PDA

View Full Version : 7/5 casting prestige class?! (WiP) (PEACH)



flabort
2010-07-30, 09:34 PM
Over-Dedicated Scholar
Prerequisites: ability to cast 2nd Level spells, spell craft (5 ranks), concentration (13 ranks)
HD: d1
{table]Level|BaB|Ref save|Fort save|will save|Spell Casting|special
1|+0|-0|-0|+0|+1 level of existing spell casting class|Heavy Study
2|+1|-0|-0|+0|+2 level of existing spell casting class|Lost Time, Weakened Body
3|+1|-1|-1|+1|+1 level of existing spell casting class|Scholar's Memory
4|+2|-1|-1|+1|+2 level of existing spell casting class|Over Study, Colapsing Magic
5|+2|-1|-1|+1|+1 level of existing spell casting class|Heaven's Spellbook[/table]
Skills: 2+Int skill points per level
Concentration (con), knowledge (any) (Int), Profession (wis), search (int), spellcraft (int)

Proficiencies: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains no new proficiencies with any weapons or armor.

Spellcasting: Any levels in Over-Dedicated Scholar stack with existing spellcasting classes when determining spells known/castable per day, as well as caster level, and what spell levels he has access to. the second and fourth levels of Over-Dedicated Scholar count as double for these purposes. this does not stack with any other class features, and only stacks with one class.

Heavy Study: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains one extra spell known or castable per day for each spell level he has access to. This comes at the cost that both these new spells available and one other spell are only castable at half his total caster level. He may gain a new spell like this for each level, or he may decline this bonus for an individual level.

Lost Time: The Over-Dedicated Scholar has spent copious amounts of time on his studies. Time he will never get back. he loses one point of Str and Dex each permanently, having not used his muscles for some time.

Weakened Body: The Over-Dedicated Scholar may not use a standard action in the same turn as a move action, and vice versa. they may trade one in for the other, if they are able from other sources (such as being able to trade a standard action for a move action to run).

Scholar's Memory: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains a +3 untyped bonus to knowledge checks attempting to learn the history of any place, object, or creature.

Over Study: The Over-Dedicated Scholar spends more time studying that much else. Each day, he must spend three extra hours studying or resting in the proccess of preparing his spells, or be as if fatigued for the whole day, taking a -2 penelty to Str and Dex, and being unable to run or charge. This may stack to become exhausted if too much exertion is spent.

Colapsing Magic: The Over-Dedicated Scholar must take a full round action to cast a spell in his top two levels availible. this includes spells altered by metamagic.

Heaven's Spellbook: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains knowledge of a multitude of spells beyond his power. Once per day, the Over-Dedicated Scholar may cast a spell up to 3 levels higher than his highest spell slot, including level increases through metamagic. This does not affect Colapsing Magic.




4th level is a "dead level", but seeing as it GAINS spellcasting levels, that other prestige classes seem to lose frequently, it balances that out. seems over powered to me, mainly due to Gained Power. may remove that one and move scholars memory to 3rd. I could throw in more penalties to balance it all out... in fact, I'd like to.
Meant to be taken after other prestige classes, where caster levels are lost. or, alternatively, to get 9th level spells even sooner.
thoughts? suggestions? flames? penalties I could use?

Edit: see post here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9044911&postcount=16) for changes. more posts may be linked later.

Milskidasith
2010-07-30, 09:46 PM
So you made a PrC that, by design, is a straight upgrade over normal casters, which are already all the strongest classes in the game? I just don't understand why you would do such a thing.

Zaydos
2010-07-30, 09:47 PM
1st: make it where you cannot get in unless you have lost caster levels or where the extra caster levels cannot get you casting at above your Hit Dice or something. Getting 9th level spells sooner is broken in oh so many ways.

2nd: even with +1/level casting this is significantly stronger than Wizard or Sorcerer, and actually have abilities that are better than the vast majority of prestige classes that cost levels of casting (although that's not saying much). I'd definitely remove Heaven's Spellbook as it is quite powerful and probably put off the 2nd +2 level till 5th. I'd also be worried about Heavy Study, either make it all or nothing or remove it. I can understand the desire to give them some abilities and avoid dead levels but with enhanced casting that's already more than enough.

Now as for penalties you could give them...
I don't really know, this is hard...
I'd give them d1 hit dice (or d0) although that is only -1.5 hp/level and not much of a penalty.
I'd also go the Survivor route and give them absolutely 0 BAB bonus.
Then at Lv 2 or 4 I'd probably give them some ability like...
Magic Vulnerability: Suffers a -2 on saves versus spells and spell-like abilities. Any SR they possess is reduced by 5.

I hope this helps, I'd still put some penalty at Lv 4 too.

Flickerdart
2010-07-30, 09:57 PM
Nothing can balance this class - not even negative HD or BAB. It's like negative LA.

Edea
2010-07-30, 10:29 PM
It needs full BAB, d10 or d12 HD (I'd say d12), and an expanded skill list/more skill points.

Redshirt Army
2010-07-30, 10:33 PM
It needs full BAB, d10 or d12 HD (I'd say d12), and an expanded skill list/more skill points.

Only then will it be competitive with Lightning Warrior. :smallbiggrin:

FlamingKobold
2010-07-30, 10:45 PM
Only then will it be competitive with Lightning Warrior. :smallbiggrin:
No, the only way to make it compete with the Lightning Warrior is to give it a familiar. Or a second one if the character already has one.

ON topic: Yeah... This doesn't really work. I think Milskidasith hit the nail on the head: What is the point of this class? If it can be balanced (which I doubt), It would require massive penalties.

Tinydwarfman
2010-07-30, 10:46 PM
You have got to be kidding me. This is even better than incantatrix. More like it should have 2/5 progression instead of 5/5.

Galileo
2010-07-30, 10:49 PM
This might be an interesting concept if you limited it to half-casters, like the paladin or ranger. Otherwise, it's absurd.

Stompy
2010-07-30, 11:03 PM
Here's my PEACH...


Over-Dedicated Scholar

Sounds like the Loremaster class, but I'll continue.


Prerequisites: ability to cast 2nd Level spells, spell craft (5 ranks)

That's incredibly lax for PrC requirements. This means you can enter the class with a 3rd level wizard What aren't any knowledges on here? It seems fitting for a scholar (and is super required for loremaster).

One other thing: can you take this class as a sorc? I can't imagine why a sorc would be a over-dedicated scholar fluff-wise. Sound too wizard-y to me.


HD: d4

Makes sense


table{table]Level|BaB|Ref save|Fort save|will save|Spell Casting|special
1|+0|+0|+0|+0|+1 level of existing spell casting class|Heavy Study
2|+1|+0|+0|+0|+2 level of existing spell casting class|Scholar's Memory
3|+1|+1|+1|+1|+1 level of existing spell casting class|Gained Power
4|+2|+1|+1|+1|+2 level of existing spell casting class|
5|+2|+1|+1|+1|+1 level of existing spell casting class|Heaven's Spellbook[/table]

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that this class has bad will. Also, I'll get to why I think 7/5 casting is a bad idea.


Skills: 2+Int skill points per level
Concentration (con), knowledge (any) (Int), Profession (wis), search (int), spellcraft (int)

no craft? no descipher script?


Proficiencies: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains no new proficiencies with any weapons or armor.

makes sense.


Spellcasting: Any levels in Over-Dedicated Scholar stack with existing spellcasting classes when determining spells known/castable per day, as well as caster level, and what spell levels he has access to. the second and fourth levels of Over-Dedicated Scholar count as double for these purposes.

I assume you've going to put in the "this doesn't stack with other class abilities" clause later. Also, the "can only advance one casting class" should be here too.

As people have vaguely pointed out, giving more than one spellcasting level per level is a bad plan. It's basically like taking two levels of wizard at that point, and mind you, wizard is one of the most versatile/powerful classes in the game. Giving a free tier of spells means that the caster gets his newer more annoying/disabling spells sooner. And the worst part is the only setback from this class is a 2-3 from the will save and a free wizard feat.


Heavy Study: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains one extra spell known or castable per day for each spell level he has access to. This comes at the cost that both these new spells available and one other spell are only castable at half his total caster level. He may gain a new spell like this for each level, or he may decline this bonus for an individual level.

Please clarify; I am confused by the wording. What are the drawbacks for accepting another spell at a given spell level? By the wording, it suggests that if I do accept the bonus spell, then it and one other spell (I assume you mean the same level) get their CL halved.

Back to the actual point, there are spells which the class could prepare that could really care less about the caster's CL. Examples include web, grease, solid fog, basically any spell that ignores SR and isn't CL dependant on effects (so fireball is out). (They are easily dispelable, however, but still, free spells!)


Scholar's Memory: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains a +3 untyped bonus to knowledge checks attempting to learn the history of any place, object, or creature.

So, he gets a +3 to knowledge(history) then?


Gained Power: The Over-Dedicated Scholar is able to use metamagic at a reduced cost. He may apply one free level of metamagic to his spells, at the penalty that he must cast that spell at half caster level. This stacks with Heavy Study, so that a spell may be forced to be cast at one quarter caster level.

This can actually be really good. Grab silent spell so that you can spont cast silent dim. doors in case of emergency. Quickened spells like web and grease are also good candidates.


Heaven's Spellbook: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains knowledge of a multitude of spells beyond his power. Once per day, the Over-Dedicated Scholar may cast a spell up to 3 levels higher than his highest spell slot, including metamagic.

Heaven? What if I'm CE? :smallsmile: I don't see what heaven has anything to do with the class.

Also, as if 2 more spell levels weren't good enough, Once per day you can cast up to 3 levels higher? Is this 3 caster levels, or 3 spell levels? Still, it's WAY too good. Let's take a wizard4/your-class5. He is an effective wizard 11, meaning he can cast 6th level spells. That is way too good as is, but depending on the wording from this feature, he can cast a 7th level as a 14th level wizard (see: forcecage), or a 9th level spell (see: gate).

As is, every caster (hell, why was I assuming you could only do this with arcane classes; let's archivist it up!) who has his eyes affixed to power is going to take this class 100% of the time. The 2 extra levels of casting is simply way too powerful, and the capstone means that they are perilously close to being able to cast game-breaking 9th level spells.

end PEACH

Glimbur
2010-07-30, 11:08 PM
Side issue: consider the interactions of Heaven's Spellbook and Extra Slot. Now you have a spell slot two higher than you can normally cast.

I'd also like to join the chorus stating that this is too good.

Milskidasith
2010-07-30, 11:10 PM
You have got to be kidding me. This is even better than incantatrix. More like it should have 2/5 progression instead of 5/5.

2/5 casting would be worthless. The class features are rather poor; one per day metamagic, dropping your caster level by a ton to get a worse version of incantatrix's capstone, and more spells known in exchange for permanent, crippling CL penalties. The only useful feature, besides the one per day superspell, is the fast caster progression and the fact it's free, and maybe that you can grab an extra spell that doesn't need CL as a sorc.

This is 7/5 casting, by the way.

Yes, the superspell is very good, but at one/day, it's not worth giving up three caster levels for when all you can do is meta stuff up at higher levels. At low levels, it lets you access powerful stuff earlier, but sorcerers don't know higher level spells (without other cheese), so only wizards get the full gamebreaking benefit, and.... meh. At mid levels, it's a huge buff, but one higher level spell is unlikely to be worth three lost caster levels even then, and certainly not when it's just a bit of extra MM on one spell per day.

Merk
2010-07-30, 11:25 PM
Perhaps include as a requirement that you must have "lost" at least 2 caster levels? Then you could take this to get back to 20/20 casting.

Milskidasith
2010-07-30, 11:27 PM
Perhaps include as a requirement that you must have "lost" at least 2 caster levels? Then you could take this to get back to 20/20 casting.

So a free to enter PrC that lets you ignore the weaknesses of other PrCs (whether it's necessary or not, depending on what class loses caster levels) and gives some powerful, if not gamechanging, features? That's still overpowered.

Zaydos
2010-07-30, 11:32 PM
Which is why I said to remove Heaven's Spellbook and Heavy Study and limit it to characters that had lost casting way back at the 3rd post. Suggested a weakness to give it too.

flabort
2010-07-31, 09:34 AM
OK, some of these suggestions work really well.

I am going to:
Remove the free metamagic
give it d1 HD
clarify that spellcasting doesn't stack with other class abilities, and only one class.
move scholars memory to 3rd
add "lost time" at 2nd (str and dex penalty due to loss of practice)
negative ref and fort saves, still at poor values.
Add "over study" at 4th, giving him constantly fatiuged status, stacks with other sources of that status.

Although the have been suggested (thanks!), I am not going to:
make it require a caster level 2 levels below current HD
make it 2/5 casting (it's purpose is to be opposite of that)


Just to clarify, the purpose is to give casters behind in levels extra chances to catch up, and to give straight casters, such as wizards, 9th level spells faster, at major disadvantages, having studied too long.
And yes, sorcerers may take this. I see no reason why a sorcerer might not spend a lifetime gaining new magics, so that he may be more versitile.

Tinydwarfman
2010-07-31, 09:39 AM
OK, some of these suggestions work really well.

I am going to:
Remove the free metamagic
give it d1 HD
clarify that spellcasting doesn't stack with other class abilities, and only one class.
move scholars memory to 3rd
add "lost time" at 2nd (str and dex penalty due to loss of practice)
negative ref and fort saves, still at poor values.
Add "over study" at 4th, giving him constantly fatiuged status, stacks with other sources of that status.

Although the have been suggested (thanks!), I am not going to:
make it require a caster level 2 levels below current HD
make it 2/5 casting (it's purpose is to be opposite of that)


Just to clarify, the purpose is to give casters behind in levels extra chances to catch up, and to give straight casters, such as wizards, 9th level spells faster, at major disadvantages, having studied too long.
And yes, sorcerers may take this. I see no reason why a sorcerer might not spend a lifetime gaining new magics, so that he may be more versitile.

Yeah, here's your problem. You don't do that. EVER. Personally I feel the original class would be about splitting even with a straight wizard at 3/5, and a fair bit better at 4/5. But yes, I was over-reacting before when I said 2/5. I just do that when I see "-1 to all metamagics". Its a broken ability.

No amount of disadvantages can bring down 7/5 casting (except maybe losing actions), because at high levels, a wizard could have 2 HP and still do just fine.

flabort
2010-07-31, 09:48 AM
Losing actions? did you say losing actions?
PERFECT!
I will put that on, soon. although, I just did a block of editing, and will wait a bit before doing that.

Boci
2010-07-31, 09:51 AM
No amount of disadvantages can bring down 7/5 casting (except maybe losing actions)

Lets focus on this. Possible disadvatages for this class:

1. Loss of a move action at level 2 and swift action at level 4. You now have 1 standard action per round which you can trade for a move or swift action, using immediate actions means you cannot act on your nect turn.

2. Loss of caster levels. At levels 1,3 and 5 you loose 1 caster level for all purposes except determining which spells you can cast. At levels 2 and 4, you loose 2 caster levels. Further more, any affect that would raise your caster level has no effect on you.

3. Forced extreme specialization. By taking this class, you choose one school of arcane magic. That and universal spells are the only ones available to you.

I think one of those should work, maybe not 2 though.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 10:08 AM
This is just bad. The class can't be balanced, especially not by giving it penalties to dump stats, and the entire point (making wizards more powerful) is pointless.

Losing actions is the only way to make this class bad, and doing so would simply make this class worthless. Losing so many caster levels you are essentially a same level caster makes this class worthless anywhere past level 17/18, and extreme specialization isn't enough of a penalty.

There is no way to balance this, because the concept is just so fundamentally the opposite of "balanced."

Morph Bark
2010-07-31, 10:17 AM
This would be quite different if it was meant for Paladins/Rangers/Hexblades...

Boci
2010-07-31, 10:38 AM
Losing actions is the only way to make this class bad, and doing so would simply make this class worthless.

I dunno, it would make for an interesting wizard in a tier 3 or lower game. Certainly not something to be played often, but I would give it a try.


Losing so many caster levels you are essentially a same level caster makes this class worthless anywhere past level 17/18

Meaning it is not that much a problem, since not all games go that far.


and extreme specialization isn't enough of a penalty.

Fix the specialized school to divination?


This would be quite different if it was meant for Paladins/Rangers/Hexblades...

Yes. Then it would need full BAB, 2/3 good saves, d10 hitpoints, and some minor class features.

Morph Bark
2010-07-31, 10:40 AM
Fix the specialized school to divination?

Just as long as both Conjuration and Transmutation at least would be forbidden... then it would actually downpower it some. But just some. 9th-level spells are full of OOMPH.

Boci
2010-07-31, 10:42 AM
Just as long as both Conjuration and Transmutation at least would be forbidden... then it would actually downpower it some. But just some. 9th-level spells are full of OOMPH.

True, then again, Artificer can already make scrolls of the spells 2 levels earlier.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 11:16 AM
I dunno, it would make for an interesting wizard in a tier 3 or lower game. Certainly not something to be played often, but I would give it a try.

Dropping a T1 class that, even with bad PrCing, is still probably T1 down to T3 means the prestige class is essentially worthless to take, and incredibly weak. Even if you wanted to nerf yourself, that doesn't mean making a terrible PrC is the right way to go.


Meaning it is not that much a problem, since not all games go that far.

Yeah, this has the same flaws as "The DM won't let you use this class to be broken, so it isn't broken." Just because not all games involve the broken element doesn't mean it isn't broken; would it be only 1/20th the problem if I gave the warblade a capstone that said "You become invincible and can kill everybody and autosucceed on all rolls?" No, it would not.


Fix the specialized school to divination?

There are still problems with this, since the wizard can now more easily break the game with omniscience, and, with shenanigans, can just use early Miracles (or wishes, but that burns EXP) to get things done.

Mr.Moron
2010-07-31, 11:21 AM
I know how to make it balanced!


Theory, not Practice(Ex): At 1st Level, you intense study makes your mastery of magic more about theory than practice. As such while they may be more advanced than they might otherwise be, they have flaws when put into use. Whenever casting a spell of the two highest levels available to you, you suffer the following penalties.


Your caster level is treated as 4 lower than normal.
The spell is treated as being 2 levels lower for the purposes effects such as globe of invulnerability and spell turning.
The DC of the spell is 2 lower than normal.
Spells with a casting time of Swift action, become a standard action. Standard actions become full-round actions. 1-Round Actions complete at the end of the next turn after you start casting, rather than the beginning creatures summoned by spells with a casting time of 1-Round can't act the turn they're summoned. Metamagic and other effects apply normally to these adjusted times. For example, a swift action spell made standard can be made swift again by being Quickened.
You suffer a -20 penalty to all concentrated checks to sustain the spell, avoid interruptions to casting, or cast it defensively.
The spell is unstable (see below).


Instability:

There is a a 10% chance each time you cast such a spell for it to fail spectacularly. This sort of dramatic failure also occurs whenever a caster level check you make as part of the spell (such as spell resistance or dispel check) shows a "1" on the d20 or whenever the target of a spell passes their save with a "20" showing on the d20.

In any case a spell triggering instability has the following effects:

First, the spell fails to activate normally at all, being expended without any effect whatsoever.

Second, a new spell effect of the same level is generated randomly (such as by consulting the table for possible scrolls (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/scrolls.htm)). This spell effect is then applied in such a way as to most negatively affect the caster and his allies. For example a Summon Monster effect would creatures hostile to them, while a Fireball effect would be centered such that it hits as many of his allies as possible.

This effect is resolved at +4 Caster level and +2 DC over normal (and thus +8 Caster level and +4 DC over what the attempted spell would normally use after penalties.)

Thrid, you roll Xd4 where X is the effective level of the spell you were attempting to case. You must instantly lose a number of prepared spells or spell slots equal to the result. No action, not even a free or immediate action may be taken in response to this.

Finally, the wild magic burns out portion of your mind or power. Your maximum prepared spells (or spell slots) for that level of spell is reduced by 1 for 1d10d10d10 days.


...but in all seriousness I have to agree with the majority. Extra caster levels are just so powerful it's hard to not to make them even more game breaking than standard casting already is.

Maybe, if it gave you access to a single spell slot of 1 level higher than your can normally cast, that only had like a 50% chance of actually working it might be OKAY.

Boci
2010-07-31, 11:30 AM
Dropping a T1 class that, even with bad PrCing, is still probably T1 down to T3 means the prestige class is essentially worthless to take, and incredibly weak. Even if you wanted to nerf yourself, that doesn't mean making a terrible PrC is the right way to go.

I'm just saying with some changes this PrC has the potential to make one interesting character and then never be used again. And looking at all the PrC ever printed, that puts this one's use above quite a few official ones.


would it be only 1/20th the problem if I gave the warblade a capstone that said "You become invincible and can kill everybody and autosucceed on all rolls?" No, it would not.

But playing a warblade in a game you knew was going to end at level 12 would not be a problem.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 11:38 AM
I'm just saying with some changes this PrC has the potential to make one interesting character and then never be used again. And looking at all the PrC ever printed, that puts this one's use above quite a few official ones.

Again, saying "Other stuff is poorly balanced with a bad design goal" doesn't change the fact this is as well.




But playing a warblade in a game you knew was going to end at level 12 would not be a problem.

That wouldn't make it balanced, though, which is the point.

Boci
2010-07-31, 11:42 AM
Again, saying "Other stuff is poorly balanced with a bad design goal" doesn't change the fact this is as well.

But all we need from a PrC is one ingame use to justify its existents. More are better, but one will do.


That wouldn't make it balanced, though, which is the point.

All it would mean it that hyou would not play a warblade in a game that was going to reach level 20 or beyond. That would still make the warbalde a good and adaptable class that could be used in a number games.

Morph Bark
2010-07-31, 11:42 AM
But playing a warblade in a game you knew was going to end at level 12 would not be a problem.

By that reasoning, a class that gets an amount of ways to break the game at every level other than 1 would be okay and balanced. As long as you don't play past level 1.

There's a term for that: male cattle excrement.

Boci
2010-07-31, 11:56 AM
By that reasoning, a class that gets an amount of ways to break the game at every level other than 1 would be okay and balanced. As long as you don't play past level 1.

There's a term for that: male cattle excrement.

No, not at all.
Firstly, yes, if you are always level 1, why does it matter that you will break the game at level 2? Just don't use the class if you are going to level 2. Not a problem for a homebrewed class/PrC.
Secendly, Level 1 is a lot less broad than level 1-19.

The Glyphstone
2010-07-31, 12:02 PM
I know how to make it balanced!


Theory, not Practice(Ex): At 1st Level, you intense study makes your mastery of magic more about theory than practice. As such while they may be more advanced than they might otherwise be, they have flaws when put into use. Whenever casting a spell of the two highest levels available to you, you suffer the following penalties.


Your caster level is treated as 4 lower than normal.
The spell is treated as being 2 levels lower for the purposes effects such as globe of invulnerability and spell turning.
The DC of the spell is 2 lower than normal.
Spells with a casting time of Swift action, become a standard action. Standard actions become full-round actions. 1-Round Actions complete at the end of the next turn after you start casting, rather than the beginning creatures summoned by spells with a casting time of 1-Round can't act the turn they're summoned. Metamagic and other effects apply normally to these adjusted times. For example, a swift action spell made standard can be made swift again by being Quickened.
You suffer a -20 penalty to all concentrated checks to sustain the spell, avoid interruptions to casting, or cast it defensively.
The spell is unstable (see below).


Instability:

There is a a 10% chance each time you cast such a spell for it to fail spectacularly. This sort of dramatic failure also occurs whenever a caster level check you make as part of the spell (such as spell resistance or dispel check) shows a "1" on the d20 or whenever the target of a spell passes their save with a "20" showing on the d20.

In any case a spell triggering instability has the following effects:

First, the spell fails to activate normally at all, being expended without any effect whatsoever.

Second, a new spell effect of the same level is generated randomly (such as by consulting the table for possible scrolls (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/scrolls.htm)). This spell effect is then applied in such a way as to most negatively affect the caster and his allies. For example a Summon Monster effect would creatures hostile to them, while a Fireball effect would be centered such that it hits as many of his allies as possible.

This effect is resolved at +4 Caster level and +2 DC over normal (and thus +8 Caster level and +4 DC over what the attempted spell would normally use after penalties.)

Thrid, you roll Xd4 where X is the effective level of the spell you were attempting to case. You must instantly lose a number of prepared spells or spell slots equal to the result. No action, not even a free or immediate action may be taken in response to this.

Finally, the wild magic burns out portion of your mind or power. Your maximum prepared spells (or spell slots) for that level of spell is reduced by 1 for 1d10d10d10 days.


...but in all seriousness I have to agree with the majority. Extra caster levels are just so powerful it's hard to not to make them even more game breaking than standard casting already is.

Maybe, if it gave you access to a single spell slot of 1 level higher than your can normally cast, that only had like a 50% chance of actually working it might be OKAY.

This could be hilarious if you read it right, or wrong. After all, 11 of the 20 faces of a d20 show a 1 on them.:smallbiggrin:

Magikeeper
2010-07-31, 12:27 PM
DMs are unlikely to allow homebrew that is broken at any level - it is easier to not deal with it. Not all DMs decide that the PCs will stop at level X anyway.

As for this class, the balancing factor could be:

Requirements:
Base Fortitude Save: +8*
Skills: 18 ranks in Concentration*
Feats: Endurance
Spells: Must be able to cast 4th level arcane spells, use lesser invocations, or be unable to cast spells higher than 6th level (Not including restrictions caused by low ability scores)*.

*To survive the INTENSE studying. Prevents wizards from qualifying pre-epic without multicasting.
*Cannot enter the class until level 15.
*Paladins qualify without multiclassing, pure Clerics do not. Not sure how to flavorfully explain this.

At this point some or even most of the random penalties can be removed as the class is neutered for all pure casters. Unless there is some arcane prestige class that both boosts fort saves, gives full casting, and is awesome.

jiriku
2010-07-31, 01:13 PM
Flabort let me get some clarification from you before I PEACH. What's your purpose behind building this class? What role is it intended to fill in the game world? Since wizards are already studious, scholarly spellcasters, and loremasters are already wizards who are even more studious and scholarly than the usual, what niche are you trying to fill that's not already covered by existing prestige classes?

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 03:41 PM
But all we need from a PrC is one ingame use to justify its existents. More are better, but one will do.

No, that has nothing to do with balance. You can use incantatrix to break the game, but that doesn't make it a balanced PrC and, on the other end, you can use Green Star Adept (I think that is the name?), and that doesn't make it balanced (in the opposite direction).

Having a single use does not make something well designed and balanced. By that argument, every class is perfectly balanced and designed, because there is a "use," which is a very vague term, for everything.


All it would mean it that hyou would not play a warblade in a game that was going to reach level 20 or beyond. That would still make the warbalde a good and adaptable class that could be used in a number games.

That does not make it balanced. Are you reading what I am saying? Just because you can say "If you don't do X, Y isn't unbalanced" doesn't change that fact. If you don't use metamagic, incantatrix isn't much of a boost, but that doesn't mean incantatrix isn't incredibly strong.

Boci
2010-07-31, 04:08 PM
No, that has nothing to do with balance. You can use incantatrix to break the game, but that doesn't make it a balanced PrC and, on the other end, you can use Green Star Adept (I think that is the name?), and that doesn't make it balanced (in the opposite direction).

Having a single use does not make something well designed and balanced. By that argument, every class is perfectly balanced and designed, because there is a "use," which is a very vague term, for everything.



That does not make it balanced. Are you reading what I am saying? Just because you can say "If you don't do X, Y isn't unbalanced" doesn't change that fact. If you don't use metamagic, incantatrix isn't much of a boost, but that doesn't mean incantatrix isn't incredibly strong.

I am not talking about balance. If we limiting this PrC to a single standard action per round, it could turn a wizard into a tier 3, and makes an interesting character concept. You would only use it once, but that is enough. If you are paying for material, you would rightfully expect something more, but in this case you are not, so that is neither here or there.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 04:20 PM
I am not talking about balance. If we limiting this PrC to a single standard action per round, it could turn a wizard into a tier 3, and makes an interesting character concept. You would only use it once, but that is enough. If you are paying for material, you would rightfully expect something more, but in this case you are not, so that is neither here or there.

I am not talking about anything besides balance, so I do not know why you are trying to argue with me; even my comments on your suggestion were purely about balance. Furthermore, if it drops it to T3, it is unbalanced, and payment has nothing to do with how good an idea is or the standards it should be held to. Please don't argue "You expect a better computer/car/house for more money" because those are things, not concepts; a concept does not become bad if you paid somebody $500 dollars for it, nor does it become good if the guy returns your money because you weren't satisfied.

Regardless of whether you consider this interesting, it is unbalanced and the design goal (make wizards more powerful) is poor, and overturning it so it instead drops casters multiple tiers in exchange for no benefit is likewise a poor concept and poorly balanced. Neither massive power boosts nor massive power drops are good design.

Boci
2010-07-31, 04:27 PM
Regardless of whether you consider this interesting,

That has been my stance from the very beginning: This PrC is interesting, with the potential for a good tier 3 wizard, but could only be used once. I assumed that since I acknowledged it could only be used once, it went without saying that I felt it was badly designed.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 04:31 PM
That has been my stance from the very beginning: This PrC is interesting, with the potential for a good tier 3 wizard, but could only be used once. I assumed that since I acknowledged it could only be used once, it went without saying that I felt it was badly designed.

The PrC was not dropping the casters in tiers until you decided to start making balance changes, and those changes themselves were badly designed in the opposite direction, since the plan was "make a PrC that vastly drops the power of whoever takes it."

Arguing with somebody (me) who's only stance is "it's badly designed and poorly balanced" does not seem to imply you thought it was badly designed or poorly balanced. Saying "It can only be used once" is a statement that was... pretty much meaningless. It had no real relevance to any of the conversation, and didn't really make sense (you could easily use your modifications multiple times), it just wasn't worth arguing.

The only other thing I have to say is that "interesting" is not always a good thing.

Boci
2010-07-31, 04:36 PM
Arguing with somebody (me) who's only stance is "it's badly designed and poorly balanced" does not seem to imply you thought it was badly designed or poorly balanced. Saying "It can only be used once" is a statement that was... pretty much meaningless. It had no real relevance to any of the conversation, and didn't really make sense (you could easily use your modifications multiple times), it just wasn't worth arguing.

You said "This class cannot be balanced," Which to me logically implied you also meant "It should not exist", to which I countered "It can be used to make an interesting wizard character". So apparantly, through miscommunication we then eached started arguing about two completly different things.


The only other thing I have to say is that "interesting" is not always a good thing.

Interesting is always good, just sometimes not good enough.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 05:03 PM
You said "This class cannot be balanced," Which to me logically implied you also meant "It should not exist", to which I countered "It can be used to make an interesting wizard character". So apparantly, through miscommunication we then eached started arguing about two completly different things.

Saying it cannot be balanced is just that: It cannot be balanced. You seem to take far more from statements than they actually mean, especially when "this cannot be balanced" and "this shouldn't exist" are a far leap from each other. Do I think this should exist? Personally, no, because it's only design goal is to make casters advance faster.


Interesting is always good, just sometimes not good enough.

This is a semantic argument, but "interesting" only means something that you can be interested in. I consider this class "interesting" because I don't see why somebody would want to make wizards more powerful, but that doesn't mean it was good. The word interesting is not just a bland synonym for good, or a quality that only exists in good things. There is nothing that is always good at all times in all situations.

Boci
2010-07-31, 05:11 PM
Personally, no, because it's only design goal is to make casters advance faster.

So I interpreted you correctly.


This is a semantic argument, but "interesting" only means something that you can be interested in. I consider this class "interesting" because I don't see why somebody would want to make wizards more powerful, but that doesn't mean it was good. The word interesting is not just a bland synonym for good, or a quality that only exists in good things. There is nothing that is always good at all times in all situations.

Meh, interesting is always a good trait for me as a far as character concepts go. Not that interesting means they should always be played.

Milskidasith
2010-07-31, 05:16 PM
So I interpreted you correctly.

Yes, you correctly guessed my feelings. That still doesn't matter, because it was still irrelevant to all my statements. If it makes you feel better you guessed right, sure, but it had nothing to do with the conversation.

Boci
2010-07-31, 05:19 PM
Yes, you correctly guessed my feelings. That still doesn't matter, because it was still irrelevant to all my statements. If it makes you feel better you guessed right, sure, but it had nothing to do with the conversation.

It has everything to do with what I have been saying.

You: This class is unbalanced, it should not exist.
Me: I don't know, it could make an interesting PC, but I would only use it once.

That is all I have been saying.

grarrrg
2010-07-31, 05:23 PM
A couple possible changes to better balance it.

Option A (minor change): Move the "+2 caster level" bonuses to 3rd, and 5th, so it advances 1, 1, 2, 1, 2. It feels better if it's more of a capstone boost. Currently all the 5th level really grants over 4th is the "Heaven's" one time +3 boost, and d1 hp. 5th has the same bab, same saves, same etc... as 4th. I don't believe 5th offers enough to be worth not just taking a level of Wizard instead.

Option B (major change): Make it a 6/5 progression prc with caster advancement of 0, 0, 2, 2, 2. (or a 7/5 with the 5th level granting +3). This way a character doesn't/can't benefit until level 5. Would maybe need to refluff it to account for the 2 'dead' levels.

Morph Bark
2010-07-31, 05:49 PM
It has everything to do with what I have been saying.

You: This class is unbalanced, it should not exist.
Me: I don't know, it could make an interesting PC, but I would only use it once.

That is all I have been saying.

Interesting =/= balanced.

The Planar Shepherd is pretty interesting.

Boci
2010-07-31, 05:51 PM
Interesting =/= balanced.

The Planar Shepherd is pretty interesting.

Can you quote me saying its balanced?

Morph Bark
2010-07-31, 06:01 PM
Can you quote me saying its balanced?

You did not outright say it, just like Milskidasith didn't outright say "it should not exist". But "You: This class is unbalanced, it should not exist. Me: I don't know--" seems to suggest thoughts of it not being unbalanced.

I'm just saying though, a Planar Shepherd can also make for an interesting villain. I wouldn't use something of this sort for a PC.

Boci
2010-07-31, 06:07 PM
You did not outright say it, just like Milskidasith didn't outright say "it should not exist". But "You: This class is unbalanced, it should not exist. Me: I don't know--" seems to suggest thoughts of it not being unbalanced.

I already aknowledged it was badly designed (see post 38). I was just saying that limiting to a standard action every round could make an interesting character concept. I was diagreeing with Milskidasith "it should not exist" opinion.

flabort
2010-08-01, 12:05 AM
I am going to do this (2nd level):
Weakened body: unable to use a move action and a standard action in the same turn. This allows for two move actions in a single turn, or 2 standard actions in one turn, if other class features would allow.

And this (4th level):
Colapsing magic: all spells in top two spell levels availible take full-round actions to cast (including meta-magiced spells).

As well, I'm adding concentration 13 as a pre-req (not 18, sorry, but still limits it to 10th level or more)

flabort
2010-08-01, 12:25 AM
Shameless double post:
People keep asking what the purpose of this class is:
Mainly to catch up on lost casting. and to take absured penalties, and gain extra spell slots.
Flavor wise, a wizard realized he was falling behind his peers one day, and went into overdrive. he has studied so long, and so hard, that his physical abilities lagged far into... debt. His knowledge of spells is far beyond his peers, although he is unpracticed, often having trouble casting them.

It fits into a game world as the frail guy who was picked on by the jocks at school... although the school was a wizards accademy, making the "jocks" the frail guys who would get picked on by the real jocks at another school. this guy would be the guy, who, rather than the eccentric guy who experiments on everything, would be the knowledgable guy with a massive library.

...haven't I awnsered this before?

Milskidasith
2010-08-01, 12:40 AM
You are not answering the main question that was asked, which is this.

Why do you believe that casters should, for any cost, get faster advancement? You can write a whole backstory, but that isn't a design goal, that's fluff made up to explain the mechanics. Especially early on, when this class was free to enter and had no penalties, the design goal of "Give casters more power or, at the least, free to obtain faster advancement" made no sense, and you have yet to answer it.

Yes, it seems the intent is to let you catch up from PrCs (why? If they lose CLs, there is usually a reason, although it is not always a great one), and advance faster, but you have yet to provide a reason for why giving wizards that capability is something you feel needs to be done.

Gorgondantess
2010-08-01, 12:50 AM
It fits into a game world as the frail guy who was picked on by the jocks at school... although the school was a wizards accademy, making the "jocks" the frail guys who would get picked on by the real jocks at another school. this guy would be the guy, who, rather than the eccentric guy who experiments on everything, would be the knowledgable guy with a massive library.

...haven't I awnsered this before?

Said frail guy wouldn't be picked on by jocks, because said frail guy can make them vomit out their lungs in about 3.5 seconds.

I happen to think this class is broken. I happen to think casting as a fullcaster class above your ECL is insanely broken, no matter what. If you pile on enough penalties, that doesn't stop it from being broken. It just makes it broken the other way. I, as a DM, would not allow this class, under any circumstances, and I consider myself a very liberal DM: ask anyone on this forum, and I believe they'll likely agree with me.
I like the sentiment of letting those who ended up with casting below ECL catch up. That's fine and great- in fact, I think it should've been done earlier. But casting above your ECL is broken, end of story, I don't care if you give negative BAB, negative HP, negative saves, and hell, -2 to all physical attributes every level, and then only let them make one action a round, it's still broken so long as you're able to cast gate before a regular wizard can. Fix that problem, and I'll consider it.

faceroll
2010-08-01, 07:22 AM
Said frail guy wouldn't be picked on by jocks, because said frail guy can make them vomit out their lungs in about 3.5 seconds.

I happen to think this class is broken. I happen to think casting as a fullcaster class above your ECL is insanely broken, no matter what. If you pile on enough penalties, that doesn't stop it from being broken. It just makes it broken the other way. I, as a DM, would not allow this class, under any circumstances, and I consider myself a very liberal DM: ask anyone on this forum, and I believe they'll likely agree with me.
I like the sentiment of letting those who ended up with casting below ECL catch up. That's fine and great- in fact, I think it should've been done earlier. But casting above your ECL is broken, end of story, I don't care if you give negative BAB, negative HP, negative saves, and hell, -2 to all physical attributes every level, and then only let them make one action a round, it's still broken so long as you're able to cast gate before a regular wizard can. Fix that problem, and I'll consider it.

I agree that -10 HP or whatever isn't a big deal, but if you decrease the action advantage of casting spells, say requiring 1 round per 2 spell levels (round up) to cast a spell, and you remove the goofball chain gate nonsense that TO defaults to when defending the real ultimate power of spell casters, but is rarely seen in game, then it becomes a serious problem. Sure, you can open up with a battle winning spell, but it's going to take 4 rounds to get off. That means you have 4 rounds of standing and chanting while your friends have fun. The real issue will be access to stuff like teleport and similar spells earlier, as it changes the nature of the game.

Milskidasith
2010-08-01, 08:24 AM
I agree that -10 HP or whatever isn't a big deal, but if you decrease the action advantage of casting spells, say requiring 1 round per 2 spell levels (round up) to cast a spell, and you remove the goofball chain gate nonsense that TO defaults to when defending the real ultimate power of spell casters, but is rarely seen in game, then it becomes a serious problem. Sure, you can open up with a battle winning spell, but it's going to take 4 rounds to get off. That means you have 4 rounds of standing and chanting while your friends have fun. The real issue will be access to stuff like teleport and similar spells earlier, as it changes the nature of the game.

Which is broken the other way around, as he says... piling on penalties until you are completely incapable of doing anything is just as broken a PrC as one that gives you power for free.

faceroll
2010-08-01, 08:51 AM
Which is broken the other way around, as he says... piling on penalties until you are completely incapable of doing anything is just as broken a PrC as one that gives you power for free.

Um, being able to teleport 500 miles or turn invisible or fly or kill a room full of people with a word is hardly complete incapability.

Haarkla
2010-08-01, 08:54 AM
As well, I'm adding concentration 13 as a pre-req (not 18, sorry, but still limits it to 10th level or more)
You should reduce it to concentration 8. IMO Prestige classes should generally be enterable at 5th level.

Milskidasith
2010-08-01, 08:58 AM
Um, being able to teleport 500 miles or turn invisible or fly or kill a room full of people with a word is hardly complete incapability.

Yes, except when you have no defenses and it takes five rounds to cast any spell at the capstone, you've sacrificed action economy so much you're worthless and it's effectively a T-2 PrC. Sure, a crafty wizard could make it worse, but it's still a huge power drop for him, which is broken design as much as giving them a boost is.

EDIT: Haarkla, PrCs are frequently able to be entered at tenth level. There's no design problem with PrCs requiring later entry, especially because certain abilities would be broken or more unbalanced when obtained earlier.

faceroll
2010-08-01, 09:02 AM
Yes, except when you have no defenses

Ah yes, the wizard's party, how easily they are forgotten. :smallcool:

Milskidasith
2010-08-01, 09:09 AM
Ah yes, the wizard's party, how easily they are forgotten. :smallcool:

Are you honestly arguing that something is balanced because other classes that are not in any way related to the current class can help the guy? That is totally irrelevant to balance. If you are just nitpicking, my question is simply "why?" What purpose does it serve to nitpick that the party members can technically defend the wizard? (I say technically because managing aggro in D&D is practically impossible once everybody is flying). Even if they can defend the wizard, it doesn't change that it's a horribly weak PrC when he takes five times as long to do anything and loses all mobility and immediate action spells besides that.

faceroll
2010-08-01, 09:20 AM
Are you honestly arguing that something is balanced because other classes that are not in any way related to the current class can help the guy?

Yes. I usually play D&D with other people, and what other people play is entirely what decides whether something is balanced or not. If there were no other people, balance wouldn't matter.


That is totally irrelevant to balance.

Really.


If you are just nitpicking, my question is simply "why?" What purpose does it serve to nitpick that the party members can technically defend the wizard?

You are operating under 3e TO assumptions that wizards should be able to solo everything (as they certainly have the mechanical capabilities). I'm not sure if I buy into that is what the wizard class should be. I like the idea behind Batman and GOD wizards that need their parties.


(I say technically because managing aggro in D&D is practically impossible once everybody is flying).

Dungeon terrain and reach works out just fine.


Even if they can defend the wizard, it doesn't change that it's a horribly weak PrC when he takes five times as long to do anything and loses all mobility and immediate action spells besides that.

Then make it less of a penalty. No need to get excited. It's not like I'm advocating the death of your dog. :smallconfused:

Morph Bark
2010-08-01, 09:44 AM
Faceroll, I think what Milskidasith is trying to say is that a class or PrC should be workable regardless of what assumptions you might have as to the surrounding area or people. Not all wizards are in parties (despite them often having fitting hats for parties) and even if they are they might not be incredibly played to each other or built and equipped towards working around the wizard.

And if they are built and equipped towards working around the wizard, then it's not really a party anymore, it's a wizard with minions. And that's something that I believe to be a rather different thing.

Milskidasith
2010-08-01, 09:46 AM
Yes. I usually play D&D with other people, and what other people play is entirely what decides whether something is balanced or not. If there were no other people, balance wouldn't matter.

Yes, balance is a comparison between other things. It is not a comparison between parties. Your suggestion (make casting take five times as long for people entering this PrC) makes the class far weaker in comparison to the normal wizard, probably a -2 tier PrC (not necessarilly T3, that's just the name, though this probably would be pretty low).

In short: When balancing things, you do not factor in what the other party members are doing, or, if it is necessary to, you assume they are all equally capable. Saying "This class isn't unbalanced because his party members can be stronger to make up for it" is a cop-out.

What you actually do is compare the PrC to the class it is meant to be entered from, and make sure the two are roughly on the same power level. Free extra spells known and casting levels is a massive buff (the original class), and massive penalties and getting one fifth as many spells off, not counting your loss of movement and defensive spells, is a massive nerf, so neither are balanced compared to the average caster. Yes, the caster isn't balanced compared to the average monk, but then all discussion would be "Monk PrC needs more ninth level spells, wizard PrC needs to remove all casting advancement and give non synergistic features."


Really.


Yes. What your party members can do has no bearing on the balance of a class in a theoretical setting. Not all wizards will be powerful, but that doesn't mean they can't be, which is the entire point of balance; the tiers are how much power a class can get, not how much they will always have or use.

Yes, parties have to be around the same tier (or played at that level, at least) in order to work together, but that doesn't change the way the classes themselves are balanced. You don't say "The monk is balanced because he can play OK with fighters and CW Samurai" you say "The monk is weak because he is weaker than the majority of classes and doesn't have options." PrCs are even easier, because PrCs are very specifically meant to be taken by a certain few classes (in most cases), so it is easy to know if it is stronger or weaker than the base class.


You are operating under 3e TO assumptions that wizards should be able to solo everything (as they certainly have the mechanical capabilities). I'm not sure if I buy into that is what the wizard class should be. I like the idea behind Batman and GOD wizards that need their parties.


That has nothing to do with balance. Just because you don't like that wizards are strong does not mean you can actually argue that a PrC that makes the wizard's spells take five times as long to cast is not unbalanced!


Dungeon terrain and reach works out just fine.

Dangerous terrain doesn't apply while flying, reach doesn't protect against ranged, and most fights are over before five rounds.


Then make it less of a penalty. No need to get excited. It's not like I'm advocating the death of your dog. :smallconfused:

Three things.

One: I did not post with any intent for emotion there, and, reading it, I do not see it. If you think there is, then I apologize, but that was not my intent. Saying "horribly weak" is not because I am in any way emotional, it is because it is, in fact, "horribly weak;" taking the PrC is a horrible choice for anybody who doesn't want to make it near impossible to use his primary class feature (because, when you finish, your spells take longer to cast than most fights).

Two: Your most recent post, however, is moderately offensive because you are indirectly disparaging all the work me and everybody else puts into balancing classes by essentially saying "it doesn't matter, the party will balance it out."

Three: In the case of PrCs, balanced is, unless the design goal is stated to be otherwise, assumed to be about neutral, with maybe a small power boost to the class, or a boost in one area in exchange for specialization or feats. You don't compare wizard PrCs to what the monk is doing, you compare it to what the wizard can do. In this case, getting off one fifth as many spells and losing the ability to use many of your immediate action defenses is a massive nerf, which is why this class is unbalanced.

FlamingKobold
2010-08-03, 12:20 AM
I have decided that if I make a campaign setting with a god of logic, intelligence and awesomeness, its name will be Milskidasith.

Anyway, yeah, he's got it right, faceroll. The OP said PEACH, which generally implies some semblance of trying to determine how balanced something is. If there is no explicitly stated balancing point (Say, "I play in a party of 5 lightning warriors" or "The CW samurai is the most powerful class in my campaign"), we assume a +0 to +1 range for a PrC. What Milski is saying is a lot more beneficial to both the OP and the homebrew community at large by trying to make it objectively balanced.

flabort
2010-08-03, 08:21 AM
Well, 50% say the class is hopelessly unballanceable, and the other 50% seem to be occupied telling the first half that the class is "not unballanced", or something like that.
So that would mean its actually mostly ballanced now?

Milskidasith
2010-08-03, 04:37 PM
Well, 50% say the class is hopelessly unballanceable, and the other 50% seem to be occupied telling the first half that the class is "not unballanced", or something like that.
So that would mean its actually mostly ballanced now?

Not really, no. Just because some people seem to be arguing that, since it's interesting, we can ignore balance issues, doesn't change the issues exist.

Morph Bark
2010-08-03, 05:08 PM
Well, 50% say the class is hopelessly unballanceable, and the other 50% seem to be occupied telling the first half that the class is "not unballanced", or something like that.
So that would mean its actually mostly ballanced now?

It's more like 50% says it is unbalanced or unbalance-able, whilst the other 50% seem to be occupied telling the first half that it doesn't matter if it is unbalanced as long as it is interesting.

This neither means the first 50% finds it uninteresting nor does it mean the last 50% thinks it is balanced (or unbalanced, unless they otherwise said so).

Thrice Dead Cat
2010-08-03, 05:54 PM
May as well PEACH this sucker.


Over-Dedicated Scholar
Prerequisites: ability to cast 2nd Level spells, spell craft (5 ranks), concentration (13 ranks)

Requirements are essentially "be a 10th level spellcaster."

HD is really just unnecessary. HP comes from CON, not HD. That and being undead here makes me laugh all the way to the bank. BAB is whatever: you're a caster. Saves are odd, at best. Save penalties are just kind of random. Skill points look fine, though.

The extra spellcaster is NOT balanced. Getting more spells faster is crazy good. You know that Loredrake shenanigans people talk about? Yeah, no reason to offer that in PrC form.



Heavy Study: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains one extra spell known or castable per day for each spell level he has access to. This comes at the cost that both these new spells available and one other spell are only castable at half his total caster level. He may gain a new spell like this for each level, or he may decline this bonus for an individual level.

This tries to be a nerf, but it really just means that wizards prepare a spell per level that doesn't care about CL. Sorcerers do the same for the free spells they grab. It's at this point that this class is basically a freebie gaining extra spells for practically nothing.


Lost Time: The Over-Dedicated Scholar has spent copious amounts of time on his studies. Time he will never get back. he loses one point of Str and Dex each permanently, having not used his muscles for some time.

Hitting stats I don't care about? Whatever. I'll either just polymorph into somthing better or bear it and not care about losing maybe a point of AC and some carrying capacity.


Weakened Body: The Over-Dedicated Scholar may not use a standard action in the same turn as a move action, and vice versa. they may trade one in for the other, if they are able from other sources (such as being able to trade a standard action for a move action to run).

This basically forces me to trade a free level of casting on a the Mobile Spellcaster feat, which allows you to double move and cast in one action. I'd take that trade - that or grab movement with swift actions.

It's at this point in the class that you have to blow a feat to retain mobility, but otherwise you're ahead. You're a 12th level character casting spells at least as a 13th level character, possibly more.


Scholar's Memory: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains a +3 untyped bonus to knowledge checks attempting to learn the history of any place, object, or creature.

Free Skill Focus (Knowledge: EVERYTHING). Eh, whatever. It's practically a dead level. The penalties to fortitude and reflex are near worthless at this point due to magic solving your problems. That or just be undead so you no longer care about fortitude saves and realize that reflex saves just lead to taking damage, which is generally negligible.


Over Study: The Over-Dedicated Scholar spends more time studying that much else. Each day, he must spend three extra hours studying or resting in the proccess of preparing his spells, or be as if fatigued for the whole day, taking a -2 penelty to Str and Dex, and being unable to run or charge. This may stack to become exhausted if too much exertion is spent.

Another attempt at a tax. The thing is, the penalties are to dumb stats and this doesn't prevent me from preparing spells. By this point I could have my own fast flowing time plane, making this meaningless. In the event that I don't, I buy some dirt cheap sandals to prevent ever becoming fatigued. That or become undead.

Colapsing Magic: The Over-Dedicated Scholar must take a full round action to cast a spell in his top two levels availible. this includes spells altered by metamagic.[/quote]

For the same reasons above, this does not balance the extra level. I either blow a spell known to drop my casting back down to a standard action, cheat away the spell level with Sanctum Spell/Earth Spell shenanigans, or simple not care about my mobility and just fire away. It hurts Swift/Immediate Action spells, but nothing else, really.

By this point, I'm a 14th level caster with 16th level spells. That's an extra level of spells for both wizards and sorcerers. That's serious fire power there.


Heaven's Spellbook: The Over-Dedicated Scholar gains knowledge of a multitude of spells beyond his power. Once per day, the Over-Dedicated Scholar may cast a spell up to 3 levels higher than his highest spell slot, including metamagic.

Free metamagic is powerful. Really, really, really, powerful. Once a day, I persist something godly and laugh like a maniac. This also negates the previous damage caused by Collapsing Magic, as my highest level spell is now hypothetically 12th level, meaning spells 10th level or lower are now back to their normal casting time. Wait a minute...


Seriously, though. This class is free to enter, tries to stop the power increase but fails due to the fact that it's so frakking easy to stop things like Fatigue. The only thing that might hurt would be losing my move action every round I cast, but there's still a feat for that.

I've got to side with Milski on this one: way too strong, even at the late entry and attempts at balancing it.