the feat requires "iron will", not very useful for a wizard.
in combat it sucks, except in the last round of combat (prey for it's the last)
BUT.....
if you are preparing for combat, or not in combat at all, you can cast spells as if you were 3 levels higher!, paying only with 3 rounds stunned. spells that lasts 10 min/level or 1 hour/level now last 30 min or 3 hours more. spells like greater magic weapon can have a nice boost, and there are lot of examples with other spells...
what do you think?
You could maybe think about some type or variation.dont listen to him! that's my master, and he's thinking in removing the feat. :D :D hahahah
any comments? ideas?
is it too powerful or not??
1) It has a pre-requisite that isn't too helpful.
2) Dragonlance has a unique situation were it is a definated draw-back to not be a member of a certain prestige class. Because the prestige class pretty much decides most of the feats that you are going to chose, it makes it a much more difficult choice for the player. Since this feat requires another, this means two less metamagic, item creation, or spell focus feats the caster can have. It basically specializes him in a certain form of casting. He cant create two many items, or work much with the effect of most of his spells, but he CAN make them stronger.
I realize per core rules #2 isn't really that much of a balancing factor, but in my DL campaign, I make the caster definetly reap the consequences of his actions. IF he's is not a WoHS, he will be hunted. If he is, his choice of feats is hard. But the rewards are good.
It adds to the flavor of being DL, the enemy can have it to, and Idont have much of a problem keeping it manageable.
im looking for arguments like Nox11 gave
is the feat balanced or not.
byes!
I like the feat, I think it's pretty balanced and adds good flavor.
Now Spellcasting Prodigy....ugh. Every level 1 spellcaster takes this thing, perhaps a bit overpowered?
Not sure about Spell-casting prodigy.
Reserves of strength has a rather hefty price attached to it really. First off, you have to take a rather worthless feat to get it. Seconly, if you're planning on being a WoHS then you're going to have to wait quite a few levels to get access to this feat (or be a renegade for a while). Finally, you say your players can easily cast spells out of combat that last longer, etc. Well, the trick to that is your players never know when a little surprise might come along. ;) If you think some player is doing this sort of thing too often and it is truely becoming a problem (I don't think it really would be, but if it seems to be...) then make him think twice about using this feat SO often by a little well placed "random" encounter or two. This will teach him to be a bit more careful of when (and how often) he taxes his strength too much. Of course, don't do something like this too often or you'll just be punishing your player for his choice of feats...but used wisely, this can be just the needed trick to make sure the feat stays balanced in your games (I personally think it's just fine though).
As for spellcasting prodigy, only human wizards can really take it...and, of course, sorcerers. Keep in mind, that if any non-human takes this freat (because you can take it only on first level and all others besides humans get only one first level feat) he will HAVE to be a renegade for a while. If a wizard can cast 3rd level spells (ie: if he's 5th level or more) and not a member of the WoHS then he is a renegade. And any non-human that takes this feat can't become a renegade until 7th level (not the normal 5th level). That's quite a good while for a wizard to have to dodge renegade hunters. Of course, not all renegades are hunted down like dogs (especially if you're playing in the current era) but it's still something that I think most non-human characters (and players) should (and would) probably avoid. Unless they wish to be renegades of course. ;) Just make sure you enforce the WoHS's laws on magic and show the player that life as a renegade (even for a few levels) will be rather hard and dangerous. Anyway, back to the main point, the feat can only be taken by a small number of players (without drawbacks from the above) and, to me, it really helps to represent that humans are the ones who most often have the most magical power (due to short lives they learn faster, humans are the ones that most often go looking for greater power, etc). Not to mention that it doesn't do all THAT much anyway. It gives the player an extra bonus spell or two (not that big of a thing at later levels to be sure), ups the DC of his spells by +1 and adds the same +1 to a few skill checks. There are certainly other feats that do more. So with the "forced renegade" racial restriction, the way it fits so well with the theme of the setting, and the fact that it doesn't do all that much I don't really think it's a problem. Nice to be sure, but you don't want your players to be taking feats that will do them no good...there are plenty of those in the PHB. I'm glad to see that DL added some feats that are actually good enough to have players enjoying selecting them. Ummm...oh yes, let's all run right out and get toughness every chance we get! ;)
Furthermore - Who says a wizard has to take the prestige class to actually be a WoHS? I believe it's been pointed out in many a discussion that, if a player doesn't want to, they don't have to take the prestige class to be a WoHS. They just have to pass the test. It'd be logical, ofcourse, for them to go hand in hand, and I, myself, would even strongly pressure it. But it's not outright required, so we can hardly use it as a basis for balance. We're right back at the point where any wizard can take Spellcasting prodigy - And that's not even taking into account any wizards that prefer to be Thorn Knights, or whatever else. Being a renegade is a somehwta unreliable balancing factor.
That said, I'm still not sure it's overly powerful. I'm simply ambivalent on this. It's a free boost to power, one that I have rarely seen left behind in games that I've played since its introduction - It's basically essential to a powerful caster, because while it only gives a +1 bonus to a bunch of things, that +1 bonus tends to stack rather nicely, and, well - It matters, in the long run. But it is a feat, and theoretically there are better choices.
Reserves of Strength, though... I don't know. I don't think 'random encounters' are enough of a balancing factor. I'd just make some kind of other balancing factor, like too much repeated use is unhealthy for a caster, or something. But that's me operating on my own - As it stands, I'd probably feel it's a little on the strong side.
As for the WoHS, I haven't heard anybody say that and I really don't agree. Of course, it would be up to each DM. But as far as I'm concerned...if a player wants to join the WoHS then he takes that prestiege class. That's what it was designed for. If you take that away you're taking away quite a bit of the flavor. That's like saying you can be any old fighter and still call yourself a knight of solamnia, etc. Being a WoHS means something...it's a choice that you have to deal with, both the good and the bad. And that's what the prestiege class represents. So, in my games at least, you're no WoHS without the class.
And since you brought up the Knights.
That's where I heard a lot of this talk initially, because according to the prestige class, there should've been no Knights of the Sword or Rose prior to the War of the Lance. Unless, ofcourse, we're presented with a later incarnation of the prestige class for the fourth age. But it's hard to be a divine caster with no gods and no mysticism. So as things stand, somebody would need to be a Knight of the Sword/Rose without that prestige class.But I see your point, ofcourse. I'm just saying that, looking things at a balance perspective for the forum population as a whole, we need to look at the way thigns have been seen on the whole. And to my knowledge, that's the general consensus - That you don't need the prestige class, just the Test.
Or that's the impression I got, anyway. People are free to correct me if they like.
I just like the flavor that the WoHS class adds to the game. Just like the wizards in the books, players have to take the good and the bad with becoming a WoHS. Which is why I make them take the class (this is automatic when you pass the test in my campaign...like it suggests in DLCS). But, of course, that's all up to any DM. As for the Knights, you do see that they cast some healing spells in a few books. But, during the age of despair when healing magic was not available I take it that the class was different. I'm sure they will address that in the War of the Lance source book. The knighthood was totally different in almost all respects in that age (even the measure has been revised since then) so it's quite likely that the requirments of knighthood have changed as well. That's my ideas behind it anyway.
In either case, I don't think reserves of strength or spellcasting prodigy are overpowered...under my way of doing things or otherwise.