| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't then, by that same logic, mean that you could get free Empower on a Quickened spell? I mean your paying 4 levels for quicken and Empower is only three levels of increase. Why not piggy back?
No. Empower and quicken specifically state a spell takes up a spell slot of 2 or 4 higher levels respectively. A heightened spell does not specify that one must actually increase the spell level to make a heightened spell. It simply states that for all intents and purposes the spell is treated as its heightened level. This is an important distinction. The other metamagic feats all use the term Levels higher than actual level.
Here we have competing definitions of heightened level.
1)The heightened level is equivalent to 1 effective level increment for each level raised through use of Heighten spell.
2)The spell's heightened level is the resulting level after all modifiers from metamagic or any similar effect is applied, regardless of order.
Option 1 leaves heighten spell rather useless when interacting with the metamagic feat system as a whole. Option 2 basically chains the spell save DC to the spell slot used, rather than the spell itself. It removes the whole concept of increasing the spell level incrementally from heighten spell ONLY, because heighten spell never actually STATES that you must increase the spell level. As written, you could put a "Heightened" acid splash into a 0 level spell slot and you would have no mechanical change.
This opens up an incredibly complex amount of choices to casters, who otherwise have little to no character customization options in the feats department that drastically change how the character plays. It is equivalent in effect on gameplay to Rapid Shot, Two-Weapon fighting, or Vital strike, as it opens up a slew of character customization options to arcane casters who effectively have little to no other way to differentiate themselves mechanically from Another_Wizard_01 besides a couple of "+1" feats in spell focus and spell penetration. The other metamagic feats attempt to accomplish variety in spellcasting, but fail. The lower DCs really make the use of metamagic feats (aside from quicken spell) a typically bad idea.
Even if the developers don't intend for heighten spell to be interpreted in the way option 2 presents, a feat that allows this activity should exist. It fixes the entirely broken metamagic system. Two-weapon fighting suffers similar mechanical penalties until the two-weapon fighting feat is taken. It almost fixes the extremely shaky save DC system. It makes a caster's remaining spell slots in a day consistently describe how many DC X, Y, and Z spells they can still cast before resting. That consistency is key. It allows DMs to more accurately gauge the status of the party's firepower in respect to upcoming encounters. That very much makes the DM's job during play. The consistent DCs also make the player's calculations during their action easier. In general, it speeds up combat by removing a large chunk of complex math from the metamagic calculation, and faster combat is good.
Heighten spell is a metamagic that works pretty much exactly like any other metamagic feat. You get a benefit for expending the spell with a spell slot cost increase. The only differences between Heighten and the others is that a heightened spell becomes the level you increase it to for all purposes (which is the whole point of heighten spell) and that the spell slot cost increase is a variable value not static on Heighten.
Well, the bolded part is wrong. It works completely differently from every other metamagic feat. There is no specification anywhere in the feat of a +1 level for a +1 heightened level. You can certainly argue it's implied, but it's never stated. Every other metamagic feat uses a separate paragraph to specifically state the exact manner in which that feat interacts with spell levels. I think it makes just as much logical sense that the heightened level be the level of the spell slot that the spell currently occupies regardless of other modifiers. This should be a clarification errata regardless of which interpretation the devs intended. This interpretation is far more elegant and generates a much simpler rule than the common interpretation. If the devs want to clarify this all they need do is errata in the definition of "heightened level" as either option 1 or option 2. (Or an option 3 I'm not seeing, etc.) I hope that before they do so they play a little with both definitions, and more importantly design encounters under both definitions.
While the second definition is quite a bit more powerful, in my opinion it flat out plays better. Which as far as I'm concerned makes it how I'm going to play it from now on when I'm GMing. If I need to do a little mechanical tweaking to account for it I'll address that as it comes up.
Assuming the second option is not intended, and we're petitioning for an elegant change in the way the system works, I present the following argument: This change doesn't really effect encounters under CR 10, and those are the bulk of the encounters in the Bestiary. Would it affect older modules and adventure content? Yes, but all it's going to do is give a 10-25% higher chance of an arcane caster to be effective in encounters when he has a high level spell slot with a low level customized spell prepared in that slot. They still have to have the spell slots at the appropriate level for the DC, and the real cost of metamagic feats has never been the reduced DC but the fact that you're burning a slot for an empowered fireball that could easily have become a cone of cold if you had spent that feat elsewhere. You're not giving a caster a higher number of super-high DC spells in a day, you're just making sure he always has the same number of high DC spells each day. Consistency makes it easier to gauge a party's ability to deal with challenging fights and makes encounter CR adjustment to fit player skill much less difficult. This strengthens the CR system as a whole, which is good for DMs.
More importantly, it normalizes expected DCs at a given character level. Metamagic without heighten spell makes DCs for a given expenditure of spell slot resources unpredictable. That means that a player who specializes in metamagical alteration of spells can have a drastically different (and almost always lower) amount of high DC spells remaining after a single encounter of an equal CR than a caster who simply uses no metamagic feats. Interpreting heighten spell in the suggested way makes a player's ability to judge their need to rest far less complicated. "How many spells of level X or higher do I have left? If I do not feel I have enough high level spells to affect an even challenge encounter I should rest and recuperate my spells."
A caster who is spending feats to customize their spellcasting should not be forced to penalize themselves for wanting to make their low level spells more interesting. This interpretation does not allow a spell to increase its DC beyond an equivalent level spell, so as far as the monster's concerned there is no difference in the odds to save between the 9th level spell slot used to power a meteor swarm and the 9th level spell slot holding an empowered maximized heightened fireball. The fireball might do slightly more average damage (I think it's something like 11 damage), but they just spent 3 feats to do that. Is that really all that bad for the game?
Heighten a level 1 spell to 2 then the cost is one level.
Heighten a level 2 spell to 7 then the cost is 5 levels.If you heighten any spell to 9th level you cannot add any othe metamagic to the spell. It is a 9th level spell and you don't have spell slots bigger than that in Pathfinder.
This isn't actually the only correct answer. Again, this correct only if you're interpreting "heightened level" as option one. That may well be the intended definition. Option 2 is also currently a valid definition as it also presents a consistant and elegant solution. I also believe it simply makes for better play.
Adding on free metamagic slot expenditures would be double dipping and nowhere in D&D Of PfRPG is there any examople of spell level increase cost being usable for two feats at the same time. Using that logic that means that as long as you quicken a spell for 4 level increase you would get stilled and empower for free too if you have them.
This is a misunderstanding of the interpretation that is being presented and I hope that I've cleared up the difference. All other metamagic feats explicitly describe how they alter the spell level of the spell. The heighten spell feat is extremely vauge about the way it effects spell level.
Bypassing level dependant defenses and increasing save targets are enough.
In terms of this particular feat in a vacuum? Yes. In terms of system mechanics? No, it isn't. This isn't about whether heighten spell is good on its own. It is. The problem is the entirety of the other metamagic feats are BAD except for quicken spell and perhaps widen spell. Interpreting heighten spell in this way allows for a much smoother integration of the metamagic system into the casting system.
Frankly I to answer the quote I would need to know what levels your campaigns usually play at? Heighten can be frighteningly effective at higher levels. (15+)
And the other metamagic feats can be frighteningly ineffective at higher levels. I have played casters at high levels (17+ into epic levels) in 3.5. You were lucky to get a saving throw to roll in your favor. Pathfinder has drastically reduced this problem because Mr. Bulmahn is rather good with his math, but IMO this is an incredible chance to overall normalize the interaction with the spellcasting system and make it far easier to design around in the future, before a second bestiary and the high level sections of another AP are published. This change basically means that all metamagic feats become equally effective on a spell whether it be a save based spell, a ranged touch, a melee touch, a no save spell, etc. It makes some very flavorful level 1 spells relevant at the end of the game.
In my opinion, if this the devs explain that this is not the intended use of the feat, they should add a feat that does accomplish this in some book. It will increase the longevity of the spell DC system by a huge amount, because it will allow you to better predict caster fatigue when designing adventure paths, modules, etc.