Twin Spell Metamagic Feat

[Patlin]

Complete Arcane, p. 84. Effected spell is cast twice at the same time and target or area. +4 levels to cast.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Not even waiting for discussion, YES. This is an absolute no-brainer.

 

[stonegod]

Ah, the feat every blastificer wants. Fair warning, if this goes in, it'll be on every artificer's list for wand damage.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Ah, the feat every blastificer wants. Fair warning, if this goes in, it'll be on every artificer's list for wand damage.

That's because the Artificer is broken with wands, with or without this feat. I'm hoping we can reach a solution for that in some other way because the fact that the artificer's broken ability breaks a feat like Twin is in no way the fault of Twin (or Energy Admixture. Or Quicken. Etc)

 

[stonegod]

That's because the Artificer is broken with wands, with or without this feat. I'm hoping we can reach a solution for that in some other way because the fact that the artificer's broken ability breaks a feat like Twin is in no way the fault of Twin (or Energy Admixture. Or Quicken. Etc)

Actually, I see it as the opposite (CA breaking the ECS) as the former was released after the later.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Twin Spell existed far before Complete Arcane. It was just reprinted without changes. The Artificer ability was already broken without Twin Spell, and if you consider CA to be breaking the ECS, I would say that places an unfair burden on all supplements that effectively requires all metamagic feats that are perfectly balanced for their intended users (normal casters) due to a level increase to be considered unbalanced because a class was created that could use them without limit without paying anything for it except gold.

Forcing the Artificer to only be able to add in one Metamagic feat per round fixes all the current problems and problems with later metamagic feats as well. It's powerful to be able to twin the wand, but not gamebreaking (and you could already just Quicken it and then cast again for one more charge than twinning). And it's not like anyone would typically want to add more than one per round unless they were trying to cheese out the Artificer.

 

[Patlin]

Forcing the Artificer to only be able to add in one Metamagic feat per round fixes all the current problems and problems with later metamagic feats as well.

Drat, I'm obviously not trying hard enough... adding more than one metamagic feat at a time hadn't even occurred to me. Seems fair to me that a wand should only be allowed one metamagic item infusion at a time, and that the class ability use-extra-charges bit should only be allowed to be used once per round, but I think it'd be fair to let these two seperate things work together. That's a completely different proposal, though.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Drat, I'm obviously not trying hard enough... adding more than one metamagic feat at a time hadn't even occurred to me. Seems fair to me that a wand should only be allowed one metamagic item infusion at a time, and that the class ability use-extra-charges bit should only be allowed to be used once per round, but I think it'd be fair to let these two seperate things work together. That's a completely different proposal, though.

I agree that if they use the class ability *and* the infusion they should be able to get two. I just don't think they should be able to get twelve all at once with the class ability alone and then blow through half the wand to do ridiculous damage (Twinned Energy Admixtured Quickened + Twinned Energy Admixtured Scorching Ray == 96d6, and then with Dual Wand Wielder you can do another 48d6)

 

[Knight Otu]

Forcing the Artificer to only be able to add in one Metamagic feat per round fixes all the current problems and problems with later metamagic feats as well. It's powerful to be able to twin the wand, but not gamebreaking (and you could already just Quicken it and then cast again for one more charge than twinning). And it's not like anyone would typically want to add more than one per round unless they were trying to cheese out the Artificer.

That's the fix I suggested in the Sharn thread, isn't it?

Anyway, I think Twin Spell is OK. Yes.

 

[Ferrix]

I vote Yes on twin spell.