Need help with metamagic feat idea

[Matthias]

Here is the key concept: a metamagic that causes a spell that would normally do nothing on a successful save to have a minor penalty on the target, for 1 round at most.

For example, with Blindness/Deafness a made save with this metamagic could impose a -2 to Perception checks related to the targeted sense

The drawback I feel ought to be a -1 or -2 to the DC to save against the spell. I am not sure if the feat should add a spell level.

I envision this metamagic to be vagely like Power Aattack, but for spells. Better chance of getting something for your trouble, even if you give up the full bang for your buck

The other problem is what does the feat do exactly to the spell? The exact effect would vary from spell to spell and the GM would need to approve the 'minor effects' to make sure they are not overpowered for a spell failure for any spell of its level.

I can also see how someone might think the very concept needs improvement, but this forum is good for analysis and critique so any advice is welcome.

 

[paradox42]

I like the concept, but it looks (to me) to be ridiculously difficult without a skill-based spellcasting system. Power Attack is easy because its mechanic can be simple: just lower your attack bonus, and BANG! More damage! Spells are either all-or-nothing, or all-or-half, depending on the save result and the spell's specific function. So implementing a sliding scale of power will require major changes.

 

[BriarMonkey]

Just off the top of my head, I'd say that a feat like this would have to use a higher spell slot - at a minimum 1, and mayhaps 2. The reason is that you are now granting a spell an effect, regardless of the saving throw being successful or not. This means that the spell caster will always have an detrimental effect on the target, despite how good (or bad) their saves are.

As for the sliding scale and various effects for the vast array of spells out there, you could codify it somewhat by having a miss effect key off of either the type of spell (necromancy, enchantment, etc.); the predominant energy used by the spell (fire, unholy, necromantic, etc.); the predominant effect of the spell (damage, charm, debuff, etc.); or a combination of these. For example, you might say that any spells that use negative energy and are subject to the feat cause the target to become "shaken" even if they succeed on a save; similarly, any spells that use cold or air energy cause a target to become "slowed" on a save; or, any necromantic spells cause a target to become "nauseated" on a save.

Of course, even trying to break down broad categories like this, I think there is a lot of work that needs to be done to ensure that all the categories have somewhat balanced detriments from the feat. Keeping a general guideline of penalties being -1 or at most, -2, for the round, would definitely help to keep things from getting too far into the weeds.

As for the idea itself, I think it definitely has merit and could open some interesting options. But you may also want to think about the stacking of meta-magic feats and whether they would affect this feat as well.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

This idea may be waaaaaay too powerful:

When you learn (Wizard/Cleric) or cast (Sorcerer/Bard) a meta-magicked spell of level N, select another spell of the same school and sub-school that you know (but that you don't necessarily have prepared) of level N-2 max. If your target is not affected by the spell you cast, then the 2nd spell takes effect and the target does not get a saving throw against it.

Both spells must be single-target spells. SR applies in both cases.

AR

 

[Squire James]

Giving the caster that much choice would indeed be too powerful (regarding the "level N-2 spell with no save" feat). Think of a 4th (or 5th) level spell with Hold Person as the secondary with no save...

For the original feat, I would make a series of feats that specifies the extra effect and base it off a fairly major spell type (such as school or spell sub-type). If the secondary effect is fairly weak (i.e. a level 0 or 1) effect, it doesn't raise the level of the spell. If it's stronger than that, raise the spell 1 or 2 levels. Require a feat related to that spell type as a prerequisite (Spell Focus, Elemental Spell, etc.). That way, most wizards would only take 1 or maybe 2 of them (more to keep them unique than for balance). If the "bonus effect" is like a level 1+ spell, "caster level 2X+1, where X is the equivalent spell level" should probably be added as a requirement as well.

If you create more than one feat for a single category, only one can be applied to a particular spell (or maybe allow 2 if an extra +1 is added to spell level).

 

[Matthias]

All the above has been good input. Probably the most elegant way to 'prescribe' a hits-anyway effects (HAEs0) is to key them off spell school, subschool, descriptor type, and so on, perhaps offering one or two posisble effects for each one, but all standardized.

would also confine the HAEs to the power level one expects from alchemical items, perhaps relating them further to a range of alc. item cost (1st-3rd level =~ 0-5 gp, 4th-6th =~ 5-25 gp, 7th-9th level =~ 25 gp and up). The point is entirely valid that a passed save vs. some spell should not rise to the penalty of a failed save of a spell at anywhere near a comparable level. But with this design approach, perhaps a +1 slot adjustment will be necessary, and if the feat is allowed to be applied multiple times for multiple effects, there would be a +1 slot markup for every HAE added.

Thus, a necromantic spell with [evil] and [cold] descriptors could take a necromancy, OR an evil, OR a cold hits-anyway-effect for one application of the metamagic.

With these specifications, the next question becomes whether a caster should be able to take the feat just once and be able to emphasize any school and any descriptor, or should a caster be limited to a certain list of preselected descriptors, not counting spell school, which are chosen when the feat is taken (for example, 3 + magic ability modifier)?

Further, I would not as a rule have other metamagics normally be able to enhance the effects of this feat (i.e. no Maximized HAEs).



How does this look?

Emphasized Spell [this is only a placeholder name, I'm not attached to it or anything]
prereqs: ability to cast magic, magic ability score 13+
effect: Choose a number of spell schools equal to magic ability modifier. You can add a 'hits anyway effect' according to spell school, of any spell you cast from those school. (Caster can choose from a list of standardized effects at the time the metamagic feat is applied.)
Special: Feat can be taken multiple times, no stacking, choose additional schools each time feat is taken, etc.

Improved Emphasized Spell
prereq: Emphasized Spell
effect: similar to parent feat but choose a number of spell descriptors to Emphasize (standardized effects given for each.)

Greater Emphasized Spell
other metamagics can enhance Emphasized Spell HAEs ?

 

[BriarMonkey]

Yeah, I think that looks like a good starting point.

Playtesting will show up any issues with it, particularly when it's used against the characters.

 

[paradox42]

Agreed, but it needs a list of HAEs. One can't playtest this properly without that. Alchemical items aren't standardized as far as I can tell, so pegging the "maximum allowed cost" to them is a difficult way to start.