|
| 90 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Recently I have seen several threads where problems have arisen with the term "spell level" when used in conjunction with metamagic feats.
People constantly cite "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot." to say that:
- lesser metamagic rods can be used in conjunction with metamagiched 1-3 level spells, even if the modified level is well above third level (like a quickened fireball);
- the concentration check to cast metamagiched spells is based on the original level of the spell, not the current level;
- a magus can recall a empovered shocking grasp with 1 arcana point as what matter is the unmodified level of the spell;
- I haven't jet see someone claiming that a pearl of power will recall a spell based on its original level but I am sure someone will make that argument too.
Maybe they are right in some or all of those examples, but I think it need a clarification as "spell level" is often used in a interchangeable way with "spell slot", so please hit the FAQ button.
The question:
The phrase "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot." is in reference to the DC of a spell, its ability to bypass a protective spell that only stop up to a specific level of spells, the casting stat requirement and what spell slot you need to counter it when using some abilities or it extend to the DC of the concentration checks, what metamgic rods can affect it, to the cost of recalling the spell through the use of class ability (spell recall) or magic items (pearl of powers)?
FAQ'd.
|
|
About the Pearl of power thing, note the wording of the runestone of power:
Once per day, a spontaneous caster can draw upon a runestone of power to cast a spell—doing so is part of the spellcasting action, and expends that runestone’s power for the day rather than one of the spellcaster’s actual spell slots for the day. An expended runestone of power recharges its capacity after 24 hours. The spell must be of a particular level, depending on the runestone.
It power the spell slot, it is not dependent on the spell level. If Pearl of powers count the original spell level and not the modified spell level the Runestone become significantly weaker in comparison.
For discussion I am quoting the relevant passages:
Lesser and Greater Metamagic Rods: Normal metamagic rods can be used with spells of 6th level or lower. Lesser rods can be used with spells of 3rd level or lower, while greater rods can be used with spells of 9th level or lower.
So, it appears the key phrase is Spells of X Level. It is not unreasonable to take this to mean Spell Level.
Casting Defensively: If you want to cast a spell without provoking any attacks of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 15 + double the level of the spell you’re casting) to succeed. You lose the spell if you fail.
So, level of the spell in this case. However, in the chart it states 'spell level'.
Spell Recall (Su): At 4th level, the magus learns to use his arcane pool to recall spells he has already cast. With a swift action he can recall any single magus spell that he has already prepared and cast that day by expending a number of points from his arcane pool equal to the spell’s level (minimum 1). The spell is prepared again, just as if it had not been cast.
Again, spell level.
This seemingly normal pearl of average size and luster is a potent aid to all spellcasters who prepare spells (clerics, druids, rangers, paladins, and wizards). Once per day on command, a pearl of power enables the possessor to recall any one spell that she had prepared and then cast that day. The spell is then prepared again, just as if it had not been cast. The spell must be of a particular level, depending on the pearl. Different pearls exist for recalling one spell per day of each level from 1st through 9th and for the recall of two spells per day (each of a different level, 6th or lower).
The Pearl of Power is less clear, it does not directly state spell level but it does seem to mean spell level.
Spells modified by a metamagic feat use a spell slot higher than normal. This does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up. Metamagic feats do not affect spell-like abilities.
By all appearances, things based on spell level and not the level of spell slot would use the base spell level. In some cases (Metamagic Rods) I don't see this as a problem but I clearly see this as a problem for Concentration, Magus' spell recall, and especially Pearls of Power.
FAQ'd.
- Gauss
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
FAQ clicked. If PDT decides that my Magus can recall Maximized Intensified Shocking Grasp for only 1 Arcane Point, then I think I may hang up my scimitar. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My opinion: While the metamagic feat does not modify the spell level for things like save DC, in order to recall the spell in its modified form you would need to 'pay' the modified spell level.
|
My opinion: While the metamagic feat does not modify the spell level for things like save DC, in order to recall the spell in its modified form you would need to 'pay' the modified spell level.
My opinion agrees. What actually gets 'spent' is the spell slot. A wizard who prepares the fireball with metamagic so that it uses a 6th-level slot is still casting a third level spell for most calculations, but is using one of his 6th level slots. So it would require a 6th-level pearl of power to recall it. It is unfortunate that the language is so close in how it is used, requiring a great deal of context sensitivity.
My opinions:
Metamagic Rods are based on the Spell Level before other Metamagic Feats are applied (excepting Heighten Spell which modifies the actual spell level.
Concentration checks, Magus' Spell Recall, and Pearl of Power should be based on Spell Slot (or Modified Spell Level).
- Gauss
I believe the wording here is pretty clear, especially in light of the fact that Heighten Spell exists. Spell level means spell level, not spell slot. The only thing that creates a "modified spell level" is Heighten Spell, and abilities that refer to "spell level" refer to exactly that.
@Diego, nicely covered.
For clarity/completeness it would be nice to also see answered succinctly. Does a spell prepared in a higher level spell slot (without applying any metamagic feats) follow the same rules?
@Lord Pendragon. There a number of places in the rules where the text says "spell level" when it is meant as "spell slot level". I [url]http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pyvz&page=2?Using-Rods-with-Metamagically- Enhanced-Spells]cover it in this thread over several posts[/url]. This shows a clear ambiguity in the term which leaves open the question in cases where it is not obviously meant to mean spell slot level does it always mean spell level, or should some of those also mean spell slot level - which is basically what the FAQ is asking for clarification on.
My opinions:
Metamagic Rods are based on the Spell Level before other Metamagic Feats are applied (excepting Heighten Spell which modifies the actual spell level.Concentration checks, Magus' Spell Recall, and Pearl of Power should be based on Spell Slot (or Modified Spell Level).
- Gauss
Actually, I'd go for 'required spell slot' rather than 'used slot' for Concentration checks, Magus' Spell Recall, and Pearl of Power.
I have zero problems with a wizard preparing a vanilla Fireball in one of his level 7 slots (for whatever reason), and using a mere level 3 PoP to recall it.
I do have problems with the same wizard recalling a Quickened Fireball with a level 3 PoP.
Good point Midnight_Angel. Thanks
- Gauss
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
FAQ'ed. Here's what I really think the rule should be for metamagic spell sdjustments:
A metamagic enhanced spell counts as the higher spell level in every way that doing so would a disadvantage: concentration checks, spell recall items and abilities, using metamagic rods, etc. The spell counts as its original level whenever being higher level would be an advantage: save DCs, globe of invulnerability, levels used by spell turning, etc.
It's simple and easy to use in 99% of situations, and prevents most "abuse."
FAQ'd. I have my opinion but the wording is not as clear as it could be. Simply consistently using "spell level" and "spell slot used" in the rules would be sufficient to clear up any confusion.
Not an official FAQ answer, and it only answers one specific question posed in this thread.
But SKR says this about defensive casting concentration DC.
I took it to work how Gauss laid it out.
Idk, I thought all of this was intentional.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The phrase "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot."
How is that not clear? The sole exeption is clearly and explicitly cited in Heighten Spell.
An empowered fireball can also be maximized with a Lesser Rod of Maximised Spell. Why? Because the fireball is a 3rd level spell. The fact that it is empowered only means you need a heigher level slot to memorise it. In all ways it is still used and affected like a third level spell as stated clearly and unambiguously in the description of metamagic.
The phrase "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot."How is that not clear? The sole exeption is clearly and explicitly cited in Heighten Spell.
An empowered fireball can also be maximized with a Lesser Rod of Maximised Spell. Why? Because the fireball is a 3rd level spell. The fact that it is empowered only means you need a heigher level slot to memorise it. In all ways it is still used and affected like a third level spell as stated clearly and unambiguously in the description of metamagic.
The 'problem' (if it is one) comes in when you take into factor magic items and class features that allow you to recall spells. A 13th level Magus with Magical Lineage and Metamagic Master on Shocking Grasp could prepare an a maximized intensified empowered Shocking Grasp ((1st level spell + 1 [intensified] + 2 [empowered] + 3 [maximized]) - 1 [Magical Lineage] - 1 [Metamagic Master] = 5), and then recall it using Improved Spell Recall for a single arcane point.
At 13th, you'd like have 10 arcane points minimum, which would add up to - and someone check my math - 990 damage* from a single spell slot and arcane points alone?
*(60*11*1.5)=990. That's assuming no crits. Assume to 2 crits across 11 attacks, that goes up to 1170 damage...
At 13th, you'd like have 10 arcane points minimum, which would add up to - and someone check my math - 990 damage* from a single spell slot and arcane points alone?
*(60*11*1.5)=990. That's assuming no crits. Assume to 2 crits across 11 attacks, that goes up to 1170 damage...
Seems like a lot, doesn't it? I've seen this a couple times recently. It's not so much if you spread it out over the number of rounds it would actually take to deliver this damage, and compare it to the damage other classes can do.
What RAW does is give the magus some staying power. If you house rule that the magus must pay for spell slot, it would take his entire arcane pool to recall that Shocking Grasp twice. And that's with Magical Lineage and Metamagic Master. He couldn't recall it more than *once* without both of those specific traits.
The rules seem pretty clear, and the magus hardly seems overpowered compared to the things I see on these forums every day from other classes.
Seems like a lot, doesn't it? I've seen this a couple times recently. It's not so much if you spread it out over the number of rounds it would actually take to deliver this damage, and compare it to the damage other classes can do.
What RAW does is give the magus some staying power. If you house rule that the magus must pay for spell slot, it would take his entire arcane pool to recall that Shocking Grasp twice. And that's with Magical Lineage and Metamagic Master. He couldn't recall it more than *once* without both of those specific traits.
The rules seem pretty clear, and the magus hardly seems overpowered compared to the things I see on these forums every day from other classes.
It does seem like a lot, consideirng that by 13th level he could have easily picked up 10 or so 1st level pearls of power, and could do twice that - and also considering that after doing all that, the Magus still has at minimum 17 spells left, all of which he could use to cast intensified Shocking Grasp...
For a class that, at least in my experience, is far from lagging behind in DPR without this, it's not only a power boost, it's an incredibly imbalanced power boost.
Second, theoretical damage never tells the whole story. For example, the backstab class feature can allow a twf rogue to do 403,200 d6 of damage a day. (4 attacks / round, 7d6 / attack) but no one ever calls the rogue broken.
Well, if we remove the crits, it's not theoretical; unless you die, or something stupid like grab a potion with a spell charged, you are going to do 990 damage with this combination.
Comparing it to what a Rogue might be able to do given the perfect circumstances isn't really a good comparison. A better comparison would require a hypothetical: If you could deal a guaranteed 1848 damage from dice alone as a Rogue*, would you consider it overpowered?
*Limiting this to 11 rounds just like the Magus, and assuming that like the Magus, you have the capacity to not only get all four attacks a round, but that you always get sneak attack and maximize the damage.
The phrase "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot."How is that not clear? The sole exeption is clearly and explicitly cited in Heighten Spell.
An empowered fireball can also be maximized with a Lesser Rod of Maximised Spell. Why? Because the fireball is a 3rd level spell. The fact that it is empowered only means you need a heigher level slot to memorise it. In all ways it is still used and affected like a third level spell as stated clearly and unambiguously in the description of metamagic.
This should include the concentration DC to cast a metamagic'd spell right?
Mmm, that means for example that the DC to casting defensively is higher for a metamagic spell?That's my understanding.
(Overall, metamagic isn't very good, IMO, in that its drawbacks overcompensate for its benefits.)
In an unofficial answer "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level" doesn't appear to have the same clear meaning for everyone.
*(60*11*1.5)=990. That's assuming no crits. Assume to 2 crits across 11 attacks, that goes up to 1170 damage...
Anyone dumping that much resources into a shocking grasp should also be crit fishing. I'd put the crit rate closer to 30% (or 3.3 crits per 11 attacks).
This is based on after BAB, weapon enhancements, and possible party buffs targeting a moderate AC needing a natural 11+ on the d20 to hit. 15-20 crit range giving a 60% chance of all hits to threaten (of the first attack in your iterative which should be the one you are trying to release your SG through). And a 50% chance of all threatens to confirm - for a 30% crit rate.
Such a magus should also take the increase arcane pool feat, for 2 more AP. A ring of arcane mastery for another 4. And should invest in a headband of vast intellect for another 1-2. I'd also recommend a wyroot spear for CgD's on helpless enemies, assuming your GM doesn't rule that CdG doesn't count as a confirmed crit - you won't get a lot of points back (unless your GM allows you to cheese by carrying a bag of unconscious rats around), but it will increase longevity of the magus day.
'In all ways' is simply a lie.
They have multiple terms that use 'spell level' and are not clear when one is being used instead of another. Worse they coincide frequently.
Multiple terms...?
|
|
Multiple terms...?'In all ways' is simply a lie.
They have multiple terms that use 'spell level' and are not clear when one is being used instead of another. Worse they coincide frequently.
Multiple pieces of the rules. Generally the context make it clear what is the intended meaning (spell level or spell slot), but sometime it become messy when a writer mean it one way, the Developer reading it interpret it the other way and the players fight on what is the correct interpretation.
- * -
I am happy to see we have got several new hits for the FAQ.
Thanks.
|
|
Generally the context make it clear what is the intended meaning (spell level or spell slot), but sometime it become messy when a writer mean it one way, the Developer reading it interpret it the other way and the players fight on what is the correct interpretation.
Game terms should not need context for a definition.
It create ambiguity where its entire purpose is to create clarity.
I hope that you get errata rather than a FAQ, as really they need to let the dreaded thesaurus run wild in a few places of the rules.
-James
This is one of the times I agree with you james.
I have started playing with the old style boardgames. Initially I used the translated rules, occasionally checking the original version.
After an error too many in the translation of a game term as a common term, specifically [B]Bog]/b] (as a hexagon where a vehicle can get bogged down) as mud (that had a lot of other in game effects) I stopped reading the translations and used only the original version of the rules.
Using bold every time a term is used to mean a specific in game effect can be too much in a rulebook the size of the CRB, as it will slow down reading ans reduce the pleasure in reading it, but consistency is important.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The phrase "In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot."How is that not clear? The sole exeption is clearly and explicitly cited in Heighten Spell.
An empowered fireball can also be maximized with a Lesser Rod of Maximised Spell. Why? Because the fireball is a 3rd level spell. The fact that it is empowered only means you need a heigher level slot to memorise it. In all ways it is still used and affected like a third level spell as stated clearly and unambiguously in the description of metamagic.
So your empowered maximized fireball could be put into a wand priced as a 3rd level spell, right?
'In all ways' is simply a lie.
They have multiple terms that use 'spell level' and are not clear when one is being used instead of another. Worse they coincide frequently.
-James
From the CRB
Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell's higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat).
I'm really hoping to see an answer, but especially hoping that the answer will not be benficial to casters. Being able to use a lesser rod to quicken a maximized fireball just seems too good.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The best way to rule it would be that a metamagic spell counts as its initial spell level, or its adjusted level, whatever is worse for the caster. So things like saving throws would be based off of the initial level, but things like Pearls of Power, concentration checks, and Metamagic Rods use the adjusted level.
I hope they keep allowing rods+metamagic fireballs. That kind of thing is a niche build that does damage and very little of anything else. A caster with persistent SoS's (very little investment) does a lot more than a caster with metamagic stacked fireballs (rather large investment). It's hardly the epitome of tier 1 power and stopping it doesn't do anything to limit their game changing ability. I really don't want to see it ruled against because it's not really a problem. The whole build is stopped by any of multiple 4th level spells.
From the CRB
Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell's higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat).
Hmm, it sounds like general wording based around Heighten Spell and any similar effects printed in later books. Can't tell if RAI it's supposed to be applied to other metamagic...
For items I'd probably allow it but treat for determining the cost of the item as if it used a higher spell level. So you could have a wand of intensified, maximised, empowered fireball but it would cost as if it was a 9th level spell... or something.
From the CRB
Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell's higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat).
Right. And the only metamagic that changes a spells level is heighten. All the rest of them change the spell SLOT level. Now for creation of items RAI is very clear (IMO). Not clear is all the other cases where the rules say spell level when intent was possibly spell SLOT level.
I hope they keep allowing rods+metamagic fireballs. That kind of thing is a niche build that does damage and very little of anything else. A caster with persistent SoS's (very little investment) does a lot more than a caster with metamagic stacked fireballs (rather large investment). It's hardly the epitome of tier 1 power and stopping it doesn't do anything to limit their game changing ability. I really don't want to see it ruled against because it's not really a problem. The whole build is stopped by any of multiple 4th level spells.
Not all choices are equal, or intended to be. The rules should, as much as possible, be straight forward and consistent. I have yet to see anyone show that this has ever been allowed (though a number of people read the rules with that interpretation of intent).
Not all choices are equal, or intended to be. The rules should, as much as possible, be straight forward and consistent. I have yet to see anyone show that this has ever been allowed (though a number of people read the rules with that interpretation of intent).
But if it's not allowed then that isn't consistent by virtue of not using 'spell level' in the same way on a metamagic rod as a metamagic feat.
Tbf, I don't see the confusion or potential multiple meanings of spell level so that's why I asked above what was meant by multiple terms. But.. all I got was clarification that they meant it had multiple meanings/contexts, not what they were. :/
I'd love a real answer on this. Pretty much everyone I've ever played with (myself included) has read pearls of power and metamagic rods as being based on the adjusted level - e.g. you can't maximize a quickened fireball with a lesser rod. Frankly I don't see the argument the other way, other than a comical reading of the RAW rather than RAI.
All the same, I'd love an answer to settle it here.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd love a real answer on this. Pretty much everyone I've ever played with (myself included) has read pearls of power and metamagic rods as being based on the adjusted level - e.g. you can't maximize a quickened fireball with a lesser rod. Frankly I don't see the argument the other way, other than a comical reading of the RAW rather than RAI.
All the same, I'd love an answer to settle it here.
FAQed 55 times so far. I think it is at or near the top of the list.
The problem is that the reply will touch a lot of rules, items and other stuff. It is not something that can be clarified by a 1 row of text, so it will take time.
I created my own thread with this question before being pointed here. Here is hoping this gets answered, and faq'ed it myself
|
|
One thing occurs to me about a wand with a metamagic feat. Suppose I want to buy a wand of Maximized Fireballs. Although Maximized Fireball is a 3rd level spell, it uses a 6th level slot. Therefore (I think) a wizard would need to be at least 11th level to make the wand.
EDIT
Damage: 10d6 maximized
Range: 840 feet
Cost: 750 x 3 x 11 = 24750
Save DC: 10+3+3 = 16 (assuming 3rd level, but 16 INT needed to cast the spell)
|
I'd love a real answer on this. Pretty much everyone I've ever played with (myself included) has read pearls of power and metamagic rods as being based on the adjusted level - e.g. you can't maximize a quickened fireball with a lesser rod. Frankly I don't see the argument the other way, other than a comical reading of the RAW rather than RAI.
All the same, I'd love an answer to settle it here.
Strange... I've always interpreted metamagic rods as only concerned with the base spell level. Order of metamagic enhancement becomes important if you don't.
I agree with pearls of power, however.
I'd love a real answer on this. Pretty much everyone I've ever played with (myself included) has read pearls of power and metamagic rods as being based on the adjusted level - e.g. you can't maximize a quickened fireball with a lesser rod. Frankly I don't see the argument the other way, other than a comical reading of the RAW rather than RAI.
All the same, I'd love an answer to settle it here.
Strange... I've always interpreted metamagic rods as only concerned with the base spell level. Order of metamagic enhancement becomes important if you don't.
I agree with pearls of power, however.
Order would always have to be with feats applied before rods. For a prepared caster you prepare a spell with whatever feats applied without any foreknowledge of whether or not you are also going to use a rod with it. Now a spontaneous caster you might be able to argue that application could be done in either order - but only if you want to give further advantage to the spontaneous caster - which you shouldn't do. The application should be consistent across the board.