Patlin
Explorer
Persistent Fly, Swift (8th level)
Persistent Sniper's Shot (7th level)
Persistent Golem Strike (7th level)
I know a lot of people thought that the spell slot used for a persistent spell ought to vary based on the duration of the initial spell, but the official solution was simply to raise it to a +6 slot metamagic feat. Originally, I believe it was +4. As I recall, Divine Favor was a particularly sore point where this feat was concerned, as it lasted only 1 minute.
However, at the same time they've introduced a variety of swift spells, balanced mostly by being of extremely short duration (all of the examples last one round) and personal effect... which would allow Fly, Swift to be made Persistent while Fly itself could not, and at a lower level than fly would be as a persistent spell if even elligible.
The latter two offer a possible out, if you are inclined to take it, in that they repeat the duration in the body of the text. One could (possibly in an over technical, semantic way) interpret this to be a discharge condition. Fly, Swift doesn't have this language.
I guess my question boils down to this: Too good to be true? Or does the amount of power expended by way of high level spell slots balance the utility of making these otherwise short spells last all day?
Persistent Sniper's Shot (7th level)
Persistent Golem Strike (7th level)
I know a lot of people thought that the spell slot used for a persistent spell ought to vary based on the duration of the initial spell, but the official solution was simply to raise it to a +6 slot metamagic feat. Originally, I believe it was +4. As I recall, Divine Favor was a particularly sore point where this feat was concerned, as it lasted only 1 minute.
However, at the same time they've introduced a variety of swift spells, balanced mostly by being of extremely short duration (all of the examples last one round) and personal effect... which would allow Fly, Swift to be made Persistent while Fly itself could not, and at a lower level than fly would be as a persistent spell if even elligible.
The latter two offer a possible out, if you are inclined to take it, in that they repeat the duration in the body of the text. One could (possibly in an over technical, semantic way) interpret this to be a discharge condition. Fly, Swift doesn't have this language.
I guess my question boils down to this: Too good to be true? Or does the amount of power expended by way of high level spell slots balance the utility of making these otherwise short spells last all day?