Cha doesn't hurt, the loss of the ablity to be healed often and the physical transformations I think are a pretty good evening out of things. I guess with the innate spell and three bonus feats I can see the loss of one level of spellcasting. 2 is my limit when it comes to 10 level prestige classes. I'm not a fan of the griffon rider getting only half progression, but I confess I havent looked over it extensively. Getting a griffon is nice.. but still a wizard character losing spells sucks a**.

To me, spells are everything. I think prestige classes should enhance the wizard/sorceror class, not take away something and add another. But again, these are just my opinions. I understand no one is forced to take one.
#7

true_blue

Sep 24, 2004 16:56:09
I figured out that the second dwarf left couldnt be a Black Robe because they said how many were left. And if you counted up the people they mentioned, there wasn't room for another person. So I made the dwarf that was left be a red robe. There was another dwarf when they were gathered that was mentioned as being a Black Robe I think though. But I assume he had died in the battle.