Persistent Spell Metamagic & Spells with Save / Round

[Chimon]

Persistent Spell Metamagic

Quote:

Benefit: Whenever a creature targeted by a persistent spell or within its area succeeds on its saving throw against the spell, it must make another saving throw against the effect. If a creature fails this second saving throw, it suffers the full effects of the spell, as if it had failed its first saving throw. A persistent spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.

Spells that do not require a saving throw to resist or lessen the spell's effect do not benefit from this feat

Does the Persistent Spell Metamagic persist for the entirety of a spell's duration, in the case of spells that allow for a save per round (to remove an ongoing effect) after failing the initial save?

For example, an enemy who fails the initial save of Glitterdust is blind (or paralyzed if Hold Person). Would their save at their next round to remove blindness/paralysis also be made twice (taking lower) or just once?

[Jiggy]

Good question. Depends on whether "targeted by" is something you can still be after the spell has been cast.

Back after some research...

EDIT: Don't see anything helpful in the Magic chapter. This is probably an "ask your GM" question (or "expect table variation" in PFS).

[Remy Balster]

By the exact syntax of the feat, yes, any saving throw required, even after any initial saving throw, will require a secondary save if they succeed the first. Unless the creature was never targeted… in which case the answer is sort of.

If it is an area effect, while in the area, the creature must roll two saves to succeed, but if there is a persistent effect that they must save against after exiting the area, they need only make one save.

If the spell is a targeted spell, however, any saves required at any time from this spell will require two saves.

“Whenever a creature targeted by a persistent spell or within its area succeeds on its saving throw against the spell, it must make another saving throw against the effect.”

This can be parsed out, to show this.

When;
A) A creature that has been targeted by the modified spell
Or
B) A creature within the area of the modified spell
and
Makes a saving throw and succeeds
then
They must make a secondary save to resist the spell effect.

[Jiggy]

Remy Balster wrote:

When;

A) A creature that has been targeted by the modified spell

Careful; that's not actually what it says.

It doesn't say "a creature that has been targeted", it says "a creature targeted". That's an entirely different tense. What you wrote refers to the targeting having happened at any point in the past (in which case your interpretation would be correct exactly as you demonstrated). However, what the feat actually says is written in a form of present tense, referring to something that is currently being targeted.

So we would need to know whether the affected creature is still counting as "targeted" on the second round, but we don't know that. Therefore, we can't answer the question with any sort of certainty.

[Bizbag]

I think that's way overthinking it. If you make a saving throw against the spell, you roll again if you succeed the first time.

If a spell is an ongoing area effect, and you are within the area, you satisfy "whenever a creature within the area...".
If a targeted spell has multiple saves, and you were targeted the first time, so you are still a target, subject to ongoing effects.

Essentially, you are still the target of Hold Person in subsequent rounds, because paralyzing you for multiple rounds is what the spell does.

[Ilja]

In the case of glitterdust though, it doesnt target anyone, and its effect remain after theyve left the area.

[Ilja]

Also, depending on effect.what constitues a "save against the spell" may be ambiguous.

[DesolateHarmony]

For Glitterdust, since it isn't targeted, you would use Persistent Spell in regards to the area of the spell. If you succeed in leaving the area of effect, removing the blindness condition would only be one Saving Throw per round. The effects may have been caused in the area, but the wording of Persistent Spell reads: "Whenever a creature targeted by a persistent spell or within its area...."

[Scavion]

Hold Monster is looking mighty fine now.

[Bizbag]

Ilja wrote:

Also, depending on effect.what constitues a "save against the spell" may be ambiguous.

How is that ambiguous at all? The only thing I can think of that wouldn't require a double-save is non magical fire sparked by a spell effect.

Quote:

For Glitterdust, since it isn't targeted, you would use Persistent Spell in regards to the area of the spell. If you succeed in leaving the area of effect, removing the blindness condition would only be one Saving Throw per round. The effects may have been caused in the area, but the wording of Persistent Spell reads: "Whenever a creature targeted by a persistent spell or within its area...."

There's a whole thread going now regarding Glitterdust, so I would come up with more than one explanation re: Persistent spell depending on how Paizo or your GM rule.

If it's a persistent cloud, you may not even need to save against blindness if you leave the cloud; it may just stop blinding you.
If it's a covering of dust on anyone in range, that dust doesn't go away if you move - so it'd be a continuous effect of the spell subject to Persistent.

What I won't agree with is that it's a covering of dust, which stays on you if you move away, but you somehow lose the benefit of Persist if they move away from the original blast area. It'd be the same dust, with no link to its original area.

[Remy Balster]

Jiggy wrote:

Remy Balster wrote:

When;

A) A creature that has been targeted by the modified spell

Careful; that's not actually what it says.

It doesn't say "a creature that has been targeted", it says "a creature targeted". That's an entirely different tense. What you wrote refers to the targeting having happened at any point in the past (in which case your interpretation would be correct exactly as you demonstrated). However, what the feat actually says is written in a form of present tense, referring to something that is currently being targeted.

So we would need to know whether the affected creature is still counting as "targeted" on the second round, but we don't know that. Therefore, we can't answer the question with any sort of certainty.

No.

You have your tenses mixed up.

"a creature targeted" is past tense, simple. It denotes a completed action. The action is finished. "to be a target" has been done.

I translated it into a different tense, the progressive perfect past tense. Most people have an easier time reading perfect tenses. It doesn't confuse them as much.

Simple past tense can be misused in regular speech.

Ie.

I walked to my car.

This is a simple past tense sentence. But some people would intepret it as present tense mistakenly. Or mistakenly say something like this and mean present tense. But it is still a past tense sentence.

To be clear, and leave no doubt, the use of helping verbs are... helpful.

I had walked to my car.

This is the perfect past tense. (It isn't really perfect, that's just what they're called)

///

My parsing of the sentence is correct.

Whenever (Clause)
A creature (subject)
targeted by a persistent spell (state of subject)
or (logic modifier)
within its area (alternate subject state)
succeeds (clause trigger)
on its saving throw against the spell (trigger details)
it must make another saving throw against the effect. (result)

Ie. When the state of the subject [a creature] is [{has been targeted} or {within the area}] and performs trigger action [succeeds on saving throw] then perform action [it must make another saving throw].

[Remy Balster]

Jiggy wrote:

"A man entranced by a harpy doesn't have long to live."

"I have this feeling like we're being watched."
"I used to be the hunter, but now I'm the hunted."
"I'm being targeted by the mafi– *gack!*"
"Don't take it personally, he's just really jaded."
"I think your plan is too convoluted."

Your first example is one of those misuses I mentioned earlier. "A man who is entranced by a harpy..." etc., is the correct form. Might need some commas too.

'Being' changes a simple past tense verb into a progressive perfect tense, it denotes 'a past until current' tense, ie progressive. It is a way to express that something has already started and is continued up until this moment and beyond.

You've also used some of the good ol English flex in the list, a fun use of a past tense verb is as a substitute for a noun. "I'm the hunted". Hunted in this case is a person, place, or thing. This can be done rather easily with 'the', as the function of 'the' is to denote a noun, or to demonstrate emphasis of a quality as important (with use of adjective).

Jaded isn't a verb. It is an adjective. Same with Convoluted.

[Remy Balster]

Jiggy wrote:

Wait, is english even your first language? Because if not, that would definitely make sense why all these verb tenses have you mixed up; those can be hard, even for native speakers. But overall you're doing really well! :)

Uh... I'm not the guy mixing up verbs for nouns and adjectives. (Hint: That is you, my friend) It is fine, this is rather common. Hopefully you can recognize what is going on, so that you can work on your problem areas. (We all have problem areas)

For the record, "I had walked to my car." is in fact a sentence.