Metamagic feats combined with Item Cration feats

[Carthain]

If the spell is cast, but absorbed by the item rather than having its effect around the spellcaster, then it would have the exact same effect as if the spell just left the casters memory (or the slot just went away).

True, the end result would be the same -- except that unless you Rule-0 your game, that's not how it works. It's actually stated that the spell is not cast, just removed from memory as if it had been cast. So while the end result of what you say would end up being the same, the method that you use to create the item is different from the core rules.

So unless you tell me that you are Rule-0ing how it works, I have to assume that the core rulebooks are correct -- which means that your idea of the spell being cast (at all) is wrong.

I argued back that metamagic feats can also only be used on spells actually cast.

Ummm, but if you prepare a spell (for casters who prepare spells), then you use the metamagic feat that you apply to it. So how can you say that metamagic feats can only be used on spells actually cast?


... But, in an effort not bring the argument over here, I'm not going to respond to every point of your post -- just the above two, as those are the ones I need to have the most clarification on ^_^

 

[Mistwell]

True, the end result would be the same -- except that unless you Rule-0 your game, that's not how it works. It's actually stated that the spell is not cast, just removed from memory as if it had been cast. So while the end result of what you say would end up being the same, the method that you use to create the item is different from the core rules.

So unless you tell me that you are Rule-0ing how it works, I have to assume that the core rulebooks are correct -- which means that your idea of the spell being cast (at all) is wrong.

Are you really trying to tell us that the words "as if it were cast" in the rule is the same as "it is actually stated that the spell is not cast".

You show me where it says the words "the spell is not cast" and we will have an agreement. Until then, your belief that the words "as if it were cast" means "it is not actually cast" is simply that, your belief. IMO, the context of that sentence is not meant to be a ruling on whether the spell is actually cast, just a method of explaining the effect in a system that did not comtemplate this kind of situation. "You treat the spell as if it were cast" means in this context that "if you ever have any question about this situation, treat it as if it were cast, instead of treating it as if it were not cast". We now have a question about whether an ability that only impacts spells that are cast can be used during item creation. Therefore the rule tells us "treat it as if it were cast". Great, we have our answer, for purposes of this situation, the rules all act as if the spell were cast, and hence the ability can be used.

Ummm, but if you prepare a spell (for casters who prepare spells), then you use the metamagic feat that you apply to it. So how can you say that metamagic feats can only be used on spells actually cast?

Okay, you are correct, I will amend my statement. A sorceror, who does not prepare his spells in advance, can use a metamagic feat when making an item. In order for that sorceror to use a metamagic feat, he has to cast the spell. He cannot use a metamagic feat without casting the spell, since he cannot memorize the spell (without an additional feat permitting spell memorization). Therefore you can extract the general rule that item creation must involve the casting of a spell, because sorcerors can create metamagiced items.

 

[Carthain]

Are you really trying to tell us that the words "as if it were cast" in the rule is the same as "it is actually stated that the spell is not cast".

No. But then, if you read the whole section that I refer you to, you'll find more indications that the spell is not cast.


Let's look at the section for wondrous items (DMG, page 246):

"If spells are involved in the prerequisites for making the item, the creator must have prepared the spells to be cast (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) but need not provide any material components or focuses the spells require, nor are any XP costs inherent in a prerequisite spell incurred in the creation of the tiem."

Okay, so if you are actually casting the spell, then why do you not need any material components? foci? Why don't you have to pay any XP costs of the spell(s) in question?

"The act of working on the item triggers the prepared spells, making them unavailable for casting during each day of the item's creation. (That is, those spell slots are expended form his currently prepared spells, just as if they had been cast.)"

If you are actually casting the spell, then why does making an item trigger them and make them unavilable for casting during the day. That wouldn't work very well, now would it? If you had to cast the spell, but working on the item triggered the spell and made it so you couldn't cast it that day, then how would you cast the spell? It's suddenly uncastable for that day.


So it's not just those few words at the end that I'm putting emphasis on -- it is just that they happen to summarize how it works.

As well, if you do actually cast them, then why does it say "as if they had been cast"? And why doesn't it say that the spells have no actual effects when cast in this manner (because their power is absorbed into the item or whatever).

 

[dcollins]

Clearly metamagic feats can be applied to magic items (PH p. 78, "Magic Items and Metamagic Spells").
No other feats can be so applied (no core rule anywhere expands this past metamagic feats), including Spell Focus or general Bard feats.

Other than that, you guys seem to be hashing out some arcane issue about a house-ruled alternative bard which probably the rest of us can't even follow. As such, perhaps it's best to take it offline or move it to House Rules.

 

[kreynolds]

Let's look at the section for wondrous items (DMG, page 246):

"If spells are involved in the prerequisites for making the item, the creator must have prepared the spells to be cast (or must know the spells, in the case of a sorcerer or bard) but need not provide any material components or focuses the spells require, nor are any XP costs inherent in a prerequisite spell incurred in the creation of the tiem."

Okay, so if you are actually casting the spell, then why do you not need any material components? foci? Why don't you have to pay any XP costs of the spell(s) in question?

You do need the material components and you do need to spend the XP during the creation process. See DMG errata.

 

[Henrix]

I don't have BoEM2, so I cannot follow the discussion.

Why ever are you discussing whether the spell is cast during item creation or just treated 'as if it were cast'?

What sort of significance do you think that has in the game?

The spell/spell slot is, after item creation, used up. As if it had been cast with any Metamagic feats involved.

Whether you actually cast the spell or not has no effect on the spell effect later produced by the item.
The DC is always 10 +spell level + minimum ability needed to cast the spell, and the caster level is at minimum or whatever you've paid for (up to your own).

 

[AuraSeer]

[...]We now have a question about whether an ability that only impacts spells that are cast can be used during item creation.

Exactly which ability are you talking about?
Metamagic feats can be used, because the rules specifically state that this is the case. Other than metamagic, I can't think of a spell-dependent ability that would make sense for use in a magic item.

I guess I'm wondering whether this discussion has any game ramifications, or is just a quibble over semantics.

 

[mkletch]

It's actually stated that the spell is not cast, just removed from memory as if it had been cast. So while the end result of what you say would end up being the same, the method that you use to create the item is different from the core rules.

This is the core of the argument. 'As if it has been cast' means 'exactly as if it had been cast'. If you could apply the metamagic feat when casting, then you can when creating. If you cannot while creating the item, then you cannot when casting the spell. It seems like Carthain is the one trying to rule-0 the metamagic bard wand.

-Fletch!

 

[Carthain]

You do need the material components and you do need to spend the XP during the creation process. See DMG errata.

Ahh, okay, thanks for the heads-up on that ^_^

This is the core of the argument. 'As if it has been cast' means 'exactly as if it had been cast'.

Right, but, it does not neccesarily mean that it is actually cast.

Allow me to give you a little more background:

There is a feat that can increase a spellsong's duration by a certain amount when the spellsong is cast. The amount that it is extended by depends on a Perform check.

So, Mistwell is saying that the spell is actually cast, so you should be able to use that feat in item creation -- and I said you can't, because you don't actually cast the spell. So semantics is the issue.

Because the spell isn't actually cast, the feat cannot be applied. Plus, there are no rules given along with the feat (which is a [General] feat btw, not [Metamagic]) on how to use that feat with item creation. As such, I said it's not possible to use the feat in item creation (for the multiple reasons given already), and Mistwell seems to disagree with me.

 

[mkletch]

Allow me to give you a little more background:

There is a feat that can increase a spellsong's duration by a certain amount when the spellsong is cast. The amount that it is extended by depends on a Perform check.

[...]

Because the spell isn't actually cast, the feat cannot be applied. Plus, there are no rules given along with the feat (which is a [General] feat btw, not [Metamagic]) on how to use that feat with item creation. As such, I said it's not possible to use the feat in item creation (for the multiple reasons given already), and Mistwell seems to disagree with me.

Only a metamagic feat can be applied to an item. It actually changes the spell involved; that is why it can be stored. A general feat? <buzzer> There are thousands of players that wish they could apply greater spell focus to the items they create. That is exactly the same as a general feat that extends the duration of a spell.

-Fletch!