[3.5E] New Revision Spotlight - Mummy and Mummy Lord

[Emerald]

4d6+8.

-Hyp.

I'd use 1d20+12 myself. That gets 13-32, which is close enough for me. Plus, it requires fewer dice.

 

[jasamcarl]

Let me restate in a different way:

1) 3.0 metamagic is a waste; you have to "pay" for it twice (once by taking the feat, once by using a higher-level spell slot), and it's much less effective for 2 spellcasting classes (bard and rogue). The revised metamagic was well-received among the staff at the time (IIRC), and was something that I'd consider taking (in fact, my sorcerer in the game I'm playing now has the revised Extend Spell). But the revised metamagic feats were dropped from the 3.5 rules because there wasn't enough time to playtest them. So something that many (rightly) complain about in the core rules isn't being fixed, even though the revised PH was done first and so they've had from at least Feb of last year to about Feb of this year to playtest it.

2) Revisions are being made to the MM monsters and new monsters added. WotC claims the two versions are compatible (with "minor changes") even though some creatures have obviously experience significant revisions (such as the mummy's +2 HD) and there have been significant changes to the skills, feats, and some special abilities (such as DR). WotC admits some of its original CRs were off and needed to be fixed. And apparently these updated monsters have all been playtested and new CRs assigned.

So we have the MM 3.5, which has been in development for less time than the PH, and has more revised material than the PH. And apparently there has been enough time to playtest all of those monsters, but not enough time to playtest the revised metamagic system.

And I admit, I'm miffed that the revised metamagic isn't going to be in the PH 3.5. I liked it a lot, and I think Andy Collins did a great job creating it and making it work.

Uh, do you actually know the specific time frames and work hours assigned to the phb and mm during the calender time, or are you just talking out of your ass when you make the claim that the phb has had more development time than the MM; do you know how intensive development was during these periods.

And two, you still amazingly don't seem to understand the cost/benefit analysis that I and others are alluding to. Regardless of whatever weaknesses one sees in how the metamagic rules work, other things, such as class and monster balance took greater priority; they may take more time, but the payoff is still in the end greater.

 

[Graf]

I've seen metamagic used quite successfuly in my current game. From reading story hours I don't think this is an isolated case.
Given my wizard-players ability to wring every ounce of power from his spellbook I don't think he wouldn't be maximizing his fireballs or extending his buffs if he were being "over charged".

Many powerful and useful feats don't work without some other preperation. I'm not sure why memorizing a spell as a higher level is somehow different from the constraints applied to other classes.

Weapon focus/Finesse/Specialization requires the character to use a specific weapon. Not the same but without that preperation the feat does nothing for the character. Fighting with two weapons causes a combatant to forgo the ac bonus of a shield, or else take additional feats to compensate.
And so forth.

[the following comment assumes that the metamagic system is similar to the one that A. Collins kicked off the house rules dragon magazine collum with. obviously his system was different then I'm talking out of my rear.]
Feats, especially good feats, don't usually just give out free once-a-day powers with no special strings attached.

Let me restate in a different way:

And I admit, I'm miffed that the revised metamagic isn't going to be in the PH 3.5. I liked it a lot, and I think Andy Collins did a great job creating it and making it work.

This was the metamagic system previewed (by Andy Collins) in the house rules section of dragon a few months ago?
I thought it was interesting, and might be a lot of fun. However it
didn't seem like a "better version of metamagic" but a "different way to do metamagic if you want arcane casters to be more spontanous".

 

[Technik4]

Look if they have 2 things, lets say:

A) A new and improved metamagic system, already designed

B) A new method of creating monsters, updated monsters.

They divide their work by book. "A" would fall under the phb, which was probably given the longest development time due to it being the book MOST people will buy (or rebuy). "B" falls under the MM, which being the 3rd book and like it or not probably the book fewest people (total people, not people on these boards) will buy (they have other monster books, its pretty much a DM-only buy, etc) it has the shortest dev timeframe. Yes they have to make many adjustments to CR/EL and tweak monsters they feel are misrepresented, which means play-testing them against different groups of iconics.

It just seems like an updated metamagic system is an odd thing to cut.

Technik

 

[jasamcarl]

Look if they have 2 things, lets say:

A) A new and improved metamagic system, already designed

B) A new method of creating monsters, updated monsters.

They divide their work by book. "A" would fall under the phb, which was probably given the longest development time due to it being the book MOST people will buy (or rebuy). "B" falls under the MM, which being the 3rd book and like it or not probably the book fewest people (total people, not people on these boards) will buy (they have other monster books, its pretty much a DM-only buy, etc) it has the shortest dev timeframe. Yes they have to make many adjustments to CR/EL and tweak monsters they feel are misrepresented, which means play-testing them against different groups of iconics.

It just seems like an updated metamagic system is an odd thing to cut.

Technik

I'm sure someone has already mentioned this, but let me reiterate. Yes the phb brings in the most revenue, but that does not mean that investing extra development time will increase its value appreciably, especially if it is already in mostly servicable order. And we are not talking about the phb in general, but metamagic as a subsystem. It is easily conceivable that the costs in time and manpower for playtesting simply outweighed the benefits of improving metamagic versus other parts of the system, even if they are contained within books which are expected to sell less. Again, I point to class balance as a far larger issue for most groups.

 

[Graf]

It just seems like an updated metamagic system is an odd thing to cut.

Technik

again I could be wrong about what the meta-magic system will look like.
But if the goal is to make 3.5 strongly backwards compatible then changing the metamagic system to a limited-use at-will ability (like the on in the house rules article) is pretty radical; I -could- see there being outcry from players who are used to being able to maximize/empower/extend as many spells per day as they like and constructed their characters around that.

Though, that has nothing to do with playtesting time for new PH material vs. playtesting time for new MM material of course.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Almost as significantly, the ability to extend long duration spells so as to effect the next day without leaving an open slot is incredibly advantageous. A wizard's player needs to leave a 4th level slot open for each extended GMW he wants to cast before going to bed (and have in effect when storming the dungeon/castle/etc. tomorrow). That means running the risk that he might actually need a second improved Invisibility during the day but not have it available. The sorceror faces no such opportunity cost for midnight extended buffing.

Full round action...

I don't see giving up an MEA to be able to Silent Spell your Dispel Magic or Heighten your Glitterdust on the fly to be an extreme sacrifice.

The Quicken/3.5 Haste comment has merit. But I feel that for the most part, a sorcerer makes better use of Metamagic feats than a Wizard.

Sure, he doesn't have as many of them, but he has supreme tactical flexibility with those he does have.

-Hyp.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

This was the metamagic system previewed (by Andy Collins) in the house rules section of dragon a few months ago?

Which Dragon Mag was that?

 

[Najo]

Revised Metamagic

Sean,

I would like to know what you can tell us about the revisied meta magic feats that were being worked on for 3.5?

Nate

 

[seankreynolds]

Uh, do you actually know the specific time frames and work hours assigned to the phb and mm during the calender time, or are you just talking out of your ass when you make the claim that the phb has had more development time than the MM; do you know how intensive development was during these periods.

Well, I _was_ still working at WotC in March 2002 when the PH was getting wrapped up and the MM was just getting started....

And two, you still amazingly don't seem to understand the cost/benefit analysis that I and others are alluding to. Regardless of whatever weaknesses one sees in how the metamagic rules work, other things, such as class and monster balance took greater priority; they may take more time, but the payoff is still in the end greater.

::sigh::