Gambling Spell [Metamagic]

[Kobold-Bard]

Just something I came up with one day. Apologies if this isn't the correct layout.

Gambling Spell [Metamagic]
You are willing to risk losing spell potency to reach for the ultimate payout.

Prerequisite: Able to cast 3rd level spells.

Benefit: When you cast a spell with this feat applied to it you roll a d20.
A roll of 1-5 results in your Caster level being considered 50% of it's normal amount including all bonuses, rounded down. For example a level 11 Cleric with an active Orange Ioun Stone would be considered CL 6 for the purposes of saving throw DC's, number of damage dice rolled etc.

A roll of 6-15 means the spell is unaltered.

A roll of 16-20 results in your Caster level being considered 50% higher than it's normal amount including all bonuses, rounded up. This effect works even if this would put a spells factor higher than normally allowed. For example a level 14 Sorcerer would be considered CL 21 for the purposes of this spell, meaning that if she cast a Gambling Fireball it would deal 15d6 damage, even though it is normally limited to 10d6.

A Gambling Spell uses a normal slot of the spell being cast, including additional Metamagic Feats

Normal: Spell's effects are decided by a fixed number.

Whaddaya think?

[strawberryman]

Interesting, but I'm biased in that gambling abilities are interesting to me. Well, more so than usual. :smallwink:

[quick_comment]

Nobody would ever use it.

The expected value is negative.

[Foryn Gilnith]

I'd never prepare this, even as a chaotic wizard. As a spontaneous caster, though, this would be useful if I could apply it at will (as in, without expending an extra move action). It's useful in certain situations, but when preparing for those situations actively gimps what are usually supposed to be your generalist spells...eh. Spontaneous casters have no such issue.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

If the enhanced CL actually had full effect regardless of caps, I'd consider it--meaning if I get CL 18 my fireball had better do 18d6 damage. Otherwise, as quick_comment said, it's not worth it to balance even chances of .5 effectiveness and 1.25 effectiveness. Either bump the increase up to +50% or reduce the penalty to -25% and then we'll talk.

[JoshuaZ]

I agree with PairODice that the penalty should probably be smaller. Also, you may want to improve the wording of "the spell activates as if you had not used this feat" to something like "the spell is unaltered." The worry here is that certain abilities cannot effect metamagic modified spells and given this wording one could still apply them after the spell has been cast. Indeed, I could see an ultimate magus trying to apply Gambling Spell twice to get two bites at the apple so to speak.

[Kobold-Bard]

Reworded 6-15, and changed it to 50% down and up.

[Surrealistik]

Consider having the spell assume the [Chaos] descriptor. I also feel that Randomize/Chaos Spell is a little better sounding.

[Trickywiggy]

Take a look at the Wild Mage prestige class. I have always thought about making the level one ability you get a metamagic feet that is the first level ability for a class who otherwise sucks badly.

[Ashtagon]

I'd also remove the metamagic tag, so that a prepared caster doesn't have to decide at the start of the day to cast a spell this way. The random nature of this feat doesn't tie in thematically with having to plan ahead.

[Worira]

I see some potential for abuse with the Holy Word line.

[Dagren]

Even at 150%, I'm still not sure it's worth it. The inverse of 50% is 200%, not 150%, likewise the inverse of 150% is 67%, not 50%.

[TooManySecrets]

I'd use it, if I had to defeat something powerful, quickly.

This can be very easy to cheese.

Let's say that you're a Cleric. You've taken Hierophant levels to pump your CL up a bit. You have that feat from Complete Divine that let's you blow turn undead for CL. You have an item or two that boosts CL.

So, let's say Cleric 13/Hierophant 2. Base CL 17, +2 boost from items, ballpark average of +3 from Divine Spell Power, giving us a total CL of 22. Get lucky and get that 50% boost, and that's a CL of 33. Which means that Holy Word is going to kill anything with 23 HD or less, no save (though SR, but with a CL of 33, I sure it will go through). I'd risk something like that on the BBEG, especially if I could escape and try again. Eventually, he/she/it is going down.

However, that's just one degenerate case. The feat itself looks good, and if you can't find a way to go around the degenerate case through rules, put some sort of note to warn the GM about potential abuse.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Even at 150%, I'm still not sure it's worth it. The inverse of 50% is 200%, not 150%, likewise the inverse of 150% is 67%, not 50%.

But multiplicative inverses aren't what this feat deals with, it's additive increments. Half of 10d6 is 5d6, so in exchange for losing 5d6 some times you should gain 5d6 other times--and 15d6 is 150%. Halving and doubling doesn't work unless you change the probabilities to make the average work out to no change, in which case it's much more likely to hurt you and less worthwhile to have.

[DanielLC]

The mean damage is the same and the standard deviation increases. This makes the fight more uncertain, which is good if you'll probably lose, but bad if you'll probably win. Considering that anyone who habitually gets into fights that they'll probably lose won't last long, I think it's safe to assume you'll probably win, making this feat almost always bad to use.

Being able to use it spontaneously, as Ashtagon suggested, will make it so it might come in handy, but it's still a waste of a feat. Perhaps you should make it so it increases damage on average.

Also, why use a d20 instead of a d4?

[Foryn Gilnith]

Being able to use it spontaneously, as Ashtagon suggested, will make it so it might come in handy, but it's still a waste of a feat. Perhaps you should make it so it increases damage on average.

Also, why use a d20 instead of a d4?

Adding the [chaos] descriptor would make it eligible for Spell Focus (chaos) if you're a DC freak; so that would make it useful. But yeah, why a d20?

[Kobold-Bard]

Adding the [chaos] descriptor would make it eligible for Spell Focus (chaos) if you're a DC freak; so that would make it useful. But yeah, why a d20?

Since d20 gets used for most things anyway just seemed appropriate. Feel free to substitute whatever dice you prefer.

[mikeejimbo]

What if instead, there was a higher chance of payoff, but a worse result if it goes wrong? Like on a natural 1, the caster takes a number of 1d10 * spell level damage, on a 2 to 15 nothing happens, and on a 16 to 20 the CL is increased by 50%.

I dunno, just a wild thought.