Metamagic Stacking Question

[Caliban]

The fact that Maximize and Empower do not stack with each other:

1. Sets up a general rule that metamgic effects don't stack like that.
2. Does not in any way contradict Twin Spell from functioning on an Empowered (or Maximized, for that matter) spell.

Wipput is right, there are ONLY two ways this can work without contradicting the very plain language in Twin Spell.

1. Both the original and copy of the spell have the extra metamagic feat applied (empower, maximize, whatever)

or

2. Neither the original or copy have the extra metamagic applied.

I find it highly unlikely that you could do a Twin Spell and then be prohibited from using any other metmagic feats on that spell. Still, to make the feat compatible with 3.5, you could simply add in at the end "... when applying Twin Spell to a spell, no other metamgic feats may be used."

The other choice, which I find more reasonable, would be to allow metamagic effects in conjunction with Twin Spell.

I would not call either a "house rule." I'd call them both rules interpretations - not the same thing as House Rules at all.

Caliban's method of applying the Twin Spell effect of repeating the underlying spell only, excluding any metmagic effects is clearly in violation of the plain language of the Twin Spell feat and cannot be considered to be within the rules as written. The feat cannot be rewritten to support this without fundementally chnaging the feat, for the two spells would no longer be identical.

Caliban's method I would definately call a House Rule because it directly contradicts the language in the Twin Spell feat.

Whatever turns you on. I'm really tired of this discussion.

 

[Li Shenron]

Whatever turns you on. I'm really tired of this discussion.

Oh no, please don't be... this thread was one of the most interesting since quite a long time

No you are ignoring the cost of the Twin feat. +4 for Twin, +2 for Empower.

You pay for one Empower, and one Twin. So you get one Empower and one extra spell.

If you could Empower both fireballs using Twin it would be equivalent of a +8 level increase, not a +6. (An Empower on the base spell, and extra spell from Twin, and an Empower on the duplicate spell as well.)

This would make Twin better than Quicken for most spells.

I try to add some more small considerations to my view...
Twin Spell "doubles" a spell, if you Twin a damaging spell you are doing it to double the damage, what else? The fact that it counts as 2 separate spells and therefore allows for two saves makes the resulting damage closer to the average (smaller variance), but the average and the maximum are both doubled. The cost for doubling the damage is +4, and note that it is the same cost as using Repeat Spell, Energy Admixture and 2 x Empower Spell (when it was possible), which all double the average/max damage.

If I cast an Empowered spell, I get +50% damage. If Empowering a Twin spell worked as you say, I get +50% damage on the single original spell but only +25% on the final. That's also why I don't think it is the right way.

-

Your point with Quicken is effectively correct, if you compare casting a normal spell and the same Quickened in the same round, you are getting the same result as with a Twin Spell but you are paying an extra slot of the base spell level. I know that it sounds a posthumous argument from me, but I really think the unbalanced feat in this in Quicken, which has too much a high cost at +4 and would not be overpowered if it was +3 or even +2 (although in 3.5 it's better because it also prevents AoO).

 

[Hypersmurf]

I really think the unbalanced feat in this in Quicken, which has too much a high cost at +4 and would not be overpowered if it was +3 or even +2 (although in 3.5 it's better because it also prevents AoO).

Casting a Quickened spell doesn't provoke an AoO in 3E or 3.5.

-Hyp.

 

[Li Shenron]

Casting a Quickened spell doesn't provoke an AoO in 3E or 3.5.

-Hyp.

I thought it was a 3.5 addition... I would have probably noticed if anyone had taken Quicken Spell in our 3.0 days

 

[Hypersmurf]

I thought it was a 3.5 addition...

Nope.

-Hyp.