How Do Metamagic Rods Work For Preparation Spellcasters?

[RainOfSteel]

It is. Modified rules are pointed out, broken rules are not.

The FAQ isn't a clarification here, it's a change.

When I look at it, the FAQ is just spelling out what the entire item description already says. That makes it a clarification.

No rules are broken.

It is a case of a magic item granting an ability/function/feature that is normally not available, just as many other magic items grant.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It is a case of a magic item granting an ability/function/feature that is normally not available, just as many other magic items grant.

Let's say we have an Druid who casts Flame Blade. A 3-foot-long, blazing beam of red-hot fire springs forth from his hand. He wields this bladelike beam as if it were a scimitar.

No problem. Druids are proficient with scimitars.

Now let's say we have an Archivist who casts Flame Blade. A 3-foot-long, blazing beam of red-hot fire springs forth from his hand. He wields this bladelike beam as if it were a scimitar.

Archivists aren't proficient with scimitars, so he takes a -4 non-proficiency penalty.

Unless, for no reason at all, we assume an extra sentence that says "The spell allows you to use the blade as someone proficient with scimitars would, should you not be proficient with scimitars."

But why would we make such an assumption?

-Hyp.

 

[Terath Ninir]

Hypersmurf's explenation about how he thinks the rod should work -- at preparation time -- goes on for more than a screen of text.

If you assume, however, that it is used when you cast the spell, the description of how it works encompases exactly one sentance. Therefor, it makes MUCH more sense for it to work at the time of casting.

 

[Seeten]

Thats true. But then it doesnt work with Sorcerors in the intuitive way. It takes all the Wizards problems with metamagic away, while continuing to highlight the sorcerors problems, and point them out.

Since wizards are already more powerful than sorcerors, this is poor from both a fair-play standpoint, and also a balance standpoint. If we assume this one sentence method is better, of which I am dubious, we also assume game balance is not worth much, I guess, and that no one cares about how the rules impact sorcerors, since as they are terrible no one plays them anyway.

With a simple clarification, "Metamagic rods take care of the metamagicking of the spell FOR the caster" we escape preparing the spell as a wizard, AND spending a full round as a sorceror, and its clear to me the intent is for the ROD to do the heavy lifting, not the wizard, and not the sorceror. Since the FAQ entry claims that the Rod does the work for the Wizard, but the Rod does NOT do the work for the Sorceror, I claim the entire FAQ entry is wholly worthless.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If you assume, however, that it is used when you cast the spell, the description of how it works encompases exactly one sentance. Therefor, it makes MUCH more sense for it to work at the time of casting.

Then why are wizards (clerics, druids, paladins, rangers... and by the wording of the rod, potentially even bards!) not subject to the rule that if you have not prepared the spell in a metamagic form in advance, you must apply the metamagic feat on the spot, and therefore must also take more time to cast a metamagic spell (one enhanced by a metamagic feat) than you do to cast a regular spell?

Alternatively, given that the FAQ says that 'sorcerer' actually means 'sorcerer (or by extension, any other spontaneous spellcaster)', can we similarly assume that 'sorcerer' actually means 'sorcerer (or by extension, any other spellcaster applying a metamagic feat on the spot to a spell not prepared in a metamagic form in advance)'... that is to say, under the casting-time interpretation, all spellcasters?

See, I don't have a problem with a rod that lets a wizard apply a metamagic feat on the fly (though I don't think the DMG metamagic rod is that rod). I have a problem with a rod that lets a wizard apply a metamagic feat on the fly without incurring the standard penalty for doing so, but which goes out of its way to remind us about that very penalty!

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

Hypersmurf's explenation about how he thinks the rod should work -- at preparation time -- goes on for more than a screen of text.

If you assume, however, that it is used when you cast the spell, the description of how it works encompases exactly one sentance. Therefor, it makes MUCH more sense for it to work at the time of casting.

By that logic, maybe we should alter the wizard class spellcasting ability to one sentance, too (I'm sure we can improve all rules this way)?

Wizards can cast all spells written in their spellbook at will.

Begone, all those complicated rules! Simplicity for everyone!

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

It is. Modified rules are pointed out, broken rules are not.

The FAQ isn't a clarification here, it's a change. That's fine, of course, the FAQ does that all the time; it's just a change I do not agree with from various viewpoints (including balance and consistency; the way I'm using them is better on both counts), and thus ignore.

What I'm talking about is the rule (without the FAQ change), and going from there, it's just as I say. Broken.

With all of the capability in Complete Arcane, Complete Mage, etc., this is hardly broken.

If Spontaneous Metamagic were broken, then Sorcerers by default would be broken. Spontaneous Metamagic 3 times per day for Wizards for X amount of gold is not broken if Spontaneous Metamagic 50 times per day for Sorcerers for free is not broken.


Btw, I agree with you that by a strict literal RAW reading, the metamagic rods should be during preparation time for preparation casters.

However, I also view this as a case where WotC meant to state one thing and was unclear, and accidentally stated something else. Hence, the FAQ is a clarification in this case.

A better poll might be: "When you first read about metamagic rods (possibly in Tome and Blood) and before you read discussions on the topic here on the board or elsewhere, did you think they were supposed to be used at casting time or preparation time?"

I suspect that possibly even Hyp or you or both misread the strict literal RAW the very first time as "at casting time" until a closer look was taken.

 

[Thanee]

With all of the capability in Complete Arcane, Complete Mage, etc., this is hardly broken.

The other 'broken'.

I suspect that possibly even Hyp or you or both misread the strict literal RAW the very first time as "at casting time" until a closer look was taken.

Indeed. In fact, I'm pretty sure, that I even said so earlier (ok, much earlier, in another thread).

It's the intuitive view you almost automatically get, before you start to think about it.

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

The other 'broken'.

What other broken?

The partially ok but still a pain in the butt for a DM broken, or the can't play the game at all with such a terrible rule broken, or some other broken?

 

[takasi]

If you rule that a wizard must use a metamagic rod during spell preparation then does he also need to hold it when casting the spell? Why?

If the wizard finds a metamagic rod during an adventure that will not end before he can rest does that mean that he can't use it?

And if you're a sorcerer who's bummed about increasing the casting time wouldn't you rather ditch your familiar and take metamagic specialist from PHB 2?