Search results

I think we can agree here that the way metamagic feats work (the cost vs the gain) makes them all pretty unattractive. Some more than others. What did Monte do in AU with them? If he did something better I'll probably use that instead.

But you are misunderstanding my problem with "free". Circumstance 1: Heighten a 1st level spell to 4th level: Cost = +3 spell levels Circumstance 2: Heighten a maximized 1st level spell: Cost = 0 levels Why should it be "free" in #2 and not #1? That's not consistent, and (besides all the...

Well, whatever. I tend to always work with my DM or players to reach a happy medium, but if you're saying you're too stuck in your ways to do that, then I guess you're right. I wouldn't actually ask to make those rolls ALL the time, I was just pointing out what COULD happen. I just believe...

True - it would be smart to Heighten it to 6th level instead of just preparing it there. This is not what I meant about it being "free". Wizard decides to heighten a spell from level 1 to level 4. The "cost" is a 4th level spell slot. Later the same wizard decides to maximize a first level...

The problem with allowing it to work like you're describing rushlight is that if you apply it to a spell on it's own it has a cost, but it doesn't have a cost if you add it to a spell that already has a metamagic feat added to it. That seems to go against designer intent in my mind and why I...

Wow - in that case if I was in your campaign everytime I entered a room with NPCs I'd be asking to make Spot, Listen, and Sense Motive checks. That's a lot of dice rolling. It's a miracle the story can progress at all. As others pointed out, a lot of the Sense Motive skill is the ability of...

I think it should be passive. It's unfair to punish a player for not being as good as his character at something. I'm not saying dice rolls should replace all roleplay, but at the same time if someone decided to sink skillpoints into Sense Motive they should benefit from that decision. I know...

BTW - I liked how that player basically threatend you with that spell at the end. Nice....NOT! That said I can kinda see his point about the area of effect. If it were on the ground and the PCs were 5ft away would they or wouldn't they be sucked in as well? As I know next to nothing about...

I like your logic here Thanee. I admit I forgot about the target in the context of this debate, and as such I believe I have come to embrace your ruling here. Good job.

Yes, that's a good point, and I didn't mean to imply that was the only use for the feat. What's your take on the 5ft step during the WWA?

Yes, but I would also read that as within reach at the time you decide to use the feat not those within reach now plus those within reach after I take a 5ft step. Again, I remember this question a few years ago and it's clouding my judgement now. I don't even know if I remember it correctly...

I wouldn't allow it as I stated before It's one attack (just many dice rolls) so you don't get to whirlwind 6 guys and then move up to get another 3. You start your attack and then finish it. You can move before or after but not during. If you were going to make 3 seperate attacks as a FRA...

So, let's say the monk can do 1d8 points of damage with an unarmed attack and make a claw attack for 1d4. Is his flurries going to be 1d8+1d4? Just 1d8? If it's just 1d8, it's effectively the same as not allowing a natural weapon in a flurry. Is there any PC playable creature that's going...

True - I guess with all the demands on my time I tend towards the "easier" spirt of the law now (unless it adversely affects gameplay and/or fun). These shadow spells are just crappily written. Is there a Complete Illusionist book or anything coming that might help with these spells?

Oh, I would have too 5 or 10 years ago, but I barely have enough time to play let alone start delving into fixing crappy spells anymore. It just isn't a priority now I'm afraid - adventures, fleshing out NPCs, etc has become more important than complete rule/reason consistency :) I used to be...

:) It probably should for it to work like I think it was intended. When spells are just messed up like this one is, I tend to just keep things simple and explain it away as "magic". Lazy I know, but it works. They seem to want you to be able to use this spell to simulate any other spell, so...

Perhaps the spell is "broadcasting" into the mind your attacker that there is mage armor protecting you. So even though he shouldn't know there is armor there, the magic of the spell causes him to react as though there was mage armor there. It IS magic after all :)

Yup :) I like Sejs. Seems very rules savvy and polite :)

Actually, monks are weird. Since they can use any body part in a flurry of blows, it gets weird when you have special attacks tied to a specific body part (like claws on your hand). A "normal" flurry might consist of a punch, an elbow, and a knee. Suddenly, it's only punches (or claws)...

Double post