Yuku free message boards

Aelryinth wrote:

---

Lastly, a THIRD abuse. We really, really, REALLY need a ruling on whether or not Metamagic Item infusions stack on one another. The infusions are a completely cheesy way to break the metmagic cap to begin with, and being allowed to Split Ray, Admixture, Twin, Repeat and Quicken a staff or wand for x16 dmg twice a round (for an Empowered Scorching Ray, for example...18d6 x 16, anyone?) at a charge a pop, is completely busted.

This could be nipped in the bud, and brought back into balance simply by not letting the infusions apply independently, but only the most recent (which is what Keith Baker has intimated he does.) This needs to be a finished ruling, or the Artificer breaks far too easily.

And of course, if this ruling applies, we also need to get rules on applying metamagic, because you can still use Metamagic Spell Trigger to add a second effect, and that stacking problem is addressed in my second post.

==Aelryinth

I hate to fork this thread in another direction, but I do have a question (well a request for clarification, actually) about this infusion. There is another infusion just like this one (Metamagic Scroll - Magic of Eberron (page 99 I think)) that allows you to apply a metamagic feat to a scroll - and it's a first level (instead of 3rd) and carries a restriction of a metamagic feat with a level adjustment of 2 or lower only. The wording of that one, primarily the duration, states that it's "# of rounds per level, or until used" which makes sense given that a scroll is used up once its cast (unless it has more than a single spell on it - and I'm note sure if the infusion's text states whether the feat will apply to a single spell on a scroll or not).

However, the Metamagic Item infusion has no such duration limit AND no limit on the level adjustment of the metamagic feat that can be applied (which is fine, since MOST of +4 or under anyway, and if there is to be a pattern from the infusions the level of the infusion +1 would suggest it'd allow +4 and lower - so no problems there). The problem with that infusion that I have is the duration and the effective over-powering nature of it. It allows anyone to use that wand/item with that feat - and it doesn't cost additional charges (at least it doesn't state that it does explicitly, one could argue it should since the wording "you apply a metamagic feat ..." and in all cases where a metamagic feat is applied to anything it uses additional levels; or in the case of the Artificer class ability or the feat derrived from that ability in Complete Arcane, exrta charges must be spent.

My concern is that this can be very overpowering with even a single feat applied to a decent wand. Take the 2nd level Scorching Ray at caster level 7. That's two rays at 4d6 damage for a ranged TOUCH attack... Very high chance of success to hit with any sort of touch attack in most cases (further making this questionable)... If you apply a Twin Spell to that you can get two attacks and have a chance to score a critical strike with each pair of rays, doing anywhere from 8d6 to 16d6 (for each pair) - that's a lot of damage! Now applying the feat and such, that's fine... But to allow the infusion to apply in a continuing manner makes it very overpowering quickly. Essentially what you have is a 6th level wand/item (I know, wands can't have a spell above 4th level - so does that alone bar the use of this infusion to boost a spell that far? And can it since the wand IS already built and has a set caster level?) that would cost tons more to make and would do the same kind of damage per single shot - but this infusion is allowing this extremely low cost item (by comparison) to do the same thing. There will easily come a point when it wouldn't be economical to even consider a higher level spell or item when you can cheese this one for a fraction of the cost for the same kind of power that isn't technically possible from such a lower-level item. If you burned 4 or 5 charges for this same Twinned cast you'd be spending about as much (in gp and xp) as the cost of true 6th level item/wand (again, I know wands can't have a 6th level spell, but the number crunching was only for comparison) at that caster level to do the same damage/effect. I think it works out only slightly cheaper to do it with the 6th level wand/item opposed to using the infusion...

So here's my question, in the spirit of game balance, is this infusion intended to throw that ideal (balancing the classes abilities/powers at similar levels) out the window and allow a free boost to the item without limit or cost? Is it the intention of the creators to have the duration to have an "or until used" statement (effectively making the 3rd level infusion cover the "cost" of the level adjustment of the feat which would otherwise be "paid" by adjusting the spell level in casting the spell or creating the item), or should the item require additional charges in compensation for the increased amount of power coming from the wand to do well more than it is intended and constructed to be able to conjure up? I could even see where it'd cost nothing the first time (again the infusion's level 3 and that power has to account for something, but it shouldn't account for more than three levels (or four if you consider that there's a level+1 pattern or trend between the two similar infusions)) and then cost the additional charges for additional uses? Or is it a single use only because the feat only applies to a single casting of a spell (or triggering of an item). As far as I know, no metamagic feat has a duration of effect that allows you to gain benefit from it more than once per use (with the exception of "Repeat Spell" which is basically a free recasting of the same spell from the location the first was cast from and at the same target as long as it's not more than 30 feet from where it was the first time - but barring that...).

So what is everyone else's take on this infusion. Just RAW it seems a little too powerful in that it would allow (if it is intended to work as the CO forums folks have assumed and proclaimed) anyone the ability to use that wand/item repeatedly and without additional cost to the wand and without level adjustment barring the use of any metamagic feat that would otherwise make it impossible to create a wand that could do the effects the feat will create. I mean, let's face it - at 5th level when this infusion becomes available it can last for 5 rounds - meaning that you could get up to 5 shots off that would be equivilent to several charges each (in terms of cost equiv. to the higher level spell adjusted with the feat to do the same thing if it were made that way and not boosted), without limit on the number of uses allowed, or who the user is? It just seems like there is something missing from this or some sort of clarification needed - or that it should be a higher level infusion (heck the Artificer can't do this as a class ability until level 7 and the feat that is based on this in Complete Arcane isn't available until level 9 (it has a skill (or two) that requires 12 ranks in it to take the feat). So the infusion that lets you do this multiple times without additional cost seems contrary to what the higher level artificer can do without the use of an infusion... It just doesn't make sense that the more powerful ability/infusion would come before the more costly, and therefor less poweful (a free boost to do the exact same thing is inherently more powerful than one with a cost)

So the duration and the ability for others to get a free boost on their item (or just that others can use the item with the added benefit) being applied continually whereas the feat alone would require the level difference each time doesn't seem like a problem?

I think Scorching Ray, with the feat applied (or with the feat applied when creating, let's say, a staff) even at CL 7, isn't an issue. At level CL 7 it's a two-ray spell (with the Twin Spell feat it becomes 4 rays (a whopping 16d6 if both attacks hit) on two attacks - but at the cost of a 6th level spell slot) and that's fine (since a 7th level character should be able to do some decent damage). And even with the feat, the 6th level spell slot would require a character level 11... so that's not a problem either.

What I have a problem with is allowing a 6th level spell (effectively) to be cast repeatedly at the cost of a single 3rd level spell/infusion. I don't see how that balances out with the other abilities of the class (or other classes for that matter). It really makes no sense why that one spell (so you spend a round to cast the infusion, big deal - you've got a minimum of 5 rounds following that to change a wand's output from a 2nd level spell to a 6th level spell that you can use over and over and over...) It just seems to be very powerful and completely out of place as a 3rd level spell/infusion (like I said, it makes the class feature - which the only advantages I can see for that at all are the instant "on demand" use of it and that the ability has a duration of the single use, unlike the infusion which does not have a (D) in the duration implying that you're stuck with the effect until the duration is over (since the (D) flag that is put on spells to show it allows you to "drop" the effects earlier than the full duration time listed isn't there).

What I can't get my mind wrapped around is how the single infusion somehow powers the wand to do more than it's built for for so many uses... I get the idea for the class ability (and the derived feat in Comp. Arcane) using the extra charges for this; and I would totally get it if the infusion operated like the Metamagic Scroll infusion - since it logically makes sense... But this one infusion, RAW, breaks all the common rules about the application of metamagic feats to spells (even when you look at item creation with such feats applied)... To do it once, it makes sense. The extra power for the feat comes from the infusion - but that's a 3rd level infusion to cover not one metamagic feat that requires a 4 level adjustment to the spell level (in the example I used - it can be as little as 1, and as much as 6 (Persistent Spell). So the "extra power" needed to do it comes from the infusion's levels... But I don't see how the one infusion (even with the +1 thing I mentioned) can reasonably be strong enough to do it repeatedly. I could even see it doing so if the metamagic feat only required a 1 or 2 level adjustment; because the 4 levels provided by the infusion slot wouldn't be entirely used up on a single use of the feat being applied to the spell in the item... But otherwise it makes no sense how that one infusion (especially since it's available at such a low level) can basically ignore all rules seemingly related to this sort of thing.

I don't think I can think of any other class, ability, or spell/invocation/infusion (they're all spells in my mind, since they're more or less the same kind of thing with slightly different nuances to how they work mechanically and how they're represented and portrayed artistically (ie: how you'd see them used in a book, for example)) that flies in the face of convention or breaks the rules outright in such a dramatic and controversial way as this one seems to.

I've read the 4e PHB; I don't like it at all. I think it's too much of a board game in how it "feels" and it doesn't have the "wide open" appeal to it that 3.5 does - at least to me and my group.

I'll have to look at other spells/wands (Fireball perhaps) to see how this will balance in comparison... Any other ideas (aside from "no Scorching Ray" house rules) on how to "balance" or "fix" this infusion so it doesn't imbalance the game too badly?

kkarty wrote:

---

BTW, regarding 4e - I have to agree with you, but I'm in a minority. I used to get rather excited about D&D. I've probably written over 5000 pages of material related to our game campaign. I have not written a single word since 4e came out. I feek depressed thinking about it. The 4e campaign I play in feels like a humorous distraction. I play in it, kill some stuff, gain a level, choose from my selection of 2 or 3 powers, etc. My DM seems to like it - it makes DMing very easy, since everything is so predictable. It's also quite boring, to me at least. If my character died, I wouldn't care in the least. I only play now to hang out with friends, and have basically decided to never buy a book other than the PHB (not even the DMG or the splat books). Now that the crunch text is so minimal, and I only need to know a short list of powers to play my character, I can read through the powers during the game session (since it doesn't take all that much attention to play my character), and I don't have to buy anything. As I said, you'd probably find yourself in better company at Paizo.

I hate the lack of variety in the classes in 4e especially. This is one of the worst draw-backs to the game, IMHO. I hate the "here's your handful of options, no sit down shut up and enjoy them because that's all you will get and/or need" kind of "push it into a pigeon-hole" approach to the game (any game, really).