Hawken said:
and I will go down yours. The key theme here is that you seem to imply (or I infer) that you think metamagic is useless unless is benefits a wizard character in combat.
You seem to ignore that sorcerers benefit greatly (more than wizards) from metamagic. Also given the number of caster classes in the game, and especially the need for specialized NPCs there are many feats (metamagic and non-metamagic) that are really made for them. A paladin tha wants his bless to last twice as long might want to take extend, none of my paladin characters mind you but still, one might want to do it.
Hawken said:
Empower Spell: You're able to improve a low level spell's performance by 50% by casting it at 2 levels higher. This is never as good as casting the spell twice. Variables rolled tend to an average result somewhere in the middle, which means that your Empowered Fireball may do 45-50 points instead of around 30-35 and you're using a 5th level slot. It may seem like a pay-off when you roll high and do around 75 points damage, but there are 5th level spells that are often more effective and if you roll low and only get 15-20 damage, that is only increased to maybe an average result. This isn't nearly as effective as the higher level spell that cannot be prepared because of this.
It is true that average results are, well, average. The more dice (10d6 vs. 6d6) the greater likelyhood of an average result. A regression toward the mean. Empower is awesome. And for the record, most metamagics are not as good as casting the spell twice -- I really don't get your point there. Two fireballs are better than one empowered fireball -- true but not as good as two empowered fireballs, or one empower fireball and one not.
Hawken said:
Enlarge Spell: This one is probably one of the least useless of the metamagic feats, doubling range for an increase of only 1 level. However, combat spells tend to already have very good ranges, so the usefulness there is almost moot. Other spells with shorter ranges can always benefit from this, except for touch spells which can't be doubled anyway. Most spells with a short range are short ranged for a reason. Charm type spells for example require interaction with the caster. That can't happen if they are too far away.
I disagree (again)
"Most combat spells have good ranges"? But given the Hp of sorcerer types isn't more distance your friend? Also, there are plenty of good non combat spells that benefit from an extended range. And finally from the SRD:
SRD said:
A spell’s range indicates how far from you it can reach, as defined in the Range entry of the spell description. A spell’s range is the maximum distance from you that the spell’s effect can occur, as well as the maximum distance at which you can designate the spell’s point of origin. If any portion of the spell’s area would extend beyond this range, that area is wasted.
In other words if you were to cast a fireball so the point of origin were at the extreme limit of your range you would instead make a fire hemisphere.
Hawken said:
Extend Spell: This is a good idea in theory and but is even more useless than most other metamagics. You're doubling duration for casting it 1 level higher. This is nothing that couldn't be solved by casting the spell a second time instead. A wizard with a ring of wizardry (or similar item) can use that item for a free second casting of ANY spell of a particular level and wouldn't need to spend one of his few feats on this.
Trade off : A)casting one level 2 spell or B)cast two level 1 spells. A takes fewer spell slots. A takes fewer actions. And, if the base spell were level 3 instead of level 1 then you look at casting one level 4 slot and saving both of those level 3 slots for fireballs (or what not).
Hawken said:
Heighten Spell: This is the WORST of all metamagic feats. You prepare it at a higher level for all the benefits of casting it at a higher level. Why would a wizard spend a feat on this when they could do it on their own without wasting a feat? Spell research. They want a magic missile that can beat a globe of invulnerability, do the research. The wizard would end up with a spell that would be even better than the lower level spell while still doing the same thing.
Everything you said is true. However, If you want to increse the save of the spell without forever taking away one of your known spells of X level then Heighten is the way to go.
An example
Spells have a save of 10 + spell level + caster's ability modifier
An 18th level sorcerer with a CHA of 26 casts charm person:
As a first level spell is has a DC of 10 + 1 + 8 = 19
As a ninth level spell is has a DC of 10 + 9 + 8 = 27
An 18th level fighter, ranger, barbarian, rogue has a will save of +6 lets add +3 from having an effect Wisdom of 16 from magic or whatever.
Saving against a first level charm person they have to roll a 10+ (55% success)
Saving against a ninthe level charm person they have to roll an 18+ (15% success)
Hawken said:
Maximize Spell: The price on this is too expensive. It is utterly wasteful on any spell less than 3rd level and on any spell higher than 3rd level, the higher level slot that is getting taken over could be used for a spell that is more effective anyway. A maximized fireball might be demoralizing to an army of orcs, but it would be even more devastating when the leader of those orcs was disintegrated or turned to stone or if acid cloud, chain lightning or circle of death ripped through them!
True. But the wizard would have to have those other spells prepared, and a sorcerer would have to know those other spells. I do not like maximize as much as empower but it has it's place.
Hawken said:
Quicken Spell: Casting two spells in one round is an awesome thing for any wizard, but again the amount of spell level increase makes it too much to be worthwhile. A spell adjusted this way will be one of the highest level spells a mid level wizard can cast and seems rather anti-climatic or overkill to throw out a good 4th or 6th level spell and then snap out a 1st or 2nd right after it. It might be good for a surprise, to catch someone off guard, allow for a quick escape or something, but a dimension door would work better than a quickened expeditious retreat.
Just because there are some feats that casters would only want to take at higher levels does not make them bad feats.
And in your example above, you seemed to express casting the high level spell first, then casting a quickened spell. How about the other way around? Cast quickened Magic missile then an empowered lightning bolt. Or quickened grease followed by Wall of stone, or quickened true strike followed by disentegrate.
Hawken said:
Silent and Still Spells: These are both neat ideas but shouldn't involve any level adjusting of the spell at all. The power level and function of the spell is not being adjusted one iota, it is only allowing the caster to disregard one of the components (verbal or somatic). This should be done by maybe extending the casting time to a full round or two rounds even or losing a slot of equal level at best.
All excellent suggestions for alternative rule play. Given their greater number of spell slots, sorcerers pay little to cast Silent and Still versions of their spells.
Hawken said:
Widen Spell: See comments on Maximize Spell.
Widen would change a fireball to include a 40 foot radius spread.
A normal fireball cast in a area with no obstructions would fill a volume of :
4/3 * pi * r^3 or
4/3*pi* 8000 = 32000/3 * pi = 10666*pi cubic feet.
A widened fireball would fill a volume of
4/3 * pi * 40^3 =
4/3 * pi * 64000 =
256000/3 * pi
85333 * pi cubic feet
An area eight times as much. That means you could cast 8 fireballs for the price of casting one widened fireball.
And for fairness sake, since most of the time you would not be fighting in a 3d environment were there are bad guys in exactly the right spot, let us look at a fireball in terms of area, that is if there were a horde or orcs all on a flat surface.
The area of a normal fireball is pi * r^2 or
400*pi square feet
The area of a widened fireball is
40 ^ 2 * pi
1600 * pi square feet.
so, it's like four fireballs for the price of casting one at a +3 level adjustment.
Hawken said:
The one factor that makes all these metamagics useless is that the caster can research spells at a higher level that would do these things and likely more since they would be a higher level. Yes, research takes time and money, but, honestly, how many different spells is a wizard going to empower or silence? Yes, it all depends on circumstance, but the wizard won't know that circumstance until he is already in it, then he better have the correct spell for the situation adjusted or his feat and the spell he prepared is useless. No, not only useless, but wasteful as a higher level spell more appropriate to the situation could have been used instead.
A lot of trouble could be avoid just by an extra casting of the spell that would be altered too, instead of adjusting it with metamagic and forfeiting being able to cast a more powerful spell.
All wizards all of the time, sigh. Sorcerers do not have infinite known spells. And Wizards do not have infinite spell books (well, maybe yours do).
Hawken said:
I've house ruled for my games that wizards that take metamagic feats get one free use of the feat per day--free of level adjustment. I've had plenty of wizards play but none of them have ever taken or wanted to take a metamagic feat, unless it was a mandatory requirement for another feat, ability or prestige class; and then, it was never used, only just to meet the requirement.
Then you must have some boring wizards.
I also liked the "Sculpt Spell" feat, also from 3.0's TOME AND BLOOD, which lets you adjust the shape of area-effect spells to a certain extent.
It will make life A LOT easier for him.
