Because you're summoning a Solar? That's better then any other magical effect in the game right now. It's like you're a character from Neon Genesis Evangelion (minus the emo, of course). Just cast Gate, summon your PokeSolar, and watch from the sidelines. :lol:
Okay, then cast your [insert 9th level spell here], and watch from the sidelines. Same thing, really. Whether a Solar thrashes a monster, or you kill it with direct damage/SoD/SoS/boning reality up the backside, it's dead.
But even if we DIDN'T want to summon a Solar, I'm willing to wager that when you come out of that Time Stop, it would be a whole lot better to come out with a Quickened Meteor Swarm and an Empowered Chain Lightning then if you ran around throwing Delayed Blast Fireballs at it as it tried to either kill you with its breath weapon or ate your face.
You can delay (hence the "Delayed" part) a DBF for up to 5 rounds before it goes off. Basically, you time stop, squeeze out as many DBFs as you can (staggering the delay so they all go off at the same time), then watch the fun.
Also, like I said... spectral hand + shivering touch = win against anything with a dex <=10.5.
Either way, there's a few things in this equation that are off-kilter. Gate needs to have the summoning component removed, and the Metamagic Rods need to disappear. Once those two things are done, we can step away from crazy la-la land and get back to scenarios where a Wizard might actually have to do some work to kill his enemies.There is no price that you can set - no price that is high enough - to offset the effect of a magical item that breaks all semblance of game balance once it is acquired. Metamagic Rods do just that - at all levels of play - and need to be thrown on the trash heap.
Just because you keep saying something doesn't make it true, especially when you have no evidence beyond opinion. If you don't like metamagic rods, houserule them out. Don't assume everyone else has to feel the same way as you do.
Ahem. Solar Summoning? Not even remotely balanced. Not even against other 9th level spells. Not against the 9th level summoning spells. It's got to go.
And about 3.5 being structured in such a way where spellcasters are overpowered compared to other characters? That's got to go also. Otherwise, I suspect that most players will eventually be sitting around playing D&D 4.5 instead of Pathfinder. No one like to play "second class citizen" in any game.
So play 4th edition, then. Or Experimental Might. Pathfinder is an updated 3.5. It's not meant to reinvent the entire game, which is what you're proposing.
Check the Web Enhancement. There is NO GP or XP cost for casting this spell as it currently stands in Pathfinder right now. So they managed to take a broken spell and make it even more broken! :lol:
I think you need to reread the Web Enhancement. It clearly states, on pg. 14, under Calling:
This use of the spell has a material cost of 5,000 gp in rare incense and offerings
You're making the assumption that time is a critical element in all high-level games. Guess what? It isn't. It's not unreasonable to assume that a character could take the time to raise the funds and craft the item. Even if you have a campaign where the party is rushing to save the world from some horrific, world ending threat, what are the odds that once you resolve it, you won't have some time to take a vacation and make your item of ultimate power before you move on to crush the next great menace?
No, I'm not. I'm not assuming anything. I'm stating that you can't assume 170 days of downtime to craft rods. You can't assume that every game is like the ones you've played in, or imagine.
Okay, then cast your [insert 9th level spell here], and watch from the sidelines. Same thing, really. Whether a Solar thrashes a monster, or you kill it with direct damage/SoD/SoS/boning reality up the backside, it's dead.
Meteor Swarm < Summoning Solars. The difference in power between these two spell effects cannot be overstated enough.
But even if we DIDN'T want to summon a Solar, I'm willing to wager that when you come out of that Time Stop, it would be a whole lot better to come out with a Quickened Meteor Swarm and an Empowered Chain Lightning then if you ran around throwing Delayed Blast Fireballs at it as it tried to either kill you with its breath weapon or ate your face.You can delay (hence the "Delayed" part) a DBF for up to 5 rounds before it goes off. Basically, you time stop, squeeze out as many DBFs as you can (staggering the delay so they all go off at the same time), then watch the fun.
Also, like I said... spectral hand + shivering touch = win against anything with a dex <=10.5.
Oh. You mean the Shivering Touch spell? The one from Frostburn? The one that isn't part of the Beta and was listed in a number of threads on the WoTC forums as being "completely broken"?
Frankly, if we're going to be arguing the merits of the spell mechanics in this game based on spells like that, we may as well talk about how balanced Fighters are with Gatling Guns and Power Armor.
Sueki Suezo wrote:
Either way, there's a few things in this equation that are off-kilter. Gate needs to have the summoning component removed, and the Metamagic Rods need to disappear. Once those two things are done, we can step away from crazy la-la land and get back to scenarios where a Wizard might actually have to do some work to kill his enemies.
There is no price that you can set - no price that is high enough - to offset the effect of a magical item that breaks all semblance of game balance once it is acquired. Metamagic Rods do just that - at all levels of play - and need to be thrown on the trash heap.
Just because you keep saying something doesn't make it true, especially when you have no evidence beyond opinion. If you don't like metamagic rods, houserule them out. Don't assume everyone else has to feel the same way as you do.
I think that there are many, many people in this thread have made some very solid and rational arguments regarding why Metamagic Rods need to be eliminated. I haven't heard anything so far from you that would lead me to believe that I am incorrect on this matter.
So play 4th edition, then. Or Experimental Might. Pathfinder is an updated 3.5. It's not meant to reinvent the entire game, which is what you're proposing.Ahem. Solar Summoning? Not even remotely balanced. Not even against other 9th level spells. Not against the 9th level summoning spells. It's got to go.
And about 3.5 being structured in such a way where spellcasters are overpowered compared to other characters? That's got to go also. Otherwise, I suspect that most players will eventually be sitting around playing D&D 4.5 instead of Pathfinder. No one like to play "second class citizen" in any game.
I'd like to thank you for being the latest person to tell me that I need to "go play 4th Edition" because I'd like to see a more balanced version of the 3.X system emerge from this playest! Much obliged!
And if by "reinventing the game" you mean "fixing the unbalanced magic system", then yes, I am propsing that we reinvent the game! :lol:
I think you need to reread the Web Enhancement. It clearly states, on pg. 14, under Calling:
This use of the spell has a material cost of 5,000 gp in rare incense and offerings
Oh, my bad. Well, I have to concede that point to you. It does indeed say that it costs 5,000 GP to summon a Solar. I guess I was just too busy responding to all of these threads where people tell me to go play 4th Edition to notice my error. :lol:
But that being said - does that really balance the effect? Money isn't very hard to come by in high level games, and now that most magic items cost about 50% of what they used to in 3.X, there's going to be even more of it lying around then before. And when it is implemented, it's FAR beyond the ken of other 9th level spells. Even with the 5,000 GP cost, I still don't think it's a balanced spell. It wasn't even a balanced spell back when it cost you 1,000 XP in 3.X.
In short: any spell that lets you summon a Pit Fiend or a Solar - even with a high GP cost attached to it - isn't balanced.
You're making the assumption that time is a critical element in all high-level games. Guess what? It isn't. It's not unreasonable to assume that a character could take the time to raise the funds and craft the item. Even if you have a campaign where the party is rushing to save the world from some horrific, world ending threat, what are the odds that once you resolve it, you won't have some time to take a vacation and make your item of ultimate power before you move on to crush the next great menace?No, I'm not. I'm not assuming anything. I'm stating that you can't assume 170 days of downtime to craft rods. You can't assume that every game is like the ones you've played in, or imagine.
You just assumed that taking 170 days to craft a magical items in a campaign would be impossible, and now you're telling me that I'm making assumptions and that I should consider how other games might unfold? :lol:
Meteor Swarm < Summoning Solars. The difference in power between these two spell effects cannot be overstated enough.
Meteor swarm is a terrible spell. There's lots better core PF 9th level spells, like time stop. Or wish. Mage's disjunction. Prismatic sphere. Mass hold monster. Crushing hand. Shapechange.
Oh. You mean the Shivering Touch spell? The one from Frostburn? The one that isn't part of the Beta and was listed in a number of threads on the WoTC forums as being "completely broken"?
Frankly, if we're going to be arguing the merits of the spell mechanics in this game based on spells like that, we may as well talk about how balanced Fighters are with Gatling Guns and Power Armor.
What about delayed blast fireball? You didn't address that at all.
Shivering touch is an official WotC 3.5 spell, and as such is compatible with Pathfinder. Gatling guns & power armor are not official WotC items, and afaik are only in 3rd party d20 sci-fi or anime-based products, which have little or nothing to do with Pathfinder. Now, would you like to try a counterpoint that isn't a strawman?
I think that there are many, many people in this thread have made some very solid and rational arguments regarding why Metamagic Rods need to be eliminated. I haven't heard anything so far from you that would lead me to believe that I am incorrect on this matter.
Like what? I haven't found any arguments that show Paizo needs to eliminate metamagic rods, only that some people don't like metamagic rods, and need to make a houserule.
I'd like to thank you for being the latest person to tell me that I need to "go play 4th Edition" because I'd like to see a more balanced version of the 3.X system emerge from this playest! Much obliged!
And if by "reinventing the game" you mean "fixing the unbalanced magic system", then yes, I am propsing that we reinvent the game! :lol:
If you keep hearing it, there might be some truth to it. Pathfinder probably isn't going to incorporate the widespread and major changes you want to see. Instead of getting frustrated with what you perceive to be power and balance issues, try 4e or Experimental Might. You might find them more suited to your play style.
But that being said - does that really balance the effect? Money isn't very hard to come by in high level games, and now that most magic items cost about 50% of what they used to in 3.X, there's going to be even more of it lying around then before. And when it is implemented, it's FAR beyond the ken of other 9th level spells. Even with the 5,000 GP cost, I still don't think it's a balanced spell. It wasn't even a balanced spell back when it cost you 1,000 XP in 3.X.In short: any spell that lets you summon a Pit Fiend or a Solar - even with a high GP cost attached to it - isn't balanced.
Admittedly, 5,000 GP itself isn't all that much. But spending that amount in materials EACH time you cast gate? It'll pile up really quickly, especially with quickened gate + gate. For comparisons sake, how often would you cast stoneskin in 3.5? How willing was the party to cast true resurrection instead of resurrection/raise dead/reincarnate on a fallen friend (without using the friend's equipment to pay for it)?
Also, 1,000 XP per casting? HUGE cost. You can lose a level by casting it. XP/caster level loss is bad, bad, bad.
You just assumed that taking 170 days to craft a magical items in a campaign would be impossible, and now you're telling me that I'm making assumptions and that I should consider how other games might unfold? :lol:When did I say it was impossible? I said:
1) If you ONLY buy or craft the wand, and nothing else, maybe. But that's not likely in most games. Also don't forget the 170 day crafting time for such a wand. How many games have that long of a duration between adventures?And
Also, again, you're assuming this wizard has tons of time to run his business. That's not going to be the case in lots of games. You can't claim something is broken just because of x, y, and z specific non-standard circumstances that work totally in your favor.
What part of that says "impossible"? Please argue against what I say, not what you think/hope I say.
Meteor Swarm < Summoning Solars. The difference in power between these two spell effects cannot be overstated enough.Meteor swarm is a terrible spell. There's lots better core PF 9th level spells, like time stop. Or wish. Mage's disjunction. Prismatic sphere. Mass hold monster. Crushing hand. Shapechange.
Yeah. You got me. Meteor Swarm TOTALLY sucks. We should drop it down to 5th or 6th level. That's about on par with how much damage it does, right?
/sarcasm
And summoning Solars is still better then all of these spells.
Oh. You mean the Shivering Touch spell? The one from Frostburn? The one that isn't part of the Beta and was listed in a number of threads on the WoTC forums as being "completely broken"?
Frankly, if we're going to be arguing the merits of the spell mechanics in this game based on spells like that, we may as well talk about how balanced Fighters are with Gatling Guns and Power Armor.
What about delayed blast fireball? You didn't address that at all.
Shivering touch is an official WotC 3.5 spell, and as such is compatible with Pathfinder. Gatling guns & power armor are not official WotC items, and afaik are only in 3rd party d20 sci-fi or anime-based products, which have little or nothing to do with Pathfinder. Now, would you like to try a counterpoint that isn't a strawman?
What about Delayed Blast Fireball? How does it relate to either overpowered 9th level spells or overpowered magical items?
And official WoTC spell? Who cares? WoTC isn't "official" anymore unless you're playing 4th Edition. The only "official" Pathfinder material is the playtest material that we're dealing with right now. You may chide me for talking about gatling guns and mecha, but that's really about as "official" as Frostburn is at this point in time.
And just because something was published in a WoTC book doesn't mean that it isn't broken. WoTC stuffed their books full of all kinds of broken, junky prestige classes and spells that no self-respecting DM would ever let into their game. Your crowing about Shivering Touch being "official" doesn't mean that it isn't a poorly designed spell that should be dropped. But it does indicate to me that you're not the sort of person to be bothered by issues such as "game balance" so long as you can lay waste to everything in your path in your games at home.
I think that there are many, many people in this thread have made some very solid and rational arguments regarding why Metamagic Rods need to be eliminated. I haven't heard anything so far from you that would lead me to believe that I am incorrect on this matter.Like what? I haven't found any arguments that show Paizo needs to eliminate metamagic rods, only that some people don't like metamagic rods, and need to make a houserule.
Translation: I've seen a lot of good arguments about why Metamagic Rods should be eliminated, but I still want to use these broken magical items (preferably with my broken spells), so I'm going to ignore these arguments.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
Just a huge caveat with Shivering Touch. Frostburn assumes a Frostfell campaign. As such many creatures have the Cold subtype and aren't affected by that spell. It's a huge spell when you find a monster you can use it against but it wasn't really meant to be used in the average campaign. Just because the spells are in a book doesn't mean they should be used as/is.
--Vrocking Grasp!
If you keep hearing it, there might be some truth to it. Pathfinder probably isn't going to incorporate the widespread and major changes you want to see. Instead of getting frustrated with what you perceive to be power and balance issues, try 4e or Experimental Might. You might find them more suited to your play style.I'd like to thank you for being the latest person to tell me that I need to "go play 4th Edition" because I'd like to see a more balanced version of the 3.X system emerge from this playest! Much obliged!
And if by "reinventing the game" you mean "fixing the unbalanced magic system", then yes, I am propsing that we reinvent the game! :lol:
I'm not frustrated with the power and balance issues in Pathfinder at all. If they fail to address and fix them, then my gaming group and I (and I suspect many other players) will move on to play other games. However, it would be a shame that an otherwise promising game would be hobbled by an antiquated magic system that promotes massive imbalances between spellcasting and non-spellcasting classes because a very vocal group of players that wants to maintain the utter and complete class dominance that they maintained in 3.X.
But that being said - does that really balance the effect? Money isn't very hard to come by in high level games, and now that most magic items cost about 50% of what they used to in 3.X, there's going to be even more of it lying around then before. And when it is implemented, it's FAR beyond the ken of other 9th level spells. Even with the 5,000 GP cost, I still don't think it's a balanced spell. It wasn't even a balanced spell back when it cost you 1,000 XP in 3.X.In short: any spell that lets you summon a Pit Fiend or a Solar - even with a high GP cost attached to it - isn't balanced.
Admittedly, 5,000 GP itself isn't all that much. But spending that amount in materials EACH time you cast gate? It'll pile up really quickly, especially with quickened gate + gate. For comparisons sake, how often would you cast stoneskin in 3.5? How willing was the party to cast true resurrection instead of resurrection/raise dead/reincarnate on a fallen friend (without using the friend's equipment to pay for it)?
Also, 1,000 XP per casting? HUGE cost. You can lose a level by casting it. XP/caster level loss is bad, bad, bad.
You don't need to cast Gate every day. You just need to be able to cast it whenever you need to utterly, ruthlessly, and completely crush any threat that your DM might send against you. It's like having an "I WIN" button hidden in your pocket that you can press every time you come across something that you can't deal with that deducts 5,000 GP from your credit card account.
And as far as XP losses go - they are negligible. Frank Trollman wrote a great article talking about how "XP losses" to spells and magic item creation aren't really losses at all. The way the XP system worked in 3.X, you would be able to easily make back the XP you lost to your crafting and spellcasting and simultaneously close the gap between yourself and your fellow players so long as you remained with a level or so of the rest of your party at all times. Frankly, the GP cost is more substantial - but even then, given how much cash you'll be throwing around at higher levels (especially now with cut-rate cost magic items), it's not really very substantial at all.
When did I say it was impossible? I said:
Almagest wrote:1) If you ONLY buy or craft the wand, and nothing else, maybe. But that's not likely in most games. Also don't forget the 170 day crafting time for such a wand. How many games have that long of a duration between adventures?
And
Almagest wrote:Also, again, you're assuming this wizard has tons of time to run his business. That's not going to be the case in lots of games. You can't claim something is broken just because of x, y, and z specific non-standard circumstances that work totally in your favor.
Are you serious? Now you're just quibbling over semantics at this point. :lol:
To do that with a metamagic rod would require a single magic item costing 75,500 gp.
Yeah I realized that belatedly. Looking at it even the Lesser Quicken is pretty pricey.
Just a huge caveat with Shivering Touch. Frostburn assumes a Frostfell campaign. As such many creatures have the Cold subtype and aren't affected by that spell. It's a huge spell when you find a monster you can use it against but it wasn't really meant to be used in the average campaign. Just because the spells are in a book doesn't mean they should be used as/is.
--Vrocking Grasp!
You bring up a good point. That's a book that REALLY needs to be locked down in terms of allowing its content to leak to other campaigns. I know that they have a Feat in there that, when combined with a Feat from one of the other WoTC books and the Master Of Many Forms Prestige Class, would allow Druids to transform themselves into 36HD Cryohydras and kill everything in sight with breath weapons. Completely broken, nothing that any self-respecting DM would let into their game... but still possible.
I'm not frustrated with the power and balance issues in Pathfinder at all. If they fail to address and fix them, then my gaming group and I (and I suspect many other players) will move on to play other games. However, it would be a shame that an otherwise promising game would be hobbled by an antiquated magic system that promotes massive imbalances between spellcasting and non-spellcasting classes because a very vocal group of players that wants to maintain the utter and complete class dominance that they maintained in 3.X.
Paizo never claimed this to be a goal, and they've already released a beta that doesn't address your concerns. It's not going to change. 3.5 games are not balanced -- any class can be fun, but it's up to the DM to create challenges that highlight the strengths of all characters, not just toss monsters in a room and let casters utterly destroy them.
You don't need to cast Gate every day. You just need to be able to cast it whenever you need to utterly, ruthlessly, and completely crush any threat that your DM might send against you. It's like having an "I WIN" button hidden in your pocket that you can press every time you come across something that you can't deal with that deducts 5,000 GP from your credit card account.
And other 9th level spells aren't an "I WIN" button? Other spells in general aren't an "I WIN" button? Also, you're not abusing gate at all. It's a trump card in this scenario, one that has nothing to do with metamagic rods. How does this make it, or rods, broken?
And as far as XP losses go - they are negligible. Frank Trollman wrote a great article talking about how "XP losses" to spells and magic item creation aren't really losses at all. The way the XP system worked in 3.X, you would be able to easily make back the XP you lost to your crafting and spellcasting and simultaneously close the gap between yourself and your fellow players so long as you remained with a level or so of the rest of your party at all times. Frankly, the GP cost is more substantial - but even then, given how much cash you'll be throwing around at higher levels (especially now with cut-rate cost magic items), it's not really very substantial at all.
This may be true, I haven't read Frank Trollman's article. I do know, however, that losing caster levels is in general a bad idea, and no magic item is worth spellcasting ability. I also know that you can just planar bind something and make it create items for you, or take leadership and have a cohort do it for you. Those are both better options than taking IC feats yourself.
Are you serious? Now you're just quibbling over semantics at this point. :lol:
First, please learn what "semantics" means. Second, I clearly stated the same thing I had all along -- you're making invalid assumptions. You tried to turn that into me assuming something was NEVER a valid option. There's a huge difference there, and it's one you're going to be called on by anyone you do it to.
[...]Another decent way (perhaps combined), is require a move action to use the Rod. No using two rods at once.
That's allready the case today....at least not two rods at once.
Quotes from beta page 356A) "All the rods described here are useactivated" so as a DM it is easy to rule you have to spend a move action to get your rod since you have to use it (not enough to just have the rod in your backpack).
B) "A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell"
Yeah. You got me. Meteor Swarm TOTALLY sucks. We should drop it down to 5th or 6th level. That's about on par with how much damage it does, right?
/sarcasm
Meteor swarm is basically 4 fireballs that are SR=yes, fire damage (which more monsters resist/are immune to than any other type), reflex save for half (evasion/improved evasion means 0 damage, or 1/2 at best), with a huge area (be careful where/how you use it). Direct damage spells in general are not the best options, and MS is just not worth taking when there're so many other cool spells at 9th level.
And summoning Solars is still better then all of these spells.
Why should I (or Paizo, or anyone else) believe you on this when you provide no evidence, just opinion, and you didn't even know the spell had a costly material component, or that it's actually a calling spell, not a summon?
What about Delayed Blast Fireball? How does it relate to either overpowered 9th level spells or overpowered magical items?
The point was to show that it's easy to kill things with high level spells. Gate doesn't exist in a vacuum.
And official WoTC spell? Who cares? WoTC isn't "official" anymore unless you're playing 4th Edition. The only "official" Pathfinder material is the playtest material that we're dealing with right now. You may chide me for talking about gatling guns and mecha, but that's really about as "official" as Frostburn is at this point in time.
And just because something was published in a WoTC book doesn't mean that it isn't broken. WoTC stuffed their books full of all kinds of broken, junky prestige classes and spells that no self-respecting DM would ever let into their game. Your crowing about Shivering Touch being "official" doesn't mean that it isn't a poorly designed spell that should be dropped. But it does indicate to me that you're not the sort of person to be bothered by issues such as "game balance" so long as you can lay waste to everything in your path in your games at home.
Shivering touch, broken? Really? I mean, you can't just overcome it with cold subtype monsters, monsters immune to physical ability damage/drain (like undead), high dodge/deflection bonuses (like, from high dex, or scintillating scales, or rings of protection, or the first level spell shield, or etc.), spell resistance, better initiative rolls, or good tactics, like taking out the spellcaster first, or not getting close enough for him to touch you, etc.? Just because you read something, possibly misunderstand it/not read it fully, and see it as too powerful because you can't come up with tactics to deal with it, doesn't mean it's broken. Broken means the system isn't equipped to handle it, or it's an exploit -- like infinite damage loops, or candle of invocation wish shenanigans.
Translation: I've seen a lot of good arguments about why Metamagic Rods should be eliminated, but I still want to use these broken magical items (preferably with my broken spells), so I'm going to ignore these arguments.
No, I've seen lots of interesting opinions on why metamagic rods could be houseruled. Now, if you're going to continue to make stuff up and pretend you can base a coherent argument around it, there's no point in continuing this discussion. Face it: you don't like metamagic rods, gate, or 3.5e in general, and you should really houserule them, or play something else. Don't assume everyone else wants the same things you do.
The name of this thread: Get Rid Of Metamagic Rods.
Me, I'd keep them but change them. How? I'm not sure. Perhaps, If you have more rods than one you can only use them on X spells per day.
About this thread. Three things strike me.
A) this thread seems to be changing. It's start to ge more into casters are to powerful.
B) a lot of the examples in this therade are meta gameing.
- "Maximized meteor swarm followed immediately in the same turn a quickened meteor swarm" (does sound like a fighter player trying to play a wizard). At higher levels there are for more brutal spells and options.
- one wizard vs. one dragon. Meta gameing? Yes.
C) A lot of the examples in this thread involves high level spells and high level game (maximized meteor swarm followed immediately in the same turn a quickened meteor swarm etc.) A level 7 party have other problems than a level 20 party. Are we adressing high level problems or the rods? Jason and Paizo are probably well aware of the problems with high level games and high level spells (they can read and they are not stupid). Wouldn't it be better to focus on the rod? You can turn this thread into fighter vs. wizard. Does anyone seriously believe Jason will bother, or are people just posting to pick a fight and blow of steam?
So let's return to the topic of this thread. Metamagic Rods.
At lower levels there are far worse things than maximized or quickened rods.
Silent metamagic Rod. The party comes up agains the BBEG and battle begins. BBEG cast spells and after some rounds you cast silence and the group is ready to RUN AWAY. BBEG picks his Silent metamagic Rod and continue to blast the party or hold the someone or whatever.
So metamagic rods can be a problem at lower levels to.
Why would anyone pick the silent spell feat? Just get a rod.
That rod is only going to buy you three spells though, and only if they are level appropriate to the rod. For the price you pay on the rod it's still better to have the feat to fall back on or plan around (silence the area knowing that your spells are prepared with the silent spell metamagic feat and your opponent only has 3 uses in a rod for his low level spells only).
What level can the cheapest metamagic rod come into play?
That rod is only going to buy you three spells though, and only if they are level appropriate to the rod. For the price you pay on the rod it's still better to have the feat to fall back on or plan around (silence the area knowing that your spells are prepared with the silent spell metamagic feat and your opponent only has 3 uses in a rod for his low level spells only).
What level can the cheapest metamagic rod come into play?
Silence don't come that often but when it does your in troble.
"What level can the cheapest metamagic rod come into play?" Depends on the DM. From level 7 up to lvl 9. Silent metamagic rod + dispel magic = nice.Also, even if the party is lvl 6 if you come up against the BBEG you're not counting on him having a Silent metamagic rod. And if they do and when they do you'd probably get TPK:ed.
"For the price you pay on the rod it's still better to have the feat to fall back on or plan around"
I don't agree. As a wizard you have to decide if or what spell you will prepare. And chanses are you won't need a silent spell and if you do chanses are you don't need that particular spell you've prepared.
So rod is better and more flexible. (Although 'still spell' is better as a prepared spell using the feat).
Part of it is situational of course. If you are trying to stay stealthy and need a spell silent spell can be very useful.
However we got, at the cheapest level extend, enlarge, and silent Rod wise. As you pointed out these come into play at the earilest 4th level (half wealth, 3rd level if they blow all their money on one). Not exactly a quickened spell (or maximized/empowered either), so those fears at lower levels are completely dismissable. Lesser Quicken is 35,000 which is half WBL at 11th level (and not affordable until 9th level), at which point you can already choose to quicken 1st or 2nd level spells.
The name of this thread: Get Rid Of Metamagic Rods.
Me, I'd keep them but change them. How? I'm not sure. Perhaps, If you have more rods than one you can only use them on X spells per day.About this thread. Three things strike me.
A) this thread seems to be changing. It's start to ge more into casters are to powerful.B) a lot of the examples in this therade are meta gameing.
- "Maximized meteor swarm followed immediately in the same turn a quickened meteor swarm" (does sound like a fighter player trying to play a wizard). At higher levels there are for more brutal spells and options.
- one wizard vs. one dragon. Meta gameing? Yes.C) A lot of the examples in this thread involves high level spells and high level game (maximized meteor swarm followed immediately in the same turn a quickened meteor swarm etc.) A level 7 party have other problems than a level 20 party. Are we adressing high level problems or the rods? Jason and Paizo are probably well aware of the problems with high level games and high level spells (they can read and they are not stupid). Wouldn't it be better to focus on the rod? You can turn this thread into fighter vs. wizard. Does anyone seriously believe Jason will bother, or are people just posting to pick a fight and blow of steam?
So let's return to the topic of this thread. Metamagic Rods.
At lower levels there are far worse things than maximized or quickened rods.
Silent metamagic Rod. The party comes up agains the BBEG and battle begins. BBEG cast spells and after some rounds you cast silence and the group is ready to RUN AWAY. BBEG picks his Silent metamagic Rod and continue to blast the party or hold the someone or whatever.
So metamagic rods can be a problem at lower levels to.
Why would anyone pick the silent spell feat? Just get a rod.
I was trying to argue against metamagic rods of all levels being changed/banned altogether. Some posters in this thread seem to have a bias against 3.5 style magic, so the subject quickly changed into a discussion on that, which I tried to avoid.
Back on topic -- your silent spell situation is very specific. Casting silence on a caster is a good strategy, so of course there should be a way around it. Allowing an intelligent NPC to plan around possible party strategies is a good idea. Also, don't forget NPC wealth scales more slowly than PC, so it'll take that NPC even longer to get a metamagic rod.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Gatling guns & power armor are not official WotC items, and afaik are only in 3rd party d20 sci-fi or anime-based products, which have little or nothing to do with Pathfinder. Now, would you like to try a counterpoint that isn't a strawman?
Technically, gatling guns and power armor are official WOTC items, from the D20 Modern and D20 Future books. True, they still have little to do with Pathfinder, but just saying. And they could show up, in a Barrier Peaks, or Numeria type adventure.
Silence don't come that often but when it does your in troble.
"What level can the cheapest metamagic rod come into play?" Depends on the DM. From level 7 up to lvl 9. Silent metamagic rod + dispel magic = nice.
Also, even if the party is lvl 6 if you come up against the BBEG you're not counting on him having a Silent metamagic rod. And if they do and when they do you'd probably get TPK:ed."For the price you pay on the rod it's still better to have the feat to fall back on or plan around"
I don't agree. As a wizard you have to decide if or what spell you will prepare. And chanses are you won't need a silent spell and if you do chanses are you don't need that particular spell you've prepared.
So rod is better and more flexible. (Although 'still spell' is better as a prepared spell using the feat).
Silencing spells is nice, but enemies still get a spellcraft check (-2 I believe, for no sound) to identify the spell. I don't think a silent dispel is all that nice, really, except possibly during your silence scenario (again, very specific circumstances).
That level 6 BBEG won't be able to afford that silent rod, based on normal NPC wealth. If you're giving them way better items than they can afford, of course the party is going to have a harder time.
|
|
I was trying to argue against metamagic rods of all levels being changed/banned altogether. Some posters in this thread seem to have a bias against 3.5 style magic, so the subject quickly changed into a discussion on that, which I tried to avoid.
So what your saying is that it's okay for a spellcaster to be able to take a 6th level spell and then metamagic it even though they wouldn't be able to by the regular rules for magic?
If that's the case then we need to create an equal item for the fighter that three times per day they may attack with the attack bonus and damage potential of a fighter 2-4 levels higher.
I agree with you that they shouldn't be removed from the game, however I disagree that they should remain unchanged, especially when the change proposed (well, one of the changes proposed) doesn't even hurt their effectiveness, merely puts a cap on the abusable portion of the ability. which is to do something you shouldn't be able to do at the level with which you are doing it.
In general, stacking metamagic for free, whether through class features or rods, is problematic, as it can allow, even as early as 11th level, characters to access Epic level effects. A 6th level spell with +4 effective spell levels is a 10th level spell. This can be done by a Generalist wizard stacking multiple metamagic effects with any metamagic rod and Metamagic Mastery, or just using either Metamagic Mastery or a rod to Quicken a 6th level spell. Metamagic rods and other ways of adding metamagic with no cap to maximum effective spell level allow a violation of one of the key metrics used to balance encounters. It doesn't matter which metamagic feats are applied, as metamagic with no cap to maximum effective spell level makes the spell better than it should be for the character's caster level.
The easy, clean, mechanical solution is to cap maximum effective spell level to the highest spell level castable by the character. This keeps epic level effects, like quickened greater dispel magic or quickened antimagic field, or a widened maximized acid fog in the epic territory where they belong, and means that only 15th level characters can throw around silent still mass suggestion.
|
|
A spellcaster isn't hurt by altering free metamagic to make it work within the framework of metamagic rules, nor is the rod nerfed by making it capped as if the spells were increased in level even though they aren't, all else being equal they are still useful and powerful, just not unbalanced when stacked with feats and class features to do the same thing, or just doing it to your highest level spells.
I was trying to argue against metamagic rods of all levels being changed/banned altogether. Some posters in this thread seem to have a bias against 3.5 style magic, so the subject quickly changed into a discussion on that, which I tried to avoid.So what your saying is that it's okay for a spellcaster to be able to take a 6th level spell and then metamagic it even though they wouldn't be able to by the regular rules for magic?
If that's the case then we need to create an equal item for the fighter that three times per day they may attack with the attack bonus and damage potential of a fighter 2-4 levels higher.
I agree with you that they shouldn't be removed from the game, however I disagree that they should remain unchanged, especially when the change proposed (well, one of the changes proposed) doesn't even hurt their effectiveness, merely puts a cap on the abusable portion of the ability. which is to do something you shouldn't be able to do at the level with which you are doing it.
If said spell caster can afford the rod, then sure. It'll cost him anywhere from 11,000 gp to 75,500 gp, which is anywhere from simply expensive, to unaffordable. Don't penalize PC's for intelligently allocating resources. Scale challenges appropriately.
Uh, monks already have monk's belts, flurry, and later got feats like carmendine monk, you know. Rogues have weapon properties/magic items/feats/swordsage dips that increase sneak attack damage. Clerics have divine power. Druids have wildshaping. Wizards have transformation and polymorph spells. Barbarians have rage, and Lion totem barbarians have pounce. All classes have two weapon fighting, rapid shot, many shot, etc. All classes have the belt of battle. Bards & other casters can give serious buffs to other classes, like haste, enlarge person, magic weapon, align weapon, bull's strength, cat's grace, etc. Class features/feats/spells/items that greatly increase fighting prowess are not unheard of, even in core.
I was trying to argue against metamagic rods of all levels being changed/banned altogether. Some posters in this thread seem to have a bias against 3.5 style magic, so the subject quickly changed into a discussion on that, which I tried to avoid.So what your saying is that it's okay for a spellcaster to be able to take a 6th level spell and then metamagic it even though they wouldn't be able to by the regular rules for magic?
Here's the part I like "Regular rules for magic"... because you know, magic doesn't do anything outside the rules, or have exceptions on a regular basis, or anything.
Sure they should be able to if they bought the correct magic item, and then only 3 times per day. That's what the item does. Heck if we are concerned about items letting someone do something they normally can't then the fighter can't have that +3 sword becuase it will let him hit things he normally can't and do more damage than he normally should.
I disagree with the thought that you "shouldn't" be able to do something at a particular level. It may not be easy, and it may eat up most of your WBL but that's up to the player and DM to decide. IF the player wants to give up most of what he has for something he can only do 3 times a day then fine. He's got to stretch those 3 times over 4~5 encounters, probably with multiple spells used per encounter.
Now if the metamagic rods let him do this all day with every spell he has, ok that would be a bit much, but that's not what we are talking about.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
A spellcaster isn't hurt by altering free metamagic to make it work within the framework of metamagic rules, nor is the rod nerfed by making it capped as if the spells were increased in level even though they aren't, all else being equal they are still useful and powerful, just not unbalanced when stacked with feats and class features to do the same thing, or just doing it to your highest level spells.
The amusing thing I find is, I bet people who claim metamagic rods are fine and balanced as is, likely howl that psionics are overpowered/unbalanced/broken.
In general, stacking metamagic for free, whether through class features or rods, is problematic, as it can allow, even as early as 11th level, characters to access Epic level effects. A 6th level spell with +4 effective spell levels is a 10th level spell. This can be done by a Generalist wizard stacking multiple metamagic effects with any metamagic rod and Metamagic Mastery, or just using either Metamagic Mastery or a rod to Quicken a 6th level spell. Metamagic rods and other ways of adding metamagic with no cap to maximum effective spell level allow a violation of one of the key metrics used to balance encounters. It doesn't matter which metamagic feats are applied, as metamagic with no cap to maximum effective spell level makes the spell better than it should be for the character's caster level.
The easy, clean, mechanical solution is to cap maximum effective spell level to the highest spell level castable by the character. This keeps epic level effects, like quickened greater dispel magic or quickened antimagic field, or a widened maximized acid fog in the epic territory where they belong, and means that only 15th level characters can throw around silent still mass suggestion.
You can't apply more than one metamagic effect to a spell from rods. Adding a second effect would still require a feat, and an appropriate spell level adjustment.
I also don't think you thought most of these examples through. A maximized widened acid fog has to be a (pretty terrible) 9th level spell, which does a whopping 12 acid damage + solid fog, in a 40 foot radius, for 1 round/level. Spellcasters can just freedom of movement, or teleport out with any number of spells, or dispel it, or use a gust of wind to disperse it, or even just resist some acid & randomly move around for a while. Most melee characters are probably kind of boned, but that's not due to the acid fog, that's just what happens against high-level casters. You also seem to forget that fog spells can harm your party almost as much as the enemy, since you can't see them, either.
How is a quickened AMF better than a standard action AMF? You can't cast any spells on stuff in the field, so you're not going to follow the AMF with anything. Also once the field is in place, the target is in a lot of trouble anyway, so really you're just wasting a quicken. There may be some uses for it, but nothing game-breaking, or even consistently useful in more than a few situations.
Quickened greater dispel? Well, assuming you make the caster level check(s), and don't just waste the spell and the quicken, this still isn't much more useful than a standard action dispel. The dispelled effects are gone, or suppressed for a while. Quickening the dispel isn't going to be that much more powerful, besides maybe killing whatever you're fighting a round earlier.
A silent stilled mass suggestion is a 7th level spell (8th with no metamagic rods). 15th level casters can toss this around, anyway, without metamagic rods. I don't see your point.
The amusing thing I find is, I bet people who claim metamagic rods are fine and balanced as is, likely howl that psionics are overpowered/unbalanced/broken.
Uh, I don't. Psionics is pretty well-balanced, as long as you actually read the rules, which people seem to have a problem doing.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Abraham,
Speaking from experience, even the low level rods are 'too good' My battle sorcerer carried a rod to extend mage armor (and later greater mage armor) on her familiar, often adding a phantom steed to her travel needs, and still have one extend for emergencies.
That's 3000 GP at 6th level, allowing me to 'throw' a 5th level spell effectively. The biggest complaint I hear from the 'psionics are unbalanced' group is that he can throw all his points into higher level powers. Ignoring for the moment the flaws that have been touched on with that arguement, why is that unbalanced, but being able to throw 3 spells at two levels higher than I could cast isn't?
So would a psionic item that 3 times a day gives the manifester 4 power points, allowing them to manifest a power at 2 levels higher augment for 3k GP be balanced then? I can hear the howling from here.
As to the 'official WotC' arguement, in the post D&D 3.5 world we live in, I think it's a false arguement. It is generally assumed that shivering touch is one of the horribly broken spells because a) it's an ability damage spell and it affects so much. For every 'just use all cold creatures' arguement there's a 'look it's a fire type creature' When a 3rd level spell disables most all monsters published, it's broken. Core (PHB/DMG/MM/XPH or PFRPG) vs non-core (everything else) is the common tongue of arguements. Pun-Pun is built with 'official WotC' products after all. So there should be no problem with bringing that character to a table, right?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Don't underestimate the power of a quickened dispel/greater dispel/disjunction.
A wizard 5/abjurant cheesewhore 5 (or sorcerer 6/ab champ 5) can throw a quickened dispel magic, without spell level adjustment. This means she can throw a dispel, with a fair chance to do some debuffing before following up with a regular spell. Or you can cast, move, ready the quickened action to counterspell.
My sorcerer/ruathar/abjurant cheese/going for archmage build always used round 1 to either a) cast shield on herself quickened or b) cast quickened protection from evil on the fighter so he didn't become dominate bait.
In 3.x multiple actions are king. being able to quicken your highest level spells makes you the king maker. 'free' metamagic breaks the game, in my experience.
You can't apply more than one metamagic effect to a spell from rods. Adding a second effect would still require a feat, and an appropriate spell level adjustment.
A generalist wizard can stack a rod and Metamagic Mastery to do so within the PFRPG Beta.
I also don't think you thought most of these examples through. A maximized widened acid fog has to be a (pretty terrible) 9th level spell, which does a whopping 12 acid damage + solid fog, in a 40 foot radius, for 1 round/level. Spellcasters can just freedom of movement, or teleport out with any number of spells, or dispel it, or use a gust of wind to disperse it, or even just resist some acid & randomly move around for a while. Most melee characters are probably kind of boned, but that's not due to the acid fog, that's just what happens against high-level casters.
To be sure, but any high level melee threat, like a giant, is a trivial amount of paste.
And I can't help you if you can't see the benefit to quickened greater dispel magic followed up with any of countless spells which can disable or kill. Or following up an acid fog or other nasty, lingering effect with a quickened antimagic field. Or heck, a clever use of shrink item and fly with quickened antimagic field. And if it isn't apparent how readily a silent still mass suggestion can utterly railroad a mass CR13 or 14 encounter, you obviously don't have experience with high level enchantment effects.
Speaking from experience, even the low level rods are 'too good' My battle sorcerer carried a rod to extend mage armor (and later greater mage armor) on her familiar, often adding a phantom steed to her travel needs, and still have one extend for emergencies.
That's 3000 GP at 6th level, allowing me to 'throw' a 5th level spell effectively. The biggest complaint I hear from the 'psionics are unbalanced' group is that he can throw all his points into higher level powers. Ignoring for the moment the flaws that have been touched on with that arguement, why is that unbalanced, but being able to throw 3 spells at two levels higher than I could cast isn't?
Wow, you made a 6 hour spell 12 hours, saving you exactly one of your precious 6+ first level spells, or 3+ third level spells. So broken.
Also, you couldn't just buy a 50 charge wand of mage armor for 750 gp, and recast it as necessary? Or some scrolls of greater mage armor, or phantom steed, and recast those as necessary?
And you're actually spending some of your precious few spells known on long duration buff spells? As a 6th level battle sorcerer, you know zero 3rd level spells. How were you even casting phantom steed? If you forgot, and took the spell at 7th level, you actually spent it on phantom steed, which is situational at best? At most, you'll know 3 3rd level spells. Two-thirds of your 3rd level spells are situational buffs. How is extending these broken? It's all you can do!
As to the 'official WotC' arguement, in the post D&D 3.5 world we live in, I think it's a false arguement. It is generally assumed that shivering touch is one of the horribly broken spells because a) it's an ability damage spell and it affects so much. For every 'just use all cold creatures' arguement there's a 'look it's a fire type creature' When a 3rd level spell disables most all monsters published, it's broken. Core (PHB/DMG/MM/XPH or PFRPG) vs non-core (everything else) is the common tongue of arguements. Pun-Pun is built with 'official WotC' products after all. So there should be no problem with bringing that character to a table, right?
Pun-Pun is broken. Candles of Invocation are broken. Twice-Betrayer of Shar is broken. Nanobots are broken. Diplo/Jumplomancers are broken. Shivering touch? Not close to broken. Maybe you should re-read what I said -- there's lots of options to negate shivering touch. It's not limited to solely cold subtype monsters. It's also a touch spell, which can pose all kinds of problems to casters using it, spectral hand notwithstanding.
Also, if a PC uses shivering touch, or metamagic rods, or whatever, and succeeds/does something powerful, great! He feels special. Is he always going to succeed? No. It's the DM's job to make sure there's a wide variety of encounters, so everyone has a chance to feel special.
Don't underestimate the power of a quickened dispel/greater dispel/disjunction.
A wizard 5/abjurant cheesewhore 5 (or sorcerer 6/ab champ 5) can throw a quickened dispel magic, without spell level adjustment. This means she can throw a dispel, with a fair chance to do some debuffing before following up with a regular spell. Or you can cast, move, ready the quickened action to counterspell.
My sorcerer/ruathar/abjurant cheese/going for archmage build always used round 1 to either a) cast shield on herself quickened or b) cast quickened protection from evil on the fighter so he didn't become dominate bait.
In 3.x multiple actions are king. being able to quicken your highest level spells makes you the king maker. 'free' metamagic breaks the game, in my experience.
Reading an action is a standard action. You can't ready a quickened action without it becoming a standard action, nor can you cast a spell, then ready an action without some way of gaining a second standard action.
Actions are king in 3.x, this is true. How does this make a quickened dispel/AMF broken, though? The enemy is already debuffed. Assuming they don't die/suck, they either start recasting buffs, which is a waste of a combat action for them, or they go ahead and do whatever they were going to do anyway. You probably reduce the encounter length by 1 round. Again, how is this broken, not merely powerful or just a smart thing to do?
If you think abj. champ. is so cheesy, why play one? Also, quickened abj. champ. shield followed by protection spells on your fighter isn't broken, it's just good common sense.
|
|
You know what, I'm done, this redundant silly bickering is circular and honestly just aggravating so this is my last post.
Play Experience in games both run and played in: Metamagic is fine and balanced, but sources that provide metamagic for free unbalance encounters when said ability is used to metamagic things that the character wouldn't normally be able to cast.
Argue that, oh wait you can't because that's actual play experience. wording I use.
And by the way on a tangent. Encounters are balanced around the characters having +x weapons at certain levels, the math is balanced at such so no a fighter with a +3 sword when wealth by level isn't unbalanced in fact a fighter without that same sword is often sorely underpowered. The exact opposite is true with magic and free metamagic. This may be the fault of the designers but it seems like they just didn't take into accounts the effects free metamagic has on the game considering how many sources there are for it. Other than to say its a finite resource so if your wizard is owning encounters just throw more encounters in a day. forgive me if I don't see that as a solution when there is a simple fix that keeps the item just as useful but not overpowered.
Or are you saying a free metamagic that can't be used to beef your highest level spells would be useless because you could only use it on spells you would be able to use it on anyways.
A generalist wizard can stack a rod and Metamagic Mastery to do so within the PFRPG Beta.
Not all casters are wizards. Not all wizards are generalists. This ability is gained at 8th level, which is a fairly long time to wait. You're not going to be free quickening fireballs at 5th level. It also sounds more like the problem, if any, is with the generalist wizard ability, not metamagic rods.
And I can't help you if you can't see the benefit to quickened greater dispel magic followed up with any of countless spells which can disable or kill. Or following up an acid fog or other nasty, lingering effect with a quickened antimagic field. Or heck, a clever use of shrink item and fly with quickened antimagic field.
Following nasty, lingering effects with AMF will suppress those nasty, lingering effects, unless they're instantaneous conjurations (which lingering effects are not), or they are wall of force, prismatic sphere, or prismatic wall. How is this even useful, much less "broken"?
And if it isn't apparent how readily a silent still mass suggestion can utterly railroad a mass CR13 or 14 encounter, you obviously don't have experience with high level enchantment effects.
Any area control spell can railroad a CR 13 or 14 encounter. I'm running a 14th level campaign right now, in fact, and have to be careful to make sure I don't toss in too many encounters where this can happen. You also seem to forget that mind-affecting spells become less and less useful as encounter levels increase. Tons of monsters are immune/have large bonuses against them -- so many, in fact, that one of the most recommended 3.5 banned schools for specialists is enchantment.
Play Experience in games both run and played in: Metamagic is fine and balanced, but sources that provide metamagic for free unbalance encounters when said ability is used to metamagic things that the character wouldn't normally be able to cast.
Argue that, oh wait you can't because that's actual play experience. wording I use.
My play experience is that metamagic rods are balanced well, based on their costs and the estimated level at which you can attain them. Argue that, oh wait you can't blah blah blee bloo and so on.
And by the way on a tangent. Encounters are balanced around the characters having +x weapons at certain levels, the math is balanced at such so no a fighter with a +3 sword when wealth by level isn't unbalanced in fact a fighter without that same sword is often sorely underpowered. The exact opposite is true with magic and free metamagic. This may be the fault of the designers but it seems like they just didn't take into accounts the effects free metamagic has on the game considering how many sources there are for it. Other than to say its a finite resource so if your wizard is owning encounters just throw more encounters in a day. forgive me if I don't see that as a solution when there is a simple fix that keeps the item just as useful but not overpowered.
You contradict yourself. The cost of metamagic rods is meant to be balanced based on the levels at which you can attain them, same as other magic items. I find this balance works, you don't. So do what I've said numerous times before: houserule it.
Or are you saying a free metamagic rod that can't be used to beef your highest level spells would be useless because you could only use it on spells you would be able to use it on anyways.
Who gets free metamagic rods? They're either paid for, crafted, or found in EL-appropriate treasure. Metamagic rods are fine the way they are.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
SRD.org says nothing about a readied action becoming a standard action. Thank you.
Battle sorcerer gets 1 less spell per level, minimim of 1.
You are entitled to your own opinion. Not your own facts.
And if your opinion is that something that does 3d6 points of dexterity damage, you have to use a whole lot less of monsters to counter, and is a 3rd level spell isn't broken, I can't argue with you or your opinion.
And I played an ab champ because I hadn't before. And I dumped shivering touch from her arsenal, because... it's BROKEN.
SRD.org says nothing about a readied action becoming a standard action. Thank you.
"Ready
The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action."From http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialInitiativeActions.htm
So there's no advantage in readying a quickened action vs. readying a standard action; it takes a standard action to ready anything at all.
Not all casters are wizards. Not all wizards are generalists. This ability is gained at 8th level, which is a fairly long time to wait. You're not going to be free quickening fireballs at 5th level. It also sounds more like the problem, if any, is with the generalist wizard ability, not metamagic rods.
Following nasty, lingering effects with AMF will suppress those nasty, lingering effects, unless they're instantaneous conjurations (which lingering effects are not), or they are wall of force, prismatic sphere, or prismatic wall. How is this even useful, much less "broken"?
Any area control spell can railroad a CR 13 or 14 encounter. I'm running a 14th level campaign right now, in fact, and have to be careful to make sure I don't toss in too many encounters where this can happen. You also seem to forget that mind-affecting spells become less and less useful as encounter levels increase. Tons of monsters are immune/have large bonuses against them -- so many, in fact, that one of the most recommended 3.5 banned schools is enchantment.
All right, you seem to be willfully obfuscating the fact that a quickened or maximized or still or silent or *whatever metamagic effect* spell is a better spell than it's non-metamagiced equivalent. Despite the fact that it has been attempted to be explained at the top end of 9th level spell effects, and at the lower end of 5th and 6th level effects. If you are entirely comfortable with having the ability to stack metamagic, whether through rods or the Metamagic Mastery class feature, which operates in *almost exactly the same way*, past effective caster level, then nothing anyone will say will change your mind, and I am done trying to, because it seems as though your opinion is that a quickened greater dispel magic is not actually better than greater dispel magic, and is not actually a 10th level spell equivalent. I feel that it is, and I am not inclined to change my opinion.
Although you are nitpicking the larger point I am making, there are numerous ways to park someone in an antimagic field, like every wall spell, and there are numerous ways to do nasty things by using the suppression of magic effects, like shrink item. I am well aware of the limits of mind affecting, as I have been one of the foremost advocates of paying attention to the CR12-20 creatures within SRD sources. If you aren't advancing monsters or using templates, then you are left with mostly Outsiders and True Dragons, which are going to be awesome because they are awesome.
The issue with a silent still mass suggestion isn't just what it can do in a grand melee, regardless. It means, that by holding a rod of silent spell, an arcanist can rig most social encounters they may have that day, and only those who are highly specialised in identifying magic will be aware that anything happened at all.
|
|
Who gets free metamagic rods? They're either paid for, crafted, or found in EL-appropriate treasure. Metamagic rods are fine the way they are.
Or are you saying a free metamagic rod that can't be used to beef your highest level spells would be useless because you could only use it on spells you would be able to use it on anyways.
Fine one last post because of a typo in my previous post which I just fixed.
added the word rod I just meant to say free metamagic, not free metamagic rod. And because I've never been talking about just rods, I'm talking about all free metamagic in general including feats and character abilities (i.e. universalist wizard and various PrCs) in WotC core. Which is why I want a fix for free metamagic in general, it happens that that will include rods. Maybe rods by themselves are fine, but they aren't by themselves, they can combine and stack with all the other sources of free metamagic out there which I have seen abused, a character with rods and sudden feats who was a universalist wizard and although he never got to it, he was going to take some PrC or another that gave him more. The problem isn't rods, it's free metamagic in general.
You can have free metamagic at level 1
SRD.org says nothing about a readied action becoming a standard action. Thank you.
Please re-read the SRD. Why should I take you seriously if you continually do not understand basic concepts about the game, then once you're corrected, you ignore it and reassert the same incorrect statement?
Battle sorcerer gets 1 less spell per level, minimim of 1.
You are entitled to your own opinion. Not your own facts.
Point taken, I forgot that part. Okay, so you get one casting of spectral mount at level 6, and two-thirds of your total 3rd level spells are still situational buffs. You're still not being very smart with your spell selection, when you could just buy wands & scrolls to buff yourself, and use your spell slots for things your going to cast more than once. This applies even more if you're extending hour/level duration spells. I'll say it again: extending situational, long-duration buff spells isn't a good idea, if that's all you can do, but still have tons of spells left to cast per day.
And if your opinion is that something that does 3d6 points of dexterity damage, you have to use a whole lot less of monsters to counter, and is a 3rd level spell isn't broken, I can't argue with you or your opinion.And I played an ab champ because I hadn't before. And I dumped shivering touch from her arsenal, because... it's BROKEN.
And if your opinion is that shivering touch is broken, don't use it. Which you did. But don't expect everyone to agree with your opinion, especially when it's not based on any sort of fact.
All right, you seem to be willfully obfuscating the fact that a quickened or maximized or still or silent or *whatever metamagic effect* spell is a better spell than it's non-metamagiced equivalent. Despite the fact that it has been attempted to be explained at the top end of 9th level spell effects, and at the lower end of 5th and 6th level effects. If you are entirely comfortable with having the ability to stack metamagic, whether through rods or the Metamagic Mastery class feature, which operates in *almost exactly the same way*, past effective caster level, then nothing anyone will say will change your mind, and I am done trying to, because it seems as though your opinion is that a quickened greater dispel magic is not actually better than greater dispel magic, and is not actually a 10th level spell equivalent. I feel that it is, and I am not inclined to change my opinion.
I think you're right, to an extent. But I think there's a bit of room for moving around. I don't really consider a silent version of a meteor swarm to really be equivalent to a 10th level spell. It may cost a character a slot one level higher to do without the verbal component, but I don't think it really makes the spell a full level higher.
This may be a general conceptual problem with metamagic. Metamagic spells cost higher slots to cast as a balancing tool rather than a gauge of how powerful the spell really is. Does being able to turn a fireball into a line really make it a 4th level spell? No, it just makes it a lightning bolt that does fire damage. The premium cost isn't because the spell is more powerful, but more useful for the circumstances. And the caster pays an extra level's worth of spell power for that privilege.
By comparison, I think a quickened spell is truly equivalent to a significantly higher level spell because the increased utility of its fast cast time is extremely high.
I'd be more inclined to limit the number of extra slots above and beyond a caster's normal ability to cast rather than disallow any entirely. I would suggest allowing free metamagic that only adds one level to a slot requirement to exceed normal metamagic rule limits.
All right, you seem to be willfully obfuscating the fact that a quickened or maximized or still or silent or *whatever metamagic effect* spell is a better spell than it's non-metamagiced equivalent. Despite the fact that it has been attempted to be explained at the top end of 9th level spell effects, and at the lower end of 5th and 6th level effects. If you are entirely comfortable with having the ability to stack metamagic, whether through rods or the Metamagic Mastery class feature, which operates in *almost exactly the same way*, past effective caster level, then nothing anyone will say will change your mind, and I am done trying to, because it seems as though your opinion is that a quickened greater dispel magic is not actually better than greater dispel magic, and is not actually a 10th level spell equivalent. I feel that it is, and I am not inclined to change my opinion.
I'm not obfuscating anything. Quickened is better than standard actions. But is it better to the point of nerfing it because it's unbalanced/broken? No, because it's a good tactical option, has an appropriate cost (money/feats/levels in a class/number of times you can do it/whatever), and PCs aren't the only ones who can do it.
Now, if you don't want to change your opinion, that's fine. Houserule your games. But don't expect everyone else to feel the same as you, and don't expect them to adopt the same rules you have.
Although you are nitpicking the larger point I am making, there are numerous ways to park someone in an antimagic field, like every wall spell, and there are numerous ways to do nasty things by using the suppression of magic effects, like shrink item. I am well aware of the limits of mind affecting, as I have been one of the foremost advocates of paying attention to the CR12-20 creatures within SRD sources. If you aren't advancing monsters or using templates, then you are left with mostly Outsiders and True Dragons, which are going to be awesome because they are awesome.
This gets at one of the larger points I was trying to make. Casters have TONS of options to kill or disable things. Spending multiple actions/spells/metamagic/resources on AMF + wall spells + shrink item + something else is one option they have. It's fairly well-balanced (based on being a caster) against the number of spells and their level that you expend, the number of actions you take, and the material cost of the items you use. It's certainly not head & shoulders above anything else you can do.
Also, be careful with your wall spells, since most of them block line of sight and/or line of effect to just about everything.
The issue with a silent still mass suggestion isn't just what it can do in a grand melee, regardless. It means, that by holding a rod of silent spell, an arcanist can rig most social encounters they may have that day, and only those who are highly specialised in identifying magic will be aware that anything happened at all.
Characters with lots of ranks in bluff and diplomacy, with a decent charisma, can do mostly the same thing, essentially for free, with no way to identify without a correspondingly high sense motive. A caster can also cast a couple silent stilled suggestions to accomplish a similar feat, for less cost. Charm person/monster can perform a similar function, as well. He can even use these suggestions/charms to attempt to turn the opposition against one another -- like I said, casters have tons of options to do something.
Also, if your DM allows players to walk around with expensive metamagic rods, influencing social situations will spells, without realizing that someone's bound to be suspicious/have defenses against such a thing in place, that's his fault. Don't blame the ruleset if you can't come up with in-game ways to counterbalance a perceived problem, beyond hefting the banhammer.
I think you're right, to an extent. But I think there's a bit of room for moving around. I don't really consider a silent version of a meteor swarm to really be equivalent to a 10th level spell. It may cost a character a slot one level higher to do without the verbal component, but I don't think it really makes the spell a full level higher.
This may be a general conceptual problem with metamagic. Metamagic spells cost higher slots to cast as a balancing tool rather than a gauge of how powerful the spell really is. Does being able to turn a fireball into a line really make it a 4th level spell? No, it just makes it a lightning bolt that does fire damage. The premium cost isn't because the spell is more powerful, but more useful for the circumstances. And the caster pays an extra level's worth of spell power for that privilege.
By comparison, I think a quickened spell is truly equivalent to a significantly higher level spell because the increased utility of its fast cast time is extremely high.I'd be more inclined to limit the number of extra slots above and beyond a caster's normal ability to cast rather than disallow any entirely. I would suggest allowing free metamagic that only adds one level to a slot requirement to exceed normal metamagic rule limits.
I agree, to a point. Spell power increase has almost an exponential growth pattern, while applying metamagic is nowhere near that. It seems that, unless there's a specific circumstance (the silent stilled suggestions mentioned earlier), it's not worth doing unless you can mitigate the costs somehow. Even when costs are mitigated, the power of the increased spell usually doesn't approach the level it's "supposed" to be.
I disagree that quickened x is equivalent to a spell of x's level+4, however. Quickened spells are very useful, but I can't see how a quickened 5th level spell is equal to a 9th level spell, or a quickened 9th level spell is equivalent to whatever is considered a 13th level epic spell (if you can even make that distinction with epic spells). Given the cost to quicken something, either via feat or purchase (or the few class features that can grant quicken), I feel it's pretty balanced, at least as far as casters go.
Fine one last post because of a typo in my previous post which I just fixed.
added the word rod I just meant to say free metamagic, not free metamagic rod. And because I've never been talking about just rods, I'm talking about all free metamagic in general including feats and character abilities (i.e. universalist wizard and various PrCs) in WotC core. Which is why I want a fix for free metamagic in general, it happens that that will include rods. Maybe rods by themselves are fine, but they aren't by themselves, they can combine and stack with all the other sources of free metamagic out there which I have seen abused, a character with rods and sudden feats who was a universalist wizard and although he never got to it, he was going to take some PrC or another that gave him more. The problem isn't rods, it's free metamagic in general.
You can have free metamagic at level 1
The thread is about rods. Free/cheap metamagic in general is an entirely different discussion. One note on this, though: if Paizo wants to "boost" the power of base classes to match that of some of the later classes/PrCs, free/cheap metamagic is one way to do it.
Personally, I'm somewhat okay with nerfing/mitigating some of the mechanical issues with classes like the Artificer, Initiate of the Seven Veils, the Abjurant Champion, and the Malconvoker. Trying to balance against these is an exercise in aggravation, because some of the levels to which they can be "optimized" are quite absurd.
I'm willing to say with some firmness that a quickened greater dispel magic is not better than the equivalent of disjunction, gate, or time stop. It is good, and much better than what should be available at 11th Effective Caster Level, but might be okay, for a cost, a few times a day at 15th Effective Caster Level. This means that I am more or less okay with up to +2 Spell Levels in "free" metamagic for the expenditure of resources. But there does reach a point with stacking Metamagic that turns from mostly okay to OMGWTFBBQ, particularly when you combine synergistic effects, like greater dispel magic with anything from the Enchantment school.
|
|
You just keep pulling me in...
The discussion is about metamagic rods and whether or not they are unbalanced, if the reason the rods are unbalanced is because they provide free metamagic then discussing a fix for all free metamagic is germain to the conversation. Still I'm tired of arguing so no matter what is said I'm really going to stop posting so please don't respond to this.