invisible spell (metamagic) is it worth it?

[bjoern]

OK, so I've been thinking about the interaction between spontaneous arcane casting, increased casting times from metamagic, metamagic specialist ACF, arcane spellsurge, and invisible spell.

I'm sure y'all already know but all these things together create sort of a shell game where a sorcerer can get off 2 metamagiced spells per turn or pretty much any combination of 2 spells per turn.

The thing is, MM invisible spell has been popular because it doesn't increase the spell slot when applied but can be use with spell surge in a situation where you've already cast a swift action spell but want to do another (but can't since you can only have 1 swift per turn) so you slap invisible on it and voilà its a standard action! (Since sorcs have to pay an increase in casting time when using MM which is in this case beneficial)

Couldn't the exact same thing be accomplished by using some other +1 metamagic that you have? Is it really worth the feat slot (which will probably always be useful having another feat) to keep you from once in a while using up a spell slot 1 higher than you would have if you had invisible spell?

Am I missing something (besides the occasional benefits of having your spell effects invisible for sneaking purposes)?

[Phelix-Mu]

This determination is entirely dependent on a given DM's interpretation of the feat. By explicit notation and restrictive reading, the feat is borderline worthless, as it is poorly written and has almost no mechanical effect. By liberal interpretation, it is either really good for certain builds (like an illusionist) or way overpowered, since it has a conceivably broad effect for no cost at all.

So you need to figure out just how a DM is going to interpret the "invisible" parts of the spell. I've heard like at least a half-dozen, nuanced interpretations that all sounded reasonable around various tables.

There are a number of specific, pretty useful things that the feat can do, like Invisible Spell fog cloud, which can shut down true seeing without impeding your group.

EDIT: The niche case with spellsurge is probably still only good if you can get some kind of effect out of Invisible Spell. There are a couple of other good +0 metamagics out there, though none come to mind at the moment.

[Red Fel]

Am I missing something (besides the occasional benefits of having your spell effects invisible for sneaking purposes)?

Mostly? Invisible spell is awesome for making heads hurt.

Glitterdust + Invisible Spell = invisible sparkles that somehow visibly outline invisible things.

Silent Image + Invisible Spell = an illusion that cannot be heard, felt, smelt, or otherwise sensed, apart from being seen. Also, it can't be seen.

Raise Dead + Invisible Spell = an invisible man walking around while I guess people see the corpse? Or maybe they don't? What is this, I don't even.

[bjoern]

This determination is entirely dependent on a given DM's interpretation of the feat. By explicit notation and restrictive reading, the feat is borderline worthless, as it is poorly written and has almost no mechanical effect. By liberal interpretation, it is either really good for certain builds (like an illusionist) or way overpowered, since it has a conceivably broad effect for no cost at all.

So you need to figure out just how a DM is going to interpret the "invisible" parts of the spell. I've heard like at least a half-dozen, nuanced interpretations that all sounded reasonable around various tables.

Well, the capacity that I would be using it for would just be for the free "bump" to a standard action while in spell surge. How any of the "invisible " aspects of the spell are determined is just icing. I know that invisible spell and glitterdust gets wonky

[Vortenger]

or the perennial Invisible Summoned Monster(s). Phelix-mu pretty much nailed it. Its going to be up to your DM since its worded in such a vague way.

[Phelix-Mu]

If you're looking for a clear-cut way to make a pretty sophisticated trick work at a given table, I'd avoid Invisible Spell, because that feat basically draws attention to the trick every time you use it, because the DM needs to invent, on-the-fly, the actual effect of Invisible Spell for each and every spell (and then remember it for later). As a DM of some experience, that is a bit of a record-keeping nightmare, especially with the mindbending stuff that Red Fel mentioned above.

As I said, there are likely other, more explicit, well-defined metamagics that could work with the same trick, if I'm not mistaken.

[bjoern]

or the perennial Invisible Summoned Monster(s). Phelix-mu pretty much nailed it. Its going to be up to your DM since its worded in such a vague way.

OK let's just assume that the only thing invisible spell does is the following to a spell


Nothing
Counts as metamagic
Makes its casting time take longer

That's really what I'm asking . Is it worth it just to avoid the +1 level from using a different MM to bump casting time?

[Necroticplague]

Nah, not just for that. If you simply wanted a +0 metamagic, Sanctum Spell is better, if only because it allows for early entry into some PRCs.

[Phelix-Mu]

OK let's just assume that the only thing invisible spell does is the following to a spell


Nothing
Counts as metamagic
Makes its casting time take longer

That's really what I'm asking . Is it worth it just to avoid the +1 level from using a different MM to bump casting time?

Only in isolation, in a TO context. At an actual table, the DM needs to decide just how an Invisible Spell version of [spell] works, and that is a headache.

I think you can probably google other +0 metamagics. I know there are a handful, though the only one that pops to mind is Energy Substitution (obv. not as useful, since it only works on things with an energy descriptor). If you can find one that is as broadly applicable as Invisible Spell, then that would be a superior choice, as your DM wouldn't be shooting you the evil eye across the table when you Invisible summon monster or whatever.

[The Insaniac]

Mostly? Invisible spell is awesome for making heads hurt.

I cast stilled, silent, invisible invisibility.

[bjoern]

Only in isolation, in a TO context. At an actual table, the DM needs to decide just how an Invisible Spell version of [spell] works, and that is a headache.

I think you can probably google other +0 metamagics. I know there are a handful, though the only one that pops to mind is Energy Substitution (obv. not as useful, since it only works on things with an energy descriptor). If you can find one that is as broadly applicable as Invisible Spell, then that would be a superior choice, as your DM wouldn't be shooting you the evil eye across the table when you Invisible summon monster or whatever.

Before our campaign started, we all joked about me using cooperative metamagic and invisible spell on the gnome illusionists illusions. Pretty sure it would generate some laughs.

I'm just torn between which is better....

1. An extra feat

2. Occasionally using a spell slot 1 level lower when I want to cast 2 non-metamagic spells (like a haste and invisible fly) in a turn under spell surge. (Rather than casting a haste and a practical empowered fly)

[bjoern]

I cast stilled, silent, invisible invisibility.

Invisible mirror image.

Wait

Doh!!

[With a box]

invisible wall of stone...
invisible dancing light?

[Phelix-Mu]

Before our campaign started, we all joked about me using cooperative metamagic and invisible spell on the gnome illusionists illusions. Pretty sure it would generate some laughs.

I'm just torn between which is better....

1. An extra feat

2. Occasionally using a spell slot 1 level lower when I want to cast 2 non-metamagic spells (like a haste and invisible fly) in a turn under spell surge.

I'd argue the extra feat, if used correctly.

Example:
Obtain Familiar: Now you have an extra set of actions all the time. With the right spells and stuff, the familiar can be an asset in every combat you have.

Already have a familiar?

Extra Familiar (Dragon #280): You gain an extra familiar. Make enemies look dumb as you take three actions for every action they get. Get ravens with wands or implement once imbue familiar with spell ability is within reach (a seriously good spell). The really silly thing is that the feat explicitly states that it may be taken more than once; this makes things like A Murder of Wizards builds possible, capping out at something silly like...eleven ravens on a straight wizard 20?

[dextercorvia]

Cooperative Spell works just as well as a +0. It has no effect if not being cast in conjunction with another caster (unlike Sanctum which will probably lower the level and save DC of your spell). It is also one of the requirements for Mage of the Arcane Order which is a very nice PrC for sorcerers.

If you have sufficiently high Spellcraft, then Miser with Magic is the best at this.

[Chronos]

Can Heighten Spell be used to increase the spell's level by 0? Because if so, that'd do exactly what you want (i.e., nothing), while also being a quite useful metamagic for sorcerers in other situations.

[bjoern]

Can Heighten Spell be used to increase the spell's level by 0? Because if so, that'd do exactly what you want (i.e., nothing), while also being a quite useful metamagic for sorcerers in other situations.

Heighten would be nice. There are two significant parts that will tell us the answer

Benefit
A heightened spell has a higher spell level than normal (up to a maximum of 9th level). Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level. The heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level.


Higher than normal would mean that 0 wouldn't be a valid value since its not higher than normal.

Up to 9th level would mean that 0 would work because it "up to" 9th level.

I guess the best way would be that it would have to meet both criteria to be valid and 0 only meets one criteria.

[ddude987]

Invisible spell is also good to conceal buffs if they give an aura off. It also allows invisible fog clouds to beat people with see invisibility cast. Invisible grease or caltrops so enemies unknowingly step on them helps too.

[Rubik]

On this monk build I paid a wizard to Permanency an Invisible, Widened Solid Fog on my tooth of Leraje. It segued well with my Freedom of Movement ring, and all I had to do was open and close my mouth (a free action that can be taken at any time, regardless of the point in the initiative) to activate and deactivate it. During social interactions, I could easily take out the tooth or simply use ventriloquism if need be.

Not only does it block True Seeing and See Invisibility, but it also protects against melee and non-spell ranged attacks, and it prevents 5' steps. And since only those with See Invisibility and True Seeing up can see it, most martial types (the ones who would be most likely to come into melee distance) won't know what's wrong until they try to approach, completely wasting their turns. It also neuters most of them for the entire combat, as well, and acts as a huge debuff to anyone the build gets close to without FoM available.

Happily, I do have FoM up, so I don't suffer any of those effects.

[Spindrift]

I quite like invisible spell couldkill+ necklace of adaptation.
Just point the cloud in the direction you want to walk, and follow it, poisoning anyone who tries to get you in melee.

[Malroth]

Invisible, fell animate, energy substution (cold) wall of fire in the middle of town

[animewatcha]

If you are going 3rd party to get Invisible Spell for pathfinder. Invisible Dazing Cloudkill.

[Mithril Leaf]

Come on guys, how could you not bring up weapons and armor made of invisible Wall of Iron? After the invisible fabricate of course.

[animewatcha]

Paladin / law enforcement: Kind sir. Do us all the favor and PUT SOME CLOTHES ON!!! Follow the rules of decency.

'Supposedly Naked Criminal': Excuse me, I do have them on. They are just invisible.

Paladin / law enforcement: You cannot honestly expect us to believe...

Trustworthy See Invis Detector Man: It's the truth. They are in fact invisible. No law broken.

'Formerly Supposedly Naked Criminal': Nyah nyah. *proceeds to wiggle their private parts at paladin / law enforcement*

Paladin / law enforcement: You have got to be kidding me... I swear the one who invented this fabric must of have a pedophile or a pervert or both.

[Divide by Zero]

Paladin / law enforcement: Kind sir. Do us all the favor and PUT SOME CLOTHES ON!!! Follow the rules of decency.

'Supposedly Naked Criminal': Excuse me, I do have them on. They are just invisible.

Paladin / law enforcement: You cannot honestly expect us to believe...

Trustworthy See Invis Detector Man: It's the truth. They are in fact invisible. No law broken.

'Formerly Supposedly Naked Criminal': Nyah nyah. *proceeds to wiggle their private parts at paladin / law enforcement*

Paladin / law enforcement: You have got to be kidding me... I swear the one who invented this fabric must of have a pedophile or a pervert or both.

Blame the emperor for starting that trend.

[Necroticplague]

Come on guys, how could you not bring up weapons and armor made of invisible Wall of Iron? After the invisible fabricate of course.

I've been a big fan of combining Illusory Wall, Shadow Wall of Stone, Wall of stone, Wall of Force, and all their Invisible versions together to create a 3-d Maze that essentially every party member has to take a different path through.

Person with See Invisible:"Crap, dead end."
Person without see invis:"What do you mean, there's no wall there."
*Walks through Invisible Shadow Wall of Stone*
See Invis:"Ah, it must be an illusion!"
*hits his head trying to walk through the pseudo illusion*