Eldritch Researcher + Spell Perfection = -2 metamagic levels?

[Ravingdork]

If I have the Eldritch Researcher feat and Spell Perfection in my home brew researched spell, does that mean I can reduce the metamagic adjustment to the spell by 2?

[Angry Wiggles]

It looks like that's the case to me. You might also consider taking the Magical Lineage trait to drop it yet another level, assuming nobody else knows of a rule or ruling which would prevent these from stacking.

[LazarX]

Angry Wiggles wrote:

It looks like that's the case to me. You might also consider taking the Magical Lineage trait to drop it yet another level, assuming nobody else knows of a rule or ruling which would prevent these from stacking.

It's rather hard to justify taking Magical Lineage for a spell that does not exist.

[Angry Wiggles]

LazarX wrote:

It's rather hard to justify taking Magical Lineage for a spell that does not exist.

With the Additional Traits feat, it looks like it might be technically legal. I agree with you, though, it's hilariously out of place as a combination.

[Drachasor]

It's obvious how all 3 work together. Why, the creator of the spell Stable Time Loop arguably invented this combo.

[nate lange]

with spell perfection you can already apply one metamagic feat for free... but if you really need a second, yes it looks like a valid combo. Magical Lineage (through the Additional Traits feat) also looks valid and honestly not that out of place (the background element is that you inherited arcane power from a parent/ancestor, not that they taught you how to metamagically cast a specific spell better). if you stacked them it'd be -4 level adjustment but could not drop the total below 0*, so you could do free quicken from the trait/feat and free maximize/dazing/whatever from spell perfection.

(*i guess technically it could but shouldn't if its normally a 0 or 1 level adjustment, but that's a whole different can of worms)

[Ravingdork]

I've heard some people argue that it is not a bonus.

[Drachasor]

Ravingdork wrote:

I've heard some people argue that it is not a bonus.

The game actually defines what a bonus is, which are numerical values added to checks and statistical scores. So there's no bonus here.

Of course, from what I've been seeing in the last month, Pathfinder and/or some community elements confuse what the rules say with what they want the rules to say.

[Ravingdork]

Drachasor wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

I've heard some people argue that it is not a bonus.

The game actually defines what a bonus is, which are numerical values added to checks and statistical scores. So there's no bonus here.

Of course, from what I've been seeing in the last month, Pathfinder and/or some community elements confuse what the rules say with what they want the rules to say.

So you don't think it would work then?

[Drachasor]

Oh, I was confusing Spell Perfection with a feat that actually did reduce metamagic costs. But I think those are all in 3.5.

But yes, I definitely don't think Spell Perfection would increase the metamagic reduction. That's not remotely a numerical bonus.

[Ravingdork]

I've also seen people argue that it is, Drachasor, as it provides a positive boost and is a number; ergo, it can be considered a numerical bonus.

[Drachasor]

Eh, I don't see how a reduction is adding something. It's pretty clearly subtracting something. And it's not doing it to a check or statistical score either.

[Ravingdork]

Meh, said people see anything "beneficial" as being synonymous with "bonus."

[Drachasor]

Tell them to look it up in the CRB. It's in the beginning where they go over the terms. Bonuses are quite specific.

Hmm, in fact, it seems like Superior Summoning shouldn't benefit from Spell Perfection either. It doesn't add to a check or statistical score.

Here's the Bonus definition, btw:
Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.

The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don't generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus of a given type works. Bonuses without a type always stack, unless they are from the same source.

The most amusing thing to me about this is how Spell Perfection using "numerical" in its text is redundant.

[MeatForTheGrinder]

I would argue that the reduction of a penalty is a bonus. I originally thought otherwise, but my DM convinced me when I tried to take two traits that both reduced armor check penalty and was told "bonuses from the same source don't stack".

I think the distinction between something beneficial and a bonus lies in the ability to be numerically quantifiable. If something says "you can do this special thing" it is a benefit. If it says "you can do this thing with this number added or subtracted" it is a bonus.