^^^
Metamagic feats are generally not worth it so there is no real focus on them.
The general consensus is that certain ines are worth picking up
The 1st edition had unlimited spells and therefore needed no metamagic. Then came 2E around and spells were cut down. Someone noticed at some point that a 10d6 fireball does not cut it anymore, especially since HP got slightly upped. So when 3E was written, they choose the middle path (of course). Spells were still pretty much nerfed, but they invented metamagic to allow them some usefulness past level 10. Since HP got buffed even more in 3E, the effect wasn't all that great...fireball does still 10d6, but monsters have now 15d8+30 hp instead of 12d8+0.
With this quick excourse I want to illustrate how unlikely it is that metamagic will get replaced. It is certainly possible by re-writing the spells in the vein of 1E, but I can already hear the screams that mages are way too powerful. Especially from the poor melees and archers, who dish out a lot more without using limited resources to do so. From what I see, people are also afraid to use high-powered magic systems, so there are not that many interested in one.
So unless you do it yourself, I doubt it will happen. I am certainly too lazy to do it (;)), as it is a lot of work to begin with and has quite a few ramifications along the way, which need ironing out too (e.g. magic items or monster abilities). It can certainly be done - 1E worked too and was a lot of fun to play, although quite different from Pathfinder.
I've noticed that most metamagic feats are over-priced, especially since you aren't going to want to use them all the time. On the other hand, I've got a sorceress who's fallen in total, absolute love with metamagic rods. Early on, she bought a Lesser Maximize Rod, and after seeing that sweet puppy in action, she now has a list of the many, many rods she wants.
I do think that Empower Spell is probably worth it for a blaster, but you have to do the math carefully, looking at your spell-list, before you buy! Maximize is NOT worth it if you have to pay the +3 levels!
I'm told there's even iteratives of the game (E6) where any actual progression doesn't give access to higher level spells, just the slots for use with metamagic feats.
What issues are you having with metamagic?
Here's my low-hanging fruit default suggestion:
Throw out the Vancian system altogether, and bring in the Spheres of Power system from Drop Dead Studios. It's a very organic system that does not have the same railroad-type decision trees of the limited number of published spells, has built-in methods for crafting one's own spells (the Spellcrafting feat is a must), and still allows for all the effects we're familiar with in 3.x/PF. Metamagic still has a place in this system, but its deficiencies are even more quickly understood with Spheres than in the Vancian approach.
For my own part, only Extend Spell and Empower Spell ever seemed like they *might* be worth the effort; Empower has lost its luster, but Extend is still excellent. SoP sustains these conclusions.
It doesn't do much with the caster/martial disparity, unless it's to tip the scales a little bit more in favor of the caster types -- their magic boomsticks can be fired all day. So long as you're using magic in a fashion that pretty closely parallels the at-wills from 4E.
|
I prefer a system that treats metamagic more like combat maneuvers. You can always try them, but doing so requires a caster level check (modified by the level adjustment of the metamagic feat). Then, if you actually have the proper metamagic feat, you can do it without a caster level check (using the feat normally) or on the fly with a +2 bonus.
My group is still tweaking the numbers, but it seems like a solid idea. Kinda fun to watch a wizard panic and try to maximize a fireball on the fly to try to save the day.
The 1st edition had unlimited spells and therefore needed no metamagic. Then came 2E around and spells were cut down. Someone noticed at some point that a 10d6 fireball does not cut it anymore, especially since HP got slightly upped. So when 3E was written, they choose the middle path (of course). Spells were still pretty much nerfed, but they invented metamagic to allow them some usefulness past level 10. Since HP got buffed even more in 3E, the effect wasn't all that great...fireball does still 10d6, but monsters have now 15d8+30 hp instead of 12d8+0.
With this quick excourse I want to illustrate how unlikely it is that metamagic will get replaced. It is certainly possible by re-writing the spells in the vein of 1E, but I can already hear the screams that mages are way too powerful. Especially from the poor melees and archers, who dish out a lot more without using limited resources to do so. From what I see, people are also afraid to use high-powered magic systems, so there are not that many interested in one.
So unless you do it yourself, I doubt it will happen. I am certainly too lazy to do it (;)), as it is a lot of work to begin with and has quite a few ramifications along the way, which need ironing out too (e.g. magic items or monster abilities). It can certainly be done - 1E worked too and was a lot of fun to play, although quite different from Pathfinder.
Taking damage caps off was what I was thinking as well, my goal was to make spell casting more intuitive and fast. I'm also not to worried with in pathfinder compatibly.