Is there a feat to increase non-variable spell results

[SolitonMan]

Hi, I'm wondering if there is a metamagic feat that would increase the results of a spell analogously to Maximize Spell or Empower Spell, but for non-variable results. I was thinking about this in conjunction with the Summon Undead spells, which result in a fixed number of creatures summoned.

If such a feat exists and you can point it out to me, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

 

[xigbar]

Hi, I'm wondering if there is a metamagic feat that would increase the results of a spell analogously to Maximize Spell or Empower Spell, but for non-variable results. I was thinking about this in conjunction with the Summon Undead spells, which result in a fixed number of creatures summoned.

If such a feat exists and you can point it out to me, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

There isn't a way to get more creatures from one spell slot, but Rapid Spell will let you put out two of the spells per turn. Rapid Summoning from UA is good too, and Master Specialist furthers the effects in conjunction. Basically, there are only ways to use more spells per turn, not summon more creatures with one spell, far as I can tell.

 

[SolitonMan]

There isn't a way to get more creatures from one spell slot, but Rapid Spell will let you put out two of the spells per turn. Rapid Summoning from UA is good too, and Master Specialist furthers the effects in conjunction. Basically, there are only ways to use more spells per turn, not summon more creatures with one spell, far as I can tell.

Rapid Spell sounds like a useful option. Twin Spell was something I was considering too, as well as Repeat Spell. But thanks for the answer, seems there are no Empower-like options available so I'll skip that avenue of research.

 

[xigbar]

Rapid Spell sounds like a useful option. Twin Spell was something I was considering too, as well as Repeat Spell. But thanks for the answer, seems there are no Empower-like options available so I'll skip that avenue of research.

Actually, now that I think about it the first sentence of Empower Spell, "All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half" implies that you could get more summoned creatures. If you can summon, say, 1d4+1 creatures, for example, and roll a 4, you get 6 creatures. I don't know, but that sounds logical to me.

 

[frankthedm]

There isn't for good reason: Buffs. Bonus amounts are not often random in 3.5 because of the shenanigans casters pulled in 3.0.

 

[Empirate]

I don't know, it still always struck me as rather arbitrary to limit it to variable effects. I mean, an Empowered (thus 4th level) Bull's Strength for +6... not exactly what I'd call shenanigans. Most spells that give static bonuses are not that outrageously powerful when multiplied by 1.5 AND increased by two spell levels.

Now if you want to bring up metamagic cost reducers... sure, that's more shenanigan-y, but it's not the Empower Spell that's the offender then, it's Easy Metamagic, or Incantatrix, or Divine Metamagic, or whatever.


That said, it's my firm belief that metamagic was messed up horrendously by the designers of 3.0, and the transition to 3.5 hasn't had much of a positive effect. There's very few metamagic feats that would be worth using EVEN IF YOU GOT THE FEAT FOR FREE. At least, metamagic feats right out of the box, that is.
So the designers introduced metamagic cost reducers, which brought us the wonders of Divine Metamagic cheese. Now that's not the way this should have been handled. Instead of introducing ridiculous increases in spell level (seriously, +3 for Maximize?), some other mechanic should have been found, such as reducing effective caster level, costing more spell slots, etc. Maybe even a mechanism whereby every caster could freely alter certain aspects of a spell (range, duration, damage etc.) while paying consecutively more for higher adjustments? This has been discussed with regard to Extend Spell variants here.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Actually, now that I think about it the first sentence of Empower Spell, "All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half" implies that you could get more summoned creatures. If you can summon, say, 1d4+1 creatures, for example, and roll a 4, you get 6 creatures. I don't know, but that sounds logical to me.

Actually, if the number specified is 1d4+1 then rolling a 4 would actually grant 7. As per the example given in the PHB, if the spell specifically says it does something like 1d4+1 like Magic Missile, that whole amount gets multiplied.

 

[xigbar]

Actually, if the number specified is 1d4+1 then rolling a 4 would actually grant 7. As per the example given in the PHB, if the spell specifically says it does something like 1d4+1 like Magic Missile, that whole amount gets multiplied.

I meant if you rolled what would result in a 4, a 3, +1.

 

[airwalkrr]

I don't know, it still always struck me as rather arbitrary to limit it to variable effects. I mean, an Empowered (thus 4th level) Bull's Strength for +6... not exactly what I'd call shenanigans. Most spells that give static bonuses are not that outrageously powerful when multiplied by 1.5 AND increased by two spell levels.

Now if you want to bring up metamagic cost reducers... sure, that's more shenanigan-y, but it's not the Empower Spell that's the offender then, it's Easy Metamagic, or Incantatrix, or Divine Metamagic, or whatever.


That said, it's my firm belief that metamagic was messed up horrendously by the designers of 3.0, and the transition to 3.5 hasn't had much of a positive effect. There's very few metamagic feats that would be worth using EVEN IF YOU GOT THE FEAT FOR FREE. At least, metamagic feats right out of the box, that is.
So the designers introduced metamagic cost reducers, which brought us the wonders of Divine Metamagic cheese. Now that's not the way this should have been handled. Instead of introducing ridiculous increases in spell level (seriously, +3 for Maximize?), some other mechanic should have been found, such as reducing effective caster level, costing more spell slots, etc. Maybe even a mechanism whereby every caster could freely alter certain aspects of a spell (range, duration, damage etc.) while paying consecutively more for higher adjustments? This has been discussed with regard to Extend Spell variants here.

You have obviously never been on the receiving end of some of these metamagic spells.

I wrote an adventure for the RPGA back around 2005 which was scaled for characters in the range of 6-12. In this adventure the PCs faced a wizard at the end who generally opened up the combat round with an empowered fireball. At the low range of levels, this was decimating to many groups and caused a number of deaths at the convention where it premiered. Had I decided to pull some metamagic cheese like giving him Sudden Maximize, Easy Metamagic, or whatever, even just giving him a metamagic rod, this wizard likely would have caused more than just a substantial number of player deaths; more likely it could have resulted in some TPKs. Players all throughout the RPGA were using metamagic to their own devastating effect long before the cheese was introduced. I judged well over a hundred rounds of RPGA adventures and saw more than one combat ended in a single round by a well-placed metamagic spell. Now the RPGA is not the perfect example of 3rd edition D&D, but given the fact that it followed the rules of the game to the letter it is about as close to perfect as you could get.

 

[Empirate]

Not my point really. I was on about the exceedingly high cost of many metamagic feats, not about the general utility of having metamagic in the game.

To use your example: an Empowered Fireball takes a 5th level slot, meaning we probably have a 9th or 10th level caster if that spell is his current opening. Let's say 10th level. That's 15d6 points of damage (average of 52 points), with a save for half and the not uncommon fire resistance to counter it. Sure, 52 points of damage is nice, but at 10th level? Nothing to write home about, really. An unoptimized raging Half-Orc Barbarian easily does 30 to 40 points of damage per attack at that level, taking two attacks on a full attack, more with Haste etc. A two-weapon fighting Rogue comes to around 20-25 per attack, and can take four attacks on a full attack, five with Haste etc. Granted, the Empowered Fireball works on an area (but how often have you caught more than three enemies in the area, once your DM grows wise to your tricks?), but then there's the save for half, and you won't do the same next round, and so on and so forth.
Furthermore, what group of equivalent level is taken out by a mere 52 points of damage, even if all of them are in the area, none have fire resistance (or Minor Globe of Invulnerability, or Blink, or whatever), and all of them fail their save? Sure, a 6th level group is in trouble, but a 10th level caster can just pick spells blindly and still present a deadly challenge to a gropu four levels lower. A 10th level group, on the other hand, will just say "that all you got?". Doing non-fatal damage doesn't impact the opposition's ability to kill you.

Doing a bunch of damage simply isn't an impressive use of spellcasting power, especially when you're doing it with your highest-level spell slot. This is even more true when you're playing a PC, who can normally rely on having some heavily armed folks around for cleanup. Empowered 3rd level spells rarely compare to the options you could get in 4th and 5th level, without spending a feat. Maximized 3rd level spells don't compare to what you can get in 6th level. And so on.