First off, here's the relevant page from the SRD.
So, am I the only one who thinks that metamagic rods are way too powerful? And I don't mean in the "spend money instead of a feat" way. There are several ways to use gold to buy things replicated by feats, like Agile Weapons instead of Dervish Dance, and so on.
No, my main concern is the way that metamagic rods do nothing to the level of the spell. Part if the idea of a metamagic feat is that you increase the level of the spell slot that you are using to cast a spell because the metamagic feat is making said spell more powerful. But the rod bypasses that balancing mechanism entirely. Metamagic rods make you cast spells at the level of the spell, so you're essentially boosting the spell's power for free.
Is there something I'm missing here?
Is there something I'm missing here?
Wizards also have WBL and investing in AC is generally pretty worthless. They need something to spend the money on. They only need two of the big six magic items and spells just aren't very expensive (my level 12 magus bought ALL the ones he could cast alone with all the martial gear he could want with level 12 WBL).
Wands and staves also break the spell slot rule.
The "balance" part is that there are charges per day for the rods, so it only works for 3 spells of a set base spell level or lower.
Conversely, Greater Rods allow you to apply Metamagic effects to spells that are otherwise impossible to Metamagic, such as a Quickened Wish.
Needless to say, it's one of the biggest reasons why spellcasters, mainly Wizards, by the endgame are "ROFLZOMGBBQOP," since they can metamagic their spells with a gold investment that otherwise pertains to nothing else that's useful to them. Since they only need to invest in Spellcasting, the relevant modifier, and any other neat gadgets that either make their spellcasting stronger (i.e. Rods) or allow them to keep on spellcasting, that's all their WBL goes towards. They don't have to practically worry about any defenses because Rocket Tag.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quickened Wish shouldn't be thing, is my point. If a spellcaster uses a metamagic rod, it should use up higher spell slots like the feat does.
Staff of the Master is so much better.
Quickened Wish shouldn't be thing
Why not?
Casting 2 Wish spells in a turn seems like something only a God should be able to do.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A level 20 Wizard basically is one so...
Metamagic feats are based around the idea that if you want a stronger spell, you need to pay up with a higher level spell slot along with spending a feat slot to get the ability to power the spell up in the first place.
The rods bypass not just spending a feat to do so, but also increasing the spell slot being used. I'm just saying that this seems pretty overpowered. Even for a wizard.
|
170k in gold used on a 9th level spell is not a good example for why they are too powerful just so you guys are aware. The game has already radically changed in scope at that point.
They're around mostly to make sure that the meta-magic feats get some use. There are a lot of them, some of them are very situational. They help to give spell casters some kind of treasure that they might enjoy which for years in D&D was actually very rough to do.
The rods themselves are a hefty investment for what is required for at level spell casting which is also assuming some are even available to be purchased a particular community or found as treasure. Somehow I suspect the crafting feat to make them from scratch is very rarely taken. Even a lesser quicken meta-magic rod retail is twice the GP limit for a Metropolis after all.
Why? If you basically a god you should be able to do god like things. Like 2 Wishes in one turn.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why? If you basically a god you should be able to do god like things. Like 2 Wishes in one turn.He/she is basically a god Because he/she is able to do those kind of things, and he/she should not be able to do those things in order to not be a god. Wich would make a more balanced class and a better game.
Fighters can kill careless Demon Lords with pointy pieces of wood.
By that level the question isn't whether you have God-like powers, but of what kind and how those Gods stack up to each other.
High level balance complaints are more like how Ares seems weak compared to Zeus.
I am sure someone else agrees, but there is always someone who thinks the something is overpowered even if most of us dont have a problem with it.
So are you really asking is there "anyone" that thinks it is OP, or are you asking "do the majority" of us think it is OP?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say, they do feel OP to me. I'd be interested in reading a detailed argument why they aren't, however.
On the one hand, the flavor of metamagic rods works fairly well. You have a focus item that lets you express your spells in different ways. It's decent for the more circumstantial metamagics like Merciful and Silent that you might suddenly need.
What I distrust is using metamagic rods to cast spells whose adjusted level would be higher than you could normally cast yourself (including Quickened Wish, but also a level 5 wizard using a Maximized Fireball).
I'm also not wild about metamagic rods being "free". I guess I'd feel better if there was more of a cost to the user, rather than just charges per day being used.
I like the idea of rods as being used for circumstantial things, but I'm queasy about them being used to boost the same spells all the time, because they hold a metamagic you'd apply all the time if you could afford it.
---
I'm interested in counterarguments.
metamagic rods have 3 charges per rod per day and eat a huge amount of money. which is intended to balance out the fact you could cast spells far stronger than you would normally be able to, because the rod is paying the excess cost, not you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to say, they do feel OP to me. I'd be interested in reading a detailed argument why they aren't, however.
On the one hand, the flavor of metamagic rods works fairly well. You have a focus item that lets you express your spells in different ways. It's decent for the more circumstantial metamagics like Merciful and Silent that you might suddenly need.
What I distrust is using metamagic rods to cast spells whose adjusted level would be higher than you could normally cast yourself (including Quickened Wish, but also a level 5 wizard using a Maximized Fireball).
I'm also not wild about metamagic rods being "free". I guess I'd feel better if there was more of a cost to the user, rather than just charges per day being used.
I like the idea of rods as being used for circumstantial things, but I'm queasy about them being used to boost the same spells all the time, because they hold a metamagic you'd apply all the time if you could afford it.
---
I'm interested in counterarguments.
What is OP is a matter of taste, and is almost never an objective argument. I might say ___ and ___ are reasons why they are ok, but to you ___ and ____ might be OP. At that point we would have to agree to disagree. I am sure if you detailed why they were OP, I would say, "it is not a problem at my table".
Metamagic feats are based around the idea that if you want a stronger spell, you need to pay up with a higher level spell slot along with spending a feat slot to get the ability to power the spell up in the first place.
The rods bypass not just spending a feat to do so, but also increasing the spell slot being used. I'm just saying that this seems pretty overpowered. Even for a wizard.
Completely agree. I mean, it isn't as if wizards weren't already overpowered *without* metamagic rods. IT's just one more toy to further increase the power of spells that are already extremely powerful, by any comparison.
IMHO there should be no way to lower or eliminate the spell-level slot increasing factor of metamagic, short of an artifact. That's what metamagic rods should really be: artifacts. Their power is so huge that they should be coveted and sought out, not just K-Marted into the game.
<shrug> But they are RAW. Core RAW, no less.
That's why I'm interested in hearing the arguments. That's much more informative than just "yes they are, no they aren't".
Many metamagic feats are not that good so saying "metamagic feats" are OP is already broad statement.
I like them because they make spells more useful, but you pay for them by using up higher level spell slots which can generally do worse things.
As for the rods they have a 3/day limit, so out of the fights you have for that day, they won't really affect a lot of them, and that money could go to things that are more powerful than the rods. Boosting caster levels can be done with money. Getting better defenses can be done with money. Getting items that grant freedom of movement and evasion can be done with that money.
Now of course you could argue the items I used as examples are also OP, but then we may have to go into a question and answer session like I did with another poster recently to find out exactly what problems it is causing at your table.
Sometimes the problem is not what the person thinks it is.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think that metamagic rods are a touch too powerful, at least for some applications. Part of the problem is that metamagic feats are not created equally - a rod with Persistent in it is going to basically guarantee one-shotting a BBEG 3/day, whereas a rod with Enlarge is probably getting sold for cash. Some rods are just drastically better than others, and their true adventuring value is not always reflected in their market value.
The fact that they get rid of both the feat cost of metamagic and the increased spell level, to me, bumps them just a smidge into overpowered. If I could rewrite them I would split their powers - either they grant you the feat if you don't have it, to be used as normal, or if you have the feat, you can now use it 3/day without the increased level requirements.
I think metamagic rods have contributed to overpowered casters in PF. Generally if a metamagic feat is actually a good deal for its spell level cost, I find the rods to be underpriced and see heavy use. Many metamagic feats are not good deals for their spell level cost, and those rods almost never get used either.
If you have BBEG as a lone monster he is likely to get stomped out by an optimized group anyway. Otherwise he should be ok, and focusing fire on the trouble maker is an option, but then again that goes back to playstyle.
If the PC's are allowed to go all out on tactics, but you dont want to focus fire for the sake of fun, then I think the group should discuss how they want to play the game.
|
|
I'm inclined to agree with ryric.
A rod of Silent Spell, for those situations when people try to Silence you, or when you don't want to trigger a general alarm, seems pretty okay to me. And the Silent Spell feat seems just a tad too situational to me; you usually can't predict whether you'll need it that day.
A rod of Rime Spell on a caster with a few [cold] spells on the other hand, is likely to be useful in the majority of encounters. Unless you're on an adventure against cold immune monsters, it's almost certain that you'll be able to get a lot of value from those three daily uses.
And yet these two rods (and metamagic feats!) have the same cost, in money and spell level adjustment. I guess the root problem is in the difference in quality between those two feats.
If you are a cleric and drop silence to take out the other caster then it can be useful at times. One of them is defensive(when it is needed, it is really needed) and the other is offensive so I see price value, but I do agree that not all of them with the same adjustment are equal. Extend spell is a better than widen or enlarge spell as an example. Widen spell can actually be a bad thing at times.
Ascalaphus, what problems have you had in an actual game, and what level was the party? I am asking because I am curious if the rods are not right for your table, or if you just need to make a small tweaks as a GM.
|
I'm going to land on the not-OP side, here are the things that I think provide balance to the rods:
1. cost, while wizards don't have a lot of places they need to spend money, these things are expensive, especially once you go beyond the lesser ones.
2. uses per day, at high levels 3/day is a small subset of your spells, and the utility of the rods means you will often use them up.
3. You can only use them one at a time, I'm not sure if that is RAW, or a coincidence, but they have to be in hand, and you need a free hand for somatic components, so you can practically only use one except for a few spells.
3.1 while you have a rod in hand, you can't have a wand/staff/weapon, so you don't threaten
4. Action economy, again a rod is not a weapon typically, so drawing a rod is a move action, as is storing one, so you basically need to consume your actions, albeit only your move, to swap around your rods, but it constrains your tactical movement.
*edit* #3 it is RAW that only one Rod per spell, so even if you could hold multiple (tiefling tail/alchemist mutation) you can't use it on the same spell.
In the absurd example of a wizard casting two wishes a turn, yes, this is technically possible, but thanks to the balancing constraint of wishes material components, it is improbable this tactic is going to be used except in the most direst of circumstances, it is just an outlier to the power discussion, given that wish itself is basically an outlier in power in general, and at the tail end of power curve that most folks don't play.
Why would you buy a rod when you could buy an army via constructs
Has anyone seen the "tiny god" page
Basically you spend half of a wizard's lvl 20 WBL and you have a creature that can beat everything in the beastiary.
I have never heard of this.
I have never heard of this.Why would you buy a rod when you could buy an army via constructs
Has anyone seen the "tiny god" page
Basically you spend half of a wizard's lvl 20 WBL and you have a creature that can beat everything in the beastiary.
For a homunculus there are rules saying essentially "you may pay X to increase HD by 1" with seemingly no limitation, so in the thread in question people were discussing the possibilities of having one with over a hundred HD at its disposal and potential feat builds for it.
That aside, I'm really not a fan of there being metamagic rods for the more powerful metamagics, i.e. Dazing and Quicken. Casters are already so much stronger than anything else that throwing in Dazing and Quicken Metamagic Rods is approaching salt-upon-wounds territory. As far as them being limited in charges, a high level spell with either is potentially you winning an encounter; 3 free level appropriate encounter wins per day doesn't seem bad for the prices.
|
|
Ascalaphus, what problems have you had in an actual game, and what level was the party? I am asking because I am curious if the rods are not right for your table, or if you just need to make a small tweaks as a GM.
It hasn't come up in practice yet, and I haven't changed anything about them so far. But the topic interests me. Like I said, they seem OP to me, and I'm trying to figure out how justified my impression is.
Ascalaphus, what problems have you had in an actual game, and what level was the party? I am asking because I am curious if the rods are not right for your table, or if you just need to make a small tweaks as a GM.It hasn't come up in practice yet, and I haven't changed anything about them so far. But the topic interests me. Like I said, they seem OP to me, and I'm trying to figure out how justified my impression is.
Well then it goes back to my other statement of OP varies by table. You can guess how it might go in your game, but in practice it might be different. I don't know how your group plays so I can't really say if it would be a problem for your group or not. I know it is not an issue in my games, so that is all I can really go by.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have never heard of this.Why would you buy a rod when you could buy an army via constructs
Has anyone seen the "tiny god" page
Basically you spend half of a wizard's lvl 20 WBL and you have a creature that can beat everything in the beastiary.For a homunculus there are rules saying essentially "you may pay X to increase HD by 1" with seemingly no limitation, so in the thread in question people were discussing the possibilities of having one with over a hundred HD at its disposal and potential feat builds for it.
That aside, I'm really not a fan of there being metamagic rods for the more powerful metamagics, i.e. Dazing and Quicken. Casters are already so much stronger than anything else that throwing in Dazing and Quicken Metamagic Rods is approaching salt-upon-wounds territory. As far as them being limited in charges, a high level spell with either is potentially you winning an encounter; 3 free level appropriate encounter wins per day doesn't seem bad for the prices.
Doesn't Ultimate Magic limit how many HD you can give to a construct?
The bolded portion leads me to believe that this rule should apply to homonculus as well as all other constructs.
First off, here's the relevant page from the SRD.
So, am I the only one who thinks that metamagic rods are way too powerful? And I don't mean in the "spend money instead of a feat" way. There are several ways to use gold to buy things replicated by feats, like Agile Weapons instead of Dervish Dance, and so on.
No, my main concern is the way that metamagic rods do nothing to the level of the spell. Part if the idea of a metamagic feat is that you increase the level of the spell slot that you are using to cast a spell because the metamagic feat is making said spell more powerful. But the rod bypasses that balancing mechanism entirely. Metamagic rods make you cast spells at the level of the spell, so you're essentially boosting the spell's power for free.
Is there something I'm missing here?
You're not the only one who thinks this. I happen to 100% agree. In particular quicken rods (of any strength) drive me nuts. Unfortunately the vast majority disagree.
- Torger
|
|
Well then it goes back to my other statement of OP varies by table. You can guess how it might go in your game, but in practice it might be different. I don't know how your group plays so I can't really say if it would be a problem for your group or not. I know it is not an issue in my games, so that is all I can really go by.Ascalaphus, what problems have you had in an actual game, and what level was the party? I am asking because I am curious if the rods are not right for your table, or if you just need to make a small tweaks as a GM.It hasn't come up in practice yet, and I haven't changed anything about them so far. But the topic interests me. Like I said, they seem OP to me, and I'm trying to figure out how justified my impression is.
That's true of course. I suppose it'll be educational for me to allow them and observe the results. In general I'm not very scared of powerful PCs (I've GMed Mage the Ascension; PF casters are fairly modest in comparison).
Another reason it's interesting to me is that I'm working on a houserule to work around Big Six. Since metamagic rods occasionally get bought instead of magic weaponry, it's important for me to really understand how they affect the game.
First off, here's the relevant page from the SRD.
So, am I the only one who thinks that metamagic rods are way too powerful?
Nope. I ban them outright.
|
|
Don't forget that some of the status enhancers just don't scale well, if you have a dazing fireball, as you level folks are going to make there saves and the crowd control effect is lost. Your better off having a maximized or empowered fireball so that those who make the save are still taking reasonable damage.
What is maybe more frightening, is a medium level diviner (9) being able to use a lesser metamagic rod of quicken, to cast say, haste followed by a phantasmal web in the first round of combat (and likely first with the all the bonuses they get.) While your foes are screaming and throwing up covered in fake spiders your allies zip up and pound them into a pulp. You spend the remainder of the fight blowing smoke rings from your pipe.
Wizards also have WBL and investing in AC is generally pretty worthless. They need something to spend the money on. They only need two of the big six magic items and spells just aren't very expensive (my level 12 magus bought ALL the ones he could cast alone with all the martial gear he could want with level 12 WBL).
Wands and staves also break the spell slot rule.
Every single player I've seen come into the game with this mentality ended up with a dead wizard in short order.
Every single player I've seen come into the game with this mentality ended up with a dead wizard in short order.Wizards also have WBL and investing in AC is generally pretty worthless. They need something to spend the money on. They only need two of the big six magic items and spells just aren't very expensive (my level 12 magus bought ALL the ones he could cast alone with all the martial gear he could want with level 12 WBL).
Wands and staves also break the spell slot rule.
<-- Level 1-7 arcanist and so far my AC of 11 hasn't been an issue. In one of my RotRL campaigns the conjurer leveled 1-11 with an AC that never topped ~15, he did just fine.
Both characters did however use defensive positioning (dimensional slide/shift), miss chance (mirror image/displacement) and damage reduction (protection from arrows/stoneskin) extensively.
Edit: Which doesn't invalidate your experience in any way, just saying that the reason you find "don't focus on AC" bad advice for a wizard might in part be a difference in GM and player play styles. :)
For a homunculus there are rules saying essentially "you may pay X to increase HD by 1" with seemingly no limitation, so in the thread in question people were discussing the possibilities of having one with over a hundred HD at its disposal and potential feat builds for it.
People like that need to be asked this question: do you want THIS to happen? Because THAT is how this happens!
Yeah, the magic in PF is already OP, then you add more OPness to the OPness ...