Metamagic Stacking Question

[James McMurray]

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.

Yep. But what makes the speicfic case given in Twin Spell any more valid as a general rule than the specific case given in Empower + Maximize?

Nothing at all, both choices are equally good, and should be a DM and players made ecision, until such time as an official answers comes forth from the mouths of otC. After that, some poeople will keep playing the way they did, using a house rule. And that's ok.

 

[Trainz]

Hum... if you cast a Repeated True Strike on a 3rd level fighter weilding a polearm (reach weapon) with improved trip and he trips the critter in front of him and follows with an attack that kills it, then cleaves the critter behind him...

 

[James McMurray]

Hum... if you cast a Repeated True Strike on a 3rd level fighter weilding a polearm (reach weapon) with improved trip and he trips the critter in front of him and follows with an attack that kills it, then cleaves the critter behind him...

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

 

[Caliban]

Hum... if you cast a Repeated True Strike on a 3rd level fighter weilding a polearm (reach weapon) with improved trip and he trips the critter in front of him and follows with an attack that kills it, then cleaves the critter behind him...

True Strike is personal only, you can't cast it on other people.

 

[Artoomis]

Yep. But what makes the speicfic case given in Twin Spell any more valid as a general rule than the specific case given in Empower + Maximize? ...

Feat specific rules overrule the general rules.

There one caveat - If Twinned is a 3.0 feat, then one must look to see if it works in 3.5, and, if not, one must decide how to modify it for 3.5.

 

[James McMurray]

So is Twin spell's duplication of all variables of a spell overriding the general case that metamagic feats don't affect each other, or is Maximize + Empower overriding the general case that they do?

 

[Trainz]

True Strike is personal only, you can't cast it on other people.

I was being facetious.

Sorry.

 

[Wippit Guud]

So is Twin spell's duplication of all variables of a spell overriding the general case that metamagic feats don't affect each other, or is Maximize + Empower overriding the general case that they do?

Well, actually it woud be more

A. You can't twin a spell that has been metamagically changed.
B. You can.

Since the spell doesn't explicitly say A, by the letter of the rules I guess it's B, but itwould be more of a DM's call. Or, go with C and Caliban's interpretation, which is completely viable. I'm just trying to stick to 'rules' rather that 'house rules' when in this forum.

EDIT: Which is not to say Caliban's is a house rule outright, just that I want to determine which rule is the correct rule, by-the-book.

 

[James McMurray]

So given the following two things:

1) Twin spell has a specific rule which states that it duplicates every aspect of a spell (including presumably metamagic).

2) Maximize and Empower have specific rules stating that they do not stack with one another.

You have chosen to believe that Maximize and Empower's specific rule is an exception to the general rule, whereas Twin spell is just stating the general rule.

What makes this any less a house rule than Caliban's position that the oppsite is true, and the Max / Emp is a statement fo the general rule, while Twin Spell is an exception?

Both interpretations are a house rule, because there is no hard and fast rule stating otherwise. It doesn't make either interpretation wrong, but it makes trying to come to a definitive answer in a rules forum fairly difficult.

 

[Artoomis]

So given the following two things:

1) Twin spell has a specific rule which states that it duplicates every aspect of a spell (including presumably metamagic).

2) Maximize and Empower have specific rules stating that they do not stack with one another.

You have chosen to believe that Maximize and Empower's specific rule is an exception to the general rule, whereas Twin spell is just stating the general rule.

What makes this any less a house rule than Caliban's position that the oppsite is true, and the Max / Emp is a statement fo the general rule, while Twin Spell is an exception?

Both interpretations are a house rule, because there is no hard and fast rule stating otherwise. It doesn't make either interpretation wrong, but it makes trying to come to a definitive answer in a rules forum fairly difficult.

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.