Rule Lawyers Needed

[Sugashane]

Have two players trying to stretch the game in a high powered gestalt game. I don't mind optimized builds or even overpowered as the monsters will simply get a similar boost, but it has to be somewhat legitimate.

One wants to take the feat Southern Magician from Races of Faerun. Claiming as a 14th level Wizard he would be able to cast 7 spells off the arcane list as a divine spell, as it says "Once per day per two spellcaster levels, you can cast a divine spell as an arcane spell, or vice versa." My issue is with the next sentence: "This enables you to bypass arcane spell failure due to armor, or gain additional benefit from spell that functions differently for a divine caster instead of an arcane caster, such as true seeing or magic weapon." To me this means it must be a spell you already know, you are just altering it from arcane to divine or vice versa.

Also a Cleric is purchasing metamagic feats, and wants to purchase persistent spell and looking at at trying to find a feat to allow a touch spell to be used by persistent spell. I know there is Reach Spell that would allow it to be up to 30 feet, but is there anything that actually would fit the criteria for Persistent Spell?

[sleepyphoenixx]

Southern Magician: reading the full text actually makes it pretty clear that you change a spell you already know. There is no ambiguity there imo.
What is your player hoping to accomplish with this? Cast any arcane spell of any list even if he doesn't know it?

Reach Spell & Persist: 30 feet is a fixed range so by RAW it's viable.

Keep in mind that as the GM you have the last word on this, no matter how the rules can be interpretet. If you do not want these things in your campaign just say no.

[Barsoom]

The actual source of the spell's power doesn't change, nor does its means of preparation.He still has to prepare the spell normally. He can't just cast a spell he doesn't know.

[Sugashane]

Southern Magician: reading the full text actually makes it pretty clear that you change a spell you already know. There is no ambiguity there imo.
What is your player hoping to accomplish with this? Cast any arcane spell of any list even if he doesn't know it?

Reach Spell & Persist: 30 feet is a fixed range so by RAW it's viable.

Keep in mind that as the GM you have the last word on this, no matter how the rules can be interpretet. If you do not want these things in your campaign just say no.

I'm not entirely sure. I think he is wanting to use a spells like Divine Power or Bite of the Were-Boar/Tiger/Bear/whatever that he doesn't have access to yet. I think it is a chance he is trying to abuse the Arcane Dilettante ability he has gotten from his Factotum side and use Southern Magician to use divine spells. Not really sure.


Oh absolutely. I just want to make sure I am not shorting how strong their builds can be, plus the stronger they get the more class levels I can add to other monsters they will face, it is like a fun arms race to me. I just want to avoid interpretations that are incorrect.

I appreciate the feedback guys, I'll allow the Persist spell. I actually have the belief that he wants to Persist Delay Death, I just don't know if he understands that he still goes unconscious. We'll see. LOL.

[BowStreetRunner]

Also a Cleric is purchasing metamagic feats, and wants to purchase persistent spell and looking at at trying to find a feat to allow a touch spell to be used by persistent spell. I know there is Reach Spell that would allow it to be up to 30 feet, but is there anything that actually would fit the criteria for Persistent Spell?

There are two schools of thought here. One says that regardless of what order metamagic feats are applied, each effect is applied to the original spell as it existed before being altered by metamagic. The other says that you can choose to apply the metamagic feats individually in whatever order you like, and when Reach Spell changes a spell to a 30 ft range it becomes eligible for Persistent Spell.

I've honestly never seen any official source that answers the question of which interpretation is correct, and while a lot of people will argue very passionately that there is only one possible interpretation, I can usually find equally passionate people to argue the other side.

[Alienist]

Someone gave a really good explanation for why persistent spell doesn't work with touch + reach spell. I should have saved it. :smallannoyed:

From a rules lawyer perspective there are several reasons why it doesn't work.

(1) the rules flat out say that it doesn't work with touch spells. Regardless of what else you to do it the base spell is still touch and so not eligible.

(2) reach spell does NOT give spells a fixed range. It gives them a variable range of, and I quote, "up to 30 feet". Compare with the example spell, Detect Magic, which has a range of 60 feet, not "up to 60 feet"

In general the 'fixed range' spells are basically auras which emanate outwards from the caster, who is at the center of the effect. That is why persist works on personal spells and auras only, because you are the key ingredient to which it is anchored. Touch spells don't work for that, because the anchor point would be someone or something else.

[Alienist]

There are two schools of thought here. One says that regardless of what order metamagic feats are applied, each effect is applied to the original spell as it existed before being altered by metamagic. The other says that you can choose to apply the metamagic feats individually in whatever order you like, and when Reach Spell changes a spell to a 30 ft range it becomes eligible for Persistent Spell.

I've honestly never seen any official source that answers the question of which interpretation is correct, and while a lot of people will argue very passionately that there is only one possible interpretation, I can usually find equally passionate people to argue the other side.

Even if you can choose the order in which the metamagic is applied, instead of applying each individually to the base spell*, Reach still doesn't qualify, because it is not a fixed range, it is a range of "up to 30 feet".

*In fact, there are very good reasons to say that they are applied individually to the base spells, such as every example of how Maximise and Empower work. If you could mix and match and apply them in them order you choose, then Maximise + Empower would clearly do 150% damage every time.

[Asteron]

(1) the rules flat out say that it doesn't work with touch spells. Regardless of what else you to do it the base spell is still touch and so not eligible.

The 3.5 version does NOT specify that you can't use it with touch spells.

That being said, it's powerful enough without it. He doesn't need it.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Even if you can choose the order in which the metamagic is applied, instead of applying each individually to the base spell*, Reach still doesn't qualify, because it is not a fixed range, it is a range of "up to 30 feet".

*In fact, there are very good reasons to say that they are applied individually to the base spells, such as every example of how Maximise and Empower work. If you could mix and match and apply them in them order you choose, then Maximise + Empower would clearly do 150% damage every time.

That's a viable interpretation. It's just not the only one. Instead of arguing about it just make a dm ruling how it works in your game (or if you're a player ask your dm before you take the feats with that effect in mind).

Maximize + Empower = 150% damage: That's how i rule it in my games. Blasting is already fairly weak.
If you're gonna invest the resources (+5 spell levels, 2 feats, possibly more for metamagic reducers) for what is in most cases "90 elemental damage save for half" i think it should actually make an impact. How effective that is depends on the level of power at your table.

[Barsoom]

The 3.5 version does NOT specify that you can't use it with touch spells.It doesn't need to specify this. It's enough that a "personal or fixed range" has been specified.

And a touch range is not a fixed range, because it depends on your natural reach. Now your natural reach is 5', the next moment you're Enlarged and have a 10' reach, and so on.

[BowStreetRunner]

...people will argue very passionately that there is only one possible interpretation...
And sometimes the DM will just have to make a judgement call and be done with it. :smallsigh:

[Darth Stabber]

There are two schools of thought here. One says that regardless of what order metamagic feats are applied, each effect is applied to the original spell as it existed before being altered by metamagic. The other says that you can choose to apply the metamagic feats individually in whatever order you like, and when Reach Spell changes a spell to a 30 ft range it becomes eligible for Persistent Spell.

I've honestly never seen any official source that answers the question of which interpretation is correct, and while a lot of people will argue very passionately that there is only one possible interpretation, I can usually find equally passionate people to argue the other side.

Given that maximize + empower explicitly state that you deal max damage for the regular spell + half the regular damage rolled, then we can clearly see a precedent that both effects apply simultaneously not one then the other, since in either case of one then the other the empower damage would also be maximized. I can find no evidence of any official source making an example to the contrary, ergo it is the only interpretation which holds water in the "purely logical" sense would be simultaneity.

Lawyerly enough for you?

Note: Given the massive logical inconsistencies in the system ruling otherwise is understandable, but it's not strictly adherent. Strict adherence is also not necessarily desirable, as it leads to drown healing and other absurd propositions.

[Spuddles]

It doesn't need to specify this. It's enough that a "personal or fixed range" has been specified.

And a touch range is not a fixed range, because it depends on your natural reach. Now your natural reach is 5', the next moment you're Enlarged and have a 10' reach, and so on.

And fixed range spells aren't fixed if you apply metamagic to them. So what?

[NoldorForce]

Relying on it as an override to anything else is poor form and counter to the sense of rules priority (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=289930), but the FAQ has made a few rulings over the years to clarify indeterminate situations that previously had no official standards within the rules. Metamagic priority happens to be one of them.

If my wizard applies Energy Admixture (CAr, page 78) and Maximize Spell to the same spell, does he get a spell that deals double its maximized damage (maximum normal damage in two different energy types)? If he also applied the Twin Spell feat (CAr, page 84) to the same spell would it duplicate the entire effect?
Yes and yes. Assuming your character can cast 13th-level spells—the slot required by a 2nd-level spell affected by these metamagic feats—a scorching ray so affected would create two sets of three rays each, with each ray dealing 24 points of fire damage (4d6, maximized) and 24 points of a second energy type (as appropriate for your Energy Substitution feat), for a grand total of 288 points of damage . . . assuming all six rays hit their target.

[Barsoom]

And fixed range spells aren't fixed if you apply metamagic to them.Which metamagic?? If you meant Enlarge Spell, that only affects

You can alter a spell with a range of close, medium, or long ...
And I don't know any range-altering spells other than Enlarge Spell.

[Pickford]

And fixed range spells aren't fixed if you apply metamagic to them. So what?

A spell is not it's metamagic.

The spell is the base thing that anyone and everyone who qualifies for can access. A spell with metamagic applied is different.

examples:

Fixed range = 60'
Variable range = 100' + 10'/level

And Touch and Personal are two distinct mutually exclusive ranges. Touch can be applied to ones self, but Personal cannot be applied to others.

This is similar to the Socrates is a Man but not all Men are Socrates.

[Chronos]

I think Spuddles' argument was that, if Enlarge Person counts as changing the range of a Touch spell, and thus Touch isn't a "fixed range", then by the same token, Enlarge Spell changes the range of a spell with range of, say, 30', and thus 30' isn't a fixed range.

On the question of one metamagic making a spell eligible for another, there's sort of precedent in Snowcasting, from Frostburn. Its only real purpose for existence is to make spells eligible for various metamagic feats that otherwise couldn't be applied. It's not technically a metamagic feat itself, though.

[Barsoom]

I think Spuddles' argument was that, if Enlarge Person counts as changing the range of a Touch spell....

Yes, but not only that. A touch spell cast by an Fire Giant Wizard has a different range than one cast by a human Wizard. "Touch range" means "whatever your natural reach is". It simply doesn't have a fixed number attached to it, like 50' or 30' or whatnot. Therefore it cannot by any stretch of imagination be called "fixed range".

[Pickford]

I think Spuddles' argument was that, if Enlarge Person counts as changing the range of a Touch spell, and thus Touch isn't a "fixed range", then by the same token, Enlarge Spell changes the range of a spell with range of, say, 30', and thus 30' isn't a fixed range.

On the question of one metamagic making a spell eligible for another, there's sort of precedent in Snowcasting, from Frostburn. Its only real purpose for existence is to make spells eligible for various metamagic feats that otherwise couldn't be applied. It's not technically a metamagic feat itself, though.

Ok, to be clear here's what the text of Enlarge Spell says:


Spells whose ranges are not defined by distance, as well as spells whose ranges are not close, medium, or long, do not have increased ranges.

Note the last part: close, medium, or long. Those are the defined enlargable ranges.

edit: Doh, Barsoom I didn't realize you had said this already.