Psiotheurgy and Cerebremancer?

[GregH]

Hi,

After reading the Class Acts: Psiotheurgy article in Dragon 349, I pointed it out to my resident Psion/Sorcerer/Cerebremancer, thinking it was right up his alley. Unfortunately, it may be too much up his alley. He pointed out, that as written, the Psiotheurgist feat should allow him to cast a spell or manifest a power at a level equivalent to his Psi+Sor+2*Cereb! (The 2 times the Cerebremancer comes from the fact that every Cerebremancer lets you up your spell casting and manifesting levels by one each) But in the case of, say, a Pis6/Sor5/Cere3, this is an equivalent spell casting level of 17!

We've talked about it, and have come to the mutual conclusion that this, in all likelihood, violates the spirit of the feat. So we've decided that the Cerebremancer levels should only count as one each, not two.

So, are we right? Or should we be doubling the Cerebremancer levels? That would make this feat awfully nice, and possibly even a problem when in the wrong character level combinations (especially a Cerebremancer who has only the minimum necessary Sorcerer and Psion levels).

Thanks,
Greg

[Thanis Kartaleon]

I would only have it count once. That's pretty beefy as it is - there are Practiced Spellcaster and Manifester feats that increase a character's caster/manifester level by 4 - to a maximum of the character's Hit Dice. That addendum should also apply to Psiotheurgy.

[ericthecleric]

GregH states it correctly as the feat is written. In the chosen discipline and school (or subschool), caster level (or manifester level) equals the sum of the caster level and manifester level. Therefore, his Psi6/Sor5/Cere3 would have a caster level in the chosen school/discipline of 9 (6+3) + 8 (5+3) or 17.
However, Thanis makes a great point about Practiced Spellcaster. I think the spirit of the feat should be that CL/ML shouldn’t be higher than character level (which would be 14, in this case); even so, remember that it is only for a few spells/powers.

[GregH]

Thanks for all the input. I think we'll add the "no greater than character's hit dice" in the feat description.

Greg

[Mike McArtor]

GregH wrote:

Thanks for all the input. I think we'll add the "no greater than character's hit dice" in the feat description.

Greg

Yeah, that's something we probably should have put in. My bad. :\

[GregH]

Mike McArtor wrote:

Yeah, that's something we probably should have put in. My bad. :\

No big deal. I have a very good group of players that talk alot about what they are planning for their characters, and while we all fall into the hack'n'slash/powergaming type mould, my players are also conscious enough about game balance that when something like this pops up, they are more likely to ask about it before the game than just slide it in and wait for it to occur in-game.

That helps me, because I'm not likely to see the potential outcomes of stuff like this until its too late. I love to DM, but when it comes to the rules, I don't have a great ability to extrapolate things like feats and prestige classes to see their potential impact.

So this got us talking about the feat, and the classes, which IMO is always a good thing.

And as long as there is a community here to help out on things like this, then it's all good in the end.

Thanks alot!
Greg