[3.5] Practiced Initiator?

[Thurbane]

Not sure of this should be in homebrew or not, but just wanted some quick advice.

Would a version of the Practiced Spellcaster feat modified for Martial Adepts be in any way overpowered?

Sub out Martial Lore 4 for Spellcraft, and +4 initiator level (up to max of total HD) for any one martial adept class?

Just after thoughts and ideas.

Cheers - T

[Necroticplague]

If anything, it would be incredibly weak. Initiators already get half of all class levels that aren't initiators to their IL, and a lot of maneuvers have very little scaling with IL, if not being completely independent of it. Seems fine to me.

[Troacctid]

Part of what makes Practiced Spellcaster balanced is that it doesn't actually give you access to higher-level spells, it just boosts the power of the ones you already have. Practiced Initiator doesn't have the same balancing mechanism. It would be a lot stronger.

[Stegyre]

Part of what makes Practiced Spellcaster balanced is that it doesn't actually give you access to higher-level spells, it just boosts the power of the ones you already have. Practiced Initiator doesn't have the same balancing mechanism. It would be a lot stronger.
Except that spells grow in strength faster than maneuvers. 9th level maneuvers, for example, are very nice, but 9th level spells re-write reality. The reasoning breaks down even further when one considers powers and Practiced Manifester, as at least some low-level powers augmented to the level of 9th level powers really are comparable to 9th level powers/spells. (We don't even need to bring Ardent into the discussion, with its unique power selection criteria.)

@OP, IMO, the retained limit is character level. I think that's the important thing. A 10th level character will not be able to get maneuvers any more powerful than a 10th level initiator could select. Thanks to multiclassing, the character using this feat will have a selection of additional abilities, but with the fewer real initiator levels, he will have fewer maneuvers available, fewer readied, and fewer stances.

I think it's a good feat.

[torrasque666]

I'll just say this. With regards to caster level, someone with Practiced Spellcaster gets the full benefit with just 4 levels of multiclassing. With your feat, it would need 8 levels to get maximum benefit.

[Gabrosin]

Not sure about balance but I really wish this existed.

[Twurps]

Doesn't seem overpowered to me. Melee/initiators can use the extra love. But.....


I'll just say this. With regards to caster level, someone with Practiced Spellcaster gets the full benefit with just 4 levels of multiclassing. With your feat, it would need 8 levels to get maximum benefit.

That's what acually makes it more powerfull, as you can now skip 8 levels of initiator classes, which the optimizer might very well put to good use in some caster class.
Crusader1/Cleric8/Ruby Knight Vindicator10 Gets 9th level maneuvers and spells with a level to spare.
Warblade1/Wizard8/Jade Phoenix mage10 Also gets 9th level maneuvers and spells with a level to spare.

And that's easily improded on further with PRC's. (Abjurant champion anybody?)

So not overpowered maybe, but you might end up with even MORE people going for 9th level spells instead of less. Not sure that's what you want for a melee feat.

[Xerlith]

A feat like that would probably work better if it makes full-BAB non-initiator classes grant full Initiator levels instead of half, as opposed to granting a flat +4 to IL. I mean, that cuts the caster double 9s abuse pretty short, right?

[Troacctid]

A feat like that would probably work better if it makes full-BAB non-initiator classes grant full Initiator levels instead of half, as opposed to granting a flat +4 to IL. I mean, that cuts the caster double 9s abuse pretty short, right?
For simplicity, I'd just say equal to your BAB or your normal initiator level, whichever is higher. And yeah, I think I like this version better.

[Twurps]

For simplicity, I'd just say equal to your BAB or your normal initiator level, whichever is higher. And yeah, I think I like this version better.
+1
Easy fix. I like it.

[Xerlith]

For simplicity, I'd just say equal to your BAB or your normal initiator level, whichever is higher. And yeah, I think I like this version better.

Yeah, that's better. In some cases your version makes the Swordsage grant 0.75 IL per level, though. Maybe add a "For the purposes of this feat, treat all Initiator classes as full BAB" clause?

[sovin_ndore]

I wouldn't have an issue letting something like that have a go in a game I was running (either version proposed). Especially at higher levels it requires alot of pre-req maneuvers to hit those pinnacle powers anyhow, so even splashing with a high initator level shouldn't be too overpowered. Worst manipulation I could come up with would be to splash a level of Crusader and this feat at somewhere around lvl 6... minimizing your number of maneuvers on rotation at that point while simulataniously maximizing your Initiator level.

[martixy]

Depending on your idea of balance you can have 1 or 2 feats:
1. Your other martial adept levels count towards your initiator level.
2. All of your other levels count towards your initiator level.

Combine as desired.

These have the benefit of being dead simple.