Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="seankreynolds" data-source="post: 864480" data-attributes="member: 3029">To clarify, I did mean "bard and sorcerer" above. And yes, the bard and sorcerer "pay" more that wiz and cleric because it takes longer for them to cast metamagicked spells (yes they gain the versatility, but the cost-of-use cost is still higher compared to those who don't have to long-cast). And they can't even use one of the feats (Quicken Spell).If you have access to a spell slot, either that access means a lot or it doesn't.  If it means a lot, then an ability that forces you to spend that higher slot had better be a powerful ability, because that's a big cost.  If it doesn't mean a lot, then classes like the Mystic Theurge are way overbalanced, as the justification for that class is that a multiclassed spellcaster is hurt too much by losing those higher-level spell slots.Yes, but the weapon feats let you use them *over and over again* every round and gain the full benefit of the feat at a minimal cost: using the weapon you want to use anyway. If you use a metamagic feat, by definition you are nerfing yourself because you can't use your most effective spells, or are even limited to using your worst-by-comparison spells ("Woohoo, I'm 6th-level, I'll take Empower Spell ... and empower my magic missile ... wow, that's equal to a normal fireball....")Sure they do, if you consider the prereqs "strings." There are many feats that expand your ability to do something and give it an X per day interval (Extra Turning and Stunning Fist are perfect examples). It's not bad game design to do so, you just have to justify/explain the cost (in the case of this system, it's Con-based, so obviously you're drawing on your own energy or channeling power through yourself in an unusual to power the effect).Yes.It's better in that it's not as weak as the present system, and might encourage more people to try metamagic. Better like how Skill Focus is better than feat called "Skill Casual Study" that gives you +1 to one skill. It's balanced (IMO), and something that (1) is balanced and (2) encourages a barely-used part of the game system to be used more often is better, and is good game design.</blockquote>

Verification