PDA

View Full Version : Arcane Thesis errata



Peregrine
2008-01-09, 06:05 AM
So, Arcane Thesis feat (PHB p.74) got the errata treatment, stopping it from reducing the level of a spell below its original level. It also got a mention in the FAQ, but the two contradict each other and the erratum post-dates -- and overrules, I believe -- the FAQ, which said that it only reduces the increase once, even if you apply multiple feats. The example with the errata clearly says it can apply more than once, but not reduce the final level below the original.

Problem: +0-level metamagic feats. There are a few official ones, and the Giant penned several (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/Vc8c0zrN3b8C17BVveU.html). See, I anticipated that a good fix would make it so that each metamagic feat applied could not give a level adjustment of less than +0. I would have house-ruled to that effect before the errata.

As it stands, I could use one or more of these +0-level feats with my thesis spell to reduce its level after applying other metamagic... an 8th-level empowered split-ray chain enervation is nice, but making it seeking and cooperative and thus reducing it to 6th level sounds good to me! (It makes Cooperative Spell useful for more than just getting into Mage of the Arcane Order...) And you can metamagic a 9th-level spell this way...

On the other hand, it's a fairly limited and costly approach. It gives you one butt-kicking spell at a low, low level, at the cost of several feats (and possible drawbacks of the 0-level feats).

So: stick to the published errata, or house-rule a +0 minimum per feat?

Nebo_
2008-01-09, 06:08 AM
I don't see a need to houserule it. If someone wants to specialise that much on a single spell, they should be allowed to.

weenie
2008-01-09, 06:11 AM
While it isn't game-breaking, I would still houserule the minimum +0 per feat. For commons sense's sake.

Khanderas
2008-01-09, 08:07 AM
While it isn't game-breaking, I would still houserule the minimum +0 per feat. For commons sense's sake.
For the sake of 10 characters per post, I agree. For commons sense's sake (I wouldn't even call it a houserule, just 'it does'nt work that way' because it cannot be how it was intended.

Thinker
2008-01-09, 09:38 AM
While it isn't game-breaking, I would still houserule the minimum +0 per feat. For commons sense's sake.

I don't see how that's common sense. I see no evidence that this was the intended rule and within a setting, in character, they know nothing of feats or spell levels. All they know is that they learned how to split a spell, cast it faster, etc. with less extra effort compared to another spell because they have studied that spell so long. The more extra features they add to it the more of a customization of the spell it is, making it easier for that caster specifically to cast the spell.

Kioran
2008-01-09, 10:02 AM
I don't see how that's common sense. I see no evidence that this was the intended rule and within a setting, in character, they know nothing of feats or spell levels. All they know is that they learned how to split a spell, cast it faster, etc. with less extra effort compared to another spell because they have studied that spell so long. The more extra features they add to it the more of a customization of the spell it is, making it easier for that caster specifically to cast the spell.

Oww. Apart from me thinking that only the overall cost is reduced, customization doesn´t make it easier, it´s actually a deviation from the spell you´ve learned for so long.
Sounds a bit like a justification, nit an explanation to me......

Thinker
2008-01-09, 10:11 AM
Oww. Apart from me thinking that only the overall cost is reduced, customization doesn´t make it easier, it´s actually a deviation from the spell you´ve learned for so long.
Sounds a bit like a justification, nit an explanation to me......

Its only an example of how it could be easier so perhaps it is a bit of a justification.

Telonius
2008-01-09, 10:16 AM
It should go with minimum +0. Otherwise, if you take Arcane Thesis in Acid Splash, and use Energy Substitution on it, it ends up taking up a negative one spell slot. And that's just silly. How many times a day would he be able to cast that? That's an instant "Infinity gold and XP!" loop, since the cost of Scribing a scroll would then be negative (i.e. you gain gold and xp by crafting an item).

Person_Man
2008-01-09, 10:26 AM
I think its only an issue if a player is purposefully trying to break your game with a shadowcaster build or something similar. Otherwise, any problem can easily be solved by just having a beer with the player and talking about not abusing the rules.

Keld Denar
2008-01-09, 10:37 AM
I think its only an issue if a player is purposefully trying to break your game with a shadowcaster build or something similar. Otherwise, any problem can easily be solved by just having a beer with the player and talking about not abusing the rules.

I fully support your endorsement of rational adult discussion including the consumption of rational adult beverages. Especially frothy golden goodness.

By far, the most broken application of or Arcane Thesis involves the spells Ray of Stupidity and Shivering Touch. Ability damage was never intended to multiply this way. Its pretty easy to do over 44 points of int damage or 92 dex damage a round through the application of empower, maximise, twin, split ray, and quicken. These spells were pretty overpowered to start with, but the application of abusive metamagics with level reductions makes them stupid.

I've also seen some things with Magic Missile and Orb of Fire that were pretty disturbing, pushing damage curves to the far end. There was a thread long ago on the wizards forums that had some fun builds.

kamikasei
2008-01-09, 11:16 AM
It should go with minimum +0. Otherwise, if you take Arcane Thesis in Acid Splash, and use Energy Substitution on it, it ends up taking up a negative one spell slot. And that's just silly. How many times a day would he be able to cast that? That's an instant "Infinity gold and XP!" loop, since the cost of Scribing a scroll would then be negative (i.e. you gain gold and xp by crafting an item).

This is exactly what the OP quotes the errata as saying: you can add on all the metamagic you want, but you can't reduce the metamagic cost so as to end up with a lower-level than the original, unvarnished spell. The question isn't whether the end result should be constrained to be +0 at a minimum but:

- Should the reduction apply to all the metamagic feats (so that the cost of each feat is reduced by one) or to the total (so that the cost of only one feat is reduced)?
- Should a +0 feat be allowed to be reduced, if in combination with other feats so that it still gives a +0 or higher total? In other words, while I can't use a +0 feat to reduce a spell to a lower level, can I use a +2 and +0 feat to get a +1 and -1 = +0 total metamagic cost for that casting?

kamikasei
2008-01-09, 11:21 AM
It should go with minimum +0. Otherwise, if you take Arcane Thesis in Acid Splash, and use Energy Substitution on it, it ends up taking up a negative one spell slot. And that's just silly. How many times a day would he be able to cast that? That's an instant "Infinity gold and XP!" loop, since the cost of Scribing a scroll would then be negative (i.e. you gain gold and xp by crafting an item).

This is exactly what the OP quotes the errata as saying: you can add on all the metamagic you want, but you can't reduce the metamagic cost so as to end up with a lower-level than the original, unvarnished spell. The question isn't whether the end result should be constrained to be +0 at a minimum but:

- Should the reduction apply to all the metamagic feats (so that the cost of each feat is reduced by one) or to the total (so that the cost of only one feat is reduced)?
- Should a +0 feat be allowed to be reduced, if in combination with other feats so that it still gives a +0 or higher total? In other words, while I can't use a +0 feat to reduce a spell to a lower level, can I use a +2 and +0 feat to get a +1 and -1 = +0 total metamagic cost for that casting?

Kizara
2008-01-09, 11:44 AM
This is exactly what the OP quotes the errata as saying: you can add on all the metamagic you want, but you can't reduce the metamagic cost so as to end up with a lower-level than the original, unvarnished spell. The question isn't whether the end result should be constrained to be +0 at a minimum but:

- Should the reduction apply to all the metamagic feats (so that the cost of each feat is reduced by one) or to the total (so that the cost of only one feat is reduced)?
- Should a +0 feat be allowed to be reduced, if in combination with other feats so that it still gives a +0 or higher total? In other words, while I can't use a +0 feat to reduce a spell to a lower level, can I use a +2 and +0 feat to get a +1 and -1 = +0 total metamagic cost for that casting?

No, IMO and in the opinion of many other posters in this thread.
You would have a total metamaigic cost of 1 in your example.

To make another example; if I wanted to quicken, still, silent, empower, energy subsitute, and maximise an Arcane Thesis spell, it would look like this:

+3, +0, +0, +1, +0, +2. For a total of +6.

Frosty
2008-01-09, 12:19 PM
I agree with Kizara. It's the only fair way to rule the feat. Making Arcane Thesis only apply to one metamagic feat would make it worthless. Making it lower metamgic to -1 if the feat started at +0 would make it stupidly overpowered. The middle way of capping the low end cost of EACh feat to +0 is good.

Kizara
2008-01-09, 12:30 PM
I agree with Kizara. It's the only fair way to rule the feat. Making Arcane Thesis only apply to one metamagic feat would make it worthless. Making it lower metamgic to -1 if the feat started at +0 would make it stupidly overpowered. The middle way of capping the low end cost of EACh feat to +0 is good.

I'm addition to liking being agreed with, I like your avatar. :)

Where's it from?

Frosty
2008-01-09, 12:54 PM
I've done it your way for a long time, ever since I got the PHB2. It just made sense, even before I read any FAQ or errata. As for my asvatar, I got it so long ago I forgot what it is or where it's from :smalleek:

Indon
2008-01-09, 01:49 PM
Personally, I agree with those who say that Arcane Thesis, the way the errata puts it, is only a problem with spells that are already a problem.

Let's say we have a metamagic variant Wizard (human) who took Arcane Thesis - Scorching Ray.

For his feats, he goes all-out, taking Maximize, Empower, Twin Ray, Split Ray, Repeat Spell, Quicken Spell, Arcane Thesis of course, and +0 metamagic feats for his other 5 feats.

Sadly, I only remember the modifiers for some of those feats, but assuming Twin, Split, and Repeat spell are all +3, +2 with Arcane Thesis, I do believe a maximized-empowered-twin-split-repeated-quickened Scorching Ray, with all 6 +0 metamagic feats applied, would be spell level 9, and unquickened would be spell level 6.

Each ray would deal 36 fire damage, the Wizard at level 20 would be able to cast... I think 4 (?) in a normal cast... which means Twin/Split/Repeat spell means you cast 16 beams in the first round and another 16 are auto-cast from where you cast the spell next round. Cast both one of those, and the quickened version each round, and you're attacking 32 times for 36 damage (of whatever element you want, really) on round one, and 64 times for 36 damage on each round thereafter.

Really, against many enemies it's enough to one-round encounters... which is just about what the Wizard can do anyway, only this Wizard dies horrifically (and hilariously) if he fights the Terrasque. Also, he's a living disco ball (or you could depict him as a DBZ-style fighter, which would be funny), and very much a one-trick pony, since much of his spell slots are probably dedicated to his Awesome One-round encounter spell.

You could outright break the game if you instead chose, say, Enervate... which is already considered by many to be overpowered. Ditto with Shivering Touch or other stat damage spells. And what non-damage spell would benefit enough to break the game from Arcane Thesis? One buff could be Extended at its' base level... in exchange for spending multiple feats...