PDA

View Full Version : Limitation on Number of Metamagic Feats?



Lycanthromancer
2009-02-15, 02:45 PM
My current DM insists that RAW state that you can have a maximum of two metamagic feats on any given spell. He says it's in the core rules, even though neither he, nor anybody else I know, can actually point it out.

I say it's bullpucky. I've never seen, nor heard, of this rule anywhere (except for metapsionics, but that's because of the inherent restrictions regarding psionic foci).

I know that proving something that isn't in the rules doesn't exist is...well...difficult, but can anyone back up his claim?

I wouldn't mind if it was a houserule; metamagic-out-the-wazoo is easily breakable, and I don't mind restrictions on something so abusable, but I really would like to know if anyone else has heard of this.

snoopy13a
2009-02-15, 02:54 PM
I found this:


Multiple Metamagic Feats on a Spell
A spellcaster can apply multiple metamagic feats to a single spell. Changes to its level are cumulative. You can’t apply the same metamagic feat more than once to a single spell

Vonriel
2009-02-15, 02:57 PM
I would think that if such a restriction did exist in core, it'd be on the d20srd site, and I couldn't find anything saying anything like that there.

Maybe he was reading the psionic version instead, and got mixed up?

Arcane_Snowman
2009-02-15, 03:15 PM
The only restriction on applied metamagic is that you have to be able to cast spells of the modified spells level to be able to use the metamagic feat. (the obvious one)
Secondly Snoopy13a has the only other restriction that I know of with regards to metamagic.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-15, 11:49 PM
I'm certain that rule doesn't exsist. Heck, there's a build on these boards called Cindy with a couple dozen metamagic feats applied to her Orb spells. I'd say, despite my sig, that your best bet is tracking down an official NPC that uses metamagic spells with an Empowered Maximized Acidball listed in it's memorized slots.

Or just asking him to either point to the rule or admit it's a houserule.

monty
2009-02-15, 11:54 PM
Remind him that proving the nonexistence of something is a ridiculous proposal, and that the burden of proof lies on the affirmative.

I'm 99.997% certain that if there is such a rule, somebody would have pointed it out on one of the cheesy wizard build thread by now.