PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Aid Spell (Metamagic)



Myou
2009-03-09, 03:36 AM
Hi guys, I'm looking for a metamagic feat called Aid Spell. I know I read about it somewhere but I can't find it.

It changed the range of spells from personal to touch and I think it raised the slot level by +1.

Can anyone tell me where it comes from?

If it's not from 3.5, then what would be a fair slot adjustment be for a feat that did this in 3.5?

Heliomance
2009-03-09, 04:17 AM
That's an obscene metamagic, and would be far, far higher than a +1 adjustment. Bite of the Werebear on the party meatshield for example, is hideous. The Personal range spells are by far the best buffs. The feat's certainly not in any WotC publication, if it's in third party it shouldn't be.

Eeezee
2009-03-09, 04:24 AM
Never heard of it before, but I'd think the level adjustment would definitely be more than +1. I'd suggest +3 at least

Kantolin
2009-03-09, 04:32 AM
If it helps, here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats is Wizard's feat list.

I don't see a spell similar to what you want on there, however, so I'm afraid I can't be more help than that.

Myou
2009-03-09, 04:53 AM
Thanks for the responses guys, I guess it must have been a third party feat.

So, since it's not an official feat I'll just have to decide on it's specifics myself.

How is this;


Aid Spell [Metamagic]:

Benefit: You may cast a spell that normally has a range of Personal as a Touch spell with a target of one willing creature. The spell effectively becomes a Touch spell, and should be treated as such for all mechanical purposes. An Aid spell uses up a spell slot +3 levels higher than the spellís actual level.

The +3 adjustment seems a little bit high to me, what do you guys think?

Rad
2009-03-09, 05:06 AM
Short version: if you care about balance +3 still looks too low.

Long version:
The point is that touch spells are designed so that they are not available to either a straight martial build or a straight magic build. You need a gish or mixed build to use them and that is good because gish builds are somewhat gimped in other ways.
In other words, the fact that it is impossible to cast a personal spell on someone else is a basic rule of the game; changing that is like houseruling that you can substitute your hit points for your AC or something like that.
I would probably put it on par with persistent spell and put it around +6.

Or you can tell yourself that you don't care about balance and just go with it, but if you (or your players) enjoy the tactical/combat part of D&D skrewing with the system might be a bad idea for you. If you want to walk through encounters, and the easier dragons fall the cooler you are, go with it.

Myou
2009-03-09, 05:57 AM
Short version: if you care about balance +3 still looks too low.

Long version:
The point is that touch spells are designed so that they are not available to either a straight martial build or a straight magic build. You need a gish or mixed build to use them and that is good because gish builds are somewhat gimped in other ways.
In other words, the fact that it is impossible to cast a personal spell on someone else is a basic rule of the game; changing that is like houseruling that you can substitute your hit points for your AC or something like that.
I would probably put it on par with persistent spell and put it around +6.

Or you can tell yourself that you don't care about balance and just go with it, but if you (or your players) enjoy the tactical/combat part of D&D skrewing with the system might be a bad idea for you. If you want to walk through encounters, and the easier dragons fall the cooler you are, go with it.

+6 would make it utterly useless though, do you really think that a version of Blink as a touch spell is worth a level 9 slot?

I certaily do care about balance and tactics, but +6 is ridiculous.

+4 perhaps, but unless someone has a much more convincing argument I really don't see how +6 is justified.

jcsw
2009-03-09, 06:38 AM
+6 would make it utterly useless though, do you really think that a version of Blink as a touch spell is worth a level 9 slot?

I certaily do care about balance and tactics, but +6 is ridiculous.

+4 perhaps, but unless someone has a much more convincing argument I really don't see how +6 is justified.

I'd go for +4, but would make sure to ban certain combinations. Which ones? Well it'd take some playtesting, but anything which say, removes your spellcasting temporarily should be banned, among other things.

Heliomance
2009-03-09, 06:45 AM
Believe me, DMM, Incantatrix, Arcane Thesis, Practical metamagic and others say it's not useless with a+6 adjustment on it.

If you don't believe me, let's take the spell Giant Size from Complete Arcane. 7th level personal spell which, at CL 19, gets you:
+32 size bonus to strength
-2 penalty to dex
+16 size bonus to con
+20 size bonus to natural armour
Colossal size (inc 30 ft reach).
Size bonuses stack with everything.

On a caster, that's quite nasty, but casters don't tend to wade into melee that often. A caster with that up could hold his own in melee, but wouldn't be utterly broken.

Now picture giving that to a Barbarian. Imagine how horrific an amount of damage he could do. With a +3 adjust, it's doable with Arcane Thesis or Practical Metamagic and no further tricks.

Or Bite of the Werebear. This gives:
+16 enhancement to strength
+2 enhancement to dex
+8 enhancement to con
+7 enhancement to natural armour
Free Power Attack and Blind-Fight feats.

Holy Transformation gives +4 sacred to str and con
+4 sacred to saves
Sacred bonuses stack with everything except other sacred bonuses, and how common are they?
DR 5/Evil
Outsider (archon) type
A few other random goodies.

Body of War turns you into a Warforged Titan. You get:
Huge size
Lose spellcasting ability
Str becomes 28
Dex becomes 8
Con becomes -
Land speed 50 ft
Darkvision 60 ft
Low light vision
NA becomes 18
DR 10/adamantine
Immunity to all mind-affecting spells and abilities, poison, sleep effects, stunning, disease, death effects, necromancy effects, critical hits, nonlethal damage, ability drain, fatigue, exhaustion, energy drain, any efect that requires a Fort save unless it works on objects or is harmless.
Trample special ability

For a caster, that utterly sucks. You lose your spellcasting.
Stick it on a beatstick, and suddenly it's really quite nice. Just look at that list of immunities.

Even the lowly True Strike becomes ridiculously powerful at Touch range. Stick it on an archer, and you have an unparallelled sniper. It's really not a good idea.

Myou
2009-03-09, 07:51 AM
Heliomance, you're forgetting that DMM, Incantatrix, Arcane Thesis, Practical metamagic are all broken already. So the feat can't actually be applied to Giant Size without cheeze.

But you're certainly right about how powerful an ability it would be, at the moment I think +4 or +5 would be best though, I still don't think +6 is very fair.

But what levels are those other spells you listed?


What do you guys think of this;


Aid Spell [Metamagic]:

Benefit: You may cast a spell that normally has a range of Personal as a Touch spell with a target of one willing creature. The spell effectively becomes a Touch spell, and should be treated as such for all mechanical purposes. An Aid spell uses up a spell slot +4 levels higher than the spellís actual level, except when applied to a spell that would normally render the caster unable to use spells, in which case it requires a slot +6 levels higher.

kme
2009-03-09, 08:55 AM
I suggest you put it at +2. Many spells will be just fine with +2 adjustment, and no one would use them with +4 or +5. You will just have to ban all ridiculous combat buffs(like those heliomance mentioned) as they are meant to be used by fragile spellcasters and even on them can be easily abused.

Emperor Tippy
2009-03-09, 11:47 AM
And when someone throws in a Chain spell as well?

Myou
2009-03-09, 02:53 PM
And when someone throws in a Chain spell as well?

When they do that they cast a level 1 spell in a level 9 slot (unless it's a spell that removes casting, in which case they can't chain it at all). How on Earth is that broken?

Edit: Oh, and I'm pretty sure you can't chain a touch spell, so unless you're an Archmage you can't chain anything but cantrips, and even that requires another feat.

Heliomance
2009-03-09, 03:09 PM
Because there are so very many ways to reduce metamagic costs. DMM isn't inherently broken, it's only broken when combined with certain feats, like Persist. I suspect this would be another of those.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-03-09, 09:17 PM
When they do that they cast a level 1 spell in a level 9 slot (unless it's a spell that removes casting, in which case they can't chain it at all). How on Earth is that broken?

Edit: Oh, and I'm pretty sure you can't chain a touch spell, so unless you're an Archmage you can't chain anything but cantrips, and even that requires another feat.The issue is metamagic rods, Easy Metamagic, Practical Metamagic, Arcane Thesis, Improved Metamagic, DMM, Archmage levels, or any one of a dozen ways to reduce Metamagic costs. The Cleric is considered a melee monster because of a few self-only buffs. Picture what happens to a Str-Rogue when hit with Divine Power, or a Warblade hit with Bite of the WereX or Righteous Might. Heck, one of the few uses of Arcane Archer is casting AMF on someone other than yourself. With this+Archamge, suddenly you have a Ranged Touch attack that kills enemy casters.

ericgrau
2009-03-09, 11:26 PM
There is no appropriate LA, it is impossible to balance. Either the spell will be inaccessible at low levels or it will be overpowered at high levels. It simply gives you access to something additional that should not be accessible regardless of level. Even giving someone else access to personal range 1st level spells could be abused. Say for example, quickened aid true strike. There are others with unusual bonus types that high level characters will clamor for, since they stack with all their existing bonuses. Etc. Just don't do it.

Myou
2009-03-10, 04:01 AM
Because there are so very many ways to reduce metamagic costs. DMM isn't inherently broken, it's only broken when combined with certain feats, like Persist. I suspect this would be another of those.

Well, to me it's broken because it's a huge boost in power for clerics, swapping useless turning for incredibly powerful metamagic.


The issue is metamagic rods, Easy Metamagic, Practical Metamagic, Arcane Thesis, Improved Metamagic, DMM, Archmage levels, or any one of a dozen ways to reduce Metamagic costs. The Cleric is considered a melee monster because of a few self-only buffs. Picture what happens to a Str-Rogue when hit with Divine Power, or a Warblade hit with Bite of the WereX or Righteous Might. Heck, one of the few uses of Arcane Archer is casting AMF on someone other than yourself. With this+Archamge, suddenly you have a Ranged Touch attack that kills enemy casters.

Well, I thought it was implicit that you had to be a willing target.

But in any case, I really don't think that it's that broken with a high enough adjustment.
Althought I am starting to think that the adjustment should be a bit higher.


There is no appropriate LA, it is impossible to balance. Either the spell will be inaccessible at low levels or it will be overpowered at high levels. It simply gives you access to something additional that should not be accessible regardless of level. Even giving someone else access to personal range 1st level spells could be abused. Say for example, quickened aid true strike. There are others with unusual bonus types that high level characters will clamor for, since they stack with all their existing bonuses. Etc. Just don't do it.

Well, I agree it's powerful, but with a high enough adjustment I really don't see why it should never be allowed. It's not like a 1-level dip won't get fighters 1st level spells of their own. So if it's that broken why don't all fighters take a level of wizard and get a rod of quicken?

Khatoblepas
2009-03-10, 04:24 AM
Don't Spellguards of Silverymoon get the ability to cast personal spells as touch spells? For no adjustment?

I don't think it's that broken. In fact, I think Fighters might appreciate the buffs. God knows they might need it. And I think it would be really fun to go around all buffed up to the teeth. Very epic.

Myou
2009-03-10, 07:11 AM
Don't Spellguards of Silverymoon get the ability to cast personal spells as touch spells? For no adjustment?

I don't think it's that broken. In fact, I think Fighters might appreciate the buffs. God knows they might need it. And I think it would be really fun to go around all buffed up to the teeth. Very epic.

Wow, you're right, they do!

Rad
2009-03-10, 08:57 AM
I didn't seriously playtest the +6 (and didn't want to pretend that I had) so more discussion is welcome. It could be +5 or maybe even +4 if one really has to pay it (supposing all the workaround mentioned are not used).

The problem is that there are too many ways to decrease MM cost. Incantatrix, DMM, Rods etc. If they are allowed then the cost becomes less and less efficient as a safeguard against abuse. As things are most wizards can get a level of Archmage and a rod of chain spell...

I agree that at the very least everything that states or implies the loss of magical powers should be not affected (like AMF), for the rest a reasonably high price might keep things smooth.

The real question though is: why?
Fighters are already dependent on magic enough as things are. I am afraid that such a feat would result in:
1- the casters buff the meleers.
2- this makes the encounters easier.
3- No problem: the DM just gets tougher critters.
4- Now the fighter types are completely dependent on the casters to function as the monsters are too strong for them unbuffed.

The conclusion risks to become: "Bob, your character is awesome. Sam your character is mediocre but can be awesome when Bob says so". It does not guarantee problems among the players of course, but it seems to me that it creates (or exacerbates) a problem rather than solving it.

Just my 2cp. Hope this helps

Myou
2009-03-11, 04:44 AM
I didn't seriously playtest the +6 (and didn't want to pretend that I had) so more discussion is welcome. It could be +5 or maybe even +4 if one really has to pay it (supposing all the workaround mentioned are not used).

The problem is that there are too many ways to decrease MM cost. Incantatrix, DMM, Rods etc. If they are allowed then the cost becomes less and less efficient as a safeguard against abuse. As things are most wizards can get a level of Archmage and a rod of chain spell...

I agree that at the very least everything that states or implies the loss of magical powers should be not affected (like AMF), for the rest a reasonably high price might keep things smooth.

The real question though is: why?
Fighters are already dependent on magic enough as things are. I am afraid that such a feat would result in:
1- the casters buff the meleers.
2- this makes the encounters easier.
3- No problem: the DM just gets tougher critters.
4- Now the fighter types are completely dependent on the casters to function as the monsters are too strong for them unbuffed.

The conclusion risks to become: "Bob, your character is awesome. Sam your character is mediocre but can be awesome when Bob says so". It does not guarantee problems among the players of course, but it seems to me that it creates (or exacerbates) a problem rather than solving it.

Just my 2cp. Hope this helps

You say that there are too may ways of reducing metamagic costs for it to be balanced, but if that's the case then does it not mean that every single metamagic feat is unbalaced?

I don't really have a problem with fighters depending more on buffs, because it enourages teamwork, rather than the current situation where the wizard just replaces the fighter, and gives melee classes more of a purpose. If 'Bob' decides not to buff 'Sam' then he's making the battles harder by not buffing the best targets. Imagine if clerics only healed themselves instead of the meatsheild.


I agree that it's a powerful ability, but the Spellguard of Silverymoon gets it free, no level adjustment at all. And I've never heard anyone complain that that class is broken.


So, I think I'm going to let my player playtest this for me;

Aid Spell [Metamagic]:

Benefit: You may cast a spell that normally has a range of Personal as a Touch spell with a target of one willing creature. The spell effectively becomes a Touch spell, and should be treated as such for all mechanical purposes. An Aid spell uses up a spell slot +2 levels higher than the spellís actual level, except when applied to a spell that would normally render the caster unable to use spells or reduce their ability to cast spells, in which case it requires a slot +4 levels higher.

It may be that you're absolutely right, we'll see. :3

Rad
2009-03-11, 08:41 AM
You say that there are too may ways of reducing metamagic costs for it to be balanced, but if that's the case then does it not mean that every single metamagic feat is unbalaced?
Not really. Some feats, like still/silent, are usually not worth their normal price while others (Quickened, Chain) are. Persistent Spell, for one, is probably too high in price to e used without some workaround on the price.
In general the metamagic system is not very robust and IMHO most of the metamagic-affecting things (rods, feats, class features) have not been very well thought.


I don't really have a problem with fighters depending more on buffs, because it enourages teamwork, rather than the current situation where the wizard just replaces the fighter, and gives melee classes more of a purpose. If 'Bob' decides not to buff 'Sam' then he's making the battles harder by not buffing the best targets. Imagine if clerics only healed themselves instead of the meatsheild.

So, I think I'm going to let my player playtest this for me;

It may be that you're absolutely right, we'll see. :3

I cans ee it working with the right group. I can also see some people feeling its effects though. If your players are of the right kind go for it.
As for the clerics argument... I think that creating a strategy that is so much better than anything else you could do is not great for the game. I mean: if after a while every combat HAS to be opened with "I cast Bite of the wereX on Sam" it makes the game less interesting than "Should I cast Enlarge person on Sam or Grease under the Ogre's feet?".
I still do not see what is added to the game. There are already good buff spells that you can cast on others and that are worth the action they cost, so what options does it open in the game that weren't there already?


I agree that it's a powerful ability, but the Spellguard of Silverymoon gets it free, no level adjustment at all. And I've never heard anyone complain that that class is broken.


I never heard of that one... from what I saw online now it is very setting-specific and there are heavy RP requirements that make it quite ill-suited for a PC. This might make it rare enough that it doesn't affect many games.
My concern here is not mechanical, it's mostly about the emotional response that it can have on players.

Myou
2009-03-12, 04:52 AM
I can understand your concerns, Rad, for now I'll just be trying it out.
If it does work out badly then I'll just have to drop it. :3

Myrmex
2009-03-12, 05:05 AM
Anything that has the party wizard using his spell slots to increase the utility of the party beatstick is welcome in my book.

Myou
2009-03-12, 05:33 AM
Anything that has the party wizard using his spell slots to increase the utility of the party beatstick is welcome in my book.

Yes, exactly, instead of the wizard pressing his win button he's able to conjure one up for the fighter. And the fighter will actually be able to do it better, because he has full BAB and loads of appropriate feats.

jcsw
2009-03-12, 05:52 AM
I never heard of that one... from what I saw online now it is very setting-specific and there are heavy RP requirements that make it quite ill-suited for a PC. This might make it rare enough that it doesn't affect many games.

It requires you to guard silverymoon 2 days out of every tenday (Faerun's ten day week). Quite strict.
Also it can only be applied to spells which improve AC, Saves or give or heal HP. This is quite limited, however, some things like shapechange are still valid selections.

Fiery Diamond
2009-03-12, 06:02 AM
My personal opinion is this: Make it a +3 or +4 and ban all Metamagic Level Reducing Feats/Abilities.

Seriously, the ability to reduce metamagic adjustment is just stupid.

Khatoblepas
2009-03-12, 06:10 AM
It requires you to guard silverymoon 2 days out of every tenday (Faerun's ten day week). Quite strict.
Also it can only be applied to spells which improve AC, Saves or give or heal HP. This is quite limited, however, some things like shapechange are still valid selections.

Then get the ability, and retire. I think that's possible. :P

Rad
2009-03-12, 06:45 AM
Then get the ability, and retire. I think that's possible. :P
Well, that does sound like a workaround of the requirement. I wouldn't let you do that as a DM.

Myou
2009-03-12, 06:45 AM
It requires you to guard silverymoon 2 days out of every tenday (Faerun's ten day week). Quite strict.
Also it can only be applied to spells which improve AC, Saves or give or heal HP. This is quite limited, however, some things like shapechange are still valid selections.

It seems to allow most of the spells you'd want anyway.

RP requirements are non-issues - do you really think the DM is going to prevent you meeting them? Because all you have to do is just say "Yeah, I do my 2 days service.", that or them dM works them into adventures. As Khatoblepas says, you can just get the abilty, then retire anyway


My personal opinion is this: Make it a +3 or +4 and ban all Metamagic Level Reducing Feats/Abilities.

Seriously, the ability to reduce metamagic adjustment is just stupid.

I may ban reductions for this feat if I find that it's a problem, but I'd rather avoid that if I can.

Myou
2009-03-12, 06:47 AM
Well, that does sound like a workaround of the requirement. I wouldn't let you do that as a DM.

Actually, it's suggested in the sourcebook. xD

woodenbandman
2009-03-12, 10:43 AM
I didn't seriously playtest the +6 (and didn't want to pretend that I had) so more discussion is welcome. It could be +5 or maybe even +4 if one really has to pay it (supposing all the workaround mentioned are not used).

The problem is that there are too many ways to decrease MM cost. Incantatrix, DMM, Rods etc. If they are allowed then the cost becomes less and less efficient as a safeguard against abuse. As things are most wizards can get a level of Archmage and a rod of chain spell...

I agree that at the very least everything that states or implies the loss of magical powers should be not affected (like AMF), for the rest a reasonably high price might keep things smooth.

The real question though is: why?
Fighters are already dependent on magic enough as things are. I am afraid that such a feat would result in:
1- the casters buff the meleers.
2- this makes the encounters easier.
3- No problem: the DM just gets tougher critters.
4- Now the fighter types are completely dependent on the casters to function as the monsters are too strong for them unbuffed.

The conclusion risks to become: "Bob, your character is awesome. Sam your character is mediocre but can be awesome when Bob says so". It does not guarantee problems among the players of course, but it seems to me that it creates (or exacerbates) a problem rather than solving it.

Just my 2cp. Hope this helps

This is a problem of interparty balance, because in DnD, you're either a cleric or a dead guy, basically. Druids + Clerics are THE melee peeps. Wizards are THE battlefield controllers.

The problem you've presented is interparty balance. The party is not balanced against itself. If you had a cleric, a wizard, a druid, and another druid, then you'd have no such problem because everyone fills a niche. You have beatstic, buffbot, god-child, and scout/secondary everything; If you had a bard, a psychic warrior, a swordsage, and a factotum, you'd have a fairly balanced party, with the Psywar being the beatstick, the bard being the buffbot, the swordsage, bard, and factotum all doubleteaming for battlefield control, and the whole party can pretty much be scouts; If you have a fighter, a UMD-less rogue, a monk, and some fourth weak thing, you'll have a weak party; But all those parties are totally balanced with each other, which is the secret to having a smooth gameplay experience. Everyone must have a niche and do a good job in that niche OR everyone must be able to do whatever they want on a whim and be able to switch jobs around in a civil manner.

I don't know about the balance of this feat, but I'd rather not allow parties that create the situation that you describe, which would lead to the annoying side effect of this feat, which is that the fighter is dependent on the cleric.