I assume you're proposing a houserule for Metamagic.
It is unclear, but per your houserule, is the number of metamagic uses (1/2 caster level) on a per-feat basis?
In other words, can a 10th level wizard with Maximize, Empower, and Enlarge use Maximize 5 times a day, Empower 5 times a day, and Enlarge 5 times a day, or is he limited to a total of 5 metamagic feats each day and must pick how to use them?
It's a neat idea.
It's similar to the houserule I use, except I don't limit the daily usage.
In my campaign, metamagic is applied as a move action. A spellcraft check is rolled to see if the metamagic works. You can be disrupted during this move action, just like you can be disrupted when casting a spell. If you take damage during the move action when you are applying metamagic, it adds to the spellcraft check, making it harder to successfully apply the metamagic. The DC is 15 + the adjusted spell level (Spell level after adjusting upward for the metamagic) + 1 per metamagic feat. So a 9th level mage casting an Empowered Fireball would be DC 21 (15 plus the adjusted SL of 5 +1 for one metamagic feat).
I allow casters to cast spells even if the adjusted level is a higher level than they can cast, but the DC becomes 20 + adjusted spell level +3 per metamagic feat. So a level 7 wizard wants to cast an Empowered Fireball, the DC is 28.
Losing the metamagic (failed Spellcraft roll) doesn't lose the spell, just the metamagic. On the caster's standard action, he may cast the spell, or do something else like fire a crossbow or move, but he may not cast a different spell - his focus was on whatever he was trying to apply metamagic to and he cannot switch. Essentially, the application of metamagic makes the spell take a full round to cast, and losing the metamagic doesn't change this, but finishing the full round of casting results in the original spell being cast without the metamagic. The caster can abort the act of spellcasting entirely and not lose the spell.
This way, I'm using the printed spell level adjustments for all the feats without having to make a new list or change the texts of the feats in any way.
It allows people to use metamagic without blowing higher level slots, slots which almost always are better off being used for normal spells of that level.
You and I are on the same wavelenth, I think, just getting to the same place by different vehicles.
The general problem I have with this kind of system: it's too easy to get a big skill bonus through spells, class abilities, feats, etc.
Thanks for the feedback, need to add a few other restictions so a maximized meteor swarm is either not possible or requires a substantially (nearly impossible) higher check.
Add a line to the following effect:
If the metamagic effect would normally bring the spell level of the spell over 9 then double the spell level before adding it to the DC of the check.
Thanks for the feedback, need to add a few other restictions so a maximized meteor swarm is either not possible or requires a substantially (nearly impossible) higher check.
It's hard to balance, though.
Take your DC for Persistent Spell: DC 30 + spell level. That sounds high, but suppose you have a level 10 cleric in your party with the Law and Good domains; using those domain powers (+10 to skill checks, and the ability to "take 11"), plus a Guidance cantrip (+1 to skill checks), plus 10 ranks in Spellcraft, that's an easy way of getting 32 on a check (even higher, depending on your Int bonus and other possible bonuses like bardic music, etc.).
But on the other hand, if you make the DC too high, it's impossible for "honest" players to make the skill check.
The Truenamer class (from the Tome of Magic) had the same problem; the class's abilities are based on a skill check, but the skill DC is ridiculously high without stacking on a lot of bonuses. Food for thought.
I think that the DC to Quicken a spell should be 25 + spell level and not 20 + spell level...
It's far more useful to cast faster than to cast maximized, and casting faster should be a really hard task to accomplish, especially at low levels...
And Persistence should be higher too, for much the same reason... A CD of 39 for a 9th level spell is ridicolously low for what you get...
A possible new mechanic: instead of fixed DC, why don't you state that a metamagical spell has a DC of 10 or 15 plus the level of the spell multiplied by the number of additional slots needed normally for the feat?
For example, a Maximized 3rd level Spell will have a DC of 19 or 24, while the same spell made Persistent will have a 28 or 33 DC...
This way, a Persistent 9th level Spell will have a DC of 64 or 69, something that only an epic caster could beat...
Lots of good suggestions above if you want to do something like this.
My general thought was that it should scale by 2xspell level, but I actually like this:
A possible new mechanic: instead of fixed DC, why don't you state that a metamagical spell has a DC of 10 or 15 plus the level of the spell multiplied by the number of additional slots needed normally for the feat?
I'd up it to 20+ (SL X added slots). So at first level, silent spells would be DC 21 (for 1st level spells) - Need between 13-17 typically, 10 with high int and skill focus.
That, combined with +2-3 per use (success or not perhaps) would keep the usefulness about right.
The hole in both systems is the ease of metamagic'ing low level spells. Even under this one a Persistent 1st level is only DC 26, second 32. Both of those are simple, and very very useful.
Lots of good suggestions above if you want to do something like this.
My general thought was that it should scale by 2xspell level, but I actually like this:
A possible new mechanic: instead of fixed DC, why don't you state that a metamagical spell has a DC of 10 or 15 plus the level of the spell multiplied by the number of additional slots needed normally for the feat?I'd up it to 20+ (SL X added slots). So at first level, silent spells would be DC 21 (for 1st level spells) - Need between 13-17 typically, 10 with high int and skill focus.
That, combined with +2-3 per use (success or not perhaps) would keep the usefulness about right.
The hole in both systems is the ease of metamagic'ing low level spells. Even under this one a Persistent 1st level is only DC 26, second 32. Both of those are simple, and very very useful.
While I don't dispute your analysis... I think you need to alter your perspective a little.
You are designing your DCs based on a "maxed" (perhaps min/maxed) character. Maybe that fits your game/group style, but it shouldn't be assumed for general use.
Setting the DCs to a "simple" 26 or 32, because you expect all casters to max their Spellcraft, have Spellcraft as a class skill, and are at least considering Skill Focus, sets the DC at near ridiculous levels for a less dedicated caster - such as a Ranger or Paladin, maybe even a Bard to some degree.
Not to mention it steps outside the scale intended for skill checks, where "simple" is supposed to be 10 to 15, or so.
I agree with this... The DC for checks are always based on the average character, not on the maxed-out one...
To limit abuse on these new rules there are only two ways: limiting in some ways the number of metamagics available, like a set number per day or an increasing penalty to Spellcraft checks, and putting some requisites to every metamagical feat, so that the most powerful ones are not available until the character has a certain amount of power...
A powerful consequence of rules such these is that metamagical spells need not be prepared as such in advance, increasing the versatility of each caster (cleric, druid and wizard above all) and changing the usefulness of many other things in game, like Sudden Metamagic feats, which become almost useless or at least very underpowered...
Some other limitation, such as increasing the casting time for all metamagics, should work, leaving perhaps as the only exception Quicken Spell but at an increased DC...
I've had good luck with this house rule, although it is sort of predicated on using Spell Points (from Unearthed Arcana).
The Spellcaster can use any metamagic feat they take for free a number of times per day equal to their controlling attribute. Beyond this, they can continue to use the meatmagic feat, but must pay the cost in spell points as if they were casting a spell of the adjusted level.
For Example :
Korik the Sorcerer is a level 4 sorcerer. He has access to Level 2 Sorcerer Spells, has a Charisma of 16, and 18 spell points. He takes the metamagic feat Extend Spell. The first 3 (16 CHA = +3 Bonus) times he uses the Extend Spell feat per day (on either 0, 1st, or 2nd level spells) it does not adjust his spell level at all. So he can cast Extended Mage Armor 3 times without using any more than 1 spell point per casting (cost of casting a first level spell). Once he's used his 3 extends, he can continue using extend spell, but the fourth time he casts Mage Armor Extended he has to pay 3 spell points (cost of a second level spell). If he's already spent his 3 free uses, and wants to cast Protection from Arrows Extended, he can, but it costs 5 of his 14 spell points (a hefty price to pay).
Aralen is a 3rd level sorcerer, 2nd level cleric. She has access to Level 2 Sorcerer Spells and access to Level 1 Cleric Spells. She has a 14 wisdom and a 16 charisma (for a +2 and +3 respecitively). She has 12 spell points for her Arcane spells, and 5 spell points for her Cleric spells. If she also takes Extend Spell, she can use her Extend Spell feat 2 times per day free with her clerical spells, or 3 times with her arcane spells, or some combination thereof which doesn't violate either proscription (2 clerical spells and 1 arcane, or 3 arcane, or 2 clerical, or 1 clerical and 2 arcane). If she used it twice on her clericals already, she could spend her last 3 clerical points to extend a first level cleric spell, or she could pay 1 spell point to extend a level 0 clerical spell.
It works pretty well, but only when combined with spell points. Trying to do something similar with spell levels doesn't really work.
A DM in one of the games I play had suggested this, though we use the regular spell slot system rather than the point based one, which could easily lead to abuse. I wanted something that would still retain some of the normal restrictions of the slot location but not as heavy handed as to deny the use of stronger spells.
Well, I suppose you could use it with slot locations.
First <Controlling Attribute> times per day is free, beyond that, have to expend higher spell slots. This works good for spontaneous casters, but preparation casters have to allocated some ahead of time, or just be restricted to what they can do for free.
The guy who focuses on it takes more metamagic feats than others, but his Spellcraft score is not much higher than that of any other caster, especially with the PF rules which includes some of the uses of Concentration...
That said, a guy who spend one of his precious feats to get Skill Focus or something else which boosts his Spellcraft score has to get something in return...
I don't think that be forced to pay for such a feat just to be average at doing something is funny or worth...
In 3.5, metamagic comes at two costs: you must spend feats on metamagic and you must spend high level slots to use them...
With these variants there is the same basic cost in feats, but now we lacks the slot cost and we must replace that with something of equal weight...
I do not think that limiting the daily uses of metamagic is the answer, because in 3.5 there is no such limit...
We must also consider that a Spellcraft check adds already the chance of wasting the spell, so for achieving perfect balance we need something "small" to compensate, if necessary...
What about a "cooldown" period (a number of round equal to the "value" of the metamagic) before a caster can use another metamagic and/or the limit of one single metamagic per round (avoiding maximized spells before or after quickened ones, for example)?...
The guy who focuses on it takes more metamagic feats than others, but his Spellcraft score is not much higher than that of any other caster, especially with the PF rules which includes some of the uses of Concentration...
That said, a guy who spend one of his precious feats to get Skill Focus or something else which boosts his Spellcraft score has to get something in return...
I don't think that be forced to pay for such a feat just to be average at doing something is funny or worth...
The tricky bit is that (especially in Pathfinder) it's easy to boost your skill checks without spending a feat (e.g. the Good domain ability, the Destined sorcerer bloodline, the Divination school ability, spells like Guidance and Good Hope, all of which stack with each other).
The tricky bit is that (especially in Pathfinder) it's easy to boost your skill checks without spending a feat (e.g. the Good domain ability, the Destined sorcerer bloodline, the Divination school ability, spells like Guidance and Good Hope, all of which stack with each other).
But each such boost comes as a choice: you choose to boost a skill rather than boosting something else and must face the consequences...
Think about the domain, the school and the bloodline... To take all of them, you must be a triple-class character, so you'll be good at making Spellcraft checks, but you'll also renounce to some levels as a caster, losing maximum power...
Furthermore, each of their abilities can be activated only once per day using a standard action, so using all of them burns 3 rounds, and each lasts for only a single check, so using all of them at the same time will boost the skill only once in a day...
Even casting a spell to boost your skill needs that you reserve one or more slot to that spell and cast it instead of other spells, using other actions and renouncing to other, perhaps more vital, spells...
In PF there are more ways to boost skills, but they are not so practical as one could think at first glance...