Feat value of spell slots


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion


There's a question that's been rattling around in my head for a bit: What is the feat value of a spell slot? What is the value of a spell slot for a 9-level caster at the highest level they can cast? How about for a 6-level caster? A 4-level caster? How is this different for spontaneous vs. prepared casters? What about a spell slot (scaling with a 9-level caster's highest-level casting) for a non-caster?


Put a feat value to wish and you'll have a consistent guideline how to do this.

The Exchange

a lvl 1 spell can give +4 ac effectively all day (mage armor). So 4 feats for one 1st lvl spell per day.

Or true strike +20'to hit and ignore concealment. No feat equivalent. But at least 3 for concealment and 20 for stacking weapon focus (not normally possible).

....this comparison wont work.

A feat for a first lvl spell once per day is probably fine. Second Level spells probably should require you to be character lvl 3 and have two feats spent on lvl 1 spells....


Buri Reborn wrote:
Put a feat value to wish and you'll have a consistent guideline how to do this.

Miracle would probably be a better point to base it off of, since Wish requires a truly staggering amount of gold to pull off on a daily basis.


My Self wrote:
Miracle would probably be a better point to base it off of, since Wish requires a truly staggering amount of gold to pull off on a daily basis.

Eh, to do the "cool" stuff, both require a 25,000 gp diamond.


Buri Reborn wrote:
My Self wrote:
Miracle would probably be a better point to base it off of, since Wish requires a truly staggering amount of gold to pull off on a daily basis.
Eh, to do the "cool" stuff, both require a 25,000 gp diamond.

Access to the entire Summoner list on a whim isn't cool stuff?

Scarab Sages

Bardic masterpieces cost either one feat or one spell known (of a specific spell slot depending on masterpiece). So apparently the ratio is 1:1 for 6-level spontaneous casters.


My Self wrote:
Access to the entire Summoner list on a whim isn't cool stuff?

Mass raise dead is cool stuff by comparison.


Given that there is no feat adding spell slots except a mythic one, you can see that nobody thought it would be a good idea.
And the mythic one needs to be taken once for each spell level, working your way up. A full caster would have to take it 9 times to get his bonus 9th level slots.
Maybe you could do a non-mythic version of that starting with 1st level and going up to 9th eventually by spending 9 feats.

The only thing adding a (variable) spell slot is the bonded item of the wizard, which gives you one spell per day. And that one is a class feature.


For me it really depends on whether you're comparing prepared or spontaneous casters. In general you can't really match the current feat system with prepared spells because being able to switch them out gives an incredible amount of flexibility that you an't currently match with the raw feats system.

I think that you can only compare feats with level 4 spells since feats are mostly for direct combat which is what 4th level casters do. I would need 2-3 feats per caster level for me to be satisfied with a feat based paladin or ranger. These feats will probably also have to be able to ignore most or all prerequisites or else I'd lose probably 1/2 of the feats to taxes. Even then level 3-4 spells aren't really in the same category of power as feats since they have spells like break enchantment or tree stride. There's no feats that can cure curses or allow you to move as quickly as tree stride much less the level 5-9 teleport spells


Probably depends which feat you're comparing. Leadership is just a bit better than Dodge.


GeneticDrift wrote:

a lvl 1 spell can give +4 ac effectively all day (mage armor). So 4 feats for one 1st lvl spell per day.

Or true strike +20'to hit and ignore concealment. No feat equivalent. But at least 3 for concealment and 20 for stacking weapon focus (not normally possible).

....this comparison wont work.

A feat for a first lvl spell once per day is probably fine. Second Level spells probably should require you to be character lvl 3 and have two feats spent on lvl 1 spells....

That is a good attempt at a comparison by Genetic Drift, but I find that judging trade-offs is a more enlightening measurement of value than comparison of results.

Imagine the following trade-off: a new wizard archetype gives a wizard an extra feat at first level but he loses one highest-level spell slot for all levels thereafter, regaining the previous lost slot whenever he gains a new spell level. Surely, most players would respond, "At all levels?! No way."

How about a wizard archetype that gives a wizard an extra feat at first level but he loses one 1st-level spell slot permanently? I think people might say, well that will work for a few low-level builds, and will be no problem at higher levels. We are in the right ballpark now.

Next, imagine the trade-off in the other direction, spending feats to gain an extra spell slot. I invented the following feat chain for another discussion, but it will work here, too.

Arcane Might
Your arcane might allows you to cast more spells.
Prerequisite: Ability to cast 3rd-level arcane spells.
Benefit: Chose a class that lets you cast 3rd-level arcane spells. You can cast one additional first-level spell per day from the spells for that class, subject to the usual restrictions and preparations of the class.
Special: This counts as a metamagic feat.

Improved Arcane Might
Your arcane might increases in strength.
Prerequisite: Arcane Might
Benefit: The additional spell from Arcane Might can be of any level up to the second highest level the chosen class can cast.
Special: This counts as a metamagic feat.

Greater Arcane Might
Your arcane might increases to ultimate strength.
Prerequisite: Arcane Might, Improved Arcane Might
Benefit: The additional spell from Arcane Might can be of any level the chosen class can cast.
Special: This counts as a metamagic feat.

I think many wizards would take that feat chain. So a 4th-level spell slot would be worth at least 3 feats. To be more precise, what is Improved Arcane Might gave a 2nd-level spell slot and Greater Arcane Might gave a 3rd-level spell slot. Would a 3rd-level spell slot be worth three feats?


Expanded Preparation allows an Arcanist to prepare an additional spell slot of the highest level he can cast or two of any level lower than his highest, but the benefit of the feat must be chosen when the feat is taken and cannot later be altered.


That's the Arcanist version of Expanded Arcana. It's extra spells known (even though they are called prepared by the Arcanist, that's what they are for the day), not extra spell slots you can cast with.


Magic Reservoir
Once per day you can cast any spell you have prepared without expending it. Spontaneous casters may cast any known spell without expending a spell slot of the appropriate level.

That's both a totally fine and mechanically boring feat. Plenty of room in the game for feats like that.

---
Does have some cool combo power with clerics getting an extra use of a normally limited domain only spell, but that sort of synergy seems like a cool bonus, not a problem


I kinda want to make a Fighter/Wizard comparison right now, but that's not really on-point. I suppose the value of a Wizard-scaling spell slots is much higher than a feat, especially if the feat is available to anybody. Some spells are stronger when used by martials (Form of the Dragon II + Monk, for starters), while others are simply powerful and versatile on their own (Wish, Summons, etc.). It's also 1/3-1/5 of a generalist Wizard's allotment of highest-level spells, assuming decent stats and an arcane bond. 3 feats seems to be a reasonable value for a fullcaster, especially since a full-level Familiar is 3 feats (comparable with an Arcane Bond).

For a spontaneous caster, I feel that this is significantly weaker. Probably a 1 or 2 feat deal. For a 2/3 caster, maybe 2 feats. For a non-caster, this is a significant game-changer. I want to price it cheaply, but that would put it heads and shoulders over other feats, which is somewhat of a problem of the feats system and of feat-spell equivalency. Maybe if it was a sort of tradeoff feat chain? Something like:

Arcane Dabbler
Prerequisites: 3rd level, INT 13
You may prepare and cast an arcane spell as a Wizard of a spell level of 1/2 your level (rounded down), maximum 3 at 6th level. You take a -1 to hit, damage, and other spell DC, for each spell prepared using this feat or any feats with this feat as a requirement. You do not learn any spells for free, but you gain a spellbook that functions like a Wizard's spellbook.

Arcane Magician
Prerequisites: 7th level, INT 15, Arcane Dabbler
You may prepare and cast an arcane spell as a Wizard of a spell level of 1/2 your level, maximum 6 at 12th level.

Arcane Master
Prerequisites: 13th level, INT 17, Arcane Magician
You may prepare and cast an arcane spell as a Wizard of your spell level of 1/2 your level, maximum 9 at 18th level.


In early 3.5, there was Extra Spell Slot, which allowed you one more slot, up to one lower than your highest castable.


Well, you could always compare rogue to oracle. Rogue gets a nominally feat equivalent feature evey even level and sneak attack every odd level. Sneak attach is maybe worth a feat per level. Oracle gets a nominally feat equivalent ability every even level and they're a lot better than rogue talents. Rogue gets skill points nominally worth 4 feats and maybe 4 feats worth of class features. Curse is probably value neutral.

So full spontaneous divine casting is worth at most 18 feats. With the gap between revelations and rogue talents it's probably a lot less.


My Self,
IMHO the three feats you provided are very powerful (as you said it lets non spell caster cast spells).
IMHO you might want to tone it down but I can see how this would be fine in some games provided other balancing factors were put into place. Maybe even provide a list of spells that could be selected from instead of All Arcane Spells.

I know of a few games that this would never be considered but I also know a few that would (and did) have something like this as a setting core idea.
MDC


Mark Carlson 255 wrote:

My Self,

IMHO the three feats you provided are very powerful (as you said it lets non spell caster cast spells).
IMHO you might want to tone it down but I can see how this would be fine in some games provided other balancing factors were put into place. Maybe even provide a list of spells that could be selected from instead of All Arcane Spells.

I know of a few games that this would never be considered but I also know a few that would (and did) have something like this as a setting core idea.
MDC

I was just gauging how powerful people thought casting was. Note that the feats:

a. Say that you prepare as a Wizard. Which means that you're limited to the Wizard list, and that you need to meet the Wizard stat requirements (10+spell level) to prepare the spell. That means you need to start with at least 13 INT to even consider eventually casting 9th level spells.
b. Say that you cast as a Wizard. Spell failure chance applies as normal, and you need an open hand for material and/or somatic components.
c. Have a -1 to hit and damage per spell prepared. With all three spells, this would basically be 3 levels of inverse weapon training, which is awful for martials.
d. Have a -1 to other spell DC per spell prepared. So other casters would have to dilute their magical potency to be able to access a few spell slots.

I suppose if you wanted to close off the feats further, you could require Spell Focus as a prerequisite, then only allow Wizard spells of a Spell Focus school to be prepared. Alternatively, you could restrict it to people with a Familiar, which walls you off into certain martial archetypes or requires you to take a 2-feat chain to access it at all.


IMHO, to me it is just a balance issue and casters vs non-caster.

Would you also allow any spell caster to have a feat that grants specific fighter abilities at 1/2 there level?
(Again in some games or campaign setting I could see this fly)

Power Level: Casters vs Non-casters

IMHO, this can vary a lot from game to game, group to group, system to system and GM to GM.
In the past (I have been playing on and off since 79') some games did not need, require or allow PC casters and when you did find one you protected them and tried to keep them with you.
Also as you said you are trying to get an idea on spell casting as a feat. Or if I expand it a bit you might be trying to have spell casting as feat only system (I have also played in a game using a home brew system buying spells (like with feats) and another systems spell lists for ease of use). It was fun and different for a while but everyone did not like it and it quickly went on our experiment pile. But maybe times have changed and a good game world can make this idea work.

Also as I said before every spell is not really balanced vs every other spell in a given level. ie some 1st level spells are of greater use then others (generally).
To keep balance IMHO you would have to do it on a spell by spell basis and if a sub-optional spell was selected them provide another spell to make it balanced vs the more useful spell. ie sub-optimal 1st level spell also gives you a zero level spell. The problem here is just the sheer amount of work it would take to deal with every spell combination.
MDC


To put a dollar value on additional spells/day.

Pearl of Power
Runestone of Power
Ring of Wizardry

Several ioun stones exist placing a gold piece value on feats. You should be able to engineer a price.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Feat value of spell slots All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.