PDA

View Full Version : Wand and Weapon Style [Feat]



Human Paragon 3
2007-09-20, 02:22 AM
I like this feat mostly for the visual flair, although I'm not really sure about its power level. Anyway, here it is:

Wand and Weapon Style [General]

Prerequisites: Dex 15, Two Weapon Fighting, BAB+3

Benefit: You are adept at fighting with a wand in one hand and a weapon in the other. In any round in which you are entitled to 2 or more melee attacks, you may forfeit one of them to activate a wand instead. All other rules governing the activation of wands still apply. If the spell activated by the wand requires an attack roll, penalties for two weapon fighting apply to the attack roll for that spell. A wand is considered a light weapon for the purpose of this feat.

Normal: Activating a wand is a standard action.

Caewil
2007-09-20, 04:50 AM
Very nice, but if an artificer get's it's hands on that...

But, it's hard to make artificers any more broken.

Dryad
2007-09-20, 04:39 PM
Yay for two-weapon fighting, tons gold, multiple wands.. "Hey, look at lidda; the silly halfling is pointing two wands at me!" Yes, and sneak attack with Use Magic Device.
Scorching Ray anyone?

ocato
2007-09-20, 04:52 PM
Is there a quickdraw wand feat? Because I'm seeing a rogue full attack and dropping his extra cruddy last off hand attack to quickdraw a wand and go invisible, making for a very sneak attacky and dangerous character.

DracoDei
2007-09-20, 05:30 PM
The standard quickdraw feat should cover that anyway.

Goober4473
2007-09-20, 05:57 PM
Like duel wand wielder, this should probably cost 2 charges to activate, and require craft wand.

DracoDei
2007-09-20, 07:14 PM
Never heard of that feat... but I would think that this wouldn't be nearly as good... you can only get off the one spell instead of two (which is as good as Quicken) and you are giving up an attack (admittedly not a very good one in most cases but...). I could see one or the other limitation you have suggested, but not both.

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-20, 09:08 PM
Yeah, those requirements make the feat seem so... academic. I was thinking of it more for rogue types on a UMD check or multiclassing/PrCing wizards that have a flare for personal combat.

DracoDei
2007-09-20, 09:13 PM
Well, technically, nothing about the 2 charges requirement makes it not fit the classes you have mentioned that I can see... the pre-requisite would kill it though (maybe...).

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-20, 09:35 PM
True. All the same, the two charges is to compensate for the increased spell power. With this feat you're still only casting one spell per round and you have to be in a position to make two attacks to do so (meaning a full attack). Not the same as dual wielding wands.

Dryad
2007-09-22, 09:46 PM
you may forfeit one of them to activate a wand instead. All other rules governing the activation of wands still apply.

I may forfeit one of them... Okay; I forfeit both. See; all normal rules for activating a wand still applies, that much is true, and normally, you could only activate one wand in a round, but because you've got a dual wielder here who may forfeit an attack for using a wand, this one may forfeit both attacks, as well, since it actually replaces an attack with a wand-activation.

This can be solved with the line: You may only forfeit your off-hand attack at your highest Base Attack Bonus. If you don't use this line, you'll have a spell-minigun on your hands.

DracoDei
2007-09-22, 11:32 PM
More like: "You may only do this once per round...", that would be more in keeping with the current way it works and the way I get the feeling he intended it.

TheOOB
2007-09-22, 11:56 PM
I think it would be simpler to state that you can use a wand and make a melee attack with a single full-round action, cleans things up a bit.

Dryad
2007-09-23, 02:16 PM
Or a one-handed ranged weapon. Like a thrown weapon or pistol crossbow.