patang01
04-29-2011, 10:03 AM
I'm fairly sure that this is not the first time someone mentions it and I'm sure it'll require a change in the way meta magi apply but I really don't see a reason why that should be. Unless of course I don't understand the functionality of meta magic other than a divine or arcane user have learned techniques that enhanced the functionality of spells.
Being able to slot say up to 10 spells and decide that 1 particular spells should have empower and maximize and another heighten is a way for caster and divine to tactically decide how they want to play their characters with more flexibility.
Such as I'd love to be able to use cure light mass without empower and maximize since I otherwise waste tons of SP (one full crit with any of them usually heals most fully and adding the meta magic to it is way overkill) and I'd love to be more useful by also adding some offensive spells to the mix, such as perhaps Comet fall or Divine punishment. I obviously want to maximize damage and minimize healing because it's generally more than enough, but if I do I will blow through all my SP.
That means that I have to surrender to one role or another, wasting the effort that I can lend to the group.
And no - I don't want to make a Clonk type build or offensive FvS just to 'lend a hand'. I'd like the flexibility to use divine magic instead, both offensive and supportive rather than narrow the spectrum of what I can do into two types of roles.
Similarly I'm sure Arcane would like that flexibility, such as in ToD part 3 when the arcane casters usually end up having to reconstruct whomever is tanking for optional chest. Or in VoD.
Being able to define how we use our power is a much better way to make us use as many spells as possible in varied ways then forcing it through rebalancing of spells. While I understand why that was done since we asked (and rightly so) to end blank immunities on higher end content, I do believe that allowing a better way to control how we use meta magic on spells promotes less gold standard builds and more inventive ways of getting things done.
Being able to slot say up to 10 spells and decide that 1 particular spells should have empower and maximize and another heighten is a way for caster and divine to tactically decide how they want to play their characters with more flexibility.
Such as I'd love to be able to use cure light mass without empower and maximize since I otherwise waste tons of SP (one full crit with any of them usually heals most fully and adding the meta magic to it is way overkill) and I'd love to be more useful by also adding some offensive spells to the mix, such as perhaps Comet fall or Divine punishment. I obviously want to maximize damage and minimize healing because it's generally more than enough, but if I do I will blow through all my SP.
That means that I have to surrender to one role or another, wasting the effort that I can lend to the group.
And no - I don't want to make a Clonk type build or offensive FvS just to 'lend a hand'. I'd like the flexibility to use divine magic instead, both offensive and supportive rather than narrow the spectrum of what I can do into two types of roles.
Similarly I'm sure Arcane would like that flexibility, such as in ToD part 3 when the arcane casters usually end up having to reconstruct whomever is tanking for optional chest. Or in VoD.
Being able to define how we use our power is a much better way to make us use as many spells as possible in varied ways then forcing it through rebalancing of spells. While I understand why that was done since we asked (and rightly so) to end blank immunities on higher end content, I do believe that allowing a better way to control how we use meta magic on spells promotes less gold standard builds and more inventive ways of getting things done.