|
While you can add the "silent" metamagic feat to a scrolled spell... you still have to read it aloud to trigger it. (Which kind of defeats the purpose :)
One may also recognise the similar problem of adding a "still" feat.
That's why I put the caveat in. I guess reading silently isn't an option? It works for symbols so I figured it would work.
Still of course makes sense. You have to get it out to cast it, so that defeats the purpose of still spell.
RAW I don't see anything that say that a scroll must be read aloud, even if we generally assume that.
If the spell has a vocal component and the scroll wasn't done using silent metamagic you must read it aloud. In any other situation it don't seem to be mandatory.
|
So exactly why the big whine?
Any chance we could keep this a polite discussion? Cheers.
Yes, the error was giving wizards an unlimited number of feats.
Wait, they haven't a unlimited number of feats, actually they have the same number as before UC and UM and must chose between the old stuff and new?
I'm not sure where you got the idea of Wizards having more Feats than before from? What they have is more, and more powerful Feat options. Sorcerers don't.
What's more, a character can get the flavour, and some of the benefits, which were once unique to the Sorcerer by dropping a Feat or two into them. That, in itself, isn't necessarily a bad thing... but it's only the Sorcerer's core Class Features which can be taken this way, no-one elses. That devalues the uniqueness of the Sorcerer class. If UM had allowed characters to, say, gain Wizard school abilities via dropping a couple of Feats, or Rogue Tricks, or whatever, then it'd be a more even playing field... it didn't, so it isn't.
|
|
Yes, the error was giving wizards an unlimited number of feats.
Wait, they haven't a unlimited number of feats, actually they have the same number as before UC and UM and must chose between the old stuff and new?
I'm not sure where you got the idea of Wizards having more Feats than before from? What they have is more, and more powerful Feat options. Sorcerers don't.
I didn't think that the wizard ave more feat available than before but your whole argument was and is [Loud voice] "The wizard have more feat than before: The sorcerer is screwed."
Instead the situation is that the number of different options available has increased (and not only for the wizard) but the total number of option that a single wizard can take is still the same.
You are perpetrating one of the standard fallacious arguments "the wizard can take any feat he want, he has always all the feats".
The only real difference is that a sorcerer chose most of his options at level 1 when he chose his bloodline (and now with eldritch arcana, that is much more a sorcerer feat than a wizard feat I can even broaden that choice).
A wizard "lock" 6 options at level 1: familiar/bonded object, specialist spells, opposite schools and 3 specialist school powers.
And one of those options is a negative one (opposite schools).
The sorcerer lock 8 options (his bloodline powers and feats) and 9 spells when he chose his bloodline a level 1.
So the sorcerer is more constricted by the choice he make at level 1, but from there to screaming "the sky is falling, the wizard can make 4 more choices (his class bonus feats) when he rise in level while the sorcerer has already done them" there is a profound difference.
So my reply is was heavy irony. I find depressing that it was necessary to explain it.
|
|
I'm not sure where you got the idea of Wizards having more Feats than before from? What they have is more, and more powerful Feat options. Sorcerers don't.Presumably because all Pathfinder characters now get a feat per 2 levels as opposed to per 3 in 3.5.
But that would include Sorcerers as well.
/me bash head on the desk.
...
I hope you are joking.
|
|
I didn't think that the wizard ave more feat available than before but your whole argument was and is [Loud voice] "The wizard have more feat than before: The sorcerer is screwed."
With respect, my argument was what my argument was... not what you'd like it to have been. That's one of those... what do they call them? 'Strawman' thingies, correct?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, and the whole spellbooks get destroyed bit?
Mending and Make Whole, one will repair a damaged book, the other will reconstitute matter that used to be a spellbook.
That pile of ash that used to be the chronicle of your arcane power? Completely restored if you where smart enough to stash the right scroll.
Has it been mentioned that wizards actually get feat support and sorcerers don't?
And part of wizards' feat support is devoted to stealing sorcerer's things?
Scrolling up it looks like that has been mentioned.
Then let me point it out again.
Wizards also have a feat that gives them immortality. Literally stealing other class' capstone benefits.
Seriously Paizo, what the f*%&?
Lilith, do you ever notice how you often seem to have a lot of people all disagreeing with you? Not that the majority is the best way to judge sanity, but it is a good measure of when to reevaluate one's conclusions. Perhaps not everyone else is wrong. Just a thought.Tiny Coffee Golem, when a lot of people agree with me, its a red flag that I need to re-evaluate what I believe. A quick look at history shows that when the majority of people believe something, its usually just a matter of time before they are proven wrong.
Um... what?
Take a longer look. The quick one isn't cutting it.
Lilith, do you ever notice how you often seem to have a lot of people all disagreeing with you? Not that the majority is the best way to judge sanity, but it is a good measure of when to reevaluate one's conclusions. Perhaps not everyone else is wrong. Just a thought.Tiny Coffee Golem, when a lot of people agree with me, its a red flag that I need to re-evaluate what I believe. A quick look at history shows that when the majority of people believe something, its usually just a matter of time before they are proven wrong.
Um... what?
Take a longer look. The quick one isn't cutting it.
I don't watch a lot of history shows, but I do know that on these boards the majority is usually right. Comparing people(those in the past relying on experts) who have to go on the testimony of others to people(us) who can go to the source(devs and books) is faulty logic.
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Also note that you can't make a scroll or magic item with metamagic.
The reason is simple.
If you can make a Silent Magic Missile, that's a spell on a scroll. I can then copy that spell to my own spellbook. Now I have a silent magic missile spell in my book...without the feat.
Wizards could then simply start accruing spells with the metamagic they want as non-meta'd spells, and never take meta feats, leave those for NPC's. After a short span of time, meta'd spells would be all over the place, and only fools would take metamagic.
Since you can't accrue such spells for use in magic items, you can't technically make a wand or other item with metafeats, although I freely admit it's been done in the past (Enemies and Allies had a sorc with a maximized Wand of magic missiles). Perhaps this is possible because you only have to have a meta'd spell available.
But unless you can scribe Maximized Magic Missile into your spellbook and ANY wizard can now use it, you can't do so with a scroll.
I'd also like to point out that Arcane Sorcs can ignore the casting time change several times a day; that Quicken Spell ignores it; and that Sorcs also benefit from MM Rods, because these enhance spells without a meta-cost, which is the best reason for using them.
==Aelryinth
Also note that you can't make a scroll or magic item with metamagic.
Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.
Beyond that, I don't see why any of what you're asserting with respect to spellbooks would need to be true.
I can see why Aelrynth thinks that from the rules, but I will just say it may deserve a FAQ.
|
I'm working on an overhaul of the sorcerer right now, one that replaces bloodline powers with gifts similar to revelations, but keeps some of the sorcerer flavor. Eldritch Heritage, Crossblooded, and Wildblooded are completely replaced in the new class.
How would you like to see the new class? I've got a draft of how things would look, and I should have a single bloodline revamped for the new system shortly. What would be the best way to present it?
I'm working on an overhaul of the sorcerer right now, one that replaces bloodline powers with gifts similar to revelations, but keeps some of the sorcerer flavor. Eldritch Heritage, Crossblooded, and Wildblooded are completely replaced in the new class.
How would you like to see the new class? I've got a draft of how things would look, and I should have a single bloodline revamped for the new system shortly. What would be the best way to present it?
You have whet my curiosity.
Let me know what you come up with.
A google doc is pretty universally accessible.
Also note that you can't make a scroll or magic item with metamagic.
Beyond that, I don't see why any of what you're asserting with respect to spellbooks would need to be true.
Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.
So, you're saying you can make a scroll of a Silenced Spell?
Coooool, I'll copy it into my spellbook. Who needs to learn that feat? Hey, you got Silenced versions of ALL your spells I could copy, maybe? I don't want to burn MY feats on lame metamagic if I don't have to.
==Aelryinth
|
Also note that you can't make a scroll or magic item with metamagic.
Beyond that, I don't see why any of what you're asserting with respect to spellbooks would need to be true.
Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.
So, you're saying you can make a scroll of a Silenced Spell?
Coooool, I'll copy it into my spellbook. Who needs to learn that feat? Hey, you got Silenced versions of ALL your spells I could copy, maybe? I don't want to burn MY feats on lame metamagic if I don't have to.
==Aelryinth
I really don't see where you're getting that a metamagicked spell on a scroll is a spell a wizard can scribe.
A scroll of "Silent Magic Missile" is, to be technical, a scroll of "Magic Missile modified by the Silent metamagic feat". If a wizard wants to scribe it, the spell itself is still just Magic Missile, not Silent Magic Missile. You'd use the usual rules for casting scrolls (arcane/divine, must have appropriate stat, be on spell list, caster level check if own caster level is lower than scroll's caster level).
So, to answer your questions: yes, you can make a scroll of a Silenced spell. No, you cannot scribe it into your book as a Silenced version of the spell, because that would be an entirely new spell and not a metamagicked spell.
EDIT: It doesn't cost you anything to be polite. Your attempt at humor and/or sarcasm just derails an otherwise perfectly valid thread.
Thats how I read the rules to
+1
So, you're saying you can make a scroll of a Silenced Spell?
Coooool, I'll copy it into my spellbook. Who needs to learn that feat? Hey, you got Silenced versions of ALL your spells I could copy, maybe? I don't want to burn MY feats on lame metamagic if I don't have to.
Look, I don't want to be rude, but I wrote a total of one sentence in the post you're replying to and you clearly didn't read it because it specifically addresses the strawman you conjure up in your sarcastic reply.
You owe everyone who read your response an apology for wasting their time.
IIRC there was a special feat or ability that allowed you to add metamagic to certain magic items, meaning it could not be done otherwise.
I also think only some item had that limitation. I would have to do some looking around to find the information though.
I don't see the eldritch heritage feats as an issue for the following reason.
1. First level bloodline powers aren't any real big deal. Especially since they use Charisma as a base stat. And wizards can't stack the arcane bond feature by taking the arcane bloodline option for the feat.
It also requires another feat expenditure as well as skill investment.
2. To get the advanced versions of these feats the wizard has to spend stat points on a stat he normally would not give the time of day for. just to get another bloodline power.
So yes a wizard can take SOME sorcerer features. He still is missing the meat of the sorcerer class... and he's gimped himself as a wizard to do so. And he still does not have enough goods to threathen my sorcerer's standing. While I've spent my feats to strengthen my class, not gimp it to take someone else's MINOR toys.
It's a pretty heavy feat investment as well. Four feats to take Eldritch Heritage to the max and an investment in Charisma. That's a high price for a wizard.
By taking the one level for cross-blooded sorcerer, you're now getting your spells one level slower, have lost one caster level, won't get your capstone school ability, and will get your bonus wizard feats one level slower and give one up. You don't have spontaneous casting at every level to make getting spells one level slower worthwhile.
I think the price paid is equal to the cost. And unless you are going blaster or mind control, it's not really worth it to dip into sorcerer.
Can I just ask a random question here that might set this argument on (from what I can piece together) yet another tangent?
As a 10 - 12th level wizard, you are walking around Random Jungle Zone A, with the expectation to meet jungle animal type creatures. You have not yet befriended the locals to determine anything of note with these jungles. You are not sure if the leeches poisonous and of abnormal size. You are unclear if by 'giant stone THINGS' the peasant meant stone giants, Earth elementals or Stone Golems. You have learnt from watching the cows though that walking into the streams will get your flesh stripped by the local fishes. You are not aware of any dinosaurs in the area, but a few games back there WAS that giant using one as a mount that your GM seemed to like a LITTLE too much.
How is your spell selection going to differ here from (say) Random Mountainous Zone B. Or Underground Cave Network C? Even Coastal Sea-Shanty Town D your at for the day before you go inland into Jungle Zone A?
Really? Is there that much difference? Maybe if your underground you won't pack fly, but... you know what... there are plenty of deep holes and pit traps in cavern networks.
I'm unsure of how things run in other games, but we tend to run against the clock a HECK of a lot. Spending a week befriending the locals and discovering that the leeches are of abnormal size means that typically means whatever it was we were hoping to achieve, we won't. Typically also anything that is a threat to a 10th - 12th level adventuring party... well... the level 1 commoner locals that encounter those don't tend to come back with stories to tell.
In some instances I understand. If you have reliable intel that your going up against Daemons not Demons, then you can choose your spells appropriately based on their resistances. If your sure they are Demons, not winged monkeys, you can prep banishments and dismissals. If you are in an abandoned temple, odds are undead are the order of the day (though ironically enough,...
When I play wizards, I don't plan my list around opponents. I plan it around tactics.
Why do I care about the resistances of the enemies? I don't plan to use spells of that kind unless I'm blasting, and if I'm blasting, I'm playing an admixuture specialist who can switch energy types.
Otherwise, I'm using a spell like fog cloud or an illusion spell to control the battlefield and funnel enemies to my melees or ranged attacers. Or I'm hasting my group. Or I'm casting a wall spell to seal off attackers. Or I'm casting fly so my melee can get to the enemy. Or I'm conjuring a creature to occupy an enemy until we finish another one or cast a spell.
As a wizard character, spell list preparation does not involve knowing the enemy save on rare occasion. You already have guys in your group that do a lot of damage, so your primary concern is not damage dealing unless you're doing that's your build. If it is, you'll build to deal with resistances and spell resistance.
Wizards, like sorcerers, have plans with their spells. They don't wait until the rogue tells them we're fighting frost giants to memorize fireball.
More often than not wizard players go what's this spell good for? I'll show a few examples of thinking as a wizard.
Fireball: Uses:
1. Destroying a swarm.
2. Hitting multiple low level non-resistant mooks.
3. Hitting flying creatures that are elevated and/or behind cover.
4. Doing damage.
wall of force
1. Cutting off swarming enemies or separating enemies to be taken down piece meal.
2. Providing a wall to put our backs against so we can't be attacked form all sides.
3. Closing off a position to give time for buffing, healing, and preparation for counter attack.
4. Blocking creatures from charging.
5. Some roleplay item like blocking water from entering through a broken wall or stopping a rolling boulder from crushing us or a trampling creature from run back and forth over us.
silent image
1. Creating a fake wall to cut off enemies.
2. Hiding the party.
3. Creating false images of yourself to lure out an ambush.
4. Signal someone you're in trouble.
5. Create a distraction.
6. Run some creatures off a chasm or bridge by making it appear longer than it is.
7. Cause an enemy creature to go into the water with the piranha by making it seem as though they aren't there and the water is crystal clear and safe.
You pick spells according to their uses and ability to be countered. You may leave a few slots open to pick a few spells that are specific to the enemy you face. But wizard memorization strategy is similar to sorcerer spells known strategy. You're picking spells you know you can get mileage out of in the largest number of situations to help your party.
Spontaneous casting is nice, but not the end all be all. Wizards get about enough base spells per day to plan very effective strategies. Just like sorcerers pick spells to know they can get a lot of mileage out of.
A scroll that is scribed is a spell. Nothing more, nothing less. If it's modified, then it's copyable. There is nothing in the rules that suggests you can apply a feat to a spell and then write it down...because ALL SCROLLS can be copied (Arcane) as IS.
The 'distinction' you're making with a Silent Magic Missile is not there. Silent Magic Missile, on a scroll, is a self-contained spell, no more, no less. Once it's written down, the feat means nothing. It's a second level MM spell with no verbal components, treated as a first level spell, and it can go right into your spellbook if you do this.
If you allow this, then you may as well just throw out most MM feats for wizards, because they'll just buy the Meta'd spells they need. They probably get the originals from Sorcerors with metas and Scribe Scroll.
i.e. it makes no sense. Metas are applied to a spell when cast, or when placed into the memory of a living caster. They don't go down on scrolls, and I've yet to see a Paizo example of one shoved into a wand, or stuck into a magic item. I'm fairly sure you can't even use a Ring of Spell Storing to store a meta'd spell, but I might be wrong.
3.5 had some staves with meta'd spells. Were those ported over?
==Aelryinth
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
A scroll that is scribed is a spell. Nothing more, nothing less. If it's modified, then it's copyable. There is nothing in the rules that suggests you can apply a feat to a spell and then write it down...because ALL SCROLLS can be copied (Arcane) as IS.
Strange, my copies of the Pathfinder RPG have scrolls in the magic items section of the book, not the spells section.
Perhaps you might want to contact Paizo if yours was bound incorrectly?
Or you could just admit you're wrong. I know it can be hard for most people. I have faith in you though, you can do it.
Or do you allow scrolls to be used with metamagic rods, and get that wrong too/
A scroll that is scribed is a spell. Nothing more, nothing less. If it's modified, then it's copyable. There is nothing in the rules that suggests you can apply a feat to a spell and then write it down...because ALL SCROLLS can be copied (Arcane) as IS.
Source?
Has anyone made any interesting eldritch heritage wizard builds? I'm curious to see if the chain is worth it, but hero lab hasn't implemented It yet and I'm too lazy to work through the variants on paper if someone has already done the legwork.
Note: I did believe certain magic items had meta'd spells. But I couldn't recall any.
But note no meta'd spells are in the scrolls section. Nor alluded to in the wands section ( I Don't believe wands to be imbalanced).
And amazingly, someone seems to think that because scrolls are magic items, you can't 'use them up' to scribe them into your spellbook, when you are specifically allowed to do so. Unlike other magical items. That IS imbalanced.
==Aelryinth
I am playing a crossblooded sorcerer, and now I can call on the bloodline power of three bloodlines rather than two.*
*Both these statements assume that your DM does not allow you to pick up multiple copies of the Eldritch Heritage feats.
Not quite. A crossblooded sorcerer gets to choose between either bloodline whenever gaining a power or spell. It's one or the other, not both.
|
|
I'm working on an overhaul of the sorcerer right now, one that replaces bloodline powers with gifts similar to revelations, but keeps some of the sorcerer flavor. Eldritch Heritage, Crossblooded, and Wildblooded are completely replaced in the new class.
How would you like to see the new class? I've got a draft of how things would look, and I should have a single bloodline revamped for the new system shortly. What would be the best way to present it?
You have whet my curiosity.
Let me know what you come up with.
A google doc is pretty universally accessible.
Couldn't get Google Docs to work, so I stripped it down and posted it here.
Let me know what you think of the new Oracle-style Sorcerer.
In honesty, I don't particularly see a problem with Aelryinth's way of doing things. This is not to say I believe Ael's way of reading this is correct (I don't), but simply to say that even if it is, it does not change the power dynamic.
and other stuff...
Sorcerers will always use MM feats, because they can apply them spontaneously. Scribed scrolls don't do them much good on a permanent basis, although from 3.5 there is the idea that they could prepare pre-meta'd spells in Spells Known to avoid the casting delay. They could scribe a meta'd scroll for nice profit to a wizard...once. Then the wizard can do it himself forever, and furthermore spread it to other wizards, which would mean level 5 Empowered Fireball should be all over the place, and no Wizard should have the Empower feat if they've any sense. Just buy the boosted version of the damage spell.
You have to consider the wizard and MM feat costs when looking at this.
Why have Empower?
Just grab an Empower Rod if you want to do so spontaneously. If you want it on a damage spell, there's very few spells you actually want to Empower...you only have a few to set up. The gold cost would thus be negligible, and you'd never need learn the feat. Likewise, even something as Quicken is only going to be applied to a few spells.
Remember, only generalists can apply Metamagic on the fly, and it's not strong even for them. The rest of Wizards have to prepare spells ahead of time, and having the spell pre-Empowered in their books is a planning thing. Not having to ever take Empower, and taking Spell Focus or Spell Penetration instead is a great trade-off.
Remember, you are subbing gold for a feat...multiple feats. That's always to the advantage of a wizard.
Spontaneous casting of the metamagic is only an issue if you're a generalist, and even then likely limited to a single meta feat due to the lack of slots and cost of the MM feat being applied. A generalist has to be 14th level to Quicken a spell using his MM slots, and can do it a whopping once a day. Meanwhile, the specialist gets 7 more spells a day then he does...
===Aelryinth
|
|
So, you're saying you can make a scroll of a Silenced Spell?
Yes. It's right here...
Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell's higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat). A character doesn't need the metamagic feat to activate an item storing a metamagic version of a spell.
Now would you stop with the rude posts, already?
Has anyone made any interesting eldritch heritage wizard builds? I'm curious to see if the chain is worth it, but hero lab hasn't implemented It yet and I'm too lazy to work through the variants on paper if someone has already done the legwork.
I've done it with a wizard. I've been trying to make a wizard that can take advantage of fire shield. I'm hoping this build allows it.
He's an wizard (evoker-admixture-scrollmaster). I took the Eldritch Heritage (Infernal-Pit-touched) line to get Tough as Hell for the +6 inherent bonus on con. Focusing on Con I should end up with over 250 hit points. I'm hoping that will allow me to enter melee a bit and take advantage of the damage from fire shield which will be something like 1d6+25 at high level.I've also used the Eldritch Heritage bloodline to make a sorcerer shapechanger getting the con and strength boost together. So far it's pretty good. I can get some nutty hit points. I like turning into a dragon.
|
|
Also note that you can't make a scroll or magic item with metamagic.
Beyond that, I don't see why any of what you're asserting with respect to spellbooks would need to be true.
Using metamagic feats, a caster can place spells in items at a higher level than normal.
So, you're saying you can make a scroll of a Silenced Spell?
Coooool, I'll copy it into my spellbook. Who needs to learn that feat? Hey, you got Silenced versions of ALL your spells I could copy, maybe? I don't want to burn MY feats on lame metamagic if I don't have to.
==Aelryinth
Spells Copied from Another's Spellbook or a Scroll: A wizard can also add a spell to his book whenever he encounters one on a magic scroll or in another wizard's spellbook. No matter what the spell's source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings). Next, he must spend 1 hour studying the spell. At the end of the hour, he must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell's level). A wizard who has specialized in a school of spells gains a +2 bonus on the Spellcraft check if the new spell is from his specialty school. If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into his spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook). The process leaves a spellbook that was copied from unharmed, but a spell successfully copied from a magic scroll disappears from the parchment.
I would say that "he understand the spell" is fairly clear. He comprehend the spell, not the "matamagiched" version of the spell.
On the other hand:
Independent Research: A wizard can also research a spell independently, duplicating an existing spell or creating an entirely new one. The cost to research a new spell, and the time required, are left up to GM discretion, but it should probably take at least 1 week and cost at least 1,000 gp per level of the spell to be researched. This should also require a number of Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) checks.
Nothing here prohibit wizards or sorcerers (or any other spellcasting class) to research the new spell "Silent Magic Missiles", a new 2 level spell that has only a somatic component.
The drawback of that spell is that it will be always a second level spell, it will use the space in the book or a know spell slot of a second level spell and so on.For all use and purposes it will be a new spell that mimic the effect of a existing spell with a added metamagic effect but is not that spell. Very similar to Fireball and Delayed Blast Fireball (3.5. had a metamagic feat that delayed a spell even if that feat was added some decade after the introduction of Delayed Blast Fireball).
Note that spontaneous spellcasters can research new spells. When they have developed them they add then to their spell roster the next time they are capable to add/replace as spell of the appropriate level.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
So, you're saying you can make a scroll of a Silenced Spell?Yes. It's right here...
Magic Items and Metamagic Spells: With the right item creation feat, you can store a metamagic version of a spell in a scroll, potion, or wand. Level limits for potions and wands apply to the spell's higher spell level (after the application of the metamagic feat). A character doesn't need the metamagic feat to activate an item storing a metamagic version of a spell.Now would you stop with the rude posts, already?
Wow, I never thought an off hand comment would make so much posting fodder. ;-)
The only issue we have so far with a silenced scroll is if the scroll needs to be read aloud (which would make it redundant) or if the scroll could be read silently (which I say it could*, due to the metamagic feat.) Also, Riffle scrolls come to mind.
A still scroll would be kind of useless, since you'd still have to have it in hand.
We are comparing mechanical power here, not what we "like".Great, but plenty of other BLs have good abilities/arcana/spells, and Sage is giving up Arcane Bond for a ranged touch attack, and giving up a DC boost for using INT instead of CHA. Plenty of reason not to pick it merely for crunch reasons.
I just noticed...
If I'm right and you can take Sage and Tattooed Sorcerer together, you trade back the crappy Arcane Bolt for the Familiar again.
You still lose the DC boost, but you trade that for the Verisian tatoo, which isn't an exact substitute, but it's still a DC bonus that stacks with spell focus. Kind of sucks to lose free Eschew materials but whatever.
And the Bloodline Tattoos power is kind of a waste on the Arcane's Bonus Spells, since none of them have a Saving Throw (Except possibly wish, but you'd be an idiot to waste the money casting a saving throw spell with that.)
But DANG IT my Sorcerer uses INT instead of CHA and doesn't have a crappy substitute for a Familiar - AND that Familiar is an awesome part of the back of my BALD HEAD when he's not being useful.
Ah, so the rules do allow it.
Now, is there anywhere in the rules that disallows you from taking a metamagicked spell on a scroll and copying it to your spellbook? It IS a 2nd level spell after all.
The only evidence I've seen of that is quoting 'spell' in the copy rules, which applies to a casting with metamagic as surely as one without it, and does NOT disallow it.
And in which case, you should be able to do this. Unlike preparing the spell on the fly or when studying, the 'extra energy' is already invested in the spell in scroll form, and would likewise be if copied and memorized therefrom.
Researching it would create a WHOLE NEW spell...an Empowered Fireball spell/scroll is different from one researched, because the 2nd version would be a true 5th level spell...and you could EMPOWER it on top of what was already done (since the feat is nowhere in the researched version). Such a researched spell would be inherently superior to a MM spell in all ways, and justify the research cost.
Whereas one copied with the feat is a 3rd level spell with a damage kicker you memorize in a 5th level slot without needing the feat to do so, and is exactly like a spell prepared on the fly.
===Aelryinth
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I know I know, don't feed the troll...
Ah, so the rules do allow it.
Now, is there anywhere in the rules that disallows you from taking a metamagicked spell on a scroll and copying it to your spellbook? It IS a 2nd level spell after all.
Nope, using your logic* the metamagicked spell is *not* on the sorcerer/wizard spell list, so you can't copy it. In fact you can't even cast it w/o a UMD check.
The user must have the spell on her class list.
Since I fail to see 'silent dispel magic' on the wizard/sorcerer spell list, he can't use the scroll.
For the rest of us however, we do see "Dispel Magic" on the list, and the rules say that the item can be modified with metamagic.
*
|
|
Now, is there anywhere in the rules that disallows you from taking a metamagicked spell on a scroll and copying it to your spellbook?
You can copy all of the metamagicked scroll spells you want into your spellbook. An Empowered fireball scroll (for example) can be copied into your spellbook as the spell fireball. A Silent invisibility scroll can be copied as the spell invisibility.
Sorry, I know that's not the cheese that you're looking for.
The thing in the rules that would stop you from learning metamagicked versions of spells from scrolls is this...
A wizard can only learn new spells that belong to the wizard spell lists.
I've checked the wizard spell list fairly carefully, and I don't see empowered fireball, so you're out of luck.
Instead of asking if there's anything in the rules that disallows this, maybe you could try showing us all where in the rules this is specifically allowed?
Under the same rules that allow you to copy any wizard spell on a scroll into your spellbooks? And don't even try to argue the fact that a Silent Dispel Magic is not a wizard spell, or you wouldn't be able to cast it from the scroll in the first place.
i.e. by your logic, you can't use a metamagicked scroll without UMD, because the spell on the scroll is not on ANY spell list. You'd need UMD to put it on your class list.
I.e. bad logic on your part. Try again. If you can use it as a scroll, then you can use it as a spell.
So, either you can't MM a scroll, since the MM spell is not on your class list (a bad leap of logic, but hey, you brought it up), or you can scribe it on a scroll and add it to your spells as a pre-MM'd spell, just like it is on the scroll.
==Aelryinth