D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Stacking the same Meta-magic feat

[apsuman]

I wasn't sure about this, but then:

Maxmised Lightening Bolt (7th Level spell) - 60 points of damage
Doubly Empowered Lightening Bolt (7th Level) - 20 - 120 points of damage, average 70

On the otherhand, your can be sure of the 60 points with a maxmised spell, whereas there is still an element of risk with the doubly empowered spell.

mo

A maximized lightning bolt would be a 6th level spell.

And, that is the only reason you would want maximize instead of empower.


g!

 

[Oni]

I think saying no to multiple stackings of the same meta magic feat was a good thing.

All the meta magic feats are still more or less worthwhile when used only once. However some of the metamagic feats become drastically better when they can be used over and over again. (for instance an extended melf's acid arrow.)

 

[swrushing]

However some of the metamagic feats become drastically better when they can be used over and over again. (for instance an extended melf's acid arrow.)

To double extend melfs i need to be able to cast 4th level spells. That means the melfs lasts for at a minimum 3 rounds base.

The first extend takes that to 6 rounds.

So the fourth level spell, double extended melfs, will get any gain at all from the second boosting IF and ONLY IF the target survives for more than 6 rounds after first being hit with it. So, assuming i hit it on round 1, it must still be around into round seven in order to start feeling the AWESOME POWER of the second extended and then at 2d4 per round thru 9.

I have to ask... you have seen this prove to be drastically better in actual play?
Or was it the third extend (which would kick in 13 round after being first hit) that came up impressive enough to be considered "drastic"?

heck, a frequent comment made by a sorcerer player in my game was "melf's acid should be considered a death spell. Why? because everyone i have hit with it died in the next round."

Once an enemy starts getting targetted it tends to not survive for that many rounds so as to make even a singly extended melfs acid arrow worthwhile.

Sure, on paper the "full increase of damage for each extend" seems great, but in practice the slow pace of this extra damage makes this a wasted gain.

 

[Oni]

Well hit and run tactics will drasticly improve how useful an extended MAA is.

At 8th caster level a 4th level doubled extended MAA will deal a total of 18d4 damage. At 9th caster level thats 24d4. What 4th level spell does damage in that range? At 12 caster level extended 4 times thats 50d4 over the course of 2 and a half minutes. Not a lot of time if you've pulled back and their running around trying to find a signficant enough amount of water or whatever have you to try and neutralize the acid. But there are certainly no evocations that deal damage even close to that in the 4-6 level spell range.

Of course not every time are you going to see the bennies of those extra extends, it's just a matter of knowing when to and when not to.

Also it scares the bejesus out of trolls.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Well hit and run tactics will drasticly improve how useful an extended MAA is.

But if you run, enemies can often bust loose with dispel magic or rum in order to stop the damage accumulation. Unless the enemy is actually fighting for their life at the time, there's no incentive to not shut the spell down, and it isn't that hard to do.

MAA is a kind of lame spell - extended it is still lame, and multiply extended its really lame. Remember that with a fourth level spell you could just be killing people or be doing instantaneous unavaoidable damage.

-Frank

 

[Spatula]

I wasn't sure about this, but then:

Maxmised Lightening Bolt (7th Level spell) - 60 points of damage
Doubly Empowered Lightening Bolt (7th Level) - 20 - 120 points of damage, average 70

On the otherhand, your can be sure of the 60 points with a maxmised spell, whereas there is still an element of risk with the doubly empowered spell.

[edit: whoops - maximised lightening bolt = 6th level]

Note that the doubly Empowered lightning bolt has the chance to do double the damage of the Maximized one, in addition to the chance of doing less damage. And you can eventually triply-Empower a 3rd level spell (or more, if you're using the ELH). You can't ever stack multiple Maximizes - once the spell has been maxed out, it gains no benefit from being maxed out again.

That's the only real problem with allowing the stacking of metamagic feats - some feats benefit (mainly Empower, but also Extend, Widen, etc.), and some don't (Maximize, Still, etc.). I think to level the playing field you should to require the caster to take a metamagic feat multiple times in order to use it more than once on a single spell. So you'd need to fill two feat slots with Empower Spell in order to doubly-Empower a spell, three feat slots in order to triply-Empower, etc.

 

[Li Shenron]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Li Shenron
Widen Spell is IMHO instead quite powerful to be allowed to stack...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Widen spell increases the radius by 50% of the base radius with each application and not 100%. I made that mistake myself last week when looking at the 3.5 version of widen spell and seeing a 100% there without noticing that it now modifies total area and not radius. The effect on the rate of increase of the spell area that you're describing is still there but it takes a good deal longer to ramp up and so isn't really a balance issue considering the cost of applying it to spells.

I really think that "Any numeric measurements of the spell’s area increase by 100%." refers to radius, range of a cone and length of a line.

 

[Oni]

But if you run, enemies can often bust loose with dispel magic or rum in order to stop the damage accumulation. Unless the enemy is actually fighting for their life at the time, there's no incentive to not shut the spell down, and it isn't that hard to do.

MAA is a kind of lame spell - extended it is still lame, and multiply extended its really lame. Remember that with a fourth level spell you could just be killing people or be doing instantaneous unavaoidable damage.

-Frank

I don't think the majority of your enemies will get off so easy.

Anthing with low or no intelligence isn't going to know what to do to save itself.

Most monsters and most classed characters don't just up and have a dispel ready when it's convenient. And even then it's a pass fail situation, roughly akin to blowing a spell for a second saving throw.

Access to enough fluid to properly flush the affected areas clean is unreliable.

There is less chance involved with an extended MAA than a save or die spell because the ranged touch attack is more likely to be made than the enemy is to fail a save, especially since we're talking about disallowing or allowing this in 3.5 where save dc bloat has been largely trimmed. Also it has a huge range advantage on any of the save or die spells.

The only spell that really comes close, damagewise, in that range of spell levels is a maximized fireball or lightning bolt and if they make the save your not even close. 60 or 30 damage v. 50d4?

Plus drawing the damage out has it's advantages. I don't know about you're game, but in the ones I've played in enemies tend to take off when their in trouble. If their they're still taking damage you still have a chance to stop them. Also if you trap a creature to keep it out of the fight, such as with a wall of force, ordinarily you wouldn't be able to harm them, but if you slapped them with an MAA before doing so you dealing them regular damage not to mention keeping them getting any help beyond what can be found within the barrier.

 

[green slime]

A doubly (or more) extended melf is not a real threat.

All told the great "advantage" of melf is the long range, no save/no SR.

In any single round, the melf deals no more than 2d4 damage.


Looking at the breakdown
3rd CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 2 rounds
6th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 3 rounds
9th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 4 rounds
12th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 5 rounds
15th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 6 rounds
18th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 7 rounds

Doubly Extended we get:
7th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 9 rounds
9th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 12 rounds
12th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 15 rounds
15th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 18 rounds
18th CL: MAA is dealing 2d4 for 21 rounds

Given the kind of opponents a 18th level wizard faces, does 2d4 damage per round from a 4th level spell slot seem inappropriate? Not to me. (I can't see how it gets to be 50d4 damage)

This in place of a Dimension Door, Greater Invisibility, Phantasmal Killer, or Enervation? Not for me. At least, not in the wide majority of cases where I'd want a broad repetoire of spells to handle the day's diverse problems.

 

[green slime]

Compare to the 3rd spell flame arrow which allows a 5th level caster to imbue 50 arrows with the flaming attirbute for 50 minutes.

That is a potential increase of 50d6! At 18th level, it lasts for 3 hours, and any archer worth their salt will not be missing many of those shots. These can also be fired by an archer at a far higher rate of fire. 6th level Maximised Flame Arrow deals 300 hp of damage!

Most other higher level effects cause their damage over more targets, or have greater dire effects.

2d4 acid damage really is noting to be too concerned about. Do you hear lots of PCs complaining that their RBDMs wilted their characters away?

At 7th level, A druid can strike an area for 7d6 fire and divine damage instanteously. At 24 average damage with a failed save, it requires 5 rounds of average damage from the melfs before the amount of dealt damage is exceeded. And that is just for a single target. Spells that deal damage over time, should deal a greater amount of damage (over their entire duration) than instantaneous spells in order for there to be any reason for them to exist at all. Or they would never see any use whatsoever!

Flaming Sphere deals 2d6 damage per round for CL rounds, but requires MEA to aquire a target. So doubly extending this has a greater effect, but hinders the PC by consuming an action to remain viable.

There is no good reason to prevent the stacking of metamagical feats.