Sculpt Spell or Persist Spell?

[Herzog]

I'm looking for some advise.

Next level (11), my Sorcerer/Wizard/Ultimate Magus is getting a bonus Metamagic Feat.

I'm currently in doubt whether to take Sculpt Spell or Persist Spell.

Sculpt Spell will help me out re-shaping spells to better fit the circumstances (changing a line of sonic energy into a ball for example) while Persist would allow me to change several short-time buffs into long time buffs.

I'm inclined to take Persist, but it has the additional drawback that I won't be able to use it until lvl 12, when I can take Practical Metamagic (Persist Spell) AND gain the necessary 5th lvl spellslot(s)

(sidenote: Ultimate Magus let's you buy off metamagic applied to spells of one class by sacrificing the required increase in spell level as a spellslot from the other class)

As I've never been in the position to use either Sculpt Spell or Persist Spell, I'm having trouble determining their relative power. (and whether Persist is worth it delaying use another level AND spending a second feat)

Any thoughts?

 

[Shin Okada]

In my experience, the effectiveness of Persist Spell depends largely on how often you are subject to dispelling. You invest much resources to make one spell lasts for 24 hrs/day and one cast of greater dispel magic may ruin that effort. (and counter de-buffs. Haste can be automatically dispelled by Slow and as a DM I like this trick much).

At higher level, you will tend to meet a lot of outsiders who can cast dispel magic or even greater dispel magic at-will. Also, both as PC/NPC spellcasters, dispelling is often the best move as both sides tend to be using tons of buff spells. The frequency will depend largely on each DM's taste. But in my previous campaign, many of the combats which involved spell casters and/or spell-like ability users were like buff/de-buff war.

If I were you I will take Sculpt Spell (or other metamagic feat) first, as it is useful at this level. And it will be useful even if your DM likes to use dispelling often.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Personally, I'm a big fan of Sculpt spell, especially for spontaneous casters. It makes you a lot more flexible in your target selection.

 

[jefgorbach]

I'd favor Sculpt for its immediate usefulness in increasing you (and the party's) odds of reaching future levels, esp since Persistence's downfall is the underlying effects are subject to being Dispelled, which becomes a common tactic at higher levels.

If you have access to Dragon237, convince the GM Teratism should be applicable to any creature, not just base animals since it explains the numerous creatures invented over the ages. When opportunity presents itself, learn the Teratism spells and permanently endow the party with the low level buffs as innate spell-like-abilities. This way each member only needs enchanted once per ability (instead of daily) and dispelling merely renders an ability inert for a few rounds instead of permanently removed as with Persistence.

 

[Malachei]

I'd say it depends...

If you are planning to enter the Archmage PrC, you can get Sculpt Spell at will and without a level adjustment with the Mastery of Shaping High Arcana.

But I'm not a big fan of Persist Spell, either, mainly because of the dispel issue Shin Okada has pointed out above, but also because I think that higher-level spell slots can be pretty valuable. If you can do spell research, I'd rather create a new, longer-lasting protection or divination spell in a higher spell level than persist a low-level spell. Granted, there are some who love it, and there is also some Persist Spell metamagic cheese (but I don't like cheese that much).

Finally, it depends on your playing and campaign style. If you're often subject to surprise attacks or long adventuring days, Persist might be a plus. If not, I'd definitely favor Sculpt, unless you are planning to become an Archmage.