PDA

View Full Version : A couple Metamagic Feats



MrNexx
2005-09-09, 06:46 PM
Just a couple ideas I've had that I wanted to throw by you.

Subtle Spell [Metamagic]
You have mastered casting your spells with very subtle verbal and somatic components. As such, the Spot or Listen difficulty to notice your spellcasting increases by 10, but does not reduce arcane spell failure. This adds +0 levels to the effective level of the spell.

[Note: This is not a feat for everyone; assassins might find it useful, or arcane trickster, or any other rogue/wizard types, but its not something everyone needs... just people who want to hide that they're casting spells]

xxxx Spell [Metamagic]
Prerequisites: Still Spell, Silent Spell
Benefit: You can strip the spells you cast of both verbal and somatic components, allowing them to be cast silently, and without gestures. Unless you also know Eschew Components, you still require material components for your spells, and they still require their normal casting time. Spells cast with this feat increase the effective level of the spell by one.

[I had trouble naming this one; Subtle spell is good for both feats, and Improved Subtle Spell doesn't work, because it's not really related, except in general concept, to the other spell. This one may seem slightly overpowered, but my defense is this: Most people I have spoken to agree that both Still Spell and Silent spell are a little bit too expensive... they'd be too cheap at +0, but they're too expensive at +1. With this feat, you've spent 3 feats, and you're getting the two effects for a total of +1 spell level; with the feat requirements, I think its reasonable]

I have a couple ideas for feats which increase the speed of spellcasting (i.e. would move full-round spells up to standard, standard to move, move to swift), but I imagine someone will tell me they've been invented.

CharPixie
2005-09-09, 06:54 PM
Hrmm... how about Imperceptible Spell? And Shrouded Spell instead of Subtle Spell? maaaybe?


Maybe make Subtle Spells a General or magic feat instead (-10 to Spot and Listen checks to detect spellcasting), since a wizard would always cast spells with it, and a sorceror wouldn't?

Oh, and -10 seems like a lot... but I guess it is only half of invisibility.

MrNexx
2005-09-09, 07:46 PM
Ok, another couple weird ones...

Slow Spell [Metamagic]
Prerequisites: Caster level 3+
Benefit: A spell prepared (or cast) with this meatmagic feat requires twice as long to cast as normal (spells which require a standard action now require a full-round action; spells which require a full-round action now require two rounds, spells which require a set amount of time require twice as much as normal). However, because more time is spent on the spellcasting, it costs the casters comparitively less energy, resulting in a reduction of one effective spell level, to a minium of zero. Thus, a Mage Armor spell prepared with Slow Spell would require a full round to cast, but would only occupy a 0th level spell slot.
Special: Bards, Sorcerers, and other spontaneous casters who make use of this feat will require a minimum of two rounds to cast their spell; that they are using a metamagic feat increases the casting time to a full-round action, which is then doubled.

Expensive Spell
Prerequisites: Caster Level 5+
Benefit: You may choose to require a specific, expensive material component for your spells. This material component costs a number of gold pieces equal to the spell level times your caster level, and requires a Spellcraft check equal to 10 + Caster Level + Spell level to determine. This component must be determined for any spell which is to be cast with the feat. Spells cast with the Expensive Spell metamagic feat are considered to be two levels lower than their usual spell level.

Wih
2005-09-09, 09:25 PM
Subtle Spell shouldn't be a +0. How about it adds you caster level to the check, but takes up a +1 slot?

The problem with having a +0 metamagic feat with no drawbacks is that wizards will apply it to all of their spells. This is not balanced.

I like the idea of the Imperceptable spell. Using up an extra feat to make it so it only takes up a +1 slot is a nice touch.

As for the ones that lower the spell level? That's a no-no, expecially the one for material components.
What about 1st level spells, like Identify? How would they work with it?

MrNexx
2005-09-10, 03:37 AM
Subtle Spell shouldn't be a +0. How about it adds you caster level to the check, but takes up a +1 slot?

The problem with having a +0 metamagic feat with no drawbacks is that wizards will apply it to all of their spells. This is not balanced.

On the contrary, there is a definite opprotunity cost associated with it; you could've gotten another feat. (EDIT) And further, I refer you to the canonical Eschew Materials... a +0 feat, with no drawbacks aside from being a metamagic feat (with the attendant cost and difficulty for sorcerers).



As for the ones that lower the spell level? That's a no-no, expecially the one for material components.
What about 1st level spells, like Identify? How would they work with it?

But why? If a person develops a spell, that's exactly like Identify, but doesn't require a pearl, isn't the level of going to go up? Shouldn't the reverse principle apply?

CharPixie
2005-09-10, 04:44 AM
It could be a General Feat instead: Subtle Spellcasting. That way, the appeal is equal for sorcerers and wizards, instead of wizards preping all their spells with this feat and a sorceror having to choose to use it.

I don't know about the cost of Expensive Spell... it's 25th the cost of a scroll (balanced by the use of the spell slot? hrmmm), but doesn't even require a level check to cast a spell the wizard shouldn't be able to cast. (and, do you have an example of a spell that has two versions; one that is expensive and low level, and one that isn't? identify doesn't have the upper level spell version; analyse dweomer is far more powerful, and has a focus 15 times the cost of identify's component).

Also, can you memorize a spell that is above the level you could normally cast?

Oh, and another Feat:

Willful Spellcasting (Magical Feat)
Preq: Eschew Material Components

A mage loses the ability to use material components and material focuses. Instead, any spell that has a material component cost greater than 1 gp has that cost replaced with an XP cost of 1/5 that gp cost. The mage may construct a personal focus as well, which she imbues with power; any amount of XP can be put into this focus, and it will replace a focus costing 5 times that many gp. A focus may be re-imbued with a greater amount of power, and the mage pays the difference between the power amounts. The focus is considered to be armour enchanted to XP/200 (max 5) for the purposes of magical augmentation of break DCs, hitpoints, and hardness. A focus may be any object that the mage holds in her hand. If the focus is destroyed or lost, the mage does not gain any XP back and loses the ability to cast focused spells, until she constructs a new focus (or uses another focus she has made). A mage may never get the XP refunded from a focus, but she may break the focus as a part of casting a spell, paying an XP component up to the XP of the focus.

MrNexx
2005-09-11, 06:35 PM
It could be a General Feat instead: Subtle Spellcasting. That way, the appeal is equal for sorcerers and wizards, instead of wizards preping all their spells with this feat and a sorceror having to choose to use it.

That's a possibility; it does work more generally than really altering the magic at all.


I don't know about the cost of Expensive Spell... it's 25th the cost of a scroll (balanced by the use of the spell slot? hrmmm), but doesn't even require a level check to cast a spell the wizard shouldn't be able to cast.

The trick is that you have to know the spell, first... and you can't know a spell of a higher level than you can cast. This is more useful for memorizing spells below their usual level, especially ones you're not going to want instantly. For example, a cleric with Slow Spell might use it on Cure Moderate Wounds, so it replaces a 1st level spell, not a 2nd level spell... it takes him 2 rounds to cast it, however (1 full round because he's casting spontaneously, doubled to 2 rounds), meaning he'll save those for out of combat, when he can afford the time.


(and, do you have an example of a spell that has two versions; one that is expensive and low level, and one that isn't? identify doesn't have the upper level spell version; analyse dweomer is far more powerful, and has a focus 15 times the cost of identify's component).

No I do not; however, do you honestly think that identify would be a 1st level spell if it didn't have an expensive material component?


Also, can you memorize a spell that is above the level you could normally cast?

Not unless your DM has put in a permanently metamagicked version for you to learn, that has a lower base level; you have to be able to cast a spell to learn it, IIRC.


Willful Spellcasting (Magical Feat)
Preq: Eschew Material Components

A mage loses the ability to use material components and material focuses. Instead, any spell that has a material component cost greater than 1 gp has that cost replaced with an XP cost of 1/5 that gp cost. The mage may construct a personal focus as well, which she imbues with power; any amount of XP can be put into this focus, and it will replace a focus costing 5 times that many gp. A focus may be re-imbued with a greater amount of power, and the mage pays the difference between the power amounts. The focus is considered to be armour enchanted to XP/200 (max 5) for the purposes of magical augmentation of break DCs, hitpoints, and hardness. A focus may be any object that the mage holds in her hand. If the focus is destroyed or lost, the mage does not gain any XP back and loses the ability to cast focused spells, until she constructs a new focus (or uses another focus she has made). A mage may never get the XP refunded from a focus, but she may break the focus as a part of casting a spell, paying an XP component up to the XP of the focus.

First of all, I would break these into two feats... one being the XP based casting, the other being the focus.

However, while I'm liking the idea of the focus, I'm not quite sure of the mechanics. Do you mean you pre-charge this focus with XP, allowing it to drain from the focus, instead of from the caster? Where is the advantage?

CharPixie
2005-09-11, 10:09 PM
The mechanics are as thus.

(a) Spell has a material component. Now, the spell as an XP component instead.

(b) Spell has a focus. Now, the spell requires the caster to have made their fetish/focus and for their fetish/focus to be as least as powerful as the spell's original focus.

(c) Caster breaks the fetish/focus. If the spell has a material component, that component's cost is now paid up to the cost of the fetish/focus. Any excess is wasted. If the spell requires more XP than the fetish is worth, then the caster must pay the remainder.

The idea is that a lot of spells have foci. With an XP replacement scheme, you can either ignore them, make then cost gp as usual, make the mage craft 'gp-refusnik' versions of each foci, costing the same scale as the material replacements, or make the mage craft a 'gp--refusnik' meta-focus, which stands in for all foci. I went for the latter, and allowed a mage to charge/recharge it to any 'level', allowing a gpr mage to have a 500-gp equiv focus or a 15,000 gp equiv focus.

The breaking the focus and using the XP for a spell is... well, a flavour idea that i happen to like; a choice for the desperate, since some of the XP is bound to be lost, since the component is likely gonna be less expensive than the focus was.

Wih
2005-09-12, 02:30 AM
Firstly, my point about identify was that it was a 1st level spell. That would make it a -1 level spell to cast...which the DnD system doesn't handle.

Secondly, wizards can know any spells they want - it's sorcerors who have limited spells known of specific levels. Wizards just lack the slots to cast them. Your feats would let a first level wizard cast 4th level spells, and worse, with more of these feats.

Thirdly, that was the was Eschew Materials use to work. Until they changed it.
There must have been a reason that they changed it...perhaps because it had no drawbacks?
The only 3.5 metamagic feats that are +0 spell slots are the ones that change the elemental type. This can have just as much positive effects as negitave, so they are at +0.


To summarize:
Metamagic feats increase the abilities of a spell, so that instead of researchign a new spell, you can simply make a new one more powerful. A spell slot of +1 is the equivalent power of a spell one spell level higher, two character levels higher, etc etc.
+10 to spot/listen checks is a very powerful ability at low levels, as not many low level characters can beat that +10, and thus can't counterspell etc.
At higher levels it's not that great. This is why I suggested changing it to your caster level, or half your caster level as a bonus - this makes it so it's more effective at later levels, and not so broken at lower ones.

So. Since +10 to spot/listen checks to stop people telling what you're casting is a bonus without drawbacks, it requires some compensation. +0 is not compensation - if it was, Eschew Materials would have been kept as a metamagic feat - which it wasn't.

On a different note, I like the idea of your Willful Spellcasting feat. I however think that the cost to imbue it should be more than the standard 5gp/XP, as it can count as more than one focus at a time.
Perhaps add in something similar to the drawback of having a familiar die, if the focus is destroyed?

MrNexx
2005-09-12, 02:29 PM
Firstly, my point about identify was that it was a 1st level spell. That would make it a -1 level spell to cast...which the DnD system doesn't handle.

Ah. I neglected to put "with a minimum level of zero" in the Expensive spell feat. Mea culpa.


Secondly, wizards can know any spells they want - it's sorcerors who have limited spells known of specific levels. Wizards just lack the slots to cast them. Your feats would let a first level wizard cast 4th level spells, and worse, with more of these feats.

I had forgotten that Wizards could learn spells from higher levels... however, I fail to see the problem. A basic part of spell design is that certain things (such as a faster spell, or a spell with no verbal components, or no somatic components, etc.) is going to be higher level than a spell without these features... that's why Power Word: Kill is level 9, and Slay Living is level 5... PWK has no saving throw, and requires only a verbal component, while Slay Living allows a saving throw and has somatic components.

This is the same principle at work in metamagic feats. Casting a spell without somatic components is a bonus, because you can wear armor, increasing the spell level by 1. Casting a spell so it shoots farther, explodes larger, or anything similar is a bonus, so it increases spell level. Conversely, intentionally taking a penalty on a spell... taking longer to cast it, or using expensive materials when usually only your personal strength is required... are drawbacks that you inflict, which should result in some sort of benefit; a reduced spell slot will benefit every spell, far more than increased caster level will.


Thirdly, that was the was Eschew Materials use to work. Until they changed it.
There must have been a reason that they changed it...perhaps because it had no drawbacks?

Or perhaps because it had a very large drawback... it was unusable by Bards and Sorcerers in normal usage, because, as a metamagic feat, it meant that their spells took too long.

Mechanically, what has changed about Eschew Materials? It does the exact same thing it did in 3e, still costs 1 feat to ignore all sub-1gp material components... it has no drawbacks at all that it did not have in 3e EXCEPT that, since it is not a metamagic feat, bards and sorcerers can use it normally.





To summarize:
Metamagic feats increase the abilities of a spell, so that instead of researchign a new spell, you can simply make a new one more powerful. A spell slot of +1 is the equivalent power of a spell one spell level higher, two character levels higher, etc etc.

By their name, metamagic feats alter magic, not necessarily increase it. To date, the published ones may have increased it, but that doesn't mean that a metamagic feat cannot make a spell easier to cast.


+10 to spot/listen checks is a very powerful ability at low levels, as not many low level characters can beat that +10, and thus can't counterspell etc.
At higher levels it's not that great. This is why I suggested changing it to your caster level, or half your caster level as a bonus - this makes it so it's more effective at later levels, and not so broken at lower ones.

Caster level makes sense, but I think the feat is then underpowered. Perhaps caster level +2, so they keep ahead of people with cross-class skills?

Several times, however, I notice you overlook opprotunity cost; feats are, of themselves, a cost of their effects. If the effects are relatively minor, sometimes the feat itself, and its attendant opprotunity cost, is cost enough. That's why a mechanically unchanged Eschew Materials is still around... the feat is the cost, replacing the haphazard requirement that you purchase a new spell component pouch, at the cost of a feat.

Sacrath
2005-09-12, 03:16 PM
Very true, feats don't grow on trees, and Echew Materials is much more useful than just removing the need to go looking for Spell Pouches, it removes the posiblity that an oponent will disarm/sunder said pouch and seriously hamper your spell casting.

Wih
2005-09-12, 08:34 PM
I realise that chewing up a feat is an expensive thing...as I said when i commended your Imperceptable spell.
I just don't think chewing up a feat for a metamagic +0 that has no drawbacks is a viable feat. It would be better as a feat that just added that to the DC - not a metamagic feat.
And the CL+2 doesn't quite make sense...it would have to be (CL/2)+2 to be at the same level as cross-class skills (make it +3 to make it more powerful) - CL+2 starts at the same level, and gets progressively more powerful than a cross-class spot check.
If it's just a straight +10, there should be some sort of pre-reqs - 8 ranks spellcraft? Otherwise, if it's the CL version, 4 ranks spellcraft should be more than enough.

EDIT: I forgot to talk about the whole wizards casting +5 slot spells...

OK, the reason why this is drastically overpowered is that it is yet another mechanic that will unbalance wizard/sorcerors. Wizards already get Quicken and bonus feats. That's enough - making it so they can use their bonus feats to cast spells of a higher level than they should be able to isn't right.
SOLUTION: Make it so you can't cast a higher level spell than you normally would be able to, a la Divine Metamagic.

Venatius
2005-09-13, 01:51 AM
Slow spell seems a little dubious to me. Slap that on a cleric, prebuff for combat, and you can just about double your prebuffs and suffer none at all for the extra time. Sure, if you get ambushed it's a problem, but all the other metamagic feats that impose problems like that pretty much assure the problem will be there. Slow spell could rather easily be pulled off at absolutely no disadvantage to the caster whatsoever. Too much of a freebie.

MrNexx
2005-09-13, 09:17 AM
SOLUTION: Make it so you can't cast a higher level spell than you normally would be able to, a la Divine Metamagic.

Hmmm... which opens the way for another feat, actually.

The feats, re-presented:

Subtle Casting [General]
You have mastered casting your spells with very subtle verbal and somatic components. As such, the Spot or Listen difficulty to notice your spellcasting increases by your caster level, but does not reduce arcane spell failure.

Subtle Spell [Metamagic]
Prerequisites: Still Spell, Silent Spell
Benefit: You can strip the spells you cast of both verbal and somatic components, allowing them to be cast silently, and without gestures. Unless you also know Eschew Components, you still require material components for your spells, and they still require their normal casting time. Spells cast with this feat increase the effective level of the spell by one.

Slow Spell [Metamagic]
Prerequisites: Caster level 3+
Benefit: A spell prepared (or cast) with this meatmagic feat requires twice as long to cast as normal (spells which require a standard action now require a full-round action; spells which require a full-round action now require two rounds, spells which require a set amount of time require twice as much as normal). However, because more time is spent on the spellcasting, it costs the casters comparitively less energy, resulting in a reduction of one effective spell level, to a minium of zero. Thus, a Mage Armor spell prepared with Slow Spell would require a full round to cast, but would only occupy a 0th level spell slot. You may not use this feat to cast a spell of higher level than you are normally allowed (i.e. a 5th level wizard is still limited to 3rd level spells, even if he knows spells of 4th level and higher)
Special: Bards, Sorcerers, and other spontaneous casters who make use of this feat will require a minimum of two rounds to cast their spell; that they are using a metamagic feat increases the casting time to a full-round action, which is then doubled.

Expensive Spell
Prerequisites: Caster Level 5+
Benefit: You may choose to require a specific, expensive material component for your spells. This material component costs a number of gold pieces equal to the spell level times your caster level, and requires a Spellcraft check equal to 10 + Caster Level + Spell level to determine. This component must be determined for any spell which is to be cast with the feat. Spells cast with the Expensive Spell metamagic feat are considered to be two levels lower than their usual spell level, with a minimum level of zero. You may not use this feat to cast a spell of higher level than you are normally allowed (i.e. a 5th level wizard is still limited to 3rd level spells, even if he knows spells of 4th level and higher)

NEW
Ritual Spell
Prerequisites: Caster level 9+, Slow Spell, Expensive Spell
Benefit: You may prepare and cast a spell as a ritual, vastly reducing its spell level, at the cost of time and materials. Each spell to be cast as a ritual requires 100 times the usual casting time (ten minutes for spells requiring a standard or full-round action), and material components of the original spell level squared times fifty. The ritual for each spell requires research, with a minimum Spellcraft DC of 20 + Original level of spell + revised level of spell. This research requires one day per spell, but 5 or more ranks ina Knowledge: Arcana (for arcane spells) or Knowledge: Religion (for divine spells) adds +2 to the check. The DM should make this check; if it fails by less than 5, then the caster realizes something is wrong and may spend another day in research. If the check fails by more than 5, the caster does not realize his ritual is flawed. Flawed rituals will not work. If the check fails by 10 or more, the ritual is horribly flawed, and will have some detrimental effect upon the caster.
Spells successfully cast as rituals have their effective spell levels lowered by three, to a minimum of zero. Unlike other spell-level-lowering metamagics, it is possible to cast spells of higher level than the caster is otherwise capable of, provided that the spell is known.

[There; a bit of a modification on the idea]

MrNexx
2005-09-13, 09:20 AM
Slow spell seems a little dubious to me. Slap that on a cleric, prebuff for combat, and you can just about double your prebuffs and suffer none at all for the extra time. Sure, if you get ambushed it's a problem, but all the other metamagic feats that impose problems like that pretty much assure the problem will be there. Slow spell could rather easily be pulled off at absolutely no disadvantage to the caster whatsoever. Too much of a freebie.

That's more or less the point. In order to do that, though, you'd have to plan for it; Slow Spell really rewards planning, though buff-specializing spontaneous casters are a bit of a problem.