Post/Author/DateTime	Post
edventure 07-25-07, 04:38 PM	A question came up in our weekly game. If you use Twin Spell and other metamagics (Maximise, Empower, Shaping, etc...) does it apply equally to both, or do you get one tricked out spell and one plain vanilla spell of the same type? A search of the archives states that the Sage had a ruling but I'm unable to locate it. Any opinions or links to official rulings are welcome. Thanks!
Puca 07-25-07, 05:03 PM	They work together. If you cast a Twinned Maximized Fireball, both Fireballs do max damage. That was what the sage ruled, though I only remember it from discussion on the boards, not from the source. (Tarkin made note of it, as he was a proponent of the other perspective.) Come to think of it, it may have been in the FAQ. Ill check. Edit: Yeah, FAQ. If my wizard applies Energy Admixture (Complete Arcane, page 78) and Maximize Spell to the same spell, does he get a spell that deals double its maximized damage (maximum normal damage in two different energy types)? If he also applied the Twin Spell feat (Complete Arcane, page 84) to the same spell would it duplicate the entire effect? Yes and yes. Assuming your character can cast 13th-level spells—the slot required by a 2nd-level spell affected by these metamagic feats—a scorching ray so affected would create two sets of three rays each, with each ray dealing 24 points of fire damage (4d6, maximized) and 24 points of a second energy type (as appropriate for your Energy Substitution feat), for a grand total of 288 points of damage . . . assuming all six rays hit their target.
tarkin 07-25-07, 05:39 PM	1. The PHB says Maximize and Empower do not interact. They are the only two example feats given in the core books. (I.E. A maximize empower 10th caster level fireball does 60 fire + 10d6/2, it does not do 90 points of fire. 2. The FAQ clearly lists out several other feats and says that they say do interact. 3. This is despite the fact that It goes against the core dynamic called d20 multiplication. Effectively if you twin and repeat a spell using the FAQ ruling you get x2x2 = x4 instead of x2x2=x3. It makes a Maximized(non-epic feat), Twinned (non-epic feat) Fireball , which takes up a 3+3+4=10th level slot, do the EXACT same damage as if you had cast an Intensified (Epic feat which has Maximize and Empower as pre-res) Fireball which also takes up a 10th level slot. I.E. the FAQ writers and completely turned Intesnify, which used to be a perfectlly good epic feat into a worthless feat that only a total idiot takes. I personally have felt that letting them act as Maximize + Empower does not discourage people from taking or using the feats. But it DOES stop people from going over-board with abilities that reduce metamagic costs. For that reason alone I find it best to ignore the FAQ stupidity and instead use the core ruling for Maximize/Empower for all feats.
bigbythewise 07-25-07, 08:41 PM	[list]The PHB says Maximize and Empower do not interact. They are the only two example feats given in the core books. (I.E. A maximize empower 10th caster level fireball does 60 fire + 10d6/2, it does not do 90 points of fire. It's because they both directly affect the *variable and numerical* part of a spell. [list]It goes against the core dynamic called d20 multiplication. Effectively if you twin and repeat a spell using the FAQ ruling you get x2x2 = x4 instead of x2x2=x3. Multiplication rule: "Sometimes a rule makes you multiply a number or a die roll" Sorry, but the spell is not a number or a die roll. [list]It makes a Maximized(non-epic feat), Twinned (non-epic feat) Fireball , which takes up a 3+3+4=10th level slot, do the EXACT same damage as if you had cast an Intensified (Epic feat which has Maximize and Empower as pre-res) Fireball which also takes up a 10th level slot. Yes, this is correct and balanced. I.E. the FAQ writers and completely turned Intesnify, which used to be a perfectlly good epic feat into a worthless feat that only a total idiot takes. Nonsense.
edventure 07-25-07, 09:25 PM	Our house rule for a Max-empowered spell is: Roll the full dice and add 1/2 of that to the Max number. Thanks Puca for pointing out the official FAQ. I was looking in all the Faerun FAQ's and Errata as that was where Twin was introduced.
BrutishCelt 07-25-07, 09:25 PM	I gotta go with bigby on this one. When you have a twinned, repeated spell, you're not doubling the damage; you're effectively doubling the damage each time. They are separate effects, not two effects that provide exponential damage. The twinned spell is cast twice at the same time, and the repeated spell is cast subsequently in the next round. Thus, 2 spells in the first round, and 2 spells in the second round. Heck, even energy admixture doesn't actually multiply the damage of a spell - it adds an equal number of dice of a certain energy type. The text of the feat even says "you can also admix your chosen energy type with a spell that already uses the same type, in effect doubling its normal damage dice." I'm sure that you can read that either way you like, but I believe that the spirit of the text indicates that the d20 Multiplication Rule isn't applicable in this instance.
Johnny_Angel 07-26-07, 11:30 PM	I disagree that the ruling makes the intesify feat worthless. Intensify still allows you (with one feat) to duplicate an effect which normally uses 3 feats (twinned, maximize, and the epic feat which gives your slots above level 9.) so... Intensify does something similar to what 2 non-epic feats combined with one epic feat can do...sounds like a reasonable reason to still take Intensify to me.
jaelis 07-26-07, 11:39 PM	I disagree that the ruling makes the intesify feat worthless. Intensify still allows you (with one feat) to duplicate an effect which normally uses 3 feats (twinned, maximize, and the epic feat which gives your slots above level 9.) so... Intensify does something similar to what 2 non-epic feats combined with one epic feat can do...sounds like a reasonable reason to still take Intensify to me. First, maximize spell is a prereq for intensify spell. Second, the net level increase is the same either way. If you want to apply this to a fireball, you need a level 10 slot, whether you use intensify or maximize + twin. So both combinations require the same spell slot and both require maximize spell. So you don't get anything from intensify that you wouldn't get from twin spell, and twin spell is a) non-epic b) more flexible and c) has lower prereqs. The place Tarkin's argument breaks down is at really high levels, when you are throwing around twinned intensified spells. You can't do that without intensify. And using the FAQ interpretation makes it work even better, thus ultimately making intensify even more valuable.
runestar 07-26-07, 11:42 PM	I disagree that the ruling makes the intesify feat worthless. Intensify still allows you (with one feat) to duplicate an effect which normally uses 3 feats (twinned, maximize, and the epic feat which gives your slots above level 9.) And you don't need 10+ lv slots to use intensify spell?:confused: Don't forget that intensify spell has hefty prereqs (4 other metamagic feats). Also, the maximize+twin combo has the benefit of double-counting with regards to improved metamagic. For example, improved metamagic would decrease the slot adjustment of intensify spell by 1, from +7 to +6. However, it would decrease both twin and maximize spell by 1 each, from a total of +7 to +5. This gets more significant as you take improved metamagic a 2nd time. That is not to say that intensify spell is useless though. Bear in mind that a twinned spell is subject to resistance twice (for example, fire resistance would apply to a twinned fireball twice, but only once against an intensified fireball). The opponent also gets 2 saves (but depending on whether the 1st save was a success or a failure, it can be a blessing or a boon). I would say that they each have their own pros and cons.:)
Nezkrul 07-27-07, 01:16 AM	just a nitpick but an important one: Twin spell doesn't make you cast a spell twice, it only makes the effects of the spell happen twice. Very important because the components of the spell are only used/performed once.
bigbythewise 07-27-07, 02:06 AM	What is important. If you play Epic, then at the higher levels you will probably want to have Intesify and Twin and since Maximize is a prequsite for Intensify... :]
Bopple 07-27-07, 02:44 AM	Well, the prerequisite of Intensify Spell is not a big obstacle. Whoever wants a metamagic feat like Intensify Spell, would have taken Maximize and Empower anyway. There is another problem. Look at Enhance Spell feat. If you don't let metamagic feats stack, it would be a totally useless feat.
bigbythewise 07-27-07, 03:43 AM	Enhance Spell [Metamagic][Epic] Prerequisite: Maximize Spell. Benefit The damage cap for your spells increases by 10 dice (for spells that deal a number of dice of damage equal to caster level) or by 5 dice (for spells that deal a number of dice of damage equal to half caster level). An enhanced spell uses up a spell slot four levels higher than the spell’s actual level. This feat has no effect on spells that don’t specifically deal a number of dice of damage equal to the caster’s level or half level, even if the spell’s effect is largely dictated by the caster’s level. Normal Without this feat, use the damage dice caps indicated in the spell’s description. Special You may gain this feat multiple times. Each time you select this feat, the damage cap increases by 10 dice or 5 dice, as appropriate to the spell, and the enhanced spell takes up a spell slot an additional four levels higher. There is nothing about "non-stacking" so it should stack. However, not with the Intensify spell. This is really a big piece of butter. Imagine a Fireball with 100d6 damage. Ouch! Improved metamagic is a must in here.
BrutishCelt 07-27-07, 05:05 AM	[B]Enhance Spell . Imagine a Fireball with 100d6 damage. Ouch! Hehe. . .fire. . . :plotting:
runestar 07-27-07, 09:55 AM	There is nothing about "non-stacking" so it should stack. However, not with the Intensify spell. This is really a big piece of butter. Imagine a Fireball with 100d6 damage. Ouch! Improved metamagic is a must in here. What is so scary about that? It will still be a 3rd lv spell, and 100d6 is just pathetic at the stage when you are able to enhance a fireball multiple times.;)
Nezkrul 07-27-07, 12:27 PM	What is so scary about that? It will still be a 3rd lv spell, and 100d6 is just pathetic at the stage when you are able to enhance a fireball multiple times.;) True, but at level 27 (non-core) I can deal 1200 damage with fireball using an 9th level spell slot. But at that level, damage isn't everything, since the save is still for a 3rd level spell.
bigbythewise 07-27-07, 10:08 PM	True, but at level 27 (non-core) I can deal 1200 damage with fireball using an 9th level spell slot. But at that level, damage isn't everything, since the save is still for a 3rd level spell. Double that, if quickened (per round). If you play an Archmage, you can alter that crazy damage during casting to any type of energy (5 types), which is versatile and powerfull indeed. But you're right, high damage isn't a quest.
runestar 07-27-07, 10:46 PM	True, but at level 27 (non-core) I can deal 1200 damage with fireball using an 9th level spell slot. But at that level, damage isn't everything, since the save is still for a 3rd level spell. Albeit at a crap dc which most, if not all foes will be making their reflex saves against. And pray they do not have evasion somehow.:P BTW, how would you achieve that anyways? I am guessing arcane thesis, improved metamagic twice (one as per the epic feat, 2nd as per incantatrix), easy metamagic, adriot metamagic (haluran elder) and metamagic rods?
Bopple 07-27-07, 11:09 PM	How are you pulling out that trick? Even if you lessen the metamagic slot increases, you need 100 CL to achieve that.
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 12:47 AM	Ok guys. Enhance Spell: +4 Twin Spell: +4 Repeat Spell: +3 Maximize spell: +3 If you'll take the Improved Metamagic feat three times, then: Enhance Spell: +1 Twin Spell: +1 Repeat Spell: +1 Maximize spell: +1
Steidas 07-28-07, 12:50 AM	Ok guys. Enhance Spell: +4 Twin Spell: +4 Repeat Spell: +3 Maximize spell: +3 If you'll take the Improved Metamagic feat three times, then: Enhance Spell: +1 Twin Spell: +1 Repeat Spell: +1 Maximize spell: +1 I don't think that's the way it works...
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 12:54 AM	I don't think that's the way it works... I and my brother called RAW don't agree with you.
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 12:59 AM	Albeit at a crap dc which most, if not all foes will be making their reflex saves against. And pray they do not have evasion somehow.:P Just go and develop some good INT-boosting Epic spell. You will have crazy DCs, crazy number of bonus slots and you will be whole crazy, just like Epic rules.
runestar 07-28-07, 01:01 AM	Nevertheless, it is a step in the right direction. Wiz6/incanatrix10/halruan elder5/incantatrix6. This nets you 2 epic feats at lv27, which can be used to take improved metamagic twice. With incantatrix10, this gives you -3 to the slot modifiers of all your metamagic feats. With arcane thesis: fireball and ioun stone, you have caster lv30, enough for 2 enhance spells. So enhance: +1, enhance: +1, twin: +1, intensify: +2 (with adroit casting and easy metamagic), -1 total from arcane thesis, we have a fireball dealing 720 damage with a 7th lv slot. Though 360 is a safer estimate since the foe will almost always make his reflex save. I am sure there are other ways to boost this, but my knowledge of metamagic feats is quite limited.:P
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 01:26 AM	So enhance: +1, enhance: +1, twin: +1, intensify: +2 (with adroit casting and easy metamagic), -1 total from arcane thesis, we have a fireball dealing 720 damage with a 7th lv slot. Though 360 is a safer estimate since the foe will almost always make his reflex save. What about this: Unearthly Intelligence Transmutation Spellcraft DC: 75 Components: V, S, XP Casting Time: 10 minute Range: Personal Duration: 5 days Saving Throw: No Spell Resistance: No The spell grants a +60 enhancement bonus to Intelligence. Wizards (and other spellcasters who rely on Intelligence) affected by this spell gain additional bonus spells for the increased Intelligence. XP Cost A cost for casting is 5,000 XP.
Steidas 07-28-07, 01:32 AM	I and my brother called RAW don't agree with you. Sorry, I had just read the Improved Metamagic and had read NOTHING about Incantatrix.
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 02:00 AM	Sorry, I had just read the Improved Metamagic and had read NOTHING about Incantatrix. Improved Metamagic [Epic] Prerequisites: Four metamagic feats, Spellcraft 30 ranks. Benefit The spell slot modifier of all your metamagic feats is reduced by one level, to a minimum of +1. This feat has no effect on metamagic feats whose spell slot modifier is +1 or less. Special You can gain this feat multiple times. The effects stack, though you can’t reduce any metamagic feat’s spell slot modifier to less than +1. I've just looked up the Enhance Spell description and... I am total moron. I though that it gives additional 10d6 damage, but it only increases the *cap*. LoL
Steidas 07-28-07, 02:12 AM	What about this: Unearthly Intelligence Transmutation Spellcraft DC: 75 Components: V, S, XP Casting Time: 10 minute Range: Personal Duration: 5 days Saving Throw: No Spell Resistance: No The spell grants a +60 enhancement bonus to Intelligence. Wizards (and other spellcasters who rely on Intelligence) affected by this spell gain additional bonus spells for the increased Intelligence. XP Cost A cost for casting is 5,000 XP. It's not Epic that's broken, it's its players.
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 02:40 AM	It's not Epic that's broken, it's its players. In the end, it's all about fun.
runestar 07-28-07, 02:52 AM	It's not Epic that's broken, it's its players. Unfortunately, that is about the only thing epic spellcasting is good for. The way for various factors are designed, epic spells are mainly useful for long duration buff spells rather than offensive magic. Also, does twin spell stack with energy admixture? If so, then we now have a 8th lv fireball spell which deals 1440 damage.
bigbythewise 07-28-07, 09:48 AM	Unfortunately, that is about the only thing epic spellcasting is good for. The way for various factors are designed, epic spells are mainly useful for long duration buff spells rather than offensive magic. Also, does twin spell stack with energy admixture? If so, then we now have a 8th lv fireball spell which deals 1440 damage. There is a seed called Destroy, which is good for offense, sometimes at least. It has non-typed damage and can be used to destroy Ward seed spells. That's a quite versatile. I dunno if it stack. Honestly, i don't care of it, since it wouldn't stop me from thinking that playing an epic caster with bunch of Improved Capacity and Improved Metamagic feats is a good way.
BrutishCelt 07-29-07, 08:25 AM	Also, does twin spell stack with energy admixture? If so, then we now have a 8th lv fireball spell which deals 1440 damage. It depends on how you interpret the application of metamagic feats. One option is to relate metagic feats for spells to templates for creatures. If you choose to adopt this [rather favorable] perspective, then you would add the effects of the feats in the order that the feats were applied [like templates]. In this example, first admix the fireball, then, twin it. The first feat adds an equal number of damage dice to the base spell. The second feat causes that spell [admixed fireball] to take effect twice, simultaneously. So, your admixed, twinned fireball does [10d6+10d6]+[10d6+10d6] damage, barring the inclusion of any other feats or class abilities [I'll admit that I'm not familiar enough with Epic rules to make confident rulings on them]. Anywho, that's how I look at metamagic feats, so you can take that for what it's worth.
Witch 07-29-07, 08:28 AM	What about this: Unearthly Intelligence Transmutation Spellcraft DC: 75 Components: V, S, XP Casting Time: 10 minute Range: Personal Duration: 5 days Saving Throw: No Spell Resistance: No The spell grants a +60 enhancement bonus to Intelligence. Wizards (and other spellcasters who rely on Intelligence) affected by this spell gain additional bonus spells for the increased Intelligence. XP Cost A cost for casting is 5,000 XP. How is this proof that epic is crazy, given that such a spell would not be approved by the DM, an explicit rule mentioned in the Epic Spellcasting rules?
bigbythewise 07-29-07, 10:10 AM	How is this proof that epic is crazy, given that such a spell would not be approved by the DM, an explicit rule mentioned in the Epic Spellcasting rules? I made this spell as an example for runestar. He was talking about low DC saves with the enhanced Fireball, so i just gave him a boost spell. I should have said "Epic *can* be crazy", Mr. Nitpick. :rolleyes:
Witch 07-29-07, 10:13 AM	Well - yeah, but so can pre-epic if you play a Hulking Hurler. Doesn't really make a point.
Marshall 07-29-07, 10:17 AM	I and my brother called RAW don't agree with you. Unfortunately, your Grand-daddy FAQ has the final say. MM cost reduction only works on the final level, not per feat.
Nezkrul 07-29-07, 02:57 PM	Sorcerer 6 / Incantatrix 10 / Fighter 2 (2nd racial sub) / Reforged 2 / Incantatrix 6 / Reforged 1 Warforged race, take 2 flaws from Unearthed Arcana at first level, in total you will have 21 feats (which includes Unarmored Body). Using what we on the CharOp boards call "the cheeseforged mechanic" with this build, you end up with all 4 energy substitutions and energy admixtures, twin spell, empower spell, maximize spell, rapid metamagic, practiced spellcaster, iron will, intensify spell, improved metamagic [epic] x5, and unarmored body. (you can do this with wizard and have 1 more metamagic feat but I like sorcerers better) So a twinned intensified energy admixed 4x fireball takes a 9th level slot and deals two simultaneous hits of (240 fire damage, 120 acid damage, 120 electricity damage, 120 cold damage). If you manage to breach SR, and they don't have improved evasion, and/or they aren't immune or very resistant to energy damage, that is. But again, I was just stating a point that epic spellcasting is not about damage, even when you can do something like this. Buffs are where its at. Oh and we've answered the Op's questions already :D
bigbythewise 07-29-07, 09:55 PM	Well - yeah, but so can pre-epic if you play a Hulking Hurler. Doesn't really make a point. Seeing (not just pinpointing) illusions with *mundane* vision. Passing through Wall of Force by *mundane* way. (escape artist). Swimming up waterfall with use of the *mundane* skill. And so on.... That's the point, that's the RAW.
TheDarkLord 07-29-07, 10:13 PM	Unfortunately, your Grand-daddy FAQ has the final say. MM cost reduction only works on the final level, not per feat. No, He is NOT my granddaddy, he is my step grandfather who is a complete and total idiot on par with my Cousin Customer Service... ;).
bigbythewise 07-29-07, 10:18 PM	MM cost reduction only works on the final level, not per feat. Where did you get that from? There's nothing about what you've quoted in the 3.5 FAQs because there's no reason at all. Improved Metamagic description is pretty clear.
runestar 07-29-07, 11:19 PM	Where did you get that from? There's nothing about what you've quoted in the 3.5 FAQs because there's no reason at all. Improved Metamagic description is pretty clear. The FAQ only mentions arcane thesis working on the final slot adjustment, not the slot adjustment of each individual metamagic feat. I have already factored this into my calculations. As for improved metamagic, the DMG3.5 does word it differently. However, no further splatbook appears to have endorsed this revision, nor has the online SRD, so it should be safe to continue using the ELH version as is. Seeing (not just pinpointing) illusions with *mundane* vision. Passing through Wall of Force by *mundane* way. (escape artist). Swimming up waterfall with use of the *mundane* skill. And so on.... That's the point, that's the RAW. I still don't get the point.:(
bigbythewise 07-29-07, 11:33 PM	I still don't get the point.:( Point is simple. You can do *nonsense* things (from my point of view of course) You're more the god than a hero. Some people might like that, i don't.
Vaelan 07-29-07, 11:42 PM	3. This is despite the fact that It goes against the core dynamic called d20 multiplication. Effectively if you twin and repeat a spell using the FAQ ruling you get x2x2 = x4 instead of x2x2=x3. It makes a Maximized(non-epic feat), Twinned (non-epic feat) Fireball , which takes up a 3+3+4=10th level slot, do the EXACT same damage as if you had cast an Intensified (Epic feat which has Maximize and Empower as pre-res) Fireball which also takes up a 10th level slot. I.E. the FAQ writers and completely turned Intesnify, which used to be a perfectlly good epic feat into a worthless feat that only a total idiot takes. 1. Multiplication rules do not apply because nothing is being doubled. Doubling is different than occuring twice. For example, a Greatsword deals 2d6 damage. Just because I can say that 2d6 is 1d6 doubled doesn't mean that a Greatsword only deals 3d6 damage on a critical hit (1d6 doubled twice = tripled!!!). 2. Nobody cares about Epic feats. Further, that is an inefficient use of a feat that was designed under the "punish suckers" paradigm. As such, its inefficiency is explained by the overall design paradigm and thus cannot be held against any other feature. I don't mind if you disagree, but I would appreciate it if you would try to use reasons that begin to approach validity to do so.
runestar 07-30-07, 12:04 AM	Point is simple. You can do *nonsense* things (from my point of view of course) You're more the god than a hero. Some people might like that, i don't. Maybe it is just a difference in opinion, but I see swimming upstream or squeezing though wall of force in a less broken light than using epic spellcasting to pump your stats through the roof. I mean, by the time you can muster those skill checks, why are you even bothering with such mundane means of overcoming said obstacles?
bigbythewise 07-30-07, 03:25 AM	Maybe it is just a difference in opinion, but I see swimming upstream or squeezing though wall of force in a less broken light than using epic spellcasting to pump your stats through the roof. Do you find magic *in general* broken? Do you find Fly spell broken because it just lets you, er, fly? Or Finger of Death? You *can* kill a DRAGON with it. I mean, by the time you can muster those skill checks, why are you even bothering with such mundane means of overcoming said obstacles? Why are we bothering with the RAW flaws if we can houserule?
bigbythewise 07-30-07, 03:34 AM	Also, does twin spell stack with energy admixture? If so, then we now have a 8th lv fireball spell which deals 1440 damage. Does the Energy Admixture stack with itself? (Just like Enhance spell does)
Witch 07-30-07, 06:57 AM	Seeing (not just pinpointing) illusions with *mundane* vision. Passing through Wall of Force by *mundane* way. (escape artist). Swimming up waterfall with use of the *mundane* skill. And so on.... That's the point, that's the RAW. Point is simple. You can do *nonsense* things (from my point of view of course) You're more the god than a hero. Some people might like that, i don't. Such things are not broken. They may look to you to be more divine than heroic, but classic mythology has heroes doing similar things.
runestar 07-30-07, 07:13 AM	Why are we bothering with the RAW flaws if we can houserule? Because the fact that we can houserule does not the excuse the existence of these flaws at all. Also, I am not sure if all of them can be considered flaws. I mean - if the ability to swim upstream with a high enough swim check a mechanical flaw, or simply a very valid rule which just happens to offend the sensibilities of some people? In the very least, I do not see them upsetting game balance, unlike inappropriate-designed epic spells, and that is good enough for me. Do you find magic *in general* broken? Do you find Fly spell broken because it just lets you, er, fly? Or Finger of Death? You *can* kill a DRAGON with it. Like I said, it depends on your definition of broken. Finger of death might kill a dragon on a natural 1, but the chances are very slim. On an expected value basis, it seems far from game breaking. And so what if I can fly? Plenty of other people can too. And what I can achieve with flight is fairly limited as well. Nor am I sure what the heck you are trying to insinuate anyways. I have a gut feeling you are somehow trying to discredit me using some sort of logical fallacy, but I just can't put my finger on it at the moment...(darn this flu and my fuzzy head...:( ) Does the Energy Admixture stack with itself? (Just like Enhance spell does) So what if it does? So what if it doesn't? Why are you answering my questions with more questions?:confused:
bigbythewise 07-30-07, 08:02 AM	Such things are not broken. They may look to you to be more divine than heroic, but classic mythology has heroes doing similar things. But "classic mythology" is far away from "classic adventure". Let's say. I'm making an Epic spell called "Immortality". If DM would say "It's all right, i'm approving it, look at the Elminster, he's also immortal!" then it doesn't mean that the spell isn't broken. Of course, you can still have a lot o fun and nice gameplay, but again, it doesn't mean that the spell isn't broken.
Witch 07-30-07, 08:04 AM	When did I ever claim that Epic would be "classic adventure"? And it doesn't mean that the spell is broken, either: I believe the heaviest of Epic Magic should be capable of holding off age.
runestar 07-30-07, 08:13 AM	Let's say. I'm making an Epic spell called "Immortality". If DM would say "It's all right, i'm approving it, look at the Elminster, he's also immortal!" then it doesn't mean that the spell isn't broken. Of course, you can still have a lot o fun and nice gameplay, but again, it doesn't mean that the spell isn't broken. Immortality wouldn't be broken anyways. What - do your PCs take 10 years to reach the next lv? That and aging has absolutely zero impact on gaming anyways, as shown by the dearth of effects which delay or stave off aging. I am afraid you are going to have to come up with better examples if you want to prove your point (which I still have no idea what the heck it is supposed to be). You are going to have to explain to me very slowly why you think immortality is broken.
bigbythewise 07-30-07, 08:48 AM	Because the fact that we can houserule does not the excuse the existence of these flaws at all. Also, I am not sure if all of them can be considered flaws. I mean - if the ability to swim upstream with a high enough swim check a mechanical flaw, or simply a very valid rule which just happens to offend the sensibilities of some people? In the very least, I do not see them upsetting game balance, unlike inappropriate-designed epic spells, and that is good enough for me. So, it's fine to be able to jump up to 25+ feet because *you are level 50* and *RAW allows it*. But you can't do the ritual along with twenty casters to create an armageddon because it would be JUST a *bad designed* and *meaningless overpowered* spell? The first one is simply nonsense for me, but the other *could be* possible and could be used as a part of Epic story with no problem. Like I said, it depends on your definition of broken. Finger of death might kill a dragon on a natural 1, but the chances are very slim. On an expected value basis, it seems far from game breaking. And so what if I can fly? Plenty of other people can too. And what I can achieve with flight is fairly limited as well. Yeah, Finger of Death can do it rarely on a roll 1. It's a *magic*. You can bounce all the day up to the sky like a rabbit on the high, *mundane*. Nor am I sure what the heck you are trying to insinuate anyways. I have a gut feeling you are somehow trying to discredit me using some sort of logical fallacy, but I just can't put my finger on it at the moment...(darn this flu and my fuzzy head...:( ) What? :D So what if it does? So what if it doesn't? Why are you answering my questions with more questions?:confused: I just thought that you would might to know it, sorry then. Twin spell and Energy Admixture stacking has been FAQ proved somewhere round the 2nd or 3rd post. :P
bigbythewise 07-30-07, 08:57 AM	You are going to have to explain to me very slowly why you think immortality is broken. As I've said, you can still have normal and good gameplay, this is *not* about roleplaying at all. I don't understand why are you arguing in this way, because we're discusing RAW and spell mechanics here. edit> I see now that it could be the english problem, maybe that i should have wrote "Deathlessness" instead of "Immortality".
Nezkrul 07-30-07, 04:30 PM	wrote "Deathlessness" instead of "Immortality". you can acquire the deathless template without epic magic...
bigbythewise 07-30-07, 06:38 PM	you can acquire the deathless template without epic magic... And what does mean "deathless template" in D&D terms? Is it an absolute? I doubt.
Bopple 07-30-07, 08:56 PM	Perhaps you are thinking of invulnerability to any harm(including aging effect). Deathlessness or immorality means you don't die of natural causes.