Please rate Widen Spell

[Marshall]

The Enlarge Spell feat has a much better cost/benefit ratio for spells whose area of effect is dependent upon range, specifically, those with conical areas of effect.

Or even some non-conical effects like Bless or most of the Divinations or some emanations or....

+3 is wayyy to much, I gave it a two. Change it to +1 and it gets a six.

 

[Corwin the Confused]

bump

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Hmmm, in campaigns with mass battles the +3 level is just fine, in dungeon crawl campaigns it is way too high. I like having mass battles, using a modified Open Mass Combat System from Mongoose publishing, with a modifier for size of spell, so I like the level adjustment.

Definitely a case of varying mileage...

The Auld Grump

 

[Kraedin]

It seems like you'd be better off triple-Enlarging a cone spell in mass combats.

 

[Plane Sailing]

One of the first metamagic feats I created in my campaign was "Expand Spell", which is basically like widen spell except it doubled area (for spells which state an area in 10ft cubes, for instance) or adds 50% to radius of spells with a circular area. I rated it at +1, because I saw it as being functionally equivalent to Enlarge Spell, and basically would only be useful on large battlefields or for clearing out more mooks, which is fine with me.

I was astonished to see "Widen" appear with a +3 rating. How on earth did they consider a slightly bigger fireball radius being as effective as a fireball which was guaranteed to do 60 damage? No contest!

I give the Widen Spell as written a "1", because they priced it right out of the market. At only a +1 level adjustment I'd rate it "5" - useful, neither a must have or must miss, just plain useful and might or might not be taken by any arcanist.

Cheers

 

[Shard O'Glase]

sucks, I gave it a 3 and i'm being nice because I like the style of it. But at +3 levels it just isn't worth it.

Hey this may poll get added meaning since this was the one feat they added to 3.5. If its still at +3 levels they screwed up.

 

[AuraSeer]

Yeah, I'm expecting the 3.5 version to cost only +2 or even +1. I hope they change Enlarge, too.

What I hope is that 3.5 Enlarge will affect only range, not area of effect, even for cones. To get the effect of the 3.0 Enlarge on a cone, you'd apply both 3.5 Enlarge plus Widen. Or, you could apply only Widen, to make a cone with the same range but covering a wider angle.

I've no idea if this is anywhere close to what they've actually done, though.