Persistent Spell

[Khelebhzed]

There have been many changes to the function of this metamagic feat. But with it's current limitation to level 3 spells and under, and shorter in game duration, I wondered if it might not be reviewed? Could it apply to spells if you only target yourself, instead of person only spells? Or could it be expanded on a spell by spell basis for what is and is not appropriately expended?

[Selveem]

[...]and shorter in game duration[...]

I'm confused. Are you saying persistent spells no longer last 24 in-game hours? If so, I don't think it was intentional. I'm very against this, if it has changed and it was intentional.

[Khelebhzed]

No. It used to last much longer than it's current status. But it's current duration is fine. Merely that the list of spells it affects might be extended, making it more useful without misuse.

[Keltorn]

Merely that the list of spells it affects might be extended, making it more useful without misuse.

I've seen Persistent Spell getting misused already, though thankfully I haven't seen it in a while. I used to see people settle down, memorize their persisted spells, stand up and cast them, then sit back down to forget those spells and fill the slots back up. If more spells become Persistent Spell compatible, there will undoubtedly be more of that (there certainly won't be any less). While I've never heard that technique called code abuse, it always struck me as a sneaky way to get more spells per day.

But that's not really my concern. That metamagic feat is already quite good in FK and really doesn't need more utility, at least not in my opinion. I probably wouldn't try using it in D&D without Divine Metamagic, but it's great here. I think it's good as it is now without expanding the "list" of spells that can be affected by it (there's not really a list, they just have to meet the criteria).

I didn't know the duration had gotten decreased, though, likely because I just didn't notice. Does it no longer make the spell last for twenty-four hours?

[Selveem]

Merely that the list of spells it affects might be extended, making it more useful without misuse.

I've seen Persistent Spell getting misused already, though thankfully I haven't seen it in a while. I used to see people settle down, memorize their persisted spells, stand up and cast them, then sit back down to forget those spells and fill the slots back up. If more spells become Persistent Spell compatible, there will undoubtedly be more of that (there certainly won't be any less). While I've never heard that technique called code abuse, it always struck me as a sneaky way to get more spells per day.

For the record, that's not code abuse. It actually IS allowed within D&D, even. "Spells per day" is a bit of simplification on spell restrictions. A wizard can technically cast double their allotted amount per day as long as they have an 8 hour rest in between.

Just so everyone has an understanding as to how spells are recovered, meditate = rest:

To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing her spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells.

[Keltorn]

A wizard can technically cast double their allotted amount per day as long as they have an 8 hour rest in between.

Well, if he's cheating, then sure, he can "technically" do pretty much anything.

Like other spellcasters, a wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. Her base daily spell allotment is given on Table: The Wizard. In addition, she receives bonus spells per day if she has a high Intelligence score.

That's from the class section. It gets repeated in the magic section. The term is "Spells Per Day" for a reason. Obviously, that term doesn't really apply in FK for the same reason characters don't have to sleep.

Of course, if you could trick your DM into allowing you to get away with that trick of yours, it would only leave you six hours out of the day to actually do anything. Better hope your rest doesn't get interrupted!

I'd hate for this to turn into a purely D&D discussion, but cheating in D&D and FK aren't that different. You usually know you're doing something wrong, regardless of whether you manage to convince the DM/IMM of otherwise. That rememorizing-persisted-spell-slots thing is clearly shifty, just like a slothful wizard sleeping sixteen hours a day to double his spells per day, and I can't be the only one that thinks that when I see it. Just because the code (or uninformed DM) lets you do it doesn't mean you should.

[Zorinar]

There is nothing shifty, shady or cheating or semi-cheating by using persist spell then re-memorizing spells to replace them after you have cast them. There should not even be a hint brought up that such a thing is cheating as it is not.

Its an extremely common practice in D&D and FK.

Otherwise.. any time a wizard casts a spell and then meditated to get more spells back is cheating in FK by your definition.

[Keltorn]

Its an extremely common practice in D&D and FK.

Absolutely not. I have never, ever seen that kind of trickery performed in D&D, and I feel I can safely assume you haven't, either. It is not "common practice;" it's not even an effective idea. The Divine Metamagic users would point and laugh at your useless attempts at being competent. I don't know what you're playing, but it clearly isn't 3.5 D&D. Or are you perhaps DMing for yourself? For the reasons I've already pointed out, your self-DMing would be the only way that nonsense fly.

Otherwise.. any time a wizard casts a spell and then meditated to get more spells back is cheating in FK by your definition.

How exactly did you get that "definition" from what I said? Please do not interpet my words as wildly as possible.

Meditating to get back your Magic Missile or Mage Armor is not the same thing at all. When you get them back, you're going to use them in the exact same way again. It is the same as stopping and resting for the night in D&D, the only difference being that resting eight hours, then meditating for another one doesn't work in FK. No one wants to do absolutely nothing for fourty-five minutes of real time.

What I'm talking about is shuffling your spells around so as to be permanently affected by a slew of spells without expending any magical power whatsoever for the day. If this is considered "extremely common practice," that really only further convinces me that Persistent Spell should not work with more spells. Doing so would just mean that buff spells never get prepared again since every spellcaster is already affected by them at all times.

Then again, if the suggested change were to be made, it might be fun to try dispelling people at random. All those spells gone, and completely unable to cast them again.

[Selveem]

Keltorn, I don't fall into your group of proposed code abusers, but I couldn't disagree with your position more.

I don't feel that usage of strawmen and terminology intended to cause FUD is a valid debate. Cite references and original text.

I gave specific source reference for wizards and you countered with divine casters. Divine casters are different from wizards; they often (or all?) have specific times of day that they pray for their prayers to return.

Also, your usage of the word "slew" in reference to the number of spells is inaccurate. Slew refers to "a large number." By comparison, how many spells are eligible for permanent spell for wizards or priests? I am certain if you run the percentage, you'll find that your slew can be diminished to "a meager few."

[Khelebhzed]

Back to the main point, the duration is still 24 in game hours, but it lasted much longer than that before. With the limitation to self spells, and level 3 and under, the list/criteria spells are minimal. Expanding the amount would make it more useful, such as with minor cantrips, even if those added were made to only target the caster.

[Raona]

Different DMs will handle this differently, and a plurality of interpretation does not constitute a definitive judgement. I ask we don't debate about that specific point further, even though it is sanguine here, particularly since some people's tone on that subject is rapidly becoming overly hostile/defensive.

Let's discuss Khelebhzed's specific suggestion and its fit in our game world. Our DM will make a ruling on it if enough people agree this is worth kicking up for consideration. I don't have a wizard, but if the operation of Persistent Spell recently changed, that's probably a good hint as to our DMs take on the way this spell used to operate, viz, it was overpowered. Khelebhzed's suggestion is very appropriate in light thereof, that is, it points out some limitations in the current operation of persistent spell and makes a workable suggestion for a possible revision. This is the sort of thing that will have a chance of getting our DM's consideration.