Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread: Spontaneous Metamagic?
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
I'm running an E6 campaign, and one house rule I've added is Spontaneous Metamagic from UA - specifically, the version that allows you to spend extra spell slots of the spells level instead of using higher level spell slots. I added this rule because the E6 limits made it very hard to use metamagic of any kind otherwise. So far, none of the PCs has taken any metamagic feats, but they are all at 5th/6th level and are at the cusp of adding lots more feats per the E6 "levelling" system, so I'm likely to see some soon. The PCs have also started interacting with spellcasters who are Level 6+ and have metamagic, and combats with such foes may happen in the near future.
A couple of thoughts I've had about it on my own:
- It greatly increases the ability of spellcasters to "go nova", esp. with Heighten Spell, Empower, and other classics. It also favors spellcasters when the number of encounters per day is relatively small, as it has been so far in my campaign.
- I've pretty much already told the players that this rule replaces other "metamagic manipulation" rules/feat/abilities such as DMM.
- Sanctum Spell gets interesting, since you essentially get it for free in this version. Not that its crazy overpowered, but it could lead to some odd effects. Scorching Ray comes to mind, since one of my PCs likes it . . . you only get 1 ray normally in E6, but you could get a 2nd ray in your "sanctum", essentially doubling its effectiveness.
So . . .
Has anyone used this variant before? What did you think of it? Are there any particular pitfalls I should be on the lookout for? Have I screwed myself over by allowing it? I'll freely admit that I haven't read every metamagic feat available out there, so I'm hoping I didn't overlook something important.
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
Re: Spontaneous Metamagic?
Your player can already happily do what you're worrying about via Craft Magic Tattoo, a 24hr +1CL boost for 100g and a second level spell slot. Works anywhere.
Im guessing you're evaluating it based on the incorrect writeup of it in crystalkeep.
It's intended purpose is quite legitimate in E6.