Persistent Spell + Dazing Spell


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I have two questions concerning these feats.

The wording of the last part of Persistent Spell seems a little weird, and I'm not exactly sure how to interpret it.

"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."

Is it saying "You have to roll twice" or "Pick the worst result"?
Because what if the creature fails the first one and saves the second one, what happens then? Does the creature roll the second time if it fails the check the first time?

And my second question is: does the Dazing Spell stack with Persistent Spell?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

It's saying "if it fails when rolling, roll again." If it makes it, you don't roll a second time.


...If it fails the first time, roll again? If it succeeds, you don't roll the second time???

You mean if it succeeds the first time, roll again, and if it fails the second time, the roll acts as of he had failed the first time??


There is no official passage that explains how persistent spell plays with other feats or certain spells. I think the intent was to give the initial save a second chance to fail (from the casters perspective).

Some interpret the text to mean that it adds a second save to everything involving the spell (like checking each round if the spell ends).
So we get into ask-your-DM territory here.

Dazing spell is relatively easy. The feat says that if the victim of a spell takes damage from it, he gets dazed for a number of rounds. And if there is no save, now you get one anyway against the daze part.
With a standard damage spell this is easy. If you save, you have to roll again; if you fail, you are nuked and dazed. If you make your first save, you have to make a second one. If you succeed, you are home free, if you fail, you are nuked and dazed.
If there is no save, like for scorching ray, you get now a save to check how dazing spell works out. And if you make it, you must roll a second one due to persistent spell.

Since we are talking +5 spell levels here, the whole thing is questionable. If you use a 8th level slot, you could cast a persistent dazing fireball with the DC of a 3rd level spell. Is there really no better use of such a slot than to try this? The major problem here is that the monsters have saves beyond good and evil (some have like +20 to +25) in the level range where you can use such spells. This makes spells and effects with "save negates" highly irrelevant.
Using it with a rod would be way better, if such a one is available, since you can use it before the NPC saves go through the ceiling.


Well, I'm going with Metamagic Master and the Magical Lineage traits to grant free usage of Empower and Persistent Spell with my admixture fireballs, and using a lesser rod of Maximize to ramp it up. And my metamagic slot for Dazing Spell would be reduced to +1 spell slot higher.

I just wanted to know if I could mix those two metamagic feats, because Dazing Spell says it modifies the spells and uses the spells saving throw if it has one, or a Will save if it doesn't.

So I had thought, since it modifies the spell, it becomes part of the spell...

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Quote:
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.

Quoting this would have helped.

You only roll the second time if it succeeds the first check. Then you roll a second time and if it fails it fails. So it forces the target to succeed twice to pass the check.


When I read magical lineage and metamagic master you end up with using a slot 2 levels less than it normally would, so we are talking 6th level opposed to 8th.
Which ties in to another thread we had this week about metamagic rods. Most people in there agreed that a rod works on the slot, not the spell's effective level (3rd for fireball). If they are right about this, you need a standard rod instead of the lesser (I think now that they are).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think there's any ambiguity about Persistent requiring a double save on every saving throw. The text says "whenever" a creature targeted by a spell succeeds at a save. A creature trying to save on the third round of Persistent Hold Person is still a creature targeted by Persistent Hold Person.

Some GMs may well houserule it as too powerful that way.


Vatras wrote:
When I read magical lineage and metamagic master you end up with using a slot 2 levels less than it normally would, so we are talking 6th level opposed to 8th.

There is a Magical Lineage FAQ:

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9qns

Stating that the spell slot reduction is only meant for metamagic, as it clearly says on the benefits as well.


And as stated in Metamagic Rods: "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."

It says spells of 6th level, and spells of 3rd level, and spells of 9th level. It's doesn't say anything about caster level. It's talking about the spell level itself.

Scarab Sages

Side note: Metamagic Master is actually Wayang Spellhunter from the Dragon Empires Primer. So unless your character is from Minata in Tian Xia, your GM might have an issue with it.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Vatras wrote:
magical lineage and metamagic master you end up with using a slot 2 levels less than it normally would

If you are saying a Fireball can ever take up a slot less than 3rd, then no.

Vatras wrote:
metamagic rods. Most people in there agreed that a rod works on the slot, not the spell's effective level (3rd for fireball).

Actually it takes the worse for you. So if you have a Metamagic adjusted slot of 6th on a 3rd level Fireball, you pick 3 or 6 whichever is worse for you.


Most of the comments here have the right of it. Persistent applies to every save on the spell. Persistent glitterdust equals two rolls every turn.

Persistent and Dazing definitely stack, but you have to take the lease advantageous spell level for these purposes. So if you prepare a dazing fireball that counts as a six level spell and would require a metamagic rod of persistent, normal.

If you have spell perfection you may add one metamagic feat for free to your spell that is you spell perfection choice of the metamagic you have without increasing the spell level. So if you have spell perfection (fireball) you can have a dazing fireball as a third level spell, add persistent metamagic to it (making it fifth level), and then using a normal metamagic rod of maximize or empowered even though those rods are limited to sixth level spells and below.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Keep in mind the "free" one will only be free if the total with it added is 9 or less.


Ohhh, I see now. So with Metamagic Master and Magical Lineage fireball would lower it's spell slot cost by 2 for metamagic feats.

Persistent Spell (Fireball): spell slot cost: 0
Empower Spell (Fireball): spell slot cost: 0
Dazing Spell (Fireball): spell slot cost: +1

Thus increasing Fireballs spell slot to a 4th level spell slot, and leaving the Lesser Metamagic Rod unusable with Dazing Spell.

However, if you use Spell Perfection, which you can get at level 15...You can use any metamagic feat with a spell slot cost of +3 or higher, presumably with your Magical Lineage and Metamagic Master fireballs to be free, as long as the metamagic spell slot cost for all the metamagic feats combined is 9 or less.


Just a note on hijinx... Persistent Dazing Fiery Shuriken. That is all.

Scarab Sages

You mean Dazing Winter's Grasp with a Rime Metamagic Rod, correct?


I dunno, I like shooting a double-save daze bolt at multiple enemies, plus another with a swift action on the same round for the guy who wants to be a hero, plus another with a swift action on every subsequent round. There's no fussing with areas... just an endless double-daze slapfest.

Scarab Sages

Oh, I was thinking of the spell that would hit multiple creatures. Rime, with the effect of Winter's Grasp makes movement cost 20 feet per square. Moreover, the innate reduction of the save makes it easier for the enemy to fail the save (no SR as well).

And if you have an Improved Familiar with a wand, the familiar can hit you with Channel the Gift. But you can use Channel the Gift on a Dazing Fiery Shuriken too. =)

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Wise Old Man wrote:

Ohhh, I see now. So with Metamagic Master and Magical Lineage fireball would lower it's spell slot cost by 2 for metamagic feats.

Persistent Spell (Fireball): spell slot cost: 0
Empower Spell (Fireball): spell slot cost: 0
Dazing Spell (Fireball): spell slot cost: +1

Thus increasing Fireballs spell slot to a 4th level spell slot, and leaving the Lesser Metamagic Rod unusable with Dazing Spell.

However, if you use Spell Perfection, which you can get at level 15...You can use any metamagic feat with a spell slot cost of +3 or higher, presumably with your Magical Lineage and Metamagic Master fireballs to be free, as long as the metamagic spell slot cost for all the metamagic feats combined is 9 or less.

Your last two sentences seem to be saying something wrong.

A Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Magical Lineage/Wayang Spellhunter (-2) = 2+3+3-2 = 6.

Being 6, it is using a normal Metamagic Rod.


metamagic does not change the actual level fireball is minor rod always.

As a spellcaster's knowledge of magic grows, he can learn to cast spells in ways slightly different from the norm. Preparing and casting a spell in such a way is harder than normal but, thanks to metamagic feats, is at least possible. 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. Metamagic feats do not affect spell-like abilities.

what I think your confused about is the FAQ which was specifically about concentration dc, and spell recall abilities. this was a clarification faq and not one that changes rules already in place so the part where metamagic'd spells still count as their normal spell level is still raw. everything in the faq is in reference to the concentration and spell recall abilities.

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.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

vhok, I think we are saying the same thing.

If you are saying that a multiple metamagic'd fireball that uses a 4th level slot requires the 4-6 Metamagic rod then we are.

If you are saying using a 4th level slot (required minimum) for a fireball and using a 0-3 rod, then we disagree. Because of the FAQ you quoted.


the faq is only about concentration dc and spell recalls it does not override the already in place rules for metamagic. it was just a clarification FAQ not an errata it did not change any rules already there. so the metamagic rule "this does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up." does not change and therefore a maximize fireball still counts as a level 3 spell and uses a level 1-3 rod but costs a level 5 spell slot.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

The question asked a specific question.

The FAQ gave an in general rule:
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.

So if you use a metamagic 0-3 rod on a spell using a 4th level slot, you are ignoring the disadvantage.

I have a feeling you will disagree with my logic, in which case welcome to table variance.


you are ignoring the rules

this does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up

that FAQ mentions nothing about rods being used with metamagic and add to that if a sorcerer casts a spell and applies the rod and the metamagic feat. which is applied first? are they both at the same time? your interpretation gets a bit fuzzy when actually applied in game.


Going by the apparent intent of the FAQ, I would tell players to apply metamagic and the effects of a rod in whichever order was least advantageous, assuming there's a difference. In other words, it may be in different orders at different times.


the problem is there is no actual order rules at all. because it doesn't matter as the actual level of the spell never changes unless its heighten. so there was no need to say apply feats then rods. that's simply not how it works.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

vhok wrote:
you are ignoring the rules

I get that you see it that way, but I see you ignoring the FAQ.

Either way, neither of us can quote text and claim it is RAW proving our point because each of us have an interpretation.

So it comes down to:

Ask your GM


very true, I wish they would make an faq specifically about rods used on metamagic'd spells


That is not correct. Heighten Spell increases the "effective spell level". Metamagic feats always increase the spell level of the spell; it just doesn't duplicate the effects. The order of casting doesn't matter. The spell is either prepared or cast with metamagic, the only rods that will work are the ones that cover the level the spell is increased to.

The only things that prevent an increase in spell level, as opposed to effective spell level, are spell perfection and certain feats that have been mentioned. The FAQ makes this crystal clear.


I can see your point other than the fact that it says exactly the opposite in the metamagic description.

As a spellcaster's knowledge of magic grows, he can learn to cast spells in ways slightly different from the norm. Preparing and casting a spell in such a way is harder than normal but, thanks to metamagic feats, is at least possible. 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. Metamagic feats do not affect spell-like abilities.

nothing short of a dev or faq saying otherwise will ever convince me otherwise. I really don't understand how you can read the rules that literally say it does not increase the level of the spell and come to the conclusion that the opposite is true with such conviction you come on the forums and say it.

I've said it a few times now but once again I will say it again. that FAQ specifically calls out concentration dc and spell recalls. it was a rules clarification on how they work. it did not change the already in place rules in anyway. metamagic DOES NOT increase the spell level only the spell slot.


Well it seems pretty straightforward to me; you can't cite an FAQ with a specific subject to override a rule that lies outside of that specific subject. The FAQ relates to "concentration DCs, magus spell recall, or a pearl of power", which means it has no bearing on other issues. If they had wanted to make it apply to everything similar they could have done so very easily, but they instead limited it to three specifics. If there's a relevant rules text or FAQ that applies, then that might change things.

Playing the "it's all just interpretation" card doesn't really work when there are specific un-contradicted rules to reference; in a PFS situation, a GM would be very much crossing the line if they ignored explicit rules text based on a relative comparison to an FAQ that doesn't apply.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

vhok wrote:
that FAQ specifically calls out concentration dc and spell recalls.

That came about in threads related to "which ring of spell storing do I use for a magic missile with metamagic?" where the answer has always been "which ever spell level is worse for you".

The FAQ makes that clear with a general rule. So if the higher level slot is worse for you, use that.

At no point did the level of the spell change, because worse for you is using the lower level slot for DC.

It's a general "worse for you" way of thinking.

BadBird wrote:
PFS situation, a GM would be very much crossing the line if they ignored explicit rules text based on a relative comparison to an FAQ that doesn't apply.

PFS GMs are required to enforce the rulers and not change adventure combats or tactics. Enforcing the rules by the GM's interpretation not your interpretation.


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.

the thing is metamagic rods don't care about spell slot they care about spell level

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 the FAQ still has no bearing on metamagic'd spells being used with rods. the normal spell level is what you look at to decide what level of rod you need. using a higher spell slot does not automatically make the spell that level.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

I understand you view, I disagree with it. Continuing to state your view isn't going to make more people agree with you.


back at ya ;)

my friend said this is us.


vhok wrote:

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.

the thing is metamagic rods don't care about spell slot they care about spell level

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 the FAQ still has no bearing on metamagic'd spells being used with rods. the normal spell level is what you look at to decide what level of rod you need. using a higher spell slot does not automatically make the spell that level.

You are actually making the argument for why you are incorrect. The rule is use the lower spell level or higher spell slot level. These are equivalent for the purposes of using the feat and its application to certain items. So when metamagic rods talk "spells of 6th level or lower" that can either be the spell level or spell slot level; for the purposes of metamagic these are the same. You determine which one to use on the basis of whichever is more disadvantageous. It's true pearls of power, it's true of spell DCs, and it's true of metamagic rods.

The rule was not written in a limited way; the most disadvantageous of two equivalent things spell level or spell slot level. Not most disadvantageous just when you want it to be.


spell level is absolutely not the same thing as spell slot. but as james said this conversation is pointless. without a dev or FAQ specifically talking about metamagic and rods together neither side will agree with the other.


And as James often says, 'Expect table variance.'

My own opinion is that you have to use more expensive rods, for the same reasons as stated by James and others; my current GM agrees with vhok, again by recourse to the same argument.

I go along with my GM.

I would, however, be interested in how a PFS GM would rule it.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

PFS GM here, I full by RAW with the required interpretation. You need a standard metamagic rod for levels 4-6 for a metamagic enhanced fireball.


James Risner wrote:

Your last two sentences seem to be saying something wrong.

A Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Magical Lineage/Wayang Spellhunter (-2) = 2+3+3-2 = 6.

Being 6, it is using a normal Metamagic Rod.

You're forgetting Metamagic Master with Magical Lineage, which would be,

Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Metamagic Master & Magical Lineage (-4) = 2+3+3-4 = 4.

James Risner wrote wrote:
It's a general "worse for you" way of thinking.

"Metamagic Feats FAQ: 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."

There is no interpretation.

It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal, you didn't read the RULES AS WRITTEN, and you call yourself a PFS GM, so you get nothing!
Good day, sir!
Just kidding on that last part :P


Wise Old Man wrote:
James Risner wrote:

Your last two sentences seem to be saying something wrong.

A Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Magical Lineage/Wayang Spellhunter (-2) = 2+3+3-2 = 6.

Being 6, it is using a normal Metamagic Rod.

You're forgetting Metamagic Master with Magical Lineage, which would be,

Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Metamagic Master & Magical Lineage (-4) = 2+3+3-4 = 4.

Each of these is -1, though, for a total of -2, so your final level is 6.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

I read all the rules, I just differ on the meaning. Heighten is one way to not have to pay the disadvantage thing.


Plausible Pseudonym wrote:
Wise Old Man wrote:
James Risner wrote:

Your last two sentences seem to be saying something wrong.

A Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Magical Lineage/Wayang Spellhunter (-2) = 2+3+3-2 = 6.

Being 6, it is using a normal Metamagic Rod.

You're forgetting Metamagic Master with Magical Lineage, which would be,

Persistent (+2) Dazing (+3) Fireball (3) with Metamagic Master & Magical Lineage (-4) = 2+3+3-4 = 4.
Each of these is -1, though, for a total of -2, so your final level is 6.

It's minus -1 from Magical Lineage, and -1 from Metamagic Master applied to Persistent Spell, making it 0, and Dazing Spell, making it +1, in addition with the 3rd spell level, such as Fireball = 4

..If I'm not mistaken.


both of those traits only apply once to one metamagic not once to each metamagic. dazing is +3 persistant is +2 so its 3+2-2
so a fireball would be a 6th level slot.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Wise Old Man wrote:
..If I'm not mistaken.

Mistaken, confirmed. ;-)


Both traits say it only applies to one spell...

Can someone point out the rules for stacking metamagic traits?
I can't find it anywhere.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Wayang Spellhunter wrote:
When you use this spell with a metamagic feat, it uses up a spell slot one level lower than it normally would.
Magical Lineage wrote:
When you apply metamagic feats to this spell

Both trigger once, when you apply 1 or more metamagic feats.

This has all been hashed out in the years since these traits were printed.

Dark Archive

Did the devs ever state if the traits are meant to stack?
I understand the whole "it's not a 'Trait Bonus!' so it stacks" POV, but it feels weird to me, still.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

People keep citing the FAQ as being specific to pearls of power, spell recall, etc. However, it also has a "in general" section that clearly applies the ruling to other areas of the rules.

How are people possibly reading this differently? What would be the point of adding that whole extra paragraph and using words such as "in general" to the FAQ entry if the developers didn't mean for it to have a broader effect on the game's rules?

1 to 50 of 63 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Persistent Spell + Dazing Spell All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.