@Belafon
I was pointing out that under Diegos interpretation the greater rod of quicken would never work on 7th-9th level spells, since quicken is +4. But being greater it does just that. So I was curious how he would explain the discrepancy.
Forseti and vhok have it correct i think.
If you want an outlier feat that lets you metamagic 9th level spells, Try spell perfection.
Spell Perfection doesn't actually work that way. For the "total modified level" language to have any meaning you can't exceed 9th level before you subtract out your free metamagic. So if you choose a 9th level spell perfection you can't actually get any free metamagic, 8th level is limited to a +1, 7th to a +2, etc. It's especially nice for 6th level casters who do actually get to exceed their normal spell cap.
This thread has a good discussion.
This thread has a good discussion.
That thread actually supports first applying all metamagic and only then considering the spell slot used.
I agree for feats, I just think the metamagic rods are special kicker that don't count as part of applying all metamagic.
You don't "channel" spells through the rods or something, as some people would have it. (Not saying that's what you're actually saying, just picking up on a general sentiment.)
"Possession of a metamagic rod does not confer the associated feat on the owner, only the ability to use the given feat a specified number of times per day."
Picking that apart, it seems that it's semantically correct to deduct that "Possession of a metamagic rod confers the ability to use the given feat a specified number of times per day." They don't do anything to spells, they confer the ability to do something to spells to their owner.
That, to me, makes rod-feats no different than regular feats. Regular feats also just give you the ability to do something to spells. It doesn't seem at all different in the actual execution.
I think you make a decent case, but I also think that if the PDT ever gave a ruling it would be consistent with the FAQ and their desire to limit the power of metamagic boosters and aids.
It is explicitly spelled out in the CRB that metamagic feats do not change the level of the spell used. Several times. It has been that way since 3.0. The FAQ refers to concentration checks and ways to recover spells, which has been a gray area. It is quite reasonable in what it says, stuff that lets you recover spells of a certain slot level should work that way. I do not see why this would change anything regarding metamagic rods, which function, again, off the level of the spell, not the slot level.
If it was an errata, sure. A FAQ is not really the vehicle to change rules.
Here is the FAQ question, with some bolding by me.
Metamagic: At what spell level does the spell count for concentration DCs, magus spell recall, or a pearl of power?
The spell counts as the level of the spell slot necessary to cast it.
Some have been saying it only applies to refreshing spells. What does the bolded part have to do with refreshing spells? Clearly that claim is false as concentration DC's has nothing to do with refreshing spells, so the FAQ applies to more than just that.
Here is the FAQ answer, again with some bolding by me.
For example, an empowered burning hands uses a 3rd-level spell slot, counts as a 3rd-level spell for making concentration checks, counts as a 3rd-level spell for a magus's spell recall or a pearl of power.In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster. The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
What does "In general" mean? When should it apply?
In general applies all the time, unless we are explicitly told to do otherwise. Given the FAQ was written after the CRB, and in response to these very types of questions (DC, spell level vs spell slot level, etc) a claim cannot be made the the CRB is specifically overriding these.
@Forsetti, Sissyl, vhok, and others who do not feel the FAQ applies here, let me ask a question.
How much does a empowered wand of fireball cost?
Here are the relevant rules from the PRD
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.
Emphasis mine. Note that here it calls out the spell level, not the spell slot level. The point to be noted here is that in this case the intent is clear, but it also shows that when the rules in the CRB talk about spell level and spell slot level, the two terms are sometimes used interchangeably. This is a part of the reason that FAQ was written, to clear up the ambiguity - and they made it a blanket ruling with that phrase "in general".
EDIT: If we are going to go by the most pedantic and strictest reading of the rules possible, it costs the same as the non-empowered version as both are treated as a 3rd level spell. If we apply the FAQ, even though it doesn't make any specific mention about crafting with metamagic - only DC's, and spell slot refresh items, but we apply the "in general" clause - then such a wand cannot even be created as it exceeds the maximum of 4th spell level for a wand.
Forsetti, you made a statement above that spontaneous casters would work differently then prepared casters, so that for a spontaneous caster the rod could be applied before the feat. However, in order for the two caster types to work differently you need to show a rule that they do, in fact, work differently - otherwise they work the same (looks like a duck, walks, quacks, etc like a duck - it is therefore a duck).
Here is an example from the rules of such a thing being called out differently for spontaneous casters
Sorcerers and Bards: Sorcerers and bards choose spells as they cast them. They can choose when they cast their spells whether to apply their metamagic feats to improve them. As with other spellcasters, the improved spell uses up a higher-level spell slot. Because the sorcerer or bard has not prepared the spell in a metamagic form in advance, he must apply the metamagic feat on the spot. Therefore, such a character must also take more time to cast a metamagic spell (one enhanced by a metamagic feat) than he does to cast a regular spell. If the spell's normal casting time is a standard action, casting a metamagic version is a full-round action for a sorcerer or bard. (This isn't the same as a 1-round casting time.) The only exception is for spells modified by the Quicken Spell metamagic feat, which can be cast as normal using the feat.
If it was an errata, sure. A FAQ is not really the vehicle to change rules.
1) FAQs have changed rules - regardless of whether or not an errata would have been the proper way to do it.
2) You are assuming your view of how it worked was right to begin with. It may or may not be. (regardless, how it worked in 3/3.5 no longer applies).
So we can for instance have a sorcerer who wants to cast an enlarged fireball using a lesser quicken rod. In the area of effect is a wizard who has lesser Globe of Invulnerability up. How do we apply the FAQ?
1. It is more disadvantageous to cast as a swift action so the spell can't be used with the rod but still over comes the Globe. (Use higher level)
2. It is more disadvantageous to overcome the Globe so we can use the rod but its still a 3rd level spell and the wizard is save. (Use lower level)
3. Apply each circumstance on its own and treat this as a 4th level spell for the rod and a 3rd level spell for the Globe. (Use whatever is most disadvantageous for each spell level check)
It's treated as the worse when figuring out how it works. Having the metamagic be applied at the same time from the feat and the rod is better than having the rod be required to work after the feat. Thus that is the correct way.
Fireball is a lv3 spell
Intensified is a lv3 spell from a lv4 slot
Lesser rod only works with lv3 spells
does Intensified fireball work with the rod? No, because we're told to treat it as the worse of original level and new slot level. So we need to treat it as a lv4 spell which would require a normal rod to work with it.
So we can for instance have a sorcerer who wants to cast an enlarged fireball using a lesser quicken rod. In the area of effect is a wizard who has lesser Globe of Invulnerability up. How do we apply the FAQ?
1. It is more disadvantageous to cast as a swift action so the spell can't be used with the rod but still over comes the Globe. (Use higher level)
2. It is more disadvantageous to overcome the Globe so we can use the rod but its still a 3rd level spell and the wizard is save. (Use lower level)
3. Apply each circumstance on its own and treat this as a 4th level spell for the rod and a 3rd level spell for the Globe. (Use whatever is most disadvantageous for each spell level check)
3. Each aspect of the spell is checked separately.
What does "In general" mean? When should it apply?
A more important question is "When can it apply?" because even if you think it should apply, if it can't apply, it can't apply. That FAQ entry certainly can't apply, because it tells you which of 2 numbers to use and the situation at hand only involves one number.
@Forsetti, Sissyl, vhok, and others who do not feel the FAQ applies here, let me ask a question.
How much does a empowered wand of fireball cost?
(The forum won't let me quote much more of your post so I've clipped the quote at a nice point.)
I don't see how that is important. Lack of clarity in one specific rule instance have no bearing on different aspects of the rules that don't suffer from the exact same lack of clarity.
So we can for instance have a sorcerer who wants to cast an enlarged fireball using a lesser quicken rod. In the area of effect is a wizard who has lesser Globe of Invulnerability up. How do we apply the FAQ?
1. It is more disadvantageous to cast as a swift action so the spell can't be used with the rod but still over comes the Globe. (Use higher level)
2. It is more disadvantageous to overcome the Globe so we can use the rod but its still a 3rd level spell and the wizard is save. (Use lower level)
3. Apply each circumstance on its own and treat this as a 4th level spell for the rod and a 3rd level spell for the Globe. (Use whatever is most disadvantageous for each spell level check)
Easy, You can't use the lesser quicken rod on an enlarged fireball.
But for the sake of getting the real question out, 3. The level is figured out for each check and use the worse one. So it's 3 for DC's, lesser gloves of invulnerability and some other stuff and 4 for slots and rods and concentration DC and pricing and pearls.
Forsetti, you made a statement above that spontaneous casters would work differently then prepared casters, so that for a spontaneous caster the rod could be applied before the feat. However, in order for the two caster types to work differently you need to show a rule that they do, in fact, work differently - otherwise they work the same (looks like a duck, walks, quacks, etc like a duck - it is therefore a duck).
First off, you'll find that I said that prepared casters have extra benefit, not that it works differently for them. The extra benefit springs from the fact that it actually doesn't work differently for them. If you're referring to something else I said I'm afraid you'll have to point it out because I don't know what that could be.
It allows the prepared caster to break free of their class restrictions while it doesn't allow a spontaneous caster to break free of their class restrictions and does so by adding a completely new way of casting spells to one class and not to the other.
What does "In general" mean? When should it apply?A more important question is "When can it apply?" because even if you think it should apply, if it can't apply, it can't apply. That FAQ entry certainly can't apply, because it tells you which of 2 numbers to use and the situation at hand only involves one number.
@Forsetti, Sissyl, vhok, and others who do not feel the FAQ applies here, let me ask a question.
How much does a empowered wand of fireball cost?(The forum won't let me quote much more of your post so I've clipped the quote at a nice point.)
I don't see how that is important. Lack of clarity in one specific rule instance have no bearing on different aspects of the rules that don't suffer from the exact same lack of clarity.
Your making an assumption that it can't apply based on a view of the rules that is not actually in the rules (that spontaneous casters work differently than prepared casters in this regard).
Prior to the FAQ, others made a similar claim regarding magus spell recall and pearls of power.
Part of the original discussion that spawned the FAQ was based around what type of rod was needed when using feats/rods together. Now that we have the FAQ response, we know which side the PDT falls on in that discussion.
What side they fall on is not important until they make a statement that actually applies to the situation.
Indeed, spontaneous casters.
There's nothing wrong with spontaneous casters having an extra benefit from metamagic rods because prepared casters also get several.
Unless someone can point me to a rule that says spontaneous casters need to explicitly chose an order in which to apply their metamagic feats and resulting level adjustments need to be kept as a running tally while going down that list, I will maintain my position.
You pick a spell, you apply all valid metamagic feats, regardless of the source. You adjust the level.
Better for spontaneous casters? Good for them!
And by the way, the rods don't work differently for different types of casters in this respect. The difference is brought to the table by the casters themselves. One is adding 2 feats to a 6th level spell, the other is adding 1 feat to a 7th level spell.
This is your post I was referring to.
The part I've bolded is relevant. Is there anything wrong with them gaining extra benefit? No, not really. But would there be anything wrong with granting rogues an extra d6 of damage on all their attacks? No, not really (they could use it in terms of damage output). But it not being "wrong" to do so doesn't mean we get to do so. In order to add benefits, we need a rule that tells us we get those benefits that other classes do not.
There are times I almost long for the exacting order of operations as present in Magic the Gathering for situations like this.
The problem is that if the metamagic feats are applied simultaneously, then there's no point in time that the spell level is not both above 6 and quickened.
If they're applied one at a time with equal weighting, however, then one can choose to apply the rod first.
If the spell double checks its legality after the metamagic applies, then acne only then can it be deemed the rod doesn't work.
Additionally, if the rod is applied after the metamagic feats (as would be the case for prepared casters), then the rod could not apply here.
Unfortunately, the rules don't possess enough clarity to state any one of these four possibilities as being more or less likely. So we're left with this back and forth, and veiled stabs at each other, because nothing is conclusive about the order.
At what spell level does a spell modified by a metamagic feat count for purposes of concentration DCs, magus spell recall, or a pearl of power?
The spell counts as the level of the spell slot necessary to cast it.
For example, an empowered burning hands uses a 3rd-level spell slot, counts as a 3rd-level spell for making concentration checks, counts as a 3rd-level spell for a magus's spell recall or a pearl of power.
In general, use the (normal, lower) spell level or the (higher) spell slot level, whichever is more of a disadvantage for the caster. The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage.
This is the entire text of the FAQ. By the question, it specifically deals with a) concentration DCs and b) recovering spell slots. The example reinforces this, by again specifically dealing with a) concentration checks and b) recovering spell slots. No other factor of metamagic feats is called into question at all.
How to deal with this in all situations related to concentration DCs and recovery of spell slots? Well, you choose the least favourable method. Nothing about metamagic rods, no need to pretend the FAQ covers anything other than a) and b) above.
Why they then continue with "The advantages of the metamagic feat are spelled out in the Benefits section of the feat, and the increased spell slot level is a disadvantage.
Heighten Spell is really the only metamagic feat that makes using a higher-level spell slot an advantage instead of a disadvantage." is unclear. That part of it really makes no sense. A FAQ is there to clarify things. This one certainly did not. Still, it certainly makes no statement like "this changes how metamagic feats function in all ways" or anything like what has been suggested in this thread.
Spells modified by a metamagic feat use a spell slot higher than normal. This does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up.
and
In all ways, a metamagic spell operates at its original spell level, even though it is prepared and cast using a higher-level spell slot.
are pretty explicit. The level of the spell stays the same when metamagic is applied. The slot used changes. A spell of level 3, modified by two +1 metamagic feats remains a level 3 spell, but requires a level 5 slot. Incidentally, the slot used is perfectly fine to use for determining what a) can go in a potion etc, and b) what such an item (say, a wand of empowered fireballs, if that was possible to put in a wand) would cost. Note that the magic item creation rules are not the place to look for what metamagic feats do.
One more question remains: Do metamagic rods function differently than applying the normal metamagic feat?
Metamagic rods hold the essence of a metamagic feat, allowing the user to apply metamagic effects to spells (but not spell-like abilities ) as they are cast. This does not change the spell slot of the altered spell. ... A caster may only use one metamagic rod on any given spell, but it is permissible to combine a rod with metamagic feats possessed by the rod's wielder. In this case, only the feats possessed by the wielder adjust the spell slot of the spell being cast.
Possession of a metamagic rod does not confer the associated feat on the owner, only the ability to use the given feat a specified number of times per day. ...
Lesser and Greater Metamagic rods: Normal metamagic rods can be used with spells of 6th level or lower. Lesser rods can be used with spells of 3rd level or lower, while greater rods can be used with spells of 9th level or lower.
So: Metamagic rods do not change the slot used. They function exactly like the corresponding feat apart from this. And they can be used on any spells of the given LEVEL, not slot. Clear as clear can be.
Conclusion: Trying to generalize something written about two specific cases into a general argument that strongly nerfs all metamagic is overinterpreting it. If Paizo wanted to change all metamagic in the way you describe, they would be smart enough to make it an errata, simply to avoid this argument. And if they do not, they still haven't said anything that does not pertain to concentration DCs and recovering spell slots.
A wizard casting a quickened fireball would still be casting a level 3 spell, which is perfectly fine to empower with a lesser rod of metamagic, empower.
It is explicitly spelled out in the CRB that metamagic feats do not change the level of the spell used. Several times. It has been that way since 3.0. The FAQ refers to concentration checks and ways to recover spells, which has been a gray area. It is quite reasonable in what it says, stuff that lets you recover spells of a certain slot level should work that way. I do not see why this would change anything regarding metamagic rods, which function, again, off the level of the spell, not the slot level.
If it was an errata, sure. A FAQ is not really the vehicle to change rules.
They don't change the effective level of the spell when it comes to saving throw DC's.
Metamagic feats do for the most part move the spell to a new slot level, An empowered Fireball spell takes up a 5th level slot, which means that a lesser rod can not be used to further modify it, even if it's DC is still based on it being a third level spell.
3. Each aspect of the spell is checked separately.So we can for instance have a sorcerer who wants to cast an enlarged fireball using a lesser quicken rod. In the area of effect is a wizard who has lesser Globe of Invulnerability up. How do we apply the FAQ?
1. It is more disadvantageous to cast as a swift action so the spell can't be used with the rod but still over comes the Globe. (Use higher level)
2. It is more disadvantageous to overcome the Globe so we can use the rod but its still a 3rd level spell and the wizard is save. (Use lower level)
3. Apply each circumstance on its own and treat this as a 4th level spell for the rod and a 3rd level spell for the Globe. (Use whatever is most disadvantageous for each spell level check)
And that bothers me, a spell should have one final level period not a level in some state of flux that we don't know if it is A or B until it encounters a check on its level. I mean if the wizard in my example was readying to counter spell then his own unmodified fireball would be enough since the sorcerer's spell would be 3rd level when checking if something can counter it.
Drahliana, you need to understand the difference between the level of the spell, and the slot used to cast it. Metamagic changes only the slot, not the level. And the level is what the metamagic rods check for.
This is the entire text of the FAQ. By the question, it specifically deals with a) concentration DCs and b) recovering spell slots. The example reinforces this, by again specifically dealing with a) concentration checks and b) recovering spell slots. No other factor of metamagic feats is called into question at all.
So your view is that the FAQ was written with 2 meaningless and confusing paragraphs (the last 2), then changed the rules on concentration DC's and spell recall type abilities/items?
Wouldn't it make more sense that the PDT actually has some idea what they wanted/intended out of the FAQ statement, and included those paragraphs for very specific reasons? There may be other possible meanings they intended out of those, but a very clear meaning that can be taken away is that the "in general" phrase does actually apply to all aspects of metamagic. Its consistent with existing rules (saving throw DC's don't change, crafting with metamagic remains the same, etc) and answers a broad array of questions regarding metamagic that were talked about in the original FAQ threads - and is a clear an easy ruling to understand.
Personally I prefer the straightforward reading, rather than trying to wrest the words written in the FAQ as some how not applying in these various niche scenarios.
The FAQ applies to specific cases, because those cases were previously unclear. The FAQ seems to have been made to prevent spell recovery abilities from being abused. I would guess someone used a lower level pearl of power to regain spells with metamagic?
You still have nothing that says all about metamagic is changed by this, bbangerter.
If you think the last sentences of the FAQ are clear, why do you think they are included?
Drahliana, you need to understand the difference between the level of the spell, and the slot used to cast it. Metamagic changes only the slot, not the level. And the level is what the metamagic rods check for.
Level in this case refers to slot which would be identical to level if no metamagic is applied. But using metamagic like empower raises the slot of the spell, in this case moving it out of the range of a lesser rod.
General rule, when two equally valid interpretations can be applied, go with what's worse for the caster.
...so long as it pertains to concentration DCs, pearls of power, and spell recall for maguses, yes. But no, level is a specific term, and does not refer to slot.
There are times I almost long for the exacting order of operations as present in Magic the Gathering for situations like this.
The problem is that if the metamagic feats are applied simultaneously, then there's no point in time that the spell level is not both above 6 and quickened.
If they're applied one at a time with equal weighting, however, then one can choose to apply the rod first.
If the spell double checks its legality after the metamagic applies, then acne only then can it be deemed the rod doesn't work.
Additionally, if the rod is applied after the metamagic feats (as would be the case for prepared casters), then the rod could not apply here.
Unfortunately, the rules don't possess enough clarity to state any one of these four possibilities as being more or less likely. So we're left with this back and forth, and veiled stabs at each other, because nothing is conclusive about the order.
Lacking elaborate rules, you go for what works best with what is written.
Using an order? You'd have to decide what order, based on nothing, because there's not even a hint of any kind of order that would apply in similar situations. Using an order would add more complication not covered in the rules.
Applying everything simultaneously? You're good to go. No conflict with anything stated anywhere and no new questions raised.
Since applying an order isn't explicitly called for, it's clear from the above that none is intended.
That leaves the question of double-checking. Another complication. Also not called for.
I think it's safe to say that the flow of the game is best served by not introducing complications that aren't called for. More solid rules would be good though.
The FAQ applies to specific cases, because those cases were previously unclear. The FAQ seems to have been made to prevent spell recovery abilities from being abused. I would guess someone used a lower level pearl of power to regain spells with metamagic?
You still have nothing that says all about metamagic is changed by this, bbangerter.
If you think the last sentences of the FAQ are clear, why do you think they are included?
I'm not saying the "answer was obvious" prior to the FAQ being written. I'm saying now with the FAQ and the discussion that was generated around the creation of the FAQ, it is clear (based on the context) what they intend.
Do you understand what it looks like you are saying? "These last two paragraphs don't make sense to me, but I know I'm right".
Or specifically in your own words.
Why they then continue with {quoted FAQ text} is unclear.
Does that not highly suggest you may very well be wrong in your view? If you don't understand why those paragraphs are included, does it not behoove you to find out why before making claims about their applicability to anything else?
|
@Belafon
I was pointing out that under Diegos interpretation the greater rod of quicken would never work on 7th-9th level spells, since quicken is +4. But being greater it does just that. So I was curious how he would explain the discrepancy.
Seriously? How are you get to read that in my post?
Go back and read it again.