Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majere" data-source="post: 1388323" data-attributes="member: 13916">Im going to have to go with.. Caliban your talking our your bum. Why ?Because you habitually and repeatedly contradict yourself.Let us scrutanize your first argument:1) Twin/repeat copies only the BASE spell.Firstly this is based entirely on your interpretation of what the word "original" means in the blurd of repeat spell. As far as I can tell there is no definition of "original spell" in any book ever printed. Therefore your assertion that the "original" spell is the base spell before metamagics is entirely your own reading. I think 99% of people when face with this wording would simply read it as "the same spell is cast again". And I quote"Read the feat, Twin causes the spell to be cast a second time""A repeated spell is automatically case again at the beginning of your next turn in the round"Yes quite, the spell is cast a second time, in EXACTLY THE SAME FORM as the original. The only reason the word original is used is to differentiate the first and second spell, the first definates the location of the second. the word original does NOT in anyway imply the "base" spell (another term with no definition of any book I have ever read).And in evidence I bring point 2)2) You habitually contradict yourselfHaving asserted that the feets do not see themselves and that each meta magic feat only affects the "base" spell, you now have to deal with some veryvery clear problems with this definition. Eg. An enlarged cold fire ball would, by the rules you just defined, only do cold damage to the limit of the "base" spell, after this it does fire because the cold damage substitution only affects the original spell with its original range.This is clearly going to lead to manymany problems, extended maximized spells that do maximum damage for the base period then switch to rolled damage, enlarged silent spells that are only silent if they are cast witin their original "base" range.To get out of this you NOW assert that "They affect differnet parts of the spell"- WHAOH NELLY !!!Where did you get that from, where in ANY book is the term "parts of a spell" defined. Again you are making this up as you go along. First you claim the feats ONLY affect the "base" (sic) spell, then you claim that they affect each other as long as they are differnet parts of the spell. WHERE ARE YOU GETTING THIS FROM ?Least of all you have contradicted yourself, because the very examples you state the two metamagic feats are NOT affecting the "base" spell seperately but clearly acting on each other.And no: "They affect different aspects of the spell" is not a valid get out, you are making this up. "Aspects of a spell" is not a term used in any published work ever, and certainly not put down that MM feats that affect different "aspects" stack. Stop inventing this rubbish.I fail to see one SHRED of any evidence for the terms "base" "original" "part of a spell" or "aspect". There are all terms you have made up yourself and therefor are not usable to support any argument. Your original argument of "base" spells leads to some clearly ridiculous situation, at which point you come up with the ever more spurious argument of "parts of a spell". Im afriad that it is clear that 1) Meta magic feats do stack and they affect each other.2) This does no in anyway cause them to become dependant on the order of applying the feats.To deal with the examples:a) Twinned cold fireball-Cold then twin: The twinned fireball is converted to the cold type, and then this COLD fireball twinned.Result: two cold fireballs-Twin then cold: I twin the cold fireball, I now have two fireball to which the cold subtype was applied. The two fireballs are BOTH converted to cold damageResult: two cold fireballs. b)Twin Empowered MM -Twin then Emp: I twin the empowered MM, giving me two empowered MM's I then apply the Empower to BOTH MM's.Result: Two empowered MM's-Emp then Twin: I change the MM to empowered MM, I then twin the empowered MM. Result: Two empowered MM'sI think those two will suffiec to show that, with thought, the order is spurious.3) The empower maximize example is an EXCEPTION, not a rule.Without this being in print most people would reasonably maximize the extra dice from empower. This line was put in because this particular combination is the EXCEPTION.No where in this example are the term "base" or "original" spell used. Because these terms do not exist outside of your head.Please stop filling this thread with your bunk intill you can provide self consistant rules based on print and not your imagination.Majere</blockquote>

Verification