Can this possibly be legit?

[visigani]

Academic Priest...

Is this 3.5 material? Because OH EM GEE... it makes me giddy as a school girl.

Slap prodigy on... hell, even a human, and you can burn off the level adjustment.... and be just stellar on knowledge checks.

This has Cloistered Cleric written all over it. Pick up Nymph Kissed (or whatever it is) and you'll have an absurd number of skill points (5+1+1+6).

You could cover virtually all skills and then some.

Of course your spell DCs would suck....

[Kuulvheysoon]

It's from the Dragonlance book War of the Twins, in case anybody is wondering, which makes it not official 3.5e material. The Dragonlance Campaign Setting is the only DL book to receive the Official Stamp.

Which would make this... Second party? Third party?

Besides, the feat would be much better on an Archivist, making them Int SAD (as they currently only use Wisdom for bonus spells).

[Metahuman1]

It's third Party. It also shared the glaring and unforgivable flaw with it's counter part (the one that does the exact same thing except Cha instead of Int), of not affecting spell DC's.

[Chronos]

On the other hand, though, you could make a perfectly capable cleric without ever using anything that offers a save at all.

[Jeff the Green]

Which would make this... Second party? Third party?

Third Party. Second party would be your own homebrew. (Others' homebrew is third party, though.)

And really, it's not all that amazing. It splits your casting stats, and while yes, a cleric can be perfectly capable casting spells with no save, you're significantly restricting yourself if you do.

On an archivist, though, it's rather nice.

[eggynack]

Third Party. Second party would be your own homebrew. (Others' homebrew is third party, though.)

I thought that second party was Dragon magazine type stuff. Like, first party is, "We'll make some stuff," third party is, "That guy over there is making some stuff," and second party is, "You go ahead and make some stuff, and there will be a reasonably close relationship between the stuff we make and the stuff you make."

[Jeff the Green]

I thought that second party was Dragon magazine type stuff. Like, first party is, "We'll make some stuff," third party is, "That guy over there is making some stuff," and second party is, "You go ahead and make some stuff, and there will be a reasonably close relationship between the stuff we make and the stuff you make."

No, it's the same as first, second, and third person. In contract law, for instance, the convention is that the seller is first party, customer is second party, and anyone not involved is third party.

[eggynack]

No, it's the same as first, second, and third person. In contract law, for instance, the convention is that the seller is first party, customer is second party, and anyone not involved is third party.
That does make some sense, as far as logic goes. Still, I hear it used in the manner I've implied more often. Like, you have stuff that's official, stuff that's unofficial, and stuff that's kinda sorta official. It's like the whole standard of using X.5, except due to the nature of party and person, the intermediate step is annoyingly accounted for in the manner you've described.

[Jeff the Green]

That does make some sense, as far as logic goes. Still, I hear it used in the manner I've implied more often. Like, you have stuff that's official, stuff that's unofficial, and stuff that's kinda sorta official. It's like the whole standard of using X.5, except due to the nature of party and person, the intermediate step is annoyingly accounted for in the manner you've described.

I looked up common usage, and for computer programming at least that usage is common, apparently. First party is stuff made by the platform's creator (like Mario or MS Office Windows version) and third party is made by independent studios (like Final Fantasy or Open Office). Those at least are consistent with the more traditional definitions.

Apparently people wanted a category for things that were made by studios that were contracted by the platform's creator, like Game Freak for Pokémon, and incorrectly called them second party. (Really they're first party or third party, depending on how widely you define the first party. Taking the lead from vicarious liability I lean toward calling them first party.)

So first party would be the WotC-published stuff. Third party would be things like Green Ronin's work. And pseudo-second party is... Dragonlance Campaign Setting maybe? I can't think of anything else that fits. Was Paizo paid by WotC to publish Dragon?

[eggynack]

I looked up common usage, and for computer programming at least that usage is common, apparently. First party is stuff made by the platform's creator (like Mario or MS Office Windows version) and third party is made by independent studios (like Final Fantasy or Open Office). Those at least are consistent with the more traditional definitions.

Apparently people wanted a category for things that were made by studios that were contracted by the platform's creator, like Game Freak for Pokémon, and incorrectly called them second party. (Really they're first party or third party, depending on how widely you define the first party. Taking the lead from vicarious liability I lean toward calling them first party.)
Fancy, I guess. It does seem to be a misuse of the term, but I generally just chalk it up to being one of our odd colloquialisms.


So first party would be the WotC-published stuff. Third party would be things like Green Ronin's work. And pseudo-second party is... Dragonlance Campaign Setting maybe? I can't think of anything else that fits. Was Paizo paid by WotC to publish Dragon?
I think Dragon is connected to Wizards, yeah. That's the main example I see tossed around. I thought Dragonlance Campaign Setting was first party though.

[Vedhin]

So first party would be the WotC-published stuff. Third party would be things like Green Ronin's work. And pseudo-second party is... Dragonlance Campaign Setting maybe? I can't think of anything else that fits. Was Paizo paid by WotC to publish Dragon?

DLCS is the only 1st party Dragonlance book. Ironically, it is the least well-balanced, IMO. Tarmak War Paint, White Dragonspawn, and Reservs of Strength (used with non-blasting spells) are the nails in its coffin.
The other Dragonlance books are "2nd party", but are typically safe to allow in games. Some of them are better than 1st party material, even.

[Elderand]

DLCS is the only 1st party Dragonlance book. Ironically, it is the least well-balanced, IMO. Tarmak War Paint, White Dragonspawn, and Reservs of Strength (used with non-blasting spells) are the nails in its coffin.
The other Dragonlance books are "2nd party", but are typically safe to allow in games. Some of them are better than 1st party material, even.

I'd say undead battery from age of mortal is enough to make this a contender for least balanced dragonlance book

[Vedhin]

I'd say undead battery from age of mortal is enough to make this a contender for least balanced dragonlance book

Reserves of Strength + Greater Consumptive Field laughs in your face, as do White Dragonspawn Dragonwroughts with LA buyoff and Tarmak War Paint. Seriously, read Tarmak War Paint. Is there a magic item that gives +5 untyped natural armor for an indefinite duration? That also gives fast healing 5? At the cost of 500gp? Which can be reduced by 2/3 by crafting it yourself?

[Elderand]

Reserves of Strength + Greater Consumptive Field laughs in your face.

You get an increase in caster level of 13, not that signifiant given that most spell cap their result sooner than that. If the point of interest is the bonus to strength then reserve of strength has nothing to do with it. Bonus HP ? nice but by he time you get greater comsuptive field you should be worried about save or die or save or suck on you, not HP damage.

Meanwhile with just a modicum of cha optimisation a sorcerer with undead battery can place every single metamagic feat he has on his spell whitout a single increase in spell slot.

Edit: Nevermind about consumptive field, I forgot the clause about reserve of strength allowing to bypass normal limits.

[Ansem]

You get an increase in caster level of 13, not that signifiant given that most spell cap their result sooner than that. If the point of interest is the bonus to strength then reserve of strength has nothing to do with it. Bonus HP ? nice but by he time you get greater comsuptive field you should be worried about save or die or save or suck on you, not HP damage.

Meanwhile with just a modicum of cha optimisation a sorcerer with undead battery can place every single metamagic feat he has on his spell whitout a single increase in spell slot.

Of what do you speak there, couldn't find a feat or class with that name and it sounds awesome :D

[Vedhin]

You get an increase in caster level of 13, not that signifiant given that most spell cap their result sooner than that.

Read Reserves of Strength carefully. It does not strech the cap, it shatters it into a million pieces. It is a great and balanced feat when used for blasting, as was intended, but Greater Consumptive Field gives you an ucapped CL boost with it. Proceed to crush some anthills and achieve crazy CL. Thanks to your ability to uncap spells, you can use this CL fully.

Edit: Edit swordsage'd.

[Elderand]

Of what do you speak there, couldn't find a feat or class with that name and it sounds awesome :D

Age of mortal page 209

[Elderand]

Read Reserves of Strength carefully. It does not strech the cap, it shatters it into a million pieces. It is a great and balanced feat when used for blasting, as was intended, but Greater Consumptive Field gives you an ucapped CL boost with it. Proceed to crush some anthills and achieve crazy CL. Thanks to your ability to uncap spells, you can use this CL fully.

Yeah, edited my post, I missed that on my first reading.