Search results

Yeah.

These 'reasonable' metamagic feats aren't documented anywhere. Like math class when trying to convince people it's 'show your work or it doesn't count'. Aside from the math... While dropping multiple metamagic spells in a round is a great way to nova, I find it a much less effective when...

You're also forgetting that you're not giving two feats to your example character, but three.

Using Dragon feats in your example (without documenting the source or requirements) weakens the position that orbs are broken. Dragon feats can be found to make near anything problematic.

Oh jeez... Claiming something is broken by adding Dragon stuff to it?

Where is this Easy Metamagic feat comming from?! Are there requirements? What does it even do?

Ok, I've asked about your 'easy metamagic' feat you keep talking about, but you've yet to actually produce even a vague description of it. Furthermore you're not giving 'Connie' two feats, but three as you need a metamagic feat to use it.

Oddly enough you're quibbling as well. If your position is so solid why do you have to argue the point over 5%? I'd also like to point out that casting those spells is going to mean either spending a round casting yourself, or waiting for your cleric/wizard buddy to do it for you. Which seems...

At 15th it's reasonable to have two, maybe even three +6 items, but the +2 Dex at 5th is outright silly, and the +4 Dex at 10th stretches belief.

Not to mention the availability/cost of these items. At 5th level that's about 45% of your expected wealth, at 10th it's around 30%, and at 15th it's about 18%.

Arguing your numbers is silly in that it's heavily biased. Single enemy encounters make a good portion of evokations less useful if only for the reason that the damage dice caps are different for multiple opponent attacks vs single opponent attacks. That isn't the exact phrasing, but, I did...

You insulted the position I take and I asked why in like tone. I went to check your math the other day, but could not find 'Easy Metamagic', so I can only presume it's either in a book I don't have access to (mostly campaign books and third party), or doesn't exist. I can't argue a point where...

Why do you feel the need to snipe at the people opposed to your position rather than their position? Does it make you feel better, or are you hoping that we'll stop having our opinion if you insult our position?

Wow, can't take a joke. Does spelling with extra vowels eat into your humor? Anywho, my point stands, your requirements can be made much sooner with feats.

I'd allow it with a concentration check for extraordinary violent motion not to lose the spell if it's a standard action, and only if she delays till after the Horc's turn.

The second example certainly, it's spelled out that in cases that SA is called for SS may be substituted. I believe this was in the Ninja section of CW. The first instance I'm not certain about, but would not allow as it's conditional SA instead of full SA or an SA substitute like SS. Given...

Not only that, but it still ignores that the Evoker's shtick is in taking out hordes of mooks or units of minions as much if not moreso than on one one situations. Furthermore there's going to be more low level enemies than high level ones.

Every source of fire I've seen requires fuel, from torches to lamps to lanterns to alchemist's fires. While not written out explicitely I believe that it wouldn't be against the RAI (not to mention the dreaded common sense) that fire needs fuel.

And when conjuring fire you need fuel to sustain it, or like all other non-magical fire it goes out. Conjured cold is filled by ambient heat, conjured acid becomes inert after burning something, conjured electricity discharges, conjured sound shoots away at roughly 750mph (so not even a monk...

Sure they are. Just need to remember to tag the quote message button when I reply.