PDA

View Full Version : factotem (tatum?) and incantantrix



taltamir
2009-09-26, 05:10 AM
I keep on hearing about factotem and incantantrix... I decided to look them up, but I can't find them in the index I use.
What books are they from? And why are they considered so awesome?

Tokiko Mima
2009-09-26, 05:33 AM
Factotum is a base class from Dungeonscape aka 'It's not Outside II.' It's like a rogue, but better, with the most flexibility of any class. You'll usually see this class substituting for Rogue because it's better and more fun in virtually all ways.

Incantatrix is a full casting PrC from Magic of Faerum. Though there are many rewrites of this PrC, the one thing they all have in common is free Metamagic uses, and a -1 reduction to the spell level cost of all metamagic. It's easy to generate some really horrific combination's of spells with this PrC, which is why it's one of the best Wizard PrC's out there.

kamikasei
2009-09-26, 05:34 AM
Factotum is from Dungeonscape. Incantatrix is from Player's Guide to Faerun (be aware that there's a less awesome 3.0 version in Magic of Faerun).

Tyndmyr
2009-09-26, 09:32 AM
Less awesome is debatable...very different.

The Magic of Faerun version is less metamagic focused, but it's less restrictive on banning. More importantly, the capstone of metamagic reduction comes at level 8 instead of level 10, which can be important for some builds.

The only thing the MoF version looses is the cooperative metamagic, and seizing control of effects(oh, and the crappy metamagic wand ability). In return, they get some nifty anti-ethereal abilities, and if they take all ten levels, the ability to rapidly heal themselves. I still don't know if I'd take the last level, given that you already have the MM reducer and the 2x day free MM uses at level 9, but hitting another prc earlier is useful.

Of course, it is 3.0.

Sir_Elderberry
2009-09-26, 09:47 AM
Well, since there's a 3.5 version written, isn't the MoF version no longer legal?

sonofzeal
2009-09-26, 09:54 AM
Factotum - base class, very "jack of all trades", much more so that either the Rogue or Bard. Loses the massive damage capabilities of the Rogue, but gets some healing, some limited Sor/Wiz magic, and the best acrobatics in the game. Very "Int" focussed. Very balanced too; there's one or two ways to exploit it, via flaws and the web enhancement "Font of Inspiration" feat, but it's generally right where people think of when they ask for balance.



Incantrix - Prestige class for Wizards, one of the best ways ever printed to make Metamagic easier. The problem is that making Metamagic easier allows for massive ludicrous gamebreaking pwnage. So of course, that instantly makes Incantrix one of the most popular Wizard PrCs, despite being in a relatively obscure campaign-specific book. Le sigh.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-26, 06:20 PM
Well, since there's a 3.5 version written, isn't the MoF version no longer legal?

In most games, probably.

KellKheraptis
2009-09-26, 06:28 PM
The 3.5 version's Metamagic Effect ability is actually what I use to make an "offensive tapestry" with my War Weavers, as I can blow the weave with a move action and drop a nasty debuff with a standard, and then with either a bonus standard (get creative, I can get several) or next round use MM Effect to chain it to CL other bad guys. Given that my top end build is capable of CL 40 pre-epic, that's a LOT of bad guys :) So yeah, Incantatrix ftw. And as for Factotem, it's the lynchpin in a PAO abuse build I have floating around that gets two standard actions per round + however many I wanna blow Inspiration on, along with full Swiftblade goodies up to 9th level, and BAB over 15 pre-epic. Requires cheese, however.

lsfreak
2009-09-26, 06:46 PM
Well, since there's a 3.5 version written, isn't the MoF version no longer legal?

Yea, the 3.0 one is technically overwritten, but the 3.0 version also isn't anywhere NEAR as broken. It's fairly common to allow the 3.0 version instead of the 3.5 version, and it's fairly common just to ban both versions.

DragoonWraith
2009-09-26, 07:27 PM
The 3.5 version's Metamagic Effect ability is actually what I use to make an "offensive tapestry" with my War Weavers, as I can blow the weave with a move action and drop a nasty debuff with a standard, and then with either a bonus standard (get creative, I can get several) or next round use MM Effect to chain it to CL other bad guys. Given that my top end build is capable of CL 40 pre-epic, that's a LOT of bad guys :) So yeah, Incantatrix ftw. And as for Factotem, it's the lynchpin in a PAO abuse build I have floating around that gets two standard actions per round + however many I wanna blow Inspiration on, along with full Swiftblade goodies up to 9th level, and BAB over 15 pre-epic. Requires cheese, however.
Man, War Weavers are so cool. I really like that class.

Doc Roc
2009-09-26, 09:46 PM
Man, War Weavers are so cool. I really like that class.

You are.... Not alone.

Tyndmyr
2009-09-27, 12:47 AM
Yea, the 3.0 one is technically overwritten, but the 3.0 version also isn't anywhere NEAR as broken. It's fairly common to allow the 3.0 version instead of the 3.5 version, and it's fairly common just to ban both versions.

The only non-broken thing about it is the lack magical effect cheese. I'd accept it as a substitute for the 3.5 version in a heartbeat.

olentu
2009-09-27, 12:54 AM
The 3.5 version's Metamagic Effect ability is actually what I use to make an "offensive tapestry" with my War Weavers, as I can blow the weave with a move action and drop a nasty debuff with a standard, and then with either a bonus standard (get creative, I can get several) or next round use MM Effect to chain it to CL other bad guys. Given that my top end build is capable of CL 40 pre-epic, that's a LOT of bad guys :) So yeah, Incantatrix ftw. And as for Factotem, it's the lynchpin in a PAO abuse build I have floating around that gets two standard actions per round + however many I wanna blow Inspiration on, along with full Swiftblade goodies up to 9th level, and BAB over 15 pre-epic. Requires cheese, however.

Though not talking about anything else chain spell is max of 20 secondary targets.

KellKheraptis
2009-09-27, 01:05 AM
Though not talking about anything else chain spell is max of 20 secondary targets.

Argh, I had forgotten about that...evidently they foresaw abuse via Red Wizard, then. Still, you can always re-chain it next round, for a sort of rolling debuff. Though perhaps if you're facing 40+ enemies you should ask yourself why you're working with single target spells and not dropping a hurricane on them.

olentu
2009-09-27, 01:21 AM
Argh, I had forgotten about that...evidently they foresaw abuse via Red Wizard, then. Still, you can always re-chain it next round, for a sort of rolling debuff. Though perhaps if you're facing 40+ enemies you should ask yourself why you're working with single target spells and not dropping a hurricane on them.

Well I guess one could try and get around the fact that you can’t apply the same metamagic feat more than once to a single spell by arguing that one is technically applying the the feat to a persistent spell effect rather then a spell. Though arguing this would mean that since many (and perhaps all) metamagic feats use the word spell then just because one can apply them to a spell effect does not mean that they would do anything to modify the spell effect.

Also there would still be the argument that as the spell effect has already arced to the maximum number of secondary targets the additional application could not arc to any secondary targets as then the spell effect would have exceed the maximum number of secondary targets that it could arc to.

In any case just casting a different spell rather then bothering with single targets stuff might be better depending on the circumstances.

KellKheraptis
2009-09-27, 01:31 AM
Well I guess one could try and get around the fact that you can’t apply the same metamagic feat more than once to a single spell by arguing that one is technically applying the the feat to a persistent spell effect rather then a spell. Though arguing this would mean that since many (and perhaps all) metamagic feats use the word spell then just because one can apply them to a spell effect does not mean that they would do anything to modify the spell effect.

Also there would still be the argument that as the spell effect has already arced to the maximum number of secondary targets the additional application could not arc to any secondary targets as then the spell effect would have exceed the maximum number of secondary targets that it could arc to.

In any case just casting a different spell rather then bothering with single targets stuff might be better depending on the circumstances.

Well, and if you absolutely must reuse the casting...Twin it :P