Metamagics.

[Cartheron]

I hate to use PnP as an example, but Empower and Maximize used to simply increase the level of the spell (when spells were limited in numbers remembered). In DDO terms this would probably be +5 SP and +10SP.

In PnP empower is +2 spell level and maximize is +3 spell level which translates to +10 and +15sp, but here those feats have much bigger impact - in PnP maximize is less than double damage (because average 1d6 result is 3,5 not 3), and in DDO most spells use weighted dice, so translating maximize as max dice result would give only about 30% increase in damage.

Inability to efficiently use maximize and empower on low levels is very PnP too - you have to be lev 5 to be able to maximize a cantrip, lev 7 to maximize magic missile - so you will waste a highest level slot to cast basicaly useless spell. It starts making any sense at higher levels and with some PrE (yes I know, damage casting in PnP is pointless anyway), exactly as here.

[pjw]

In PnP ... translates to +10 and +15sp,
...
Inability to efficiently use maximize and empower on low levels is very PnP too

OK, I'd be happy with:

Empower +25% (min. +5, if you want to make it unfriendly to lower levels)
Maximize +50% (min. +10, if you want to make it unfriendly to lower levels)

I suggested +5/+10 because so many spells are now quite cheap.

The key point here is that Max/Emp have been completely ignored in the spell pass, and they are *feats* and should be balanced against the spells they affect to ensure that they still provide an advantage to a player. As it stands now all they will do is help casters get into kill counts at the expense of wasting SP. Yay.

While a 3rd level spell like Frost Lance now costs 10sp, I would expect that spending a *feat* to double the damage of my spells should absolutely not make it cost 3.5 times its base cost. Same for Scorching Ray, Burning Blood etc etc.

[Malky]

Firewall went UP to 35SP I think; under this system Max/Emp would be slightly cheaper.

It went down again to 25sp when it got capped @ CL 15 in the u9 release notes

[Lycurgus]

Of course then, caster DPS would sky rocket; but then again, isn't that part of what this update is supposed to aiming for anyways?

I don't think that is actually what this update is aiming to accomplish. This is coming from the perspective of an enchantment AM, but the primary goal seems to be to increase the frequency of casting. Between the reduced duration of spells, the addition of savant sla-s, and the loss of extend as a feat for many casters, the Vision(tm) seems to be for casters to constantly be producing rather impressive looking, if ineffectual, graphical effects.

DPM may go up, if you can convince your party members to sit in a corner while you spam sla-s and un-metaed polar rays. Skyrocketing DPS, though? Not bloody likely.

[talyor]

4 SP Burning Hands.
29 SP Burning Hands Maximized.

Am I the only who sees the unreasonability in the above two statements?

Actually this is a poor example because most casters do not take maximize at early levels and by the time you do you wont be using burning hands anyways. I think maximize and heighten are fine the way they are and cannot be judged versus the devs random spell cost changes (because a cheaper spell cost plus the same price meta still equals cheaper overall). Heck you can now fire 2 maximized polar rays for 10 sp more than 1 with the old system!!!!! I always thought they worked very well it was a nice curve (for maximize)expensive below spell lvl 4 break even at spell lvl 4 and paying off on any spell lvls higher than 4. The way to actually fix them is not really a fix but to add the ability to set meta's per spell.

[kcru]

I don't think that is actually what this update is aiming to accomplish. This is coming from the perspective of an enchantment AM, but the primary goal seems to be to increase the frequency of casting. .

My take is that they're trying to make a larger number of spells balanced with regards to SP/damage, whether they're persistant or one-off effects. Extend for persistant damage throws that balance off, so they did away with it. Maximize and such throw it off for one-off effects somewhat too. The devs stated that they were looking at the metamagic thing, but there wasn't time to get it into this update. Probably at some point the costs will be reduced somewhat to make it more appealling to use metamagics on the one-shot spells, not just persistant spells, so that the efficiency remains somewhat balanced.

[Kriogen]

... The way to actually fix them is not really a fix but to add the ability to set meta's per spell.

Yes please.

[Malison]

Flat rates made sense when spell point costs were adjusted by level, it cost a rough equivalent to the level adjustment from pnp. Now that spell costs have been determined by /roll 1d100...
Make metamagics increase spell point cost by a percentage, instead of a flat out rate.

Or, preferably, let us apply them to individual spells instead of everything we cast.

[talyor]

I agree that the metamagics need to be tweaked, due to the new spell base costs. The fact that a Frost Lance heightened to level 8 costs significantly more than polar ray (Or multiple polar rays) should be an indicator that there is a problem.

The problem isnt that a hieghtened frost lace cost more than a polar ray. it is that polar ray was reduced to be less because now that the devs have ramdomized spell points thru out the lvls the only thing that spell lvls are good for is calculating DC's. Heightend was particularly affected but not really just because it is supposed to bring a spell up in dc to be = to a spell of your hieghest castable lvl and to cost the same sp as that heighest castable spell which it does according to the the sp formula for sp per spell lvl. So lets all stop complaining about the metas as they havent changed and are working correctly and just be happy with alot of spells costing less than before. Even with metas the way they are we are still coming out way ahead.

[Artagon]

I think what we need to remember when we are talking about these feats is that in PnP the feats worked very differently. Empower was indeed 1.5x the damage dice, but Maximize simply caused max damage on each die rolled, not really double damage, but consistent damage. As such, we really can't compare the spell point costs very accurately. That being said, I think the balance should be placed based upon the dev calculation of SP for AoE DoT spells. If we look at WoF, we see that they have calculated it at 5sp + 5sp/lvl of spell = 25 sp.. this would put empower, which is +2 spell lvl in PnP, at +10 sp. Maximize, which is +3 spell levels in PnP would be +15 sp. Of course, if we're going to do that.. we might as well arbitrarily change the way devs did Quicken, because hey, in PnP quicken was +4 spell lvls, so it would be +20 sp per cast.. and heighten would remain at +5 sp/lvl.

Sure, metamagics are less efficient on some spells, but we are all getting +25% spells (estimated) due to the overall cost reduction in spells, even with the inefficient metamagics. And do we really want to reduce the cost of them so much that people can have max/empowered scorching ray all day long due to Echoes?

[mournbladereigns]

You can cast it once for double damage if you need to wipe stuff out RIGHT NOW.

Or you can cast it 7 times for regular damage if you want to be point efficient.

Choice is yours.

The choice is also yours to not take Maximize at such a low level. You eat your SP bar too fast. It's a much more sensible feat to use at higher levels.

The larger problem than the cost of Maximize is how impractical it is to turn it on and off when you need to. The devs have indicated that they are looking into a system which will allow you to customize your metamagics a bit better. I'm hoping it will be soon.

That is the most punishing thing to the changes in meta's, configuring them is way to clunky and slow to make it easy to do, outside of before fights.

[Saravis]

Its been said already but it bears repeating. I agree that the metamagics need tweaking, however the argument in support of this has been blown way out of proportion. To use any spell, lvls 1-3, metas should not be an efficient approach. Low level arcanes should not be using damage metas for anything except boss fights. With pre-U9 sp cost, maximize wasn't efficient until lvl 4 spells and empower wasn't efficient until lvl 5 spells.

So for this argument to have any validity only base the tweaking of metas on spells lvl 4 and up, nothing below.

[richieelias27]

OK, I'd be happy with:

Empower +25% (min. +5, if you want to make it unfriendly to lower levels)
Maximize +50% (min. +10, if you want to make it unfriendly to lower levels)

I suggested +5/+10 because so many spells are now quite cheap.

The key point here is that Max/Emp have been completely ignored in the spell pass, and they are *feats* and should be balanced against the spells they affect to ensure that they still provide an advantage to a player. As it stands now all they will do is help casters get into kill counts at the expense of wasting SP. Yay.

While a 3rd level spell like Frost Lance now costs 10sp, I would expect that spending a *feat* to double the damage of my spells should absolutely not make it cost 3.5 times its base cost. Same for Scorching Ray, Burning Blood etc etc.

There is one major problem with giving a flat % increase on spell costs with empower and maximize, and of course also some major issues with the metamagics as they currently stand. Obviously they are re-thinking the way it all works, which I think is positive, and they're currently in the beginning phases of some sort of transition.

The problem with flat % increases is that it eliminates the fact that metamagics are supposed to be more efficient as spell levels increase according to DDO's original formula of adding a given number of SP which roughly represented a spell level increase. Eventually you would <break even> or get an increase in efficiency as the level of your spell got higher. A flat % would cause all spells to be equally inefficient.

With the previous system, one spell level was exactly 5sp. Now they've changed this, and hopefully they'll take a look at metamagics to compensate.

Ideally I would like to see metamagics applicable to each spell via your spell book, allowing you to have burning hands selected in a level 1 slot for 4sp, selected in a level 3 slot (empowered +2 levels) for 12sp, and again in a level 4 slot (maximized +3 levels) for 16sp (or 20sp since it does more than just max damage). In addition to that give all *memorization based* classes (Cleric, Wizard, Ranger, Paladin) 1 or 2 additional slots per level. Sorcs and Favored Souls can meta all spells *at will* and do not take up additional slots. This does however mean that you will no longer be able to empower anything beyond level 7, and wont be able to maximize anything beyond level 6, just as in PnP (And make empower +2 leves instead of 3, Maximize +3 instead of 5). They would likely have to re-adjust much of the upper tier costs and damage to compensate (like removing damage die caps for instance)

Naturally that option is pretty darned convoluted and so will probably not happen. Still, one can dream.

More likely what you'll see is a new method for Metamagics - metacost = metalevel*(spell cost / spell level). For instance - burning hands is level 1 and costs 4sp. Empower is metalevel 2 in DDO (10 + 5 = 2nd level spell), so 2*(4/1) making empower for burning hands cost 8 additional sp. Maximize is meta level 4 (10 + 15 = 4th level spell) in DDO so 4*(4/1) would be +16sp.
With that system burning hands is 5x normal cost maximized for double damage, while something like Polar Ray is 4*(20/8), 10sp extra for a total of 30sp maximized. A 50% cost increase for double damage (roughly the same as currently on live).

[Mjesko]

I think it would help to balance the metamagics if the cost of Empower is reduced to 8 sp and the cost of Maximize is reduced to 16 sp.

[Brennie]

(...)

The problem with flat % increases is that it eliminates the fact that metamagics are supposed to be more efficient as spell levels increase according to DDO's original formula of adding a given number of SP which roughly represented a spell level increase. Eventually you would <break even> or get an increase in efficiency as the level of your spell got higher. A flat % would cause all spells to be equally inefficient.

(...)

This is an excellent point, and something that i tried to reflect in my crazy math post earlier. At certain spell levels, metamagics should become ATLEAST spellpoint neutral, if not spellpoint efficient.

(...)

More likely what you'll see is a new method for Metamagics - metacost = metalevel*(spell cost / spell level). For instance - burning hands is level 1 and costs 4sp. Empower is metalevel 2 in DDO (10 + 5 = 2nd level spell), so 2*(4/1) making empower for burning hands cost 8 additional sp. Maximize is meta level 4 (10 + 15 = 4th level spell) in DDO so 4*(4/1) would be +16sp.
With that system burning hands is 5x normal cost maximized for double damage, while something like Polar Ray is 4*(20/8), 10sp extra for a total of 30sp maximized. A 50% cost increase for double damage (roughly the same as currently on live).

(...)

This suggestion sounds strikingly familiar to the suggestion i made earlier HERE

[Mjesko]

This suggestion sounds strikingly familiar to the suggestion i made earlier HERE

I think it would be easier for the devs if Empower and Maximize have a cost regardless of the spell level. That is the reason why i suggested 8 sp for Empower and 16 sp for Maximize. Every enhancement could reduce the cost of Empower by 1 sp and the cost of Maximize by 2 sp.

[Cartheron]

I think it would be easier for the devs if Empower and Maximize have a cost regardless of the spell level. That is the reason why i suggested 8 sp for Empower and 16 sp for Maximize. Every enhancement could reduce the cost of Empower by 1 sp and the cost of Maximize by 2 sp.

Or maybe we will just make them free?

Current cost of maximize: 25 - 4 (epic ornamented dagger,everyone has that) - 6 Improved Maximize II (reasonable investment) - 1 (optional - wiz capstone) = 15 or 14 sp.

Current cost of empower: 15 - 4 (Improved Empowering II) - 2 (item, skiver for example) - 1 (wiz capstone) = 9 or 8sp.

You can go crazy and lower those values to 12/11 and 7/6 if you really want that.

I am all for metamagic applied to every spell separately, but lowering cost of metamagics after lowering cost of most spells is like giving us big sp pool increase. Why? This game is already easy.

And btw, currently items with improved mximize give -2sp per tier, with improved empower -1sp per tier. In you version, they should both give -1sp/tier or stay as they are?

If they stay, cost of maximize with II tiers of ench would be 8, empower 4. If they would be both 1/tier maximize jumps to 10sp, but this require changing items.

Either way, maximize already is improving damage/sp ratio on most spells you want to use it on.

I dont get it why if something cost 80 (40+40), devs change it to cost 60 (20+40) everyone think that they should further improve it to 40 (20+20).

Maybe just remowe all this sp nonsence and be limited only by cooldowns? /sarcasm off

[Mjesko]

I am all for metamagic applied to every spell separately, but lowering cost of metamagics after lowering cost of most spells is like giving us big sp pool increase. Why? This game is already easy.

And btw, currently items with improved mximize give -2sp per tier, with improved empower -1sp per tier. In you version, they should both give -1sp/tier or stay as they are?

If they stay, cost of maximize with II tiers of ench would be 8, empower 4. If they would be both 1/tier maximize jumps to 10sp, but this require changing items.

The reason for lowering the cost is to improve the power of damage spells and to balance the costs of spells and metamagics.

The reduction of items should remain at 1 sp / 2 sp per tier, because a cost of 3 sp for Empower (8 base - 3 enhancements - 2 items) and 6 sp for Maximize (16 base - 6 enhancements - 4 items) is balanced for a character with the feat, the enhancement and the item.

[Cartheron]

The reason for lowering the cost is to improve the power of damage spells and to balance the costs of spells and metamagics.

The reduction of items should remain at 1 sp / 2 sp per tier, because a cost of 3 sp for Empower (8 base - 3 enhancements - 2 items) and 6 sp for Maximize (16 base - 6 enhancements - 4 items) is balanced for a character with the feat, the enhancement and the item.

Ok, I have lost you here. So, for spells with base cost 20sp (like polar ray, our favourite boss killer) turning on maximize and empower should be not only 2,5 times dps increase, but it should be a major sp boost too? I think you ask for far too much.

[Mjesko]

Ok, I have lost you here. So, for spells with base cost 20sp (like polar ray, our favourite boss killer) turning on maximize and empower should be not only 2,5 times dps increase, but it should be a major sp boost too? I think you ask for far too much.

Polar Ray:
45 sp base + 25 sp Maximize + 15 sp Empower = 85 sp
20 sp base + 16 sp Maximize + 8 sp Empower = 44 sp

The base cost of Polar Ray is reduced to 44 %, the cost of Maximize would be reduced to 64 % and the cost of Empower would be reduced to 53 %. That means the damage boost of Empower and Maximize compared to the sp cost is roughly the same as before.