Limited Wish and metamagic

[Kae'Yoss]

As a nitpick on KY, Vampiric Touch doesn't heal but rather gives temporary hp that disappear at the end of the spell duration

With "spell that heals" I meant wish or limited wish, since you can get cure spells with it.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Who said anything about prerequisites?

Well, you used not the word prerequisite, and it might be not the right word for it, but what i meant was this:

If she doesn't have the requisite ability, then the effect cannot take place.

With wish, the caster would just wish for a metamagiged spell. It would be cast, either by him with the power granted to him by the wish, or the wish would cast it on his behalf, or however you imagine wish to function in storytelling terms. He couln't cast it himself, since has not the requisite ability to do so. If he did, he would not burn 300 XP. And having not the "requisite ability" can either mean the spell is not on his spell list, he has not prepared it, his ability scores are to low (wis 11 for a 3rd-level divine spell, e.g.), the spell is from a prohibited school, or, he doesn't have the metamagic feat the spell is enhanced with.

By the same consideration, wish won't lose that much power if you disallow metamagic

Remember that it was you who brought up the issue of the utility of wish or limited wish:

This has an insignificant impact on the utility of limited wish; you use it for the purpose of accessing six zillion spells, not to take advantage of a few feats.

Why would you mention it, except if you think that the ability of using metamagic with limited wish would make the spell more versatile and, therefore, more powerful.

Irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned.

There is almost no difference between casting hundreds of spells (with many only slightly different, like the [energy] orb spells or protection from [alignment]), with many amongst them that the caster otherwise could not cast (see above), and casting them in different ways (e.g. with metamagic)

Meaningless semantics, as far as I'm concerned.

Those "meaningless semantics" often make a huge differnce! If the ability increases you get every 4th level would be no increase, but an inherent bonus. That would be meaningless semantics. Right up to the point you use a wish to get a +1 inherent bonus to the same ability...

In this special case, it makes a collosal differance: If limited wish would not cast the spell for you, but give you the power to cast it, you could not use it in many cases and the wish (as well as your 300 xp) would be wasted. If you have a prohibited school, you may NEVER cast a spell from that school as a wizard. Your evoker has illusion as his ps and wishes for an invisibility spell. The spell gives it to him, to be cast in the same round. The Evo has only one problem: he can't cast illusion..... And that's a problems a few notches higher than just not knowing how to leave the verbal components away!

All of your verbosity (including (excessive) parenthetical remarks (which make your posts look (more than a bit) like LISP code)) does a great job of shoring up your position, but means absolutely jack when it comes to invalidating alternative positions

OK, I used a wrong word. Can be cause I'm no native english speaker, and I'm quite sure that happened to you in the past, too, and more than once in your life. But I have made clear what I wanted to say further up the post, and you could discern what I meant with a second of thought, anyway. But if you've already sunk so low that you have to mock my writing stile in order to discredit me and my arguments, I think you don't even believe your own arguments anymore (and "Irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned", without further explanation why, isn't that much of an argument, anyway!)

 

[hong]

OK, I used a wrong word. Can be cause I'm no native english speaker, and I'm quite sure that happened to you in the past, too, and more than once in your life. But I have made clear what I wanted to say further up the post, and you could discern what I meant with a second of thought, anyway. But if you've already sunk so low that you have to mock my writing stile in order to discredit me and my arguments,

Pish tosh. As with all things worth doing, I mock your writing style for its own sake.

I think you don't even believe your own arguments anymore

I think this is known as "grasping at straws".

(and "Irrelevant, as far as I'm concerned", without further explanation why, isn't that much of an argument, anyway!)

(It serves its purpose, and is entirely true. That's all that can be asked of an argument.)

 

[Al]

I think that hong has an interesting point with regard to LW not granting the use of a feat.

Firstly, the difference between wishing for a 'Maximised Fireball' and 'a Maximise Spell feat for the one-time purpose of casting this Fireball which I have LWed for' is effectively nothing: the first is more commonly used to avoid excessive verbosity, but in effect the latter is what one is doing.

However, my first substantive point is that one CANNOT use LW to wish for feats, be they single-use or whatever. For example, it is possible for LW to automatically cause a creature to hit on its next attack (in the spell description). However, one cannot and indeed should not be able to permit the 'one-time use of Power Critical (MotW)' just for the purpose of that single attack. I would hope that we would concur that this is a reasonable interpretation. Similarly, it could not grant the use of Power Attack for that one attack (although had I had it anyway, I would certainly use it for all it's worth!), Cleave or any other of the host of combat-orientated feats. From there, it is a very small and logical continuation of the rationale to say that it cannot grant metamagic feats. Ergo, it does not grant spells enhanced with metamagic feats. This argument does collapse if the caster already has the feat in question, yet I presume that the clash is when the caster does not.

My second substantive point is to do with semantics (which are important btw hong): that of LW granting a spell of 6th level or lower. Note that the exact word is 'a spell of up to 6th level', not (and I would assert emphatically so) 'a spell which would occupy a slot of up to 6th level'. The latter would suggest that an Empowered 4th or Maximised 3rd level spell is permissible, the first would indicate that this is not the case. Furthermore, this argument stands even in the event that the caster does have the relevant feat.

I would qualify this by saying that I do allow metamagic from LW, even if the caster does not have the feat. Nevertheless, I consider this more of a House Rule: based purely on the official spell description and the application of rational argument, this should not be the case.

 

[James McMurray]

I personally don't see why ou can't wish for one-time use of feats. It does say "or other things along the same power level, such as automatic hitting." The use of , say, power critical for one round is no more powerful than an automatic hit, IMO.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Firstly, the difference between wishing for a 'Maximised Fireball' and 'a Maximise Spell feat for the one-time purpose of casting this Fireball which I have LWed for' is effectively nothing: the first is more commonly used to avoid excessive verbosity, but in effect the latter is what one is doing.

That would also mean that cou can wish is that you can wish for "the use of a prohibited school for the one-time purpose fo casting this spell which I have LWed for". If you get the use of that metamagic feat for this one spell, you also get the ability to cast divine spells, or spells from a prohibited school with your wizard. And spezialists are explicitly forbidden to cast spells from their forbidden schools, add them to their spellbook, prepare them, or even cast them from magic items that use spell completion or spell trigger (scrolls or wands and staffs, respectively).

However, my first substantive point is that one CANNOT use LW to wish for feats, be they single-use or whatever. For example, it is possible for LW to automatically cause a creature to hit on its next attack (in the spell description). However, one cannot and indeed should not be able to permit the 'one-time use of Power Critical (MotW)' just for the purpose of that single attack. I would hope that we would concur that this is a reasonable interpretation. Similarly, it could not grant the use of Power Attack for that one attack (although had I had it anyway, I would certainly use it for all it's worth!), Cleave or any other of the host of combat-orientated feats. From there, it is a very small and logical continuation of the rationale to say that it cannot grant metamagic feats. Ergo, it does not grant spells enhanced with metamagic feats.

It's not explicitly stated if it can or cannot. Arguing that the spell is cast for you by an outer source is both according to the descritpions of the spell (you know, the genie theme). Either this power knows all spells there are, or you contact a specific power amongst many that know that particular spell. And it is imaginable that those know all the metamagic feats and can just change the spell accordingly

If you assume instead, that you can cast the spell yourself, once, by the power of limited wish, you'd gain the power to cast a spell from a prohibited school, or even from a different class list. That would far more upset the rules than granting a feat for a single spell. (The specialists have those forbidden schools for good reason)

This argument does collapse if the caster already has the feat in question, yet I presume that the clash is when the caster does not.

My second substantive point is to do with semantics (which are important btw hong): that of LW granting a spell of 6th level or lower. Note that the exact word is 'a spell of up to 6th level', not (and I would assert emphatically so) 'a spell which would occupy a slot of up to 6th level'. The latter would suggest that an Empowered 4th or Maximised 3rd level spell is permissible, the first would indicate that this is not the case. Furthermore, this argument stands even in the event that the caster does have the relevant feat.

Yes. If you allow or forbid metamagic, you have to do it completely. No "if you have the feat, you can use it", as an empowered maximised widened fireball is still only 3rd level, but should be clearly beyond the power of limited wish: (and every mortal spellcaster below epic level, at that!).

But for "spell of up to 6th level": Read the last option of limited wish again: "Have any other effect whose power level is in line with the above effects,...". Surely, granting you a spell of 3rd level, modified with metamagic feats to make it occupy a 6th-level slot is as powerful as a 6th-level spell. It would not occupy a 6th-level slot otherwise.

This last option of LW, which I overlooked all the time, could not only resolve this special problem (of xth-level spell versus spell which occupies a xth-level slot), but the whole debate, as casting a metamagiced spell and a normal spell are IMHO the same power level if they use the same spell slots. I agree that it would be more powerful if you could use the metamagic feat you "gained" through use of the wish to prepare other spells with it, but wish allows you only to get one spell at a time.

But you made a couple of good points here, and it was nice to argue with someone that doesn't fall back to arguments like "I don't care"

 

[Piratecat]

Man! Hong must have woken up with a headache today (if you know what I mean, and I think you do.) There's no point in bickering, gentlemen; you've both made your points quite nicely, and I'd prefer not to see this turn rude.

FWIW, I'd allow metamagic to be included in a wish. It doesn't seem to unbalance the spell, and that's what primarily matters to me.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Man! Hong must have woken up with a headache today (if you know what I mean, and I think you do.) There's no point in bickering, gentlemen; you've both made your points quite nicely, and I'd prefer not to see this turn rude.

rather seems he's having that headache for a couple of days.

FWIW, I'd allow metamagic to be included in a wish. It doesn't seem to unbalance the spell, and that's what primarily matters to me.

Actually, the rules say you can do it. It's not directly written that "you can use metamagic", but you can do all things "whose power level is in line with the above". Unless someone brings a perfectly reasonable argument why the power levels of a 6th-level spell and a spell that uses a 6th-level spot because of metamagic aren't the same power level, I consider it how it is written, and any other way is rule zero

 

[Sir Hawkeye]

I think this is known as "grasping at straws."

I'm grasping my straw right now.

Sir "If you know what I mean, and I think you do" Hawkeye

We now return you to your regularly schduled metamagic argument.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I'm grasping my straw right now.

Sir "If you know what I mean, and I think you do" Hawkeye

We now return you to your regularly schduled metamagic argument.

You're all so filthy here.

That's why I like this forum