Metamagic Stacking Question

[Caliban]

Upon further thought I think this balance argument is a red herring.

A quickened Fireball followed by a Fireball would be 7th and 3rd levels spells.
A twinned Fireball is a 7th level spell.

That's a free 3rd level spell.

Same problem, right?

So, on balance, either Twinned is okay at +4 levels or it's not, other metamagic effects notwithstanding.

I don't have a problem with the Twin Spell feat itself, I see it as a version of Quicken for Sorcerers.

What I should have said it that it's effectively a free empower, which is what I said when this first came up. Or it could be a free maximize, which would be very effective with Scorching Ray.

Twinned Maximized Scorching Ray (assuming all rays hit)

My way = 72+12d6 (same way Maximize + Empower is used)

Hyps way = 144 points (effectively casting two maximized spells in one round)

(of course, Energy Resistance (Fire) would effectively nullify either spell.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

Childish, ain't it!

Oh, I expect I can live with it

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

I don't have a problem with the Twin Spell feat itself, I see it as a version of Quicken for Sorcerers.

What I should have said it that it's effectively a free empower, which is what I said when this first came up. Or it could be a free maximize, which would be very effective with Scorching Ray.

Twinned Maximized Scorching Ray (assuming all rays hit)

My way = 72+12d6 (same way Maximize + Empower is used)

Hyps way = 144 points (effectively casting two maximized spells in one round)

(of course, Energy Resistance (Fire) would effectively nullify either spell.)

True.

However, I don't see a "free" empower being any different, really, than a "free" spell in the first place, assuming that "empower" is balanced at +2 spell level and further assuming that a "free" spell at +4 spell level is balanced, then getting a "free" empowered spell at +4 levels is balanced, too.

Besides, Wippit Guud's quote from the feat locked it up for me.

 

[James McMurray]

Of course, its just as possible that Twin Spell is an exception to an unstated general rule as it is that Empower and Maximize is an exception to an unstated general rule.

 

[Artoomis]

Twin Spell is balanced against Quicken Spell because it has to be the same spell. Thus you give up the versatility of casting a quickened fireball and another spell in order to get two fireballs from one spell slot.

If you allow the twinned fireball to also duplicate all metamagic feats, you end up with someone using a 9th level slot to cast 11 levels worth of metamagic (twin plus two empowers).

I don't follow your math.

3rd level spell, Twinned, Empowered = 9th level: +4, +2 +2 levels of metamagic = 8, not 11 levels worth of metamagic.

If an empowered fireball is equivalent to a 5th level spell, that Twinning it is really no different than getting two 5th level spells, right?

 

[Caliban]

True.

However, I don't see a "free" empower being any different, really, than a "free" spell in the first place, assuming that "empower" is balanced at +2 spell level and further assuming that a "free" spell at +4 spell level is balanced, then getting a "free" empowered spell at +4 levels is balanced, too.

Besides, Wippit Guud's quote from the feat locked it up for me.

Except that it effectively allows you to stack the same metamagic feat twice, which is against the 3.5 rules.

 

[Wippit Guud]

Well, seeing as twin speed isn't 3.5, that arguement is moot. Regardless:

You are still only casting the spell once, not twice.

No feats are stacked. You only casted one, you only used (for this example) empower once.

 

[Artoomis]

Except that it effectively allows you to stack the same metamagic feat twice, which is against the 3.5 rules.

So is having a spell repeat itself.

The Twinned Spell feat requires identical effects the second time the spell goes off. That may, indeed, effectively mean you've use the same metamgic on that spell twice, but you haven't actually done that.

I think the rules are clear (which was not my position 20 minutes ago or so), Twinned Spell requires that the second instance of the spell be identical to the first in every way.

 

[James McMurray]

I don't follow your math.

Sorry, I should have said 8 metamagic levels, 11 total spell levels.

 

[Artoomis]

I don't follow your math.

Sorry, I should have said 8 metamagic levels, 11 total spell levels.

Correction: 8 metamagic levels, 14 total levels 4 + (3+2) + (3+2).