Can Divine Metamagic be made balanced? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Can Divine Metamagic be made balanced? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
BarbeChenue
01-19-06, 11:31 AM Divine Metamagic is a feat in the "Complete Divine" supplement. It allows for some pretty strong combos, especially with Metamagic feats like Persistent Spell (CA).

The goal of this thread is to assess just how balanced Divine Metamagic is, and in the event it is considered to be "overpowered", find a way to make it be more in line with what it should be.

Questions:

-Ś- Is breaking the Metamagic cap inherently broken?

I would say yes. The game was designed with the assumption that the Metamagic cap would prevent the use of high level spells in combinaison with strong Metamagic feats (Quicken spell, for example). Basically, you aren't supposed to be able to cast a spell higher than 9 before Epic play, and this goes for metemagic spells too. Supplements introduced several new Metamagic feats, as well as ways to breach the cap by allowing metamagic spells to be of a higher level than 9 without taking the appropriate spell slot.

Combining new stronger Metamagic feats with ways to breach the cap is drastically increasing the power level of those who use it versus those who don't. Thus somewhat bringing an imbalance to the game.

-Ś- Is having a 24 hours buff at the cost of three feats and some Turning attempts too strong?

Now this questions refers the most often used method of taking advantage of Divine Metamagic: using it in combinaison with Persistent spell. Contrary to the above question, this answer should address the "effect" of Divine Metamagic rather than the theory behind.

And this is basically the question I'm asking.

Let's consider the following:

1- Nightsticks (LM) can be used to power a great number of persistent spells through Divine Metamagic (much more than the feat was originally designed for).

2- Spells that have relatively long durations (10 minutes of more per caster level) versus those with extremely short ones (Swift spells for example). No distinction is made by the Persistent spell feat which is perhaps part of the problem. This doesn't necessarily concern Divine Metamagic as much as Persistent spell itself. Example: an 8h level spell slot used for Persistent Wraithstrike (SC) is over the top even at level 15.

3- Dispel Magic and Greater Dispel Magic, as well as Disjunction and Antimagic Field counter most spells. Persistent spells are very vulnerable to dispelling.

4- Clerics are seperate from Divine Metamagic. It may sound strange to ignore the class that is the most likely to use it, but when looking at the balance of an Element, it is wiser to leave seperated the balance of each element, even if they seem related, so that when one of them is changed, it is not necessary to revise the balance of the related element. Furthermore, not just clerics may use Divine Metamagic.

I'm sure I forgot several other aspects to consider, but this is a start.

First step: Determining how overpowered Divine Metamagic is.

Second step: Finding a way to balance it rather than dismissing it as broken and not allowing it ingame.
Griff_Goodbeard
01-19-06, 11:49 AM If Divine Metamagic was re-worded so that you couldn't break the metacap with it, and multiple nightsticks didn't stack with each other, this feat wouldn't be broken at all.
PhoenixInferno
01-19-06, 12:31 PM How powerful is Divine Metamagic? With spells like Divine Favor, Divine Power and Righteous Might, it totally changes class balance by providing easy access to the Fighter's main abilities.

I agree - the easiest way to ease the brokeness (because its going to be pretty powerful no matter what) to Divine Metamagic is to add "This does not allow you to cast a metamagicked spell you normally could not cast." or something like the way Metamagic Song was worded.

Forget Nightstick stacking - make Nightsticks only for Turn Undead, instead of adding Turn Undead uses.
DDogwood
01-19-06, 12:51 PM I think that the Persistent Spell metamagic feat is part of the problem, as well. Instead of making a spell last a flat 24 hours, it ought to simply increase the unit of time by one step, e.g.

x rounds -> x minutes
x minutes -> 10x minutes
10x minutes -> x hours
x hours -> x days
x days -> x weeks

and so on. This would make Persistent Spell more consistently balanced with current & future spells as written, and also more appealing for long duration spells (such as Charm Person). Combined with a limit on Divine Metamagic stating that you can't cast a spell with a higher effective level than you could normally cast, I think this would bring Divine Metamagic and its related issues back into balance.
Gerdreg
01-19-06, 01:22 PM First off I don't think Nightsticks stack. As an unamed bonus to the number of turning attemps you get, they stack with all sources by themselves. See the stacking rules in Rules of the Game.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/rg
[edit] Here is the quote:
"Unnamed Bonuses

A bonus that doesn't have a name stacks with anything except itself. This is always true, but it's sometimes hard to remember. For example, many feats provide unnamed bonuses, so don't panic when you read a feat description and it provides a bonus without a name. An unnamed bonus from a feat stacks with any other bonus; however you can't stack that unnamed bonus if you take the feat twice."

Now, my biggest point. How many of you have actually played with a Persistent Divine Metamagic Cleric in the group? I had one in my group all the way into the the high teens, and to be honest, I wasn't as impressed as I thought I would be. He was more powerful than our straight Fighter, but I think that is a problem with that class, not the Cleric. He did -alot- less damage than our straight Rogue and even our Energy Admixture Sorcerer. Defensively, our Druid MoMF still had better stats, AC, ect. (Actually the Druid was a total monster and was superior to the Cleric, in combat, in almost every way except healing.)

The few times we fought creatures that can dispel buffs (a Beholder and a Dragon come to mind) all his persistent stuff went poof, and you know what? It really didn't make that much of a difference. The real problem here is that we are comparing a well balanced powerful class, with underpowered classes. The cleric was only better at the Fighter role than the Fighter. He was not a better damage dealer than our Rogue or Mage and he actually paled in comparison to our Druid, except in healing.

In summary a fully optimized Cleric is not off balanced in comparison to a fully optimized Rogue or Mage. If you really wanna experience off-balanced, try a MoMF Druid past 12 that uses all the suggestions from the Shifter's Bible. [edit] I just realized that this may seem that I am calling for a Nerf to polymorph/ wildshape. This is actually not so. Aside from the Paladin and the Ranger (which have gotten a pretty good boost via their spells over the years, see the SC for details) I think the melee classes need to be pumped-up a bit to be on par with casters at the higher levels. Those of you who have tried an optimized high level campaign may have experienced what I am talking about. Feats and magic items just don't seem to scale as well as spells.
BarbeChenue
01-19-06, 02:31 PM I'm extremely impressed by your posts everyone! This definately helps in evaluating the problem with the combo(s) provided by Divine Metamagic.

We can seperate the problem in four:

1) The cleric has a list of spells that enable him to emulate a fighter, and actually outfight him with preparation. This is only one problem among others the cleric may have, but while revelant to the discussion at hand, it's not related to Divine Metamagic directly, only its perception.

2) The Persistent Spell feat has the following problems:

It is indiscriminate in its increase of duration. It can allow Swift spells to have their durations multiplied by 14400, which is extremely different from the 144 to 7.2 ratio of the 10 minute spells (caster level 1 to 20).
It allows the persistence of spells that were never designed with having their duration increased in this way. Furthermore, the description is unclear abou what spells should normally be eligible. It should be more restrictive.

3) Nightstick(s): allow(s) too many Turn Attemps to be made, and thus too many spells to be persified.

4) Divine Metamagic: breaks the metamagic cap.
Mist of Shadows
01-19-06, 03:29 PM My two :twocents: divine metamagic isn't broken other then it's uses with persistant spell. There are rods and other magical items that help with metamagic. Basically I think the problem is that a great number of players are mad that the durations of spells is so much worse in some cases then in 3.0. For example the old version of the straight stat buffs you could cast and have working for hours rather then meer minutes. Minimum time now is 3 minutes minimum time in 3.0 was 3 hours. I would say that is a large difference. In some ways I think people are just looking for a way to have their buff spells back rather then shelling out insane amounts of gold for magical items.

Though as for divine meta magic how I read it means you have to take divine metamagic for each metamagic feat you want to duplicate. That gets feat expensive though still worth it. Though I think night sticks are probably too cheap for what they do. :)
Xabre
01-19-06, 04:30 PM Stupid Question... Nightsticks?

I can't find these in Libris Mortis... could I get a page reference? Or maybe it's under a different name?
Broken One
01-19-06, 04:42 PM Stupid Question... Nightsticks?

I can't find these in Libris Mortis... could I get a page reference? Or maybe it's under a different name?

Libris Mortis, Magic Item Section under Rods, the first one, exactly page 78.

Greets,

Marco
Hanniball
01-19-06, 06:00 PM I have had similar experience as Gerdreg has had with watching the Divine metamagicing Cleric fall behind in relative power in comparison to even a pseudo-optimized party. However, that may have been partly due to his unfamiliararity with some of the more "useful" persistable spells.

One of the main problems I see is that many assume that you will be able to fuel an insane amount of different spells. In my experience, which consists of one Cleric 7/Loremaster 10, I have possessed the ability to fuel about three uses of DM: persistant. That's 21 turn undead attempts. 3 (base) + 6 (cha) + 8 (extra turningx2) +4 nightstick.

Albeit I WAS persistifying Shapechange, Greater Visage of the Diety and Holy Star, so three very powerful spells, but that's it. 5 feats and all of my TU attempts to cast 3 spells that are available to any cleric of equal level, but they last all day.

Antimagic field, Dispel magic/Greater, Mord's Disjunc, etc completely negate all of this preparation and effectively make several of your feats useless. I do not see Divine Metamagic as broken or in need of any adjustments sans an unreasonable DM.

Finally, this topic is more suited for the Feats board, but whateva.

Either way...just my 0.02 cp
the_LICH
01-19-06, 06:50 PM IMO divine metamagic is reasonably balanced as it is for the following 2 reasons:

it requires lots of charisma or feats to be able to make more than a one or two uses of it per day
it applies only to a single metamagic feat

Which means that it is expensive to get!

You claim that the fact that you are allowed to cast quickened/maximized/etc spells before their time is too strong and needs balance...
Many Prestige Classes and a few other feats give abilities that only very high level or even only epic spellcasters could otherwise achieve. And many low level spell effects are high-level abilities of other Prestige Classes. That doesnt change anything by itself. And that imho doesnt have anything to do with balance.

Psions are generally able to cast the same level of quickened powers 2 (or even more) levels sooner than a wizard gets to cast the same level of a spell. Does that change anything? I dont think so. They are restricted in some other way.

Persistent spells are another case entirelly. I dislike this metamagic feat too and imo it can be very powerfull by itself alone. If you are annoyed by divine metamagic use for persistent spells, change the persistent spell feat.
Taliesin52
01-19-06, 07:43 PM I think that the Persistent Spell metamagic feat is part of the problem, as well. Instead of making a spell last a flat 24 hours, it ought to simply increase the unit of time by one step, e.g.

x rounds -> x minutes
x minutes -> 10x minutes
10x minutes -> x hours
x hours -> x days
x days -> x weeks

and so on. This would make Persistent Spell more consistently balanced with current & future spells as written, and also more appealing for long duration spells (such as Charm Person). Combined with a limit on Divine Metamagic stating that you can't cast a spell with a higher effective level than you could normally cast, I think this would bring Divine Metamagic and its related issues back into balance.

IMO this is by far the best solution, and is one I've looked at before.

I don't think divine metamagic is broken. Using it to add empower spell to a cure spell or a damage spell that is inferior to an arcane one of same level (barring various domains) isn't all that bad. It's only the combination of it with persistant spell that is so bad (or broken if you prefer).

A graduated step on duration for buff spells would make persistant a lot more balanced. Heck, we could drop it from 6 levels to only 4 at that point. If someone wanted to combine neo-persistant with our other duration increasing metamagic feat, fine. It'd still be less than a day in most cases and would be costly in spell levels.
Hanniball
01-19-06, 08:26 PM I think that the Persistent Spell metamagic feat is part of the problem, as well. Instead of making a spell last a flat 24 hours, it ought to simply increase the unit of time by one step, e.g.

x rounds -> x minutes
x minutes -> 10x minutes
10x minutes -> x hours
x hours -> x days
x days -> x weeks

For a +6 increase to spell level? And you want to restrict the effective spell level cap? I don't think that's worth the investment on any level. Especially since Extend spell is only a +1 spell lvl increase. I see nothing wrong with the image or the mechanics of a character shrouding himself with magical protections all day long.

Warlock Invocations last 24 hours and they're generally accepted as balanced (at least I think it is...)

Either way...just my 0.02 cp
Taliesin52
01-20-06, 01:46 AM For a +6 increase to spell level? And you want to restrict the effective spell level cap? I don't think that's worth the investment on any level. Especially since Extend spell is only a +1 spell lvl increase. I see nothing wrong with the image or the mechanics of a character shrouding himself with magical protections all day long.

Warlock Invocations last 24 hours and they're generally accepted as balanced (at least I think it is...)

Either way...just my 0.02 cp

True, however I don't think there are any invocations that give +4 or more to physical attributes, and a fighter bab, or a size bonus and DR, etc... They are balanced differently because they are invocations.

IMO I like the stepped solution to persistant, although I'd drop it to +3 or +4 (maybe) and allow it to stack with extend spell.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BarbeChenue 01-19-06, 11:31 AM	Divine Metamagic is a feat in the "Complete Divine" supplement. It allows for some pretty strong combos, especially with Metamagic feats like Persistent Spell (CA). The goal of this thread is to assess just how balanced Divine Metamagic is, and in the event it is considered to be "overpowered", find a way to make it be more in line with what it should be. Questions: -Ś- Is breaking the Metamagic cap inherently broken? I would say yes. The game was designed with the assumption that the Metamagic cap would prevent the use of high level spells in combinaison with strong Metamagic feats (Quicken spell, for example). Basically, you aren't supposed to be able to cast a spell higher than 9 before Epic play, and this goes for metemagic spells too. Supplements introduced several new Metamagic feats, as well as ways to breach the cap by allowing metamagic spells to be of a higher level than 9 without taking the appropriate spell slot. Combining new stronger Metamagic feats with ways to breach the cap is drastically increasing the power level of those who use it versus those who don't. Thus somewhat bringing an imbalance to the game. -Ś- Is having a 24 hours buff at the cost of three feats and some Turning attempts too strong? Now this questions refers the most often used method of taking advantage of Divine Metamagic: using it in combinaison with Persistent spell. Contrary to the above question, this answer should address the "effect" of Divine Metamagic rather than the theory behind. And this is basically the question I'm asking. Let's consider the following: 1- Nightsticks (LM) can be used to power a great number of persistent spells through Divine Metamagic (much more than the feat was originally designed for). 2- Spells that have relatively long durations (10 minutes of more per caster level) versus those with extremely short ones (Swift spells for example). No distinction is made by the Persistent spell feat which is perhaps part of the problem. This doesn't necessarily concern Divine Metamagic as much as Persistent spell itself. Example: an 8h level spell slot used for Persistent Wraithstrike (SC) is over the top even at level 15. 3- Dispel Magic and Greater Dispel Magic, as well as Disjunction and Antimagic Field counter most spells. Persistent spells are very vulnerable to dispelling. 4- Clerics are seperate from Divine Metamagic. It may sound strange to ignore the class that is the most likely to use it, but when looking at the balance of an Element, it is wiser to leave seperated the balance of each element, even if they seem related, so that when one of them is changed, it is not necessary to revise the balance of the related element. Furthermore, not just clerics may use Divine Metamagic. I'm sure I forgot several other aspects to consider, but this is a start. First step: Determining how overpowered Divine Metamagic is. Second step: Finding a way to balance it rather than dismissing it as broken and not allowing it ingame.
Griff_Goodbeard 01-19-06, 11:49 AM	If Divine Metamagic was re-worded so that you couldn't break the metacap with it, and multiple nightsticks didn't stack with each other, this feat wouldn't be broken at all.
PhoenixInferno 01-19-06, 12:31 PM	How powerful is Divine Metamagic? With spells like Divine Favor, Divine Power and Righteous Might, it totally changes class balance by providing easy access to the Fighter's main abilities. I agree - the easiest way to ease the brokeness (because its going to be pretty powerful no matter what) to Divine Metamagic is to add "This does not allow you to cast a metamagicked spell you normally could not cast." or something like the way Metamagic Song was worded. Forget Nightstick stacking - make Nightsticks only for Turn Undead, instead of adding Turn Undead uses.
DDogwood 01-19-06, 12:51 PM	I think that the Persistent Spell metamagic feat is part of the problem, as well. Instead of making a spell last a flat 24 hours, it ought to simply increase the unit of time by one step, e.g. x rounds -> x minutes x minutes -> 10x minutes 10x minutes -> x hours x hours -> x days x days -> x weeks and so on. This would make Persistent Spell more consistently balanced with current & future spells as written, and also more appealing for long duration spells (such as Charm Person). Combined with a limit on Divine Metamagic stating that you can't cast a spell with a higher effective level than you could normally cast, I think this would bring Divine Metamagic and its related issues back into balance.
Gerdreg 01-19-06, 01:22 PM	First off I don't think Nightsticks stack. As an unamed bonus to the number of turning attemps you get, they stack with all sources by themselves. See the stacking rules in Rules of the Game. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/rg [edit] Here is the quote: "Unnamed Bonuses A bonus that doesn't have a name stacks with anything except itself. This is always true, but it's sometimes hard to remember. For example, many feats provide unnamed bonuses, so don't panic when you read a feat description and it provides a bonus without a name. An unnamed bonus from a feat stacks with any other bonus; however you can't stack that unnamed bonus if you take the feat twice." Now, my biggest point. How many of you have actually played with a Persistent Divine Metamagic Cleric in the group? I had one in my group all the way into the the high teens, and to be honest, I wasn't as impressed as I thought I would be. He was more powerful than our straight Fighter, but I think that is a problem with that class, not the Cleric. He did -alot- less damage than our straight Rogue and even our Energy Admixture Sorcerer. Defensively, our Druid MoMF still had better stats, AC, ect. (Actually the Druid was a total monster and was superior to the Cleric, in combat, in almost every way except healing.) The few times we fought creatures that can dispel buffs (a Beholder and a Dragon come to mind) all his persistent stuff went poof, and you know what? It really didn't make that much of a difference. The real problem here is that we are comparing a well balanced powerful class, with underpowered classes. The cleric was only better at the Fighter role than the Fighter. He was not a better damage dealer than our Rogue or Mage and he actually paled in comparison to our Druid, except in healing. In summary a fully optimized Cleric is not off balanced in comparison to a fully optimized Rogue or Mage. If you really wanna experience off-balanced, try a MoMF Druid past 12 that uses all the suggestions from the Shifter's Bible. [edit] I just realized that this may seem that I am calling for a Nerf to polymorph/ wildshape. This is actually not so. Aside from the Paladin and the Ranger (which have gotten a pretty good boost via their spells over the years, see the SC for details) I think the melee classes need to be pumped-up a bit to be on par with casters at the higher levels. Those of you who have tried an optimized high level campaign may have experienced what I am talking about. Feats and magic items just don't seem to scale as well as spells.
BarbeChenue 01-19-06, 02:31 PM	I'm extremely impressed by your posts everyone! This definately helps in evaluating the problem with the combo(s) provided by Divine Metamagic. We can seperate the problem in four: 1) The cleric has a list of spells that enable him to emulate a fighter, and actually outfight him with preparation. This is only one problem among others the cleric may have, but while revelant to the discussion at hand, it's not related to Divine Metamagic directly, only its perception. 2) The Persistent Spell feat has the following problems: It is indiscriminate in its increase of duration. It can allow Swift spells to have their durations multiplied by 14400, which is extremely different from the 144 to 7.2 ratio of the 10 minute spells (caster level 1 to 20). It allows the persistence of spells that were never designed with having their duration increased in this way. Furthermore, the description is unclear abou what spells should normally be eligible. It should be more restrictive. 3) Nightstick(s): allow(s) too many Turn Attemps to be made, and thus too many spells to be persified. 4) Divine Metamagic: breaks the metamagic cap.
Mist of Shadows 01-19-06, 03:29 PM	My two :twocents: divine metamagic isn't broken other then it's uses with persistant spell. There are rods and other magical items that help with metamagic. Basically I think the problem is that a great number of players are mad that the durations of spells is so much worse in some cases then in 3.0. For example the old version of the straight stat buffs you could cast and have working for hours rather then meer minutes. Minimum time now is 3 minutes minimum time in 3.0 was 3 hours. I would say that is a large difference. In some ways I think people are just looking for a way to have their buff spells back rather then shelling out insane amounts of gold for magical items. Though as for divine meta magic how I read it means you have to take divine metamagic for each metamagic feat you want to duplicate. That gets feat expensive though still worth it. Though I think night sticks are probably too cheap for what they do. :)
Xabre 01-19-06, 04:30 PM	Stupid Question... Nightsticks? I can't find these in Libris Mortis... could I get a page reference? Or maybe it's under a different name?
Broken One 01-19-06, 04:42 PM	Stupid Question... Nightsticks? I can't find these in Libris Mortis... could I get a page reference? Or maybe it's under a different name? Libris Mortis, Magic Item Section under Rods, the first one, exactly page 78. Greets, Marco
Hanniball 01-19-06, 06:00 PM	I have had similar experience as Gerdreg has had with watching the Divine metamagicing Cleric fall behind in relative power in comparison to even a pseudo-optimized party. However, that may have been partly due to his unfamiliararity with some of the more "useful" persistable spells. One of the main problems I see is that many assume that you will be able to fuel an insane amount of different spells. In my experience, which consists of one Cleric 7/Loremaster 10, I have possessed the ability to fuel about three uses of DM: persistant. That's 21 turn undead attempts. 3 (base) + 6 (cha) + 8 (extra turningx2) +4 nightstick. Albeit I WAS persistifying Shapechange, Greater Visage of the Diety and Holy Star, so three very powerful spells, but that's it. 5 feats and all of my TU attempts to cast 3 spells that are available to any cleric of equal level, but they last all day. Antimagic field, Dispel magic/Greater, Mord's Disjunc, etc completely negate all of this preparation and effectively make several of your feats useless. I do not see Divine Metamagic as broken or in need of any adjustments sans an unreasonable DM. Finally, this topic is more suited for the Feats board, but whateva. Either way...just my 0.02 cp
the_LICH 01-19-06, 06:50 PM	IMO divine metamagic is reasonably balanced as it is for the following 2 reasons: it requires lots of charisma or feats to be able to make more than a one or two uses of it per day it applies only to a single metamagic feat Which means that it is expensive to get! You claim that the fact that you are allowed to cast quickened/maximized/etc spells before their time is too strong and needs balance... Many Prestige Classes and a few other feats give abilities that only very high level or even only epic spellcasters could otherwise achieve. And many low level spell effects are high-level abilities of other Prestige Classes. That doesnt change anything by itself. And that imho doesnt have anything to do with balance. Psions are generally able to cast the same level of quickened powers 2 (or even more) levels sooner than a wizard gets to cast the same level of a spell. Does that change anything? I dont think so. They are restricted in some other way. Persistent spells are another case entirelly. I dislike this metamagic feat too and imo it can be very powerfull by itself alone. If you are annoyed by divine metamagic use for persistent spells, change the persistent spell feat.
Taliesin52 01-19-06, 07:43 PM	I think that the Persistent Spell metamagic feat is part of the problem, as well. Instead of making a spell last a flat 24 hours, it ought to simply increase the unit of time by one step, e.g. x rounds -> x minutes x minutes -> 10x minutes 10x minutes -> x hours x hours -> x days x days -> x weeks and so on. This would make Persistent Spell more consistently balanced with current & future spells as written, and also more appealing for long duration spells (such as Charm Person). Combined with a limit on Divine Metamagic stating that you can't cast a spell with a higher effective level than you could normally cast, I think this would bring Divine Metamagic and its related issues back into balance. IMO this is by far the best solution, and is one I've looked at before. I don't think divine metamagic is broken. Using it to add empower spell to a cure spell or a damage spell that is inferior to an arcane one of same level (barring various domains) isn't all that bad. It's only the combination of it with persistant spell that is so bad (or broken if you prefer). A graduated step on duration for buff spells would make persistant a lot more balanced. Heck, we could drop it from 6 levels to only 4 at that point. If someone wanted to combine neo-persistant with our other duration increasing metamagic feat, fine. It'd still be less than a day in most cases and would be costly in spell levels.
Hanniball 01-19-06, 08:26 PM	I think that the Persistent Spell metamagic feat is part of the problem, as well. Instead of making a spell last a flat 24 hours, it ought to simply increase the unit of time by one step, e.g. x rounds -> x minutes x minutes -> 10x minutes 10x minutes -> x hours x hours -> x days x days -> x weeks For a +6 increase to spell level? And you want to restrict the effective spell level cap? I don't think that's worth the investment on any level. Especially since Extend spell is only a +1 spell lvl increase. I see nothing wrong with the image or the mechanics of a character shrouding himself with magical protections all day long. Warlock Invocations last 24 hours and they're generally accepted as balanced (at least I think it is...) Either way...just my 0.02 cp
Taliesin52 01-20-06, 01:46 AM	For a +6 increase to spell level? And you want to restrict the effective spell level cap? I don't think that's worth the investment on any level. Especially since Extend spell is only a +1 spell lvl increase. I see nothing wrong with the image or the mechanics of a character shrouding himself with magical protections all day long. Warlock Invocations last 24 hours and they're generally accepted as balanced (at least I think it is...) Either way...just my 0.02 cp True, however I don't think there are any invocations that give +4 or more to physical attributes, and a fighter bab, or a size bonus and DR, etc... They are balanced differently because they are invocations. IMO I like the stepped solution to persistant, although I'd drop it to +3 or +4 (maybe) and allow it to stack with extend spell.