Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User3
Prince
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by User3 »

Check the new feat in the Complete Divine, Arcane Disciple, seen here: WOTC Link

Now, my question is this: how does this feat effect standard builds?

I think that a Sorcerer is going to pick a god, and then spend 3-4 feats picking up all the domains. Its more complicated than normal Sorcerer spellcasting, but access to a bunch of spells and an ability is well worth one feat.

Would it affect Assasin builds by giving them a few good spells, or True Necromancer(does this have a divine spellcasting requirement, or just the Death Domain)?

Any other clerical/arcane, non-MyTh builds effected?

I was looking at the War domain, and that seems like a pound of goodness for a single feat? Being an arcane caster with access to the totally broken Divine Power spell makes it sound like my Sorcerer basher idea might even work now.
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

I don't know how it would affect a True Necromancer or an Assassin's spellcsting, on account that they suck big time at spellcasting.

It's like a fighter taking Iron Will, it helps, but you still suck at will saves.

For a straight caster, it might be a bit better though. Clerics have been stealing from the wizards from long enough, it's about goddamned time they started stealing back, I say!
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Wrenfield
Master
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Wrenfield »

Keep in mind, you'l either have to bump up Wisdom on the stat priority latter (knocking down CON and DEX a bit) - or spend more character resources on getting your Wisdom up to a higher level via magic items.

You get potential access to 9 additional spells per each feat. And each level of spell correlates to being able to cast it only if you have a WIS of (10 + Spell Level).

So being able to cast Divine Power only once per day neccessitates a WIS of 14. Of which I don't see many Sorcerors with a WIS that high, especially in lower point buy systems.

Even if you somehow get your WIS jacked up to 16 by later levels, you still aren't getting the real muscular spells of the domain you have access to. And if you are casting them, your CON and DEX most likely suck. And ... you are most likely dieing a lot.

A Sorceror with 3-4 of these feats ... IMHO, is bad min/maxing. Especially since those are 3-4 slots he did not take metamagick feats. Now even though metamagic feats suck, they do have more value to a Sorceror than a Wizard.

And no matter how you slice it, the Wizard is still trumping the Sorceror, with or without the Arcane Disciple feats. And I'd still rather have a Cleric of Mystra with the Spell Domain and the Initiatie of Mystra feat - because for all intents and purposes, he *is* the ultimate hybrid Wizard/Cleric ... and leagues better than a Mystic Theurge to boot.
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

Yeah, thanks for reminding me why I don't like Forgotten Realms, Wren. ;)
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Username17 »

Remember, it just gives you access to the spells on your list, it doesn't actually give you any special ability to know them.

Literally, of course, it doesn't really do much of anything at all - since a Wizard still has to find a scroll to learn it off of (and as discussed elsewhere he literally has the ability to learn spells in this manner anyway - and he doesn't even have to worry about wisdom). A Sorcerer can take his spell slots as anything the DM will allow him to have (and again without worrying about wisdom) - so again the ability to learn a divine spell normally is not really an ability per se. Either standard method would also give you the spell without having a maximum of 1 spell use per day.

The advantage here is that it puts it on your normal spell list - which means that you can use spell trigger items.

So the only thing I can really think of to do with it that couldn't be done better just by using the normal rules for learning arcane spells is to take the Healing Domain and start using those fabulous god sticks.

I mean, as written you still have to find the divine spell in a scroll or another wizard's spell book before you can actually make it one of your spells known, and then it hits you with serious limitations. If you have it in scroll format or another wizard's spell book you can simply learn it normally with no limitations.

The feat seems very poorly designed all around.

-Username17
The_Hanged_Man
Knight-Baron
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by The_Hanged_Man »

The wisdom base is the real kick in the nads. Maybe you could take it to cast the cleric buffs w/o wasting a ltd wish. But since you have to blow a feat (that could be used for leadership to get a cleric sidekick), what's the point?
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by RandomCasualty »

I really don't see it being that great. If you really wanted to make the wizard who can heal, now you can, but at a very high price because you now need wisdom.

It may fit into mystic theurge builds somewhere, and maybe sorcerers in unusually high point buy systems may take it... but that's about it.
Wrenfield
Master
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Wrenfield »

Keep in mind, if your arcane spellcaster is hungry for divine spells, you can always use the mid-to-high level Summon Monster spells to take advantage of the inherent spellcasting or spell-like abilities of the summonable creatures. Especially summoning Archons, Guardinals, etc. for their healing-type spells.
Lago_AM3P
Duke
Posts: 1268
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Lago_AM3P »

I mean, as written you still have to find the divine spell in a scroll or another wizard's spell book before you can actually make it one of your spells known, and then it hits you with serious limitations. If you have it in scroll format or another wizard's spell book you can simply learn it normally with no limitations.



Can't you just slap it into your spellbook with the two free spells per level wizards already get?

I know I'm invoking Oberoni's Fallacy here, but I don't think I know anyone who plays with the 'wizards copy all scrolls' rule. Assuming that we're actually playing with that near-universal houserule, what do you think?
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Username17 »

Assuming that we're actually playing with that near-universal houserule, what do you think?


Then I still see no benefit from the general case of "You can research any spell the DM will allow you to have" to the specific case of "You can take a feat that will allow you to learn any spell that is on a Domain List that the DM approves for your character."

Essentially, the DM simply allows you or does not allow you to have any particular spell - one costs a feat and the other does not. Except for the use of spell trigger items, I'm just not seeing the benefit here.

-Username17
Lago_AM3P
Duke
Posts: 1268
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Lago_AM3P »

Then I still see no benefit from the general case of "You can research any spell the DM will allow you to have" to the specific case of "You can take a feat that will allow you to learn any spell that is on a Domain List that the DM approves for your character."


But Frank, we all know that if it has the WotC stamp on it, it's much more likely to be approved.

Again invoking the Oberoni fallacy... for some strange reason, I can see DMs allowing a feat that will let me learn anti-life shell and other crap for my wizard yet it'd be way harder to actually try to invent a spell that 'makes you invulnerable to almost all melee attacks, save for SR', even though it's WEAKER than a wizard casting starmantle and wearing a ring of evasion, and actually being immune to most physical attacks, SR or no.

Don't ask me how that works, it actually really does until you point out that your made-up rules that weren't in a book are more game balanced than Andy Collin's or Ed Stark's book. And a lot of DMs will still look at you funny.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Username17 »

So the DM is going to nerf the written word on Wizards scroll learning. Then they are going to come down and haughtily dismiss the use of spell research.

Then, after doing all that, they are going to allow you to get the spell you want by letting you take the feat that has the built-in stipulation that you only get access to the spells the DM will let you have when you take it?

Sorry, I don't buy it. If a DM is going to go that far out of his way to not let you have the spell you want, there's no way he's going to have the big penis NPC that is the god in his campaign world accept you as a disciple.

And then you don't get access to the domain you wanted, and you don't get the spell you wanted, end.

The disciple feat requires that the DM approve the god for your character, and since the god has the domains, and the domains have the spells, well... if the DM doesn't want you getting a spell you aint getting it. Period.

The only argument here is that somehow the DM is simultaneously vindictive and retarded. That they are actually trying to thwart your access to spells but can't think far enough ahead to jump two steps ahead from what god you want apprenticeship with to what spells are going to necessarily flow from that.

And if the DM is that cruel and that stupid at the same time, why are you in the game at all?

-Username17
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

Hey now, I don't let wizards copy spells of divine scrolls either.

But then again, I don't care if some dude who lives thousands of miles away that I've never met and doesn't know me from adam thinks I'm stupid and cruel anyway, so never mind. :uptosomething:
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by Username17 »

Clarifications seem to be in order:

Would you let your wizard players research a spell that was exactly the same as Divine Power?

Woud you let your players declare their discipleship to a god who granted the War domain? (assuming you allowed that section of the PGtF in your game)

If the answer to those two questions is different, you are a vindictive moron. The thing the players are asking for is the same in either case, and the DM has precisely the same built-in level of veto on either spell.

Since we are already abandoning the RAW, there's no difference between those two tacts of spell acquisition. At all.

-Username17
RandomCasualty
Prince
Posts: 3506
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Does Arcane disciple make ______ better?

Post by RandomCasualty »

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1084118058[/unixtime]]
If the answer to those two questions is different, you are a vindictive moron. The thing the players are asking for is the same in either case, and the DM has precisely the same built-in level of veto on either spell.


I'm not sure I can agree here. One of them is costing a feat, the other costs basically very minimally to research the spell.

And I definitely think someone who is willing to invest in a feat should get more than someone who is just doing spell research. You can research as many spells as you want, but you only get a finite number of feats.
Post Reply