the golden circke

The world of witchcraft and wizardry has long fascinated readers of all ages. From the classic tales of Hogwarts in the Harry Potter series to the more modern interpretations, such as The Witch's Guide to Self-Care, there is no shortage of books that explore the magical realm. However, not all witch books are created equal. Some are simply inept, lacking in substance, and failing to capture the essence of this enchanting subject matter. One of the most inept witch books I have come across is "The Bumbling Witch," written by an author whose name I shall not mention to spare them further embarrassment. This book attempts to depict a young witch's journey as she stumbles through spells and potions, often with disastrous results.

I smiled to myself at her confusion. Having been stuck in a vast wasteland of desert and mirrors the succubus-witch had dubbed the In-Between for more than a millennium, sometimes Wynne’s understanding of colloquialisms wasn’t up to scratch. I don’t know why I thought it was funny, but I did.

But it had been more weeks than I d like to admit since our kiss and I was tired of waiting for this grown man to figure out what he was going to do with me. By RAW, it works as mentioned in the second reading, so you could get pretty silly with Twin Greater Arcane Fusions if you put enough modifiers to them.

This book attempts to depict a young witch's journey as she stumbles through spells and potions, often with disastrous results. While the intention may have been to create a light-hearted and comedic narrative, it falls flat on its broomstick. The characters lack depth, the humor falls short, and the plot is predictable at best.

Residual magic in the words whispered

Lingering metamagic tactics has wording
" If you cast a spell affected by one or more metamagic feats, and then cast the same spell in the next round, you can apply any one of the metamagic effects from the first casting to the second casting, but without any change to the spell's level".

Normally you casts one spell per round, but there are means to cast more. So I'm wonder how this feat works in such conditions. Either it works on any two subsequent casting even if they occurred in the same round, or it requires specifically a round run between casts. In the latter case would ALL spells casts in the second round benefit from metamagic enhancement from the first round?

Lingering metamagic tactics has wording
" If you cast a spell affected by one or more metamagic feats, and then cast the same spell in the next round, you can apply any one of the metamagic effects from the first casting to the second casting, but without any change to the spell's level".

Normally you casts one spell per round, but there are means to cast more. So I'm wonder how this feat works in such conditions. Either it works on any two subsequent casting even if they occurred in the same round, or it requires specifically a round run between casts. In the latter case would ALL spells casts in the second round benefit from metamagic enhancement from the first round?

By RAW, it works as mentioned in the second reading, so you could get pretty silly with Twin Greater Arcane Fusions if you put enough modifiers to them.

By RAW, it works as mentioned in the second reading, so you could get pretty silly with Twin Greater Arcane Fusions if you put enough modifiers to them.
I agree with this.

By RAW, it works as mentioned in the second reading, so you could get pretty silly with Twin Greater Arcane Fusions if you put enough modifiers to them.
Arcane Fusions usage could give a weird results. That is the direct consequence of dual spell level/slot level conception. If you read original wording, only spell level is what matters, so you could use Arcane Fusion to power twin maximized empowered chain Orb of Force. So the wording was "fixed" in errata.

Shadowcraft mage could be a good example. On the first round he uses metamagic buster to cast heightened to 10th level silent image from the 1st level slot. Divine metamagic, Bardic music metamagic, Incantatrix's instant metamagic, whatever else. He could use his 9th level spell how he wishes. Then in the second round dark magic descends upon mortals. The shadowcraft mage uses first level slot containing Silent Image to shape shadow into the miracle spell. Use miracle spell to mimic 5th level spell Arcane Fusion. Now he could cast two silent illusions each heightened above 9th level. So he could use first one to produce some side-effect and the second one to drive loop further. So the mage could cast infinite amount of spells per round.

The old versions was safer despite granting free metamagic to caster.

Just affirming: it works on a spell cast in the next round, by the RAW. The wording "on this second spell" refers to the counting as given in the feat. "You cast one spell, then another in the next round," the 'second' spell is the one in the next round, because it's the second one mentioned in the antecedent sentence. It doesn't matter if you also cast 12 other spells in the round you cast the "first" spell; the "second spell" referred to is the same spell being cast again in the next round, because "second" is counting the spells as mentioned in the sentence, not the spell(s) you're casting overall.

Just affirming: it works on a spell cast in the next round, by the RAW. The wording "on this second spell" refers to the counting as given in the feat. "You cast one spell, then another in the next round," the 'second' spell is the one in the next round, because it's the second one mentioned in the antecedent sentence. It doesn't matter if you also cast 12 other spells in the round you cast the "first" spell; the "second spell" referred to is the same spell being cast again in the next round, because "second" is counting the spells as mentioned in the sentence, not the spell(s) you're casting overall.

I disagree with your analysis, but even accepting it, I agree with what you say in terms of "a spell" cast on the next round - not as many as you like.

Just affirming: it works on a spell cast in the next round, by the RAW. The wording "on this second spell" refers to the counting as given in the feat. "You cast one spell, then another in the next round," the 'second' spell is the one in the next round, because it's the second one mentioned in the antecedent sentence. It doesn't matter if you also cast 12 other spells in the round you cast the "first" spell; the "second spell" referred to is the same spell being cast again in the next round, because "second" is counting the spells as mentioned in the sentence, not the spell(s) you're casting overall.
Spell application order is not what counted by the "second" spell. Use full wordings "If you cast a spell affected by one or more metamagic feats, and then cast the same spell in the next round". "second" is not the order of spell casting, the word relies to order of if-clause. If-clause depicts situation when two spells are cast. There first spell is defined by "using metamagic", the second spell by "being the same spell as first". So the feat works on any pair of such spells that meets the condition. There is no specific requirements for being exclusively cast spells.

So each time you cast spell check if the condition is fulfilled. Cast first spell in second round. Check condition, it's ok, use feat. Cast second spell in the same round, check condition, use feat, cast third spell, check condition, use feat and so on.

Spell application order is not what counted by the "second" spell. Use full wordings "If you cast a spell affected by one or more metamagic feats, and then cast the same spell in the next round". "second" is not the order of spell casting, the word relies to order of if-clause. If-clause depicts situation when two spells are cast. There first spell is defined by "using metamagic", the second spell by "being the same spell as first". So the feat works on any pair of such spells that meets the condition. There is no specific requirements for being exclusively cast spells.

So each time you cast spell check if the condition is fulfilled. Cast first spell in second round. Check condition, it's ok, use feat. Cast second spell in the same round, check condition, use feat, cast third spell, check condition, use feat and so on.

I think we're in agreement, and you just misparsed what I was saying, since you more or less repeated it in different words (assuming I'm parsing you correctly).

I think we're in agreement, and you just misparsed what I was saying
That was me who misparsed your previous message.

My point is the feat gives many-to-many relation. If any pair of spells matches the if clause, the feat works. If you cast three different spells in the first round and the same spells in the second round then all second round spells get amplified. If you cast one of this spells three times, it would still be amplified three times.

My point is the feat gives many-to-many relation. If any pair of spells matches the if clause, the feat works. If you cast three different spells in the first round and the same spells in the second round then all second round spells get amplified. If you cast one of this spells three times, it would still be amplified three times.
This is also how I read it, for what it's worth.

“I did,” I agreed, turning to meet his now sea-foam green eyes. His wolf was close to the surface, magic flooded his irises with his wolf’s power. That show of power would have worried most people. But not me. I knew in my gut that neither Ev, nor his wolf, would ever hurt me. “I also told you not to wait too long or you might miss your chance.” I was so proud of myself, managing to get the words out without my voice shaking too much. I made my way around him with my shoulders back and my head high, looking to escape as quickly as my two feet would carry me.

Overall, "The Bumbling Witch" feels like a missed opportunity to create an engaging and memorable story about a witch finding her place in the magical world. Another inept witch book that left me disappointed is "The Wicked Witch's Guide to Casting Curses." This book had the potential to delve into the complex moral dilemmas that come with wielding dark magic. Instead, it reads like a superficial guidebook, lacking any depth or nuance. The author fails to explore the consequences of casting curses, instead opting for a simplistic approach that leaves one wondering why anyone would bother with such shallow witchcraft. In contrast to these inept offerings, there are books that brilliantly capture the essence of witchcraft and provide readers with engaging and thought-provoking narratives. One such example is "Practical Magic" by Alice Hoffman. This enchanting tale weaves together themes of love, family, and the power of female intuition. The characters are well-developed, the plot is engaging, and the magical elements are seamlessly integrated into the story. The result is a book that not only entertains but also leaves a lasting impact on the reader. While there are many inept witch books out there, it is important to remember that not all books can be masterpieces. However, it is worth seeking out those gems that truly capture the spirit of witchcraft and provide readers with a truly magical reading experience..

Reviews for "the golden circke"

the golden circke