Post/Author/DateTime	Post
yellowdingo 06-10-07, 08:32 PM	Do we need a metamagic feat that allows a Wizard to fire a fire ball at up to a mile of range? EXTENDED SPELL RANGE: Cast as spell six levels greater. Spell Range extended to a Mile. Geron the Magist stood on a rocky rise some five thousand feet from the distant Castle of Tebriz. Between them a sea of blood and steel as warriors killed for control of a thirteen acre castle overlooking a narrow pass into the valley. The words of power leaked from his lips in a low whisper as the ball of fire built against his outstreached hands. The Inferno raced out from him covering the great distance across the battlefield and hammered into the tightly sealed drawbridge. Is there a need for long range magic?
bluemage55 06-10-07, 09:31 PM	Do we need a metamagic feat that allows a Wizard to fire a fire ball at up to a mile of range? Not with the standard system. Extreme customization of a spell's range, duration, damage, casting time, or other characteristic is handled by Epic Spellcasting. If you are not using the Epic Spellcasting system, however, then something along the lines of reapeated Enlarge Spells should be applicable. Your feat seems too powerful, though.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 06-10-07, 09:35 PM	Eh, I'd let that in at spell level +3.
bluemage55 06-11-07, 12:00 AM	Eh, I'd let that in at spell level +3. And how would that make sense when Enlarge Spell x3 gets nowhere close?
Aluroon 06-11-07, 09:42 AM	And how would that make sense when Extend Spell x3 gets nowhere close? Considering its only useful in the handful of situations where you can sit back and bomb a stationary target (any other target I'd like to see your spot checks for), and that in such situations your already shooting at 1200+ range using long range spells? Cool fluff feat, useful in a handful of situations (mostly artillery bombing a target that has to come out to fight you) but overall not as useful as say Quicken spell.
Einvaldurinn_mikli 06-11-07, 11:57 AM	And how would that make sense when Extend Spell x3 gets nowhere close? I suppose you mean Enlarge Spell? If so, because Enlarge Spell blows?
bluemage55 06-11-07, 01:13 PM	I suppose you mean Enlarge Spell? If so, because Enlarge Spell blows? I meant Enlarge Spell. Enlarge spell doesn't blow at all, it's use is simply more subtle. There's a huge advantage to being able to throw mage's disjunction at 200 ft. instead of coming into 100 ft. (where your opponent can then reach you with their mage's disjunction). Allowing spellcasters to throw those around at ranges of 1 mile . . . ridiculous. Considering its only useful in the handful of situations where you can sit back and bomb a stationary target (any other target I'd like to see your spot checks for), and that in such situations your already shooting at 1200+ range using long range spells? That's not at all true. With this feat not only can you use long range spells at around 4 times their normal range, you can also use every other spell in your repetoire as well. Blasphemy for example, goes from 40 ft. to 1 mile. Many spells were balanced under the notion that they would only be used at close ranges, and you will notice that many of the most powerful spells have very limited ranges. I completely disagree with the notion that this feat would be less useful than Quicken Spell, not when it implies all-but guaranteed (except when your opponent also has the exact same overpowered feat, like how rival Pun-Puns make an even match) first-strike capability with mage's disjunction, wail of the banshee, blasphemy, creeping doom, reverse gravity, and gate.
yellowdingo 06-11-07, 05:47 PM	I would have though that requiring the user of this feat to memorize a potential spell as though it were six levels greater than its current spell level would place a limit on the level of spell that could be used to attack over that mile range... Conceivably GATE would be off limits to mix with this feat. Ultimately the feat is balanced by a spell level limit of third level spells. That comes in as Magic Missiles and Fireballs with a range of a mile.
Far_Traveler 06-11-07, 06:24 PM	I would have though that requiring the user of this feat to memorize a potential spell as though it were six levels greater than its current spell level would place a limit on the level of spell that could be used to attack over that mile range... Conceivably GATE would be off limits to mix with this feat. Ultimately the feat is balanced by a spell level limit of third level spells. That comes in as Magic Missiles and Fireballs with a range of a mile. That's the problem with using the epic boards, with improved metamagic and improved spell capacity, you can easily toss around 9th level persistant spells, and this has the same spell slot usage.
bluetooth 06-12-07, 06:20 PM	from the OPs wording it seems as though he's against the feat himself or at least highly skeptical. In any case, I would contend that throwing a fireball one mile away (but it still being 20 foot radius) it not more powerful than Meteor Swarm, Gate, Imprisonment, etc. And yes, in epic you could do a Meteor Swarm at one mile range, but it that really any more powerful than doing an Enhanced, Empowered Meteor Swarm? In some situations sure. In others not so much. The usefulness of this feat depends entirely on the situations the DM throws at the group. If I was running an Underdark game, I'd go with Level +3 since it would almost never be of any use. If I was running a game using the Open Mass Combat System more than standard combat, I'd make it level +6 at least. And that also is my answer to the OPs original question (is it needed rather than is it overpowered): *shrug* maybe, depends. What kind of game is it?
rob_douglas 06-12-07, 10:13 PM	Great reply Bluetooth. I am wondering - what is the Open Mass Combat System. Is that the Miniatures Handbook system? I am always looking for ways to handle mass combat, and haven't been satisfied with what I have seen. Now - with the idea of War sized spells - there was an article in Dragon a few years back that had War spells, and War feats. I will look it up tomorrow and see if it offers any suggestions. My initial thought is that it should be related to Enlarge spell - increasing another 100% or more. That way you won't get 1-mile range out of Disjunction right off. In 3.0 you were allowed to stack Enlarges. I think that a new feat Double-Enlarge would just be +3 total, mimicing 3 applications of Enlarge, but requiring another feat (and being subject to more Improved Metmagic). Long range spells then would be 1600ft +160/level or 4800ft at 20th level - just about 1 mile, and 6400ft at 30th. But Close would only be 100+10/level = 300ft at 20th, 400ft at 30th. ROB
bluetooth 06-12-07, 11:42 PM	Thanks rob, though I'm still an complete neophite to the epic rules, but it's good to know I seem to be getting the hang of it. And the Open Mass Combat system is 3rd party material from Mongoose Publishing (the Quintessential Fighter). I know Mongoose Publishing is guilty until proven innocent, but in my experience every one of their books has at least something in it that's a decent idea, even if it doesn't make them actually worth buying. I think the Quintessential sorcerer had one feat and one PrC that when combined together made a pretty cool idea. The Open Mass Combat system is one of those rare gems. I won't go into excessive detail, but it operates much like DnD combat, except squares are 100 foot squares instead of 5 foot squares, spells operate a little differently (such as area spells like fireballs do double damage to the unit, but unit HP is not simply the combination of all the members hp), and rounds of combat typically represent 1 minute instead of 6 seconds (though that may be an optional rule, it's been a while since I used it). Still in a situation where you have armies marching all over the place increased distances for spells would be a godsend, but yes, MDJ increasing a huge distance would be too much. Maybe there's a way to implicitly exclude it. I'll have to take a look.
bluemage55 06-12-07, 11:42 PM	If I was running an Underdark game, I'd go with Level +3 since it would almost never be of any use. If I was running a game using the Open Mass Combat System more than standard combat, I'd make it level +6 at least. In the interests of balance, you usually assume the best-case scenario for judging how strong a given spell is. For example, if there was a metamagic feat that lets your spells do +100damage if you're near water, it should have a very high modifier even though some campaigns might have very little water.
bluetooth 06-12-07, 11:45 PM	Well certainly, if your writing material for a source book. I assumed the OP was asking about a house rule. I may have assumed incorrectly. Edit: though I will say, again, that the OP was not asking about balance, but about the need for the ability to add extra range onto spells. The listed example was just an example of what he was talking about.
bluemage55 06-12-07, 11:58 PM	I believe he was asking if there was a general need for such a feat: Do we need a metamagic feat that allows a Wizard to fire a fire ball at up to a mile of range? For the creation of a feat that would be used by most people, a higher spell slot modifier would be necessary.
bluetooth 06-13-07, 12:08 AM	and again I don't see the general difference in power between a fireball at a mile range and a meteor swarm and normal range. MDJ is a problem, but if it could be implicitly excluded in the wording of the feat, then I don't think level +6 is too far out of balance. How often do you know someone is an enemy at that distance? Once your enemies know you have it they can always use Veil or heck even sneak up on your at night. There's significant diminishing returns here. A spell that you can fling 2 miles is not twice as powerful as one that goes 1 mile for instance. I think most of the metamagic feats in pre-epic are underpowered though, except maybe empower.
ArochanoX 06-13-07, 12:57 AM	How about: Close range -> 1 Mile +7 Spell level Medium range -> 1 Mile +5 Spell level Long range -> 1 Mile +3 Spell level Any other range (even if longer than 1 mile, but no personal) -> 1 mile +9 Spell level The feat could be the same and the range could be enlarged normally. Note that if a fixed range is given, the usability of the feat lowers at higher level and later becomes obsolete.
bluemage55 06-13-07, 01:14 AM	and again I don't see the general difference in power between a fireball at a mile range and a meteor swarm and normal range. MDJ is a problem, but if it could be implicitly excluded in the wording of the feat, then I don't think level +6 is too far out of balance. How often do you know someone is an enemy at that distance? Once your enemies know you have it they can always use Veil or heck even sneak up on your at night. There's significant diminishing returns here. A spell that you can fling 2 miles is not twice as powerful as one that goes 1 mile for instance. You scry the location of an enemy, move into range, and fire away. The poor sucker will have no idea where they are getting hit from.
bluetooth 06-13-07, 01:56 AM	Mind Blank? I mean seriously, if a player takes a feat that isn't common they should get some amount of time where they can use it and surprise their enemies, but after a while people will know what they can do any prepare for it.
bluemage55 06-13-07, 02:15 AM	Mind Blank? I mean seriously, if a player takes a feat that isn't common they should get some amount of time where they can use it and surprise their enemies, but after a while people will know what they can do any prepare for it. Not every creature will have mind blank active. It is an especially effective way to safely fight against non-spellcasting creatures, who will often have no way of escaping or engaging a foe fighting from a mile away. Moreover, any feat that requires characters to specifically prepare against to have any chance of survival is probably a bit powerful.
bluetooth 06-13-07, 03:14 AM	there are tons of ways to prevent scrying, including magic items that don't require you to be a spellcaster. Further, players do not always know who there enemies are and spells are not always effective against all enemies. If the party decides to scry on everyone they think is an enemy and blast them with spells, any DM in his right mind will have an enemy use magic to fool their scrying into blasting spells on a completely empty area (or an area filled with allies causing them to assume they've been betrayed) and if they've been foolish enough to prepare nothing but artillery spells then when the enemy attacks from up close they will be significantly drained of resourced. But these are only things that need to be done if players abuse a feat that extends range. (yet again I have to point out that the question is about drastic increases in range and the one mile mark is only one example. One could conceivably have feats that increased a spells range from short to medium or medium to long or feats that allowed you to fling a spell at anything you can see. ) Also, at pre-epic levels, fly is a pretty effective way to safely fight nonspell casters. A 10th level wizard can create a fireball 800 feet away, a distance many archers would have a terrible time with, especially if the wizard is also under a Greater invisibility spell. If the DM understands the pros and cons as well as the players it wouldn't be an issue.
bluemage55 06-13-07, 04:29 AM	there are tons of ways to prevent scrying, including magic items that don't require you to be a spellcaster. I didn't suggest that only spellcasters can defend against scrying. I suggested that non-spellcasters have a hard time defending against attacks at a range of 1 mile. There are indeed ways to stop scrying, but what can the tarrasque do? A brachyurus? A devastation vermin? Not every creature uses equipment, and when a feat has such a tremendous impact that everyone needs a way to defend against it, that feat is probably overpowered. Further, players do not always know who there enemies are and spells are not always effective against all enemies. If the party decides to scry on everyone they think is an enemy and blast them with spells, any DM in his right mind will have an enemy use magic to fool their scrying into blasting spells on a completely empty area (or an area filled with allies causing them to assume they've been betrayed) and if they've been foolish enough to prepare nothing but artillery spells then when the enemy attacks from up close they will be significantly drained of resourced. And what happens when a party gets into a fight, teleports away, and begins unloading then? (yet again I have to point out that the question is about drastic increases in range and the one mile mark is only one example. One could conceivably have feats that increased a spells range from short to medium or medium to long or feats that allowed you to fling a spell at anything you can see. ) Your suggestion to increase the rang from short to medium etc. would be fine. I'm primarily concerned about the 1 mile range of the feat proposed by the OP. I would have no issue against a feat that would increase the range by one category for +3 levels. Also, at pre-epic levels, fly is a pretty effective way to safely fight nonspell casters. A 10th level wizard can create a fireball 800 feet away, a distance many archers would have a terrible time with, especially if the wizard is also under a Greater invisibility spell. And as I mentioned, the biggest problem comes not from using long-range spells at long-range distances, but from using short-range spells at a distance of 1 mile. If the DM understands the pros and cons as well as the players it wouldn't be an issue. Anything that requires metagaming against is problematically powerful. I can easily come up with a solution for hulking hurler builds that deal 1,000,000 damage an attack, but the fact that I am forced to have a solution with every single character means that there is a problem.
BillTheManiac 06-13-07, 07:18 AM	It really depends on your campaign. It's going to be useless in a dungeon or in a hilly area or a forest or with purple worms burrowing under your party or in any situation where you don't see enemies at 5280 feet. But it is ridiculously powerful in that situation. So pricing it is very difficult. It's much better for sorcerers who can leave it there until it is useful then for wizards who might have to waste a high-level spell slot.
bluemage55 06-13-07, 09:46 AM	It really depends on your campaign. It's going to be useless in a dungeon or in a hilly area or a forest or with purple worms burrowing under your party or in any situation where you don't see enemies at 5280 feet. But it is ridiculously powerful in that situation. So pricing it is very difficult. It's much better for sorcerers who can leave it there until it is useful then for wizards who might have to waste a high-level spell slot. As I mentioned, you gauge the power of any ability according to the situation in which it is most effective.
BillTheManiac 06-13-07, 12:34 PM	As I mentioned, you gauge the power of any ability according to the situation in which it is most effective. That is false. An ability worth 0 here and 5 there would cost 5, while an ability worth 3 here and 3 there would cost 3. The second ability is strictly better. Also, what if that situation never comes up?
bluetooth 06-13-07, 12:42 PM	There are indeed ways to stop scrying, but what can the tarrasque do? A brachyurus? A devastation vermin? Not every creature uses equipment Are you suggesting a 10d6 fireball can do anything more than annoy the tarrasque with its 40 points of Regeneration? And the party still has to deal with it's spell reflection, which would still function. And what happens when a party gets into a fight, teleports away, and begins unloading then? The example I gave was of a party that had already wasted their spells on blasting empty space. They can't teleport away and if they could they can't unload on them. Your suggestion to increase the rang from short to medium etc. would be fine. I'm primarily concerned about the 1 mile range of the feat proposed by the OP. I would have no issue against a feat that would increase the range by one category for +3 levels. Well you haven't given an example that i've seen other than MDJ. Here's the rough draft of the feat that I'm considering: Far Spell: Increase the range category of the spell by one type. If the range of the spell was already Long it gains a new type of range detailed here: Very Long. Very Long spells have a range of 1000 feet plus 100feet/level. Enlarge Spell and Far spell stack in the following way. An Enlarged, Far Fireball would have a range of 2000feet plus 200 feet/level. A far spell uses up a slot (?) levels higher than the original spell This certainly doesn't let you cast all spells at the range of a mile, but at level 20 you are casting fireballs that far if you apply this feat and enlarge. I haven't yet decided what the level increase should be, nor have I decided what, if anything, this would do to touch spells or touch spells that have been modified by the reach spell ability of various classes (though the answer is likely: Nothing). And as I mentioned, the biggest problem comes not from using long-range spells at long-range distances, but from using short-range spells at a distance of 1 mile. You said the problem was that nonspellcasters would be unable to defend against spells at that range. I was giving an example of a situation at pre-epic where nonspellcasters would be unable to defend against spells even at close range. In the case of Fly + ranged spells, what's the tarrasque or devastation vermin going to do against a spell caster they can't physically reach? Anything that requires metagaming against is problematically powerful. I can easily come up with a solution for hulking hurler builds that deal 1,000,000 damage an attack, but the fact that I am forced to have a solution with every single character means that there is a problem. Pun-Pun builds are not what we are talking about here. The OP asked about spells at extreme ranges up to a mile. Their original feat wasn't well balanced because it made spells of different ranges have the same range, but I chose to response constructively. It's the job of the DM to work with their players. If I had a player present me with that, I would offer an alternative (as I have) rather than simply state the problems and send them back to the drawing board on their own.
BillTheManiac 06-13-07, 05:24 PM	Enemies have 30 ft. speed. At a run that's 12 mph, or a mile in 5 minutes. Clearly the caster is limited only by his spell slots. Therefore, the question is: What would be the level adjustment for a free action spell? Then reduce that by half or more because it is so situational.
bluemage55 06-13-07, 06:16 PM	Are you suggesting a 10d6 fireball can do anything more than annoy the tarrasque with its 40 points of Regeneration? And the party still has to deal with it's spell reflection, which would still function. No, I'm suggesting that other spells can be used. Fireball is actually one of the most useless spells in a capable wizard's repetoire. The example I gave was of a party that had already wasted their spells on blasting empty space. They can't teleport away and if they could they can't unload on them. And I was saying that your example was not applicable, because instead of blasting away at everything foolishly, a smart party would adventure normally until they encounter a fight, at which point they back off and fight from a ridiculous distance. Well you haven't given an example that i've seen other than MDJ. I have, you must not have read them. See the bottom of my third post. Here's the rough draft of the feat that I'm considering: I actually like your feat, although I would make it 1600 ft + 160 ft. per level, and nonstacking with Extend Spell. Again, my problem was with the the feat originally provided by the OP. You said the problem was that nonspellcasters would be unable to defend against spells at that range. I was giving an example of a situation at pre-epic where nonspellcasters would be unable to defend against spells even at close range. In the case of Fly + ranged spells, what's the tarrasque or devastation vermin going to do against a spell caster they can't physically reach? Throw large objects or make high jump checks. If the caster has to get to close or medium range to unload save-or-dies, the creature can retaliate. However, if the caster is firing save-or-dies from a mile away, those creatures have a problem. Pun-Pun builds are not what we are talking about here. The OP asked about spells at extreme ranges up to a mile. Their original feat wasn't well balanced because it made spells of different ranges have the same range, but I chose to response constructively. It's the job of the DM to work with their players. If I had a player present me with that, I would offer an alternative (as I have) rather than simply state the problems and send them back to the drawing board on their own. I didn't state that an alternative wasn't possible. As mentioned in a previous post, I would have no problem with a feat that increases the range category by one step. It's the original 1-mile for any spell feat that I was worried about.
bluemage55 06-13-07, 06:18 PM	Enemies have 30 ft. speed. At a run that's 12 mph, or a mile in 5 minutes. Clearly the caster is limited only by his spell slots. Therefore, the question is: What would be the level adjustment for a free action spell? Then reduce that by half or more because it is so situational. 5 minutes is enough time for 50 spells. No enemy of equal ECL should be expected to survive that, or make it with any equipment intact. What you're really asking is: "What is the level adjustment to safely fire off 50 spells?" Then reduce it due to the situational aspect of th feat.
rob_douglas 06-13-07, 07:11 PM	I think we are in agreement that 1-mile for any spell is bad. The proposal on the table is something that applies to spells based on their base ranges, and the question now is what the slot cost should be. I suggested simply: Far Spell Prereq: Enlarge Spell Benefit: You increase the range of your spells with close, medium, and long range to 4 times their normal range. Cost: +3 spell slots PS I looked up the War spells - Dragon 309, July 2003. None has a range greater than Long. They do have Wider Areas than Widen Spell would give though. The key to them is that you have to take a feat: War magic to gain access to War Spells. They are basically then +1 slot adjustments and 1-minute casting times to get wider or greater than normal effects. Not really applicable to the discussion. Bluetooth: Thanks for the pointer to QF, will take a look at the store, maybe buy it for that alone. ROB
bluemage55 06-13-07, 08:22 PM	Far Spell Prereq: Enlarge Spell Benefit: You increase the range of your spells with close, medium, and long range to 4 times their normal range. Cost: +3 spell slots I largely agree with this feat, although I would make it an epic feat and specify that it does not stack with Enlarge Spell.
rob_douglas 06-13-07, 11:03 PM	Agreed - Epic and it supercedes Enlarge. Then what if you want to get to 2Miles? Another feat? Maybe it should be patterned after Enhance Spell - the worry is that with Improved Metamagic it makes it too cheap to add on multiple times. ROB
bluetooth 06-14-07, 06:28 PM	No, I'm suggesting that other spells can be used. Fireball is actually one of the most useless spells in a capable wizard's repetoire. Yeah, I have to agree there, but that's part of why I was mentioning it. I have to say I agree with you that many spells would just be stupid at 1 mile, but the concept of at least some spells with extreme range would not be overpowered. And I was saying that your example was not applicable, because instead of blasting away at everything foolishly, a smart party would adventure normally until they encounter a fight, at which point they back off and fight from a ridiculous distance. Well, I do feel like in some cases this is a smart tactic that should be rewarded. But it's certainly not always applicable and it could be a hair puller for the DM after a while. But even in this situation, this assumes the party can cover ground faster than their enemies. Sure by epic teleporting is probably as common as walking, but it should be just as common for many enemies. Not all enemies would be capable of this of course (such as devastation vermin and the tarrasque) but in these situations extreme distance spells might be their only way to damage such a creature without getting killed (if the DM decided, for instance, to intentionally throw a creature at the party too powerful for them to take head to head. The wizard could blast the thing with everything he has and then the rest of the party could close in on it and it would still be a tough fight. I have, you must not have read them. See the bottom of my third post. Actually for some reason I missed that entire post. I will say that many of those spells would be hard to deal with at a mile range as a DM, but there is the mitagating factor that their saves won't be nearly as high as a non metamagic spell in the same slot. That being said, I'm not actually advocating them at the one-mile radius, just the idea of some spells getting to that distance. I actually like your feat, although I would make it 1600 ft + 160 ft. per level, and nonstacking with Extend Spell. Again, my problem was with the the feat originally provided by the OP. To be honest, I barely even paid attention to it. I may have been wrong to assume the poster was saying (as I would) "something along these lines" Also, the reason I have it stacking with Enlarge is that I don't like the idea of having a feat that just plain stops being useful. I suppose even with your version it doesn't since you don't always want to sacrifice that high a spell slot, or need that much range, but I like the players having options. Throw large objects or make high jump checks. If the caster has to get to close or medium range to unload save-or-dies, the creature can retaliate. Well the example I was giving was pre-epic. A 20th level wizard can sling medium range spells 300ft without metamagic. I don't think any 20th level character can jump that far vertically, and seeing someone who's invisible requires a magic item. In general I don't see how nonspellcasters could deal with this strategy without being specifically prepared for it. I didn't state that an alternative wasn't possible. As mentioned in a previous post, I would have no problem with a feat that increases the range category by one step. It's the original 1-mile for any spell feat that I was worried about. Well, now that we've pretty well put that idea behind us (and if I haven't been clear enough about it so far in this post I'll state it very clearly now: you're absolutely right) there's a feat called "Massive Spell" in a 3rd party book that increases any spells area to a mile for a +6 slot level adjustement. It's supposed to be part of an open source version of high magic and used in rituals that simulate mythals. The funniest part is that you'd get caught in the area of any offensive spell you tried to cast.
bluetooth 06-14-07, 06:37 PM	Rob, your feat is probably better than mine, I just like the idea of changing a spells range category. You know, would it be possible to have an entire feat tree that involved changing a spells range? Theoretically you could even decrease a spells range in order to increase another aspect of it, though I'm not sure what. Honestly if there were more interesting things you could do with metamagic, I'd probably use it. (Though I've not gotten the chance to play an ultimate magus which has me really wanting to experiment with metamagic now)
rob_douglas 06-14-07, 09:31 PM	You could go with changing ranges, I just wouldn't. The real issue comes from spells that have other Ranges, like Touch, Personal - what do you do with those. There is Reach Spell that allows you to change a Touch to 30' Ray. With a fixed distance, you could use the Enlarge or big Enlarge, but your feat would have to spell out what to do. As for decreasing range, that can be an issue too. Enlightened Fist allows you to Hold Ray, which is a neat ability when combined with Spell Opportunity, which lets you cast Touch spells as an AoO - combined with Combat Reflexes and Spellcasting Harrier. There is really no need to decrease ranges for any other spell, since you can always cast it shorter - except as you said that you want to increase something else as a benefit. I am not sure what that couldn't be increased in other ways - like DC (Heighten), Area (Widen), or damage (empower, maximize, intensify, enhance). If you aren't using a lot of metamagic feats, you should look into it. There are lots of interesting ones, especially Twin Spell, Split Ray, Repeat Spell - all good when you start applying them to 9th level spells at epic. I think that non-epic Metamagic feats are actually viable options for feat choices at epic level. And Sorcerers have a field day with them - it makes their spell choices less of an issue: Energy Susbstitution, Energy Admixture. Clerics go crazy for Persistent Spell - and of course Divine Metamagic so they can use Turn attempts that are useless at Epic to fuel metamagic instead. While having an Incense of Meditation every day so all their spells are Maximimzed. ROB
Aluroon 06-15-07, 10:22 AM	I think you all are overlooking something when you worry about the power of spells at a mile, notably that at that range your taking a -520 on your spot check. Your not going to see even huge enemies, thus, as I said in my OP, such a feat is by and large only useful for bombarding stationary targets.
bluemage55 06-15-07, 09:34 PM	I think you all are overlooking something when you worry about the power of spells at a mile, notably that at that range your taking a -520 on your spot check. Your not going to see even huge enemies, thus, as I said in my OP, such a feat is by and large only useful for bombarding stationary targets. And as I mentioned, you can see over such ranges using certain divinations. Clairvoyance, which would have an identical range to your other long range spells, does so quite nicely.
bluetooth 06-15-07, 09:44 PM	Hmm...this is a hard one for me. Sure you can see them with a divination, but you're seeing them with an entirely different set of perceptions. This isn't like casting detect magic through a scrying mirror, which specifically lets you cast through the scrying device. You may be aware of something going on at a distance, but that doesn't mean you know where the people you're seeing are in relation to your body. Scrying and Clarvoyance/Clairaudience I'd have to say wouldn't work like that, but an epic spell probably could.
BillTheManiac 06-16-07, 03:37 PM	But if it's -520 you can't see enemies to know you should use clairvoyance. By the time you see that devastation beetle he's at a semi-reasonable range.