Metamagic Feats to de-power spells.

[Arkhandus]

By the by, you may notice in this case that using Minimize Spell on Disintegrate would reduce it from a 6th-level slot to a 3rd-level slot........yet it can still turn a person entirely to dust if they fail their save. Waaay too much for a 3rd-level spell. And Minimize Spell doesn't even change the spell's effective level, only the level of slot used, so Disintegrate's Fortitude save is still based on being a 6th-level spell (not that an enemy wizard, rogue, or bard would have much chance against it anyway). What does anyone care if Disintegrate does less damage on a successful save, when it's a save-or-die spell anyway?

Food for thought.

 

[DanMcS]

By the by, you may notice in this case that using Minimize Spell on Disintegrate would reduce it from a 6th-level slot to a 3rd-level slot........yet it can still turn a person entirely to dust if they fail their save. Waaay too much for a 3rd-level spell. And Minimize Spell doesn't even change the spell's effective level, only the level of slot used, so Disintegrate's Fortitude save is still based on being a 6th-level spell (not that an enemy wizard, rogue, or bard would have much chance against it anyway). What does anyone care if Disintegrate does less damage on a successful save, when it's a save-or-die spell anyway?

Food for thought.

In the wonderful world of 3.5, disintegrate does 2d6/caster level on a failed save. Won't you join us there?

 

[Stalker0]

I've seen other attempts at this, and in general its a bad idea for 1 main reason.

A player is always going to use these new metamagic feats so that they don't have to take the penalty, and instead can just drop the spell levels.

Heal is a good example. If I use minimize spell on heal....I don't no penalty whatsoever. I still heal 10/caster level. But now, I can do it with a 3rd level slot.

Fireball is another good example. In almost every case fireball is used, its long range doesn't come into play. Most combats are close range if not point blank. I would always use contract spell on my fireball. And you know what, I think that 10 foot radius is good enough, I don't really need 20. So I have a contracted, reduced fireball and now 4 free level slots to play with. So now I can cast a quickened fireball at 3rd level!!

Now I admit that takes 3 feats, but being able to cast quickened fireballs at the same level I can normally cast them is so good who wouldn't want that?

 

[Stalker0]

Now that I've said that, if you truly want to push this idea, the only way to make balanced anti-metamagic feats is to make conditions that will ALWAYS be painful for the caster, no matter who he is, or what he's casting.

A couple of examples, spell failure that can not be negated. Maybe 15% for -1 caster level.

The spell deals con damage to the caster, that can't be healed or negated (has to heal on its own for a certain period of time).

Finding conditions that are always painful is actually really tricky. For example, an initial idea would be a metamagic feat that lower the spell level by 1, but there's a 10% chance that the spell will target you instead of the original target. That would be balanced for things like disintegrate. However, for beneficial spells, like healing, its not normally a big penalty at all. So what if during routine healing if I get some of it as well?

 

[Kelleris]

In the wonderful world of 3.5, disintegrate does 2d6/caster level on a failed save. Won't you join us there?

Then replace his/her example with finger of death to get the exact same problem back.

 

[dragoncc]

Did a couple of these over on the WizO's boards myself so I thought I'd share some feedback

snip

• Minimize Spell Metamagic:
  All variable, numeric effects of a spell modified by this feat are minimized. A minimized spell deals minimum damage, cures minimum hit points, affects the minimum number of targets, etc. For example, a [Minimized] Disintegrate will deal 2/level damage after a failed fort save, remove the target, leave his stuff, and be equivalent to a 3rd level spell. Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables. A minimized spell uses a spell slot three levels lower than the spell's actual level.

3 levels lower is way too much. I would go with 2 lower, but probably 1 lower is best.

• Depower Spell Metamagic:
  A [Minimized] spell will deal 50% less of all variable damage than normal and use a slot two levels lower, minimum 0-level. A [Depowered] Melf's Acid Arrow will deal 2d4 - 2d4/2 acid damge each round (minimum 1) and use a 0-level spell slot.

Think you have a typo there in the first sentence second word I would go with the suggested half damage period for 2 levels lower, but as is only 1 level lower.

• Contract Spell Metamagic:
  The range of a [Contracted] spell is reduced by 50%, and uses a spell slot one level lower than normal. A long range spell (400ft+40ft/level) would become (200ft+20ft/level).

Wouldn't use this one at all, -- way to abusable. I mean, how many times do you actually see a fireball cast a max range anyway? & multiple applications to the same spell, well you get the idea

• Reduce Spell Metamagic:
  The area of effect of any burst, emanation, line, or spread-shaped spell is reduced by 50%. For example, a [Reduced] fireball spell will deal 1d6/level damage in a 10-ft radius burst. A [Reduced] Spell uses a slot three levels lower than the spell's actual level.

This one again is too lowered. I'd make it only 2 levels lower, if not only 1.

• Breif Spell Metamagic:
  The Duration of a [Brief] spell is reduced by 50%. A spell with a duration of concentration, instantaneous, or permanent is not affected by this feat. A Breif spell uses up a spell slot one level lower than the spell's actual level.

This one is fine IMO.

Of course, you can also apply normal metamagic feats to these spells. So you could cast a [Breif, Silent, Still] Charm Person as a 2nd level spell, and have just enough time to slip by the guard without wasting the unnecessary duration.

Actually this is one of the rules I've suggested as a possible no no for these types of feats because where you actually run into the most problems is when you use metamagic & anti-metamagics together. A simple rule not allowing the combination solves almost any problems with these reductions.
Allow me to elaborate:
I want to cast a quickened spell of the highest spell level I can cast. Normally not possible, but with these feats, it's easy & I get almost the exact effect in many cases, especially if I use Reduce & Contrast (as you've written them) to target a foe in melee. Not a good thing IMO, so that's where I'm coming from with that rule & the advice above.

 

[Felix]

My gripe is this: why waste a feat to alter a spell to make it inferior? Feats exist to improve a character and their abilities.

Heal is not a good example. It is not subject to Maximize or Minimize because it does not have variable HP curing ability. 10/level is not variable, because while the caster level changes over time, it is a constant when the spell is cast.

So I have a contracted, reduced fireball and now 4 free level slots to play with.

Yep. Contract is too much with -3 spell levels. I was just tagging it on to Widen spell, which is +3. And as others have said, Reducing works better if instead of halving the range, it provides -1 spell level moving the range from Medium to Close, or -2 moving from Long to Close. It cannot move from Long to Medium. It'd work better that way.

So I have a contracted, reduced fireball and now 4 free level slots to play with.

Much of the pain here is in the Opportunity Cost. When you take Minimize Spell and Heighten Spell to jack up the Save DC, you are not taking Spell Focus and G. Spell Focus to do the same thing with no minimizing. Like DanMcS said, there are so many feats to choose, that these will rarely be chosen.

 

[IndyPendant]

These would never see the light of day in my campaigns, sorry. *Way* too powerful for the penalties provided. I have only seen one feat in this style in play, and even then I debate about how balanced it is. Here it is:

Slow Spell [Metamagic]
You can cast spells more slowly and carefully to gain power.
Source: Adapted from the Netbook of Feats.
Benefit: Casting a Slowed spell requires the caster’s complete concentration; they always require very dramatic Verbal and Somatic components, and Concentration checks cannot be made when casting this spell to avoid disruption, attacks of opportunity, or any other penalty. In addition, spells with a casting time of 1 action now take 1 full round to complete (taking effect in combat at the start of the spellcaster’s next action) and those with a casting time of 1 round or 1 full-round action take 2 full rounds. Spells with a casting time longer than 1 round cannot be enhanced with this Feat. And finally, a Slow Spell is cast at one half the caster’s Caster Level (round down) for all the spell’s effects. The benefit is that the spell takes up a spell slot one level lower than normal. You must be able to cast the non-enhanced version of a spell to be able to use this feat on that spell. Unlike other metamagic feats, this feat does reduce the spell’s actual level (for the purposes of save DCs, for example). Spontaneous casters do not need to take extra time to cast due to the spontaneous casting penalty when applying this feat.

The issue here is that it becomes *great* for pre-battle buffs and post-battle heals. Too good? I'm still not sure...

About the only feat I've seen that I would allow is the one that allows multiple-target spells to affect only one target for -1 spell level. And even then, probably only on Area spells (Cone, Spread, Radius, etc). The issue here is that players are *incredibly* skilled at maximizing the benefits and minimizing the penalties of feats such as these.

 

[dragoncc]

These would never see the light of day in my campaigns, sorry. *Way* too powerful for the penalties provided. I have only seen one feat in this style in play, and even then I debate about how balanced it is. Here it is:

Feats aren't supposed to penalize. They are supposed to be a return on investment by the player.

The issue here is that it becomes *great* for pre-battle buffs and post-battle heals. Too good? I'm still not sure...

For those specific cases, yes it is useful, BUT in most others (like life or death combat) it is not. So what's the problem? It clearly doesn't work well all the time, or for every spell, so I don't see every caster jumping on the wagon to take it. It has the built in side effect that it reduces the caster level in half for all effects, including those buffs & heals (you did notice that, right?), so you're not getting a full blown version of most spell's effects anyway.

About the only feat I've seen that I would allow is the one that allows multiple-target spells to affect only one target for -1 spell level. And even then, probably only on Area spells (Cone, Spread, Radius, etc). The issue here is that players are *incredibly* skilled at maximizing the benefits and minimizing the penalties of feats such as these.

Which is the case for every feat in the book

 

[drgonlovr2]

Also, in my experiences, most arcane casters go, " Screw you, i'll find other friends" and blast the people anyway. So, they most likey wouldn't want to take any chances missing something. In my experience, spellcasters would rather be too safe than not safe enough.