PDA

View Full Version : Born of Three Thunders + Immunity to Daze



Boci
2010-04-25, 10:53 PM
Do you personally consider the above combo as cheesy or is it acceptable for a blasting sorceror to use?

Abd al-Azrad
2010-04-25, 11:37 PM
I hate to take this position, because I'm somewhat of a fan of badass optimization in my own characters, but immunity to Daze is really one of those effects that RAI seems to suggest shouldn't exist, and the occasional (VERY occasional) ability that grants immunity seem to be poorly thought out. The obvious abuse of Daze immunity comes with Celerity, but this is a similarly awesome/broken abuse of action economy.

I really wouldn't feel as strongly about min-maxing and finding ways to cover your weaknesses if the issue wasn't action economy. This is a combo that removes actions from an entire enemy party at no cost, and can easily be spammed. Actions are the most valuable resource in D&D. 'Broken' may not be the word to describe your combo here, but it really does mess up the mechanics of combat in your favour, more than most attacks are capable of. I'd personally feel bad about using it, which indicates a high level of cheese.

I suppose I am a bit lactose intolerant.

arguskos
2010-04-25, 11:48 PM
Born of the Three Thunders is one of the rare metamagic feats I don't permit, just because it's too powerful and easy to abuse. Combine with an AoE electricity damage effect, or a continuous electricity damage effect, and it just gets stupidly ugly really fast. :smallyuk:

ShneekeyTheLost
2010-04-26, 12:10 AM
Easiest way to be immune to daze would be the Template Shuffle. Specifically: Necropolitian

Divide by Zero
2010-04-26, 12:15 AM
Easiest way to be immune to daze would be the Template Shuffle. Specifically: Necropolitian

Undead are immune to stunning, not dazing. Unless I missed something, no type gives immunity to dazing.

arguskos
2010-04-26, 12:16 AM
Undead are immune to stunning, not dazing. Unless I missed something, no type gives immunity to dazing.
Correct. I believe the primary method of daze immunity is getting access to Favor of the Martyr and going from there.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-26, 12:20 AM
Correct. I believe the primary method of daze immunity is getting access to Favor of the Martyr and going from there.

There's also a Dragonmark-related feat in one of the Eberron books, if I'm not mistaken, and an item or two that does it a couple of times per day.

Runestar
2010-04-26, 02:10 AM
Considering how rare daze immunity is, I see no reason to ban it, since acquiring it is already half the challenge (and I don't use eberron material). :smallamused:

Myou
2010-04-26, 05:31 AM
Considering how rare daze immunity is, I see no reason to ban it, since acquiring it is already half the challenge (and I don't use eberron material). :smallamused:

One spell. Zero challenge. And it's in the SpC too.

Runestar
2010-04-26, 06:13 AM
One spell. Zero challenge. And it's in the SpC too.

I see they have changed it from a favoured of ilmater4 spell (in player's guide to faerun) to paladin4 spell.:smallannoyed:

Still, that means it isn't available until lv14, and even then, a paladin can't afford to constantly keep it up on you. I suppose the wizard could craft a wand of it to use though...

Boci
2010-04-26, 06:14 AM
Born of the Three Thunders is one of the rare metamagic feats I don't permit, just because it's too powerful and easy to abuse. Combine with an AoE electricity damage effect, or a continuous electricity damage effect, and it just gets stupidly ugly really fast. :smallyuk:

So you wouldn't alloe it even without any protection against the dazing affect?

Boci
2010-04-26, 06:19 AM
I really wouldn't feel as strongly about min-maxing and finding ways to cover your weaknesses if the issue wasn't action economy.

So what if I just took quick recovery and boosted my will save?

Myou
2010-04-26, 06:21 AM
I see they have changed it from a favoured of ilmater4 spell (in player's guide to faerun) to paladin4 spell.:smallannoyed:

Still, that means it isn't available until lv14, and even then, a paladin can't afford to constantly keep it up on you. I suppose the wizard could craft a wand of it to use though...

Or the Archivist, or the Artificier. :smallsmile:

Runestar
2010-04-26, 06:38 AM
Or the Archivist, or the Artificier. :smallsmile:

Yes...I remember now why wotc apparently gave up trying to balance 3.5 material altogether. It just wasn't worth the effort...:smallsigh:

Myou
2010-04-26, 06:57 AM
Yes...I remember now why wotc apparently gave up trying to balance 3.5 material altogether. It just wasn't worth the effort...:smallsigh:

They never tried to begin with. :smalltongue:

Person_Man
2010-04-26, 08:28 AM
There's also the Quick Recovery feat from Lords of Madness, which lets you recover from a Daze effect as a Move Action, or Iron Heart Surge, which can end anything as a Standard Action. But the general intent of Daze effects is that nothing is immune to them, which is why Daze effects are so powerful and (comparatively) rare.

Divide by Zero
2010-04-26, 09:30 AM
There's also the Quick Recovery feat from Lords of Madness, which lets you recover from a Daze effect as a Move Action, or Iron Heart Surge, which can end anything as a Standard Action. But the general intent of Daze effects is that nothing is immune to them, which is why Daze effects are so powerful and (comparatively) rare.

Iron Heart Surge isn't much help. You need to take an action to use a maneuver, and since most daze effects are only one round, spending an action to gain the use of that action is...of questionable benefit, if it were even legal to begin with.

Boci
2010-04-26, 11:51 AM
There's also a Dragonmark-related feat in one of the Eberron books, if I'm not mistaken, and an item or two that does it a couple of times per day.

Mark of the Dauntless, although I'm not quite sure what the preq of any true dragonmark means.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-04-26, 12:15 PM
Mark of the Dauntless, although I'm not quite sure what the preq of any true dragonmark means.

You need the Least Dragonmark (any) feat, and can't qualify with Aberrant Dragonmark.

Ganurath
2010-04-26, 12:20 PM
I find the easiest way to get immunity to daze is to already be dazed. For example, using Celerity to cast a Born of Three Thunders Explosive Electric Fireball, following up with a second BoTTEEF with a standard action. You have three things saying you'll be dazed next turn, so unless they stack for duration... Arcane Thesis FTW?

Yukitsu
2010-04-26, 12:26 PM
Born of the Three Thunders is one of the rare metamagic feats I don't permit, just because it's too powerful and easy to abuse. Combine with an AoE electricity damage effect, or a continuous electricity damage effect, and it just gets stupidly ugly really fast. :smallyuk:

By my reading of born of three thunders, it only has a thunderclap when the effect ends. It says "In addition, the spell concludes with a mighty thunderclap that stuns all creatures that take damage from the spell..." emphasis on concludes. It's a lot less broken that way.

Eldonauran
2010-04-26, 12:31 PM
As a DM, I am a strong advocate for enforcing the sacrifice payments of spells or abilities. If you can't pay, you don't get to use the benefit. If you are immune to the effect and still want to use the ability/spell, we come up with an payment that is equal in its drawback.

No strongheart vests or bindings to take away your CON damage from hellfire warlock. No celerity shinanigans or bypassing the daze effects from born of three thunders.

If you play differently, glad you are having fun.

Yukitsu
2010-04-26, 12:32 PM
No strongheart vests or bindings to take away your CON damage from hellfire warlock.

The binder payment is paying the cost then healing it, as they have fast heal for stats. They are still affected by the effect. That's like saying a hellfire warlock can't have a cleric cast restoration on them.

Edit: Oh right, they both do that.

Heliomance
2010-04-26, 12:35 PM
Strongheart vests don't remove the CON damage. Hellfire warlock specifically states that if you're immune to the con damage it has no effect. Strongheart vests heal the con damage.

Pechvarry
2010-04-26, 12:37 PM
I suppose this feat has been discussed to death elsewhere in the vast interwebs, but it looks like it only knocks prone those who are stunned. This means the vast array of monsters that are immune to critical hits (which tend to also be immune to stunning) will simply take damage. They won't even be bowled over.

Seems like this combo would just make your DM turn every story arc into an undead hunt.

It's also rather weak to Evasion. Expect groups of assassins to be sent after the PCs... a lot. High reflex save + evasion > take no damage > no need to make three thunder saves.

Edit>> Doesn't Strongheart vest effectively give you "con damage reduction"? Like "any effect that lowers your CON score lowers it by 2 less than normal" or something? So it doesn't make you immune to con damage (so technically, you can hellfire away), but it just so happens to reduce the hellfire penalty to 0 con damage. To which many DMs say "you were immune to that use, so you get no benefit".

Boci
2010-04-26, 12:43 PM
Seems like this combo would just make your DM turn every story arc into an undead hunt.

I don't play with jerk DMs.


It's also rather weak to Evasion. Expect groups of assassins to be sent after the PCs... a lot. High reflex save + evasion > take no damage > no need to make three thunder saves.

That's why you need to have at least 1 orb spell.


As a DM, I am a strong advocate for enforcing the sacrifice payments of spells or abilities. If you can't pay, you don't get to use the benefit. If you are immune to the effect and still want to use the ability/spell, we come up with an payment that is equal in its drawback.

No strongheart vests or bindings to take away your CON damage from hellfire warlock. No celerity shinanigans or bypassing the daze effects from born of three thunders.

If you play differently, glad you are having fun.

I can understand this aproach, but it assumes that,
a. WotC knows how to balance things, which they do not always. Most posters agree for example that dodging the cost for hell fire is not broken, but few will say so for celerity.
b. Characters have absolutly no idea about what price they pay. Personally I feel the they would be able know, and thus could research a method to become immune.

Ganurath
2010-04-26, 12:46 PM
It's also rather weak to Evasion. Expect groups of assassins to be sent after the PCs... a lot. High reflex save + evasion > take no damage > no need to make three thunder saves.Deafening is a Fortitude save, and if you combine it with Explosive Spell thanks to Arcane Thesis you're forcing multiple Reflex saves per casting. By sheer attrition, there'll be a low roll on a Reflex save eventually. Even if not, the deafening would rob the stealthy characters of their ability to coordinate with one another and be aware of one another. Plus, they can't hear themselves very well either, so that's arguably a Move Silently penalty.

Eldonauran
2010-04-26, 12:51 PM
Strongheart vests heal the con damage.

As far as I am aware, strongheart vest prevents con damage (or reduces it by 2). I see no mention of healing that damage. I am away from my books right now, so if I am wrong, please provide quoted source.

If one was to say its instantly healed as part of the effect of the vest, I would argue that the damage never occured and the price not paid. But this is beside the point. The sacrifice must have some sort of noticable effect on the character (and I consider loss of HP for a good portion of a battle due to CON loss, a noticable effect) or they don't get to use the ability. If a cleric wants to spend 3 round (lesser restoration or restoration w/ 100gp extra) or 10 minutes to take care of that damage for you, I consider it a fair price since it uses part of the WBL or daily resources to counteract.

As for the binding, I'll re-address that at the table.


I can understand this aproach, but it assumes that,
a. WotC knows how to balance things, which they do not always. Most posters agree for example that dodging the cost for hell fire is not broken, but few will say so for celerity.
b. Characters have absolutly no idea about what price they pay. Personally I feel the they would be able know, and thus could research a method to become immune.

A) I agree but my judgement isn't based on purely mechanics. You make a deal with something to gain power at a cost. If you are able to wiggle out of making that payment, that 'something' gets wise and refuses to provide that power until payment is made. Its simple. You don't pay, you don't get want you bargained for.

B) See A. Should that character have made the deal, they will know (at least in my games) that if you don't pay, the 'something-providing-that-power' won't provide the goods. You can still get around the payment, using other resources, but you won't get away without paying the initial cost.

jiriku
2010-04-26, 01:19 PM
+1 vote for cheese. Most any effect that removes the cost of power is cheese. That's why people cry boo at the incantatrix, the dweomerkeeper, the cheater of mystra, and their ilk. Now, classes and effects like those are welcome at my table, and as the DM I relish the challenge of providing adventures for parties that use those options. But my enjoyment of the cheese doesn't change the fact that it is cheese.

absolmorph
2010-04-26, 01:27 PM
+1 vote for cheese. Most any effect that removes the cost of power is cheese. That's why people cry boo at the incantatrix, the dweomerkeeper, the cheater of mystra, and their ilk. Now, classes and effects like those are welcome at my table, and as the DM I relish the challenge of providing adventures for parties that use those options. But my enjoyment of the cheese doesn't change the fact that it is cheese.
This is my stance, too. I would let my players use a lot of the cheesier builds on here, so long as they don't step on other people's toes.
This is a bit cheesy, though.

Boci
2010-04-26, 01:28 PM
A) I agree but my judgement isn't based on purely mechanics. You make a deal with something to gain power at a cost. If you are able to wiggle out of making that payment, that 'something' gets wise and refuses to provide that power until payment is made. Its simple. You don't pay, you don't get want you bargained for.

That your interpretation though, and it does fit for some powers like the hellfire warlock, but born of three thunders? Whatever dazes you does not sound aware to me, its just a massive surge of power that you can protect yourself from.
And as others have said, a binder/hellfire warlock does pay the price, he just regains it instantly afterwards. In practice he doesn't feel the affect of paying the price, but he has never-the-less.

Akal Saris
2010-04-26, 01:39 PM
Eh, I think it's a good combination, but I'd allow it in my games for a sorcerer, assuming the other PCs are also relatively optimized.

You're going to be spending 4 feats minimum (Least Dragonmark, Mark of the Dauntless, Energy Substitution, BoTT) and 4 cross-class skill ranks for knowledge (nature) 4 ranks, so a non-human sorcerer won't even get there until 9th level - and by then blasting is hardly the best use of your actions. Especially as a full round action without more feats to get metamagic casting speed lowered.

Alternatively you could try and get Favor of the Martyr, that paladin spell, which either means lots of cross-class skill ranks in UMD to hit the DC ~34 scroll check, or dipping paladin. And using lots of scrolls or buying a wand would be generally more expensive in my games, especially for a rare spell such as this, unless you were in Sigil or similar metropolis.

As other have mentioned, the effect stuns - so constructs, undead, plants, elementals, and oozes are immune to that effect and therefore the prone effect that follows. That's a large enough list that the tactic won't be effective half the time even if I'm running a module. It also targets Fort, which is usually the best monster save.

As Yukitsu notes, the thunderclap that stuns is at the end of the spell effect, so if you use it on Call Lightning, only the last bolt will stun. But all of the previous bolts will also benefit from being half sonic, which is nice.

Also, Energy Admixture goes well with this, since it shares a spell prerequisite. You could also combine this with 5 levels in Stormcaster, so that every sonic/lightning spell forces two saves against stunning =P

So yeah - powerful combination, but it won't break the game as badly as most of these players seem to think it will.

Yukitsu
2010-04-26, 01:41 PM
As Yukitsu notes, the thunderclap that stuns is at the end of the spell effect, so if you use it on Call Lightning, only the last bolt will stun. But all of the previous bolts will also benefit from being half sonic, which is nice.



Actually, technically even more absurdly, the thunderclap at the end effects anyone that was ever damaged by the spell effect. Does this make it more broken? Not really. It simply means it functions on a duration spell as well as it does a lightning ball.

Eldonauran
2010-04-26, 01:41 PM
That your interpretation though, and it does fit for some powers like the hellfire warlock, but born of three thunders? Whatever dazes you does not sound aware to me, its just a massive surge of power that you can protect yourself from.

Well, I can see your point with the dazing not being aware. I still feel strongly that players should not be able to get around certain costs, especially when the cost is a by-product of using a feat/spell/ability that is obviously more powerful than other choices available to them, even if they spent considerable resources in getting the ability. I would still require them to pay the price, though maybe delay the onset of the daze or substitute a different payment cost should the character truly wish to ignore the daze effect. Temporary deafness or numbness that interfers with spellcasting for the next round (spell failure chance for somatic components, for instance) or maybe even a penalty to their spellcasting stat for the rest of the encounter duration.

I would most certainly rule the daze duration of BoTT + Celerity stack, if this ever came up in my game.


And as others have said, a binder/hellfire warlock does pay the price, he just regains it instantly afterwards. In practice he doesn't feel the affect of paying the price, but he has never-the-less.

With the strong heart vest, unless his hitpoint actually drop and then rise instantly (ie, still let's him 'die' if his hitpoint drop enough) then he doesn't suffer the effects for any measurable time. Otherwise, this is arguing semantics.

As for the binding, as I said, I will have to readdress it. The inclusion of a third entity in the agreement between player and 'hellfire warlock' ability might cause some non-mechanical problems. Not sure how the demon/devil will take to a third entity interferring. Besides, as above, if the warlock doesn't take an HP hit for any measurable time, he did not suffer the effects. That would be my ruling on it. I'll just need to do some more research on the subject. I am fair in my rulings. My players would have revolted long ago it not.

Abd al-Azrad
2010-04-26, 05:41 PM
So what if I just took quick recovery and boosted my will save?

I do find this a lot less stinky- a certainly palatable cheese. Your enemies make a (probably high-DC) Fort save to act next round, and you make the same high-DC Will save to do the same. In fact, I'd call that a fair trade. You keep enough risk to make it not ridiculous, it costs you a feat... I like it.


You're going to be spending 4 feats minimum (Least Dragonmark, Mark of the Dauntless, Energy Substitution, BoTT) and 4 cross-class skill ranks for knowledge (nature) 4 ranks, so a non-human sorcerer won't even get there until 9th level - and by then blasting is hardly the best use of your actions. Especially as a full round action without more feats to get metamagic casting speed lowered.

But the OP is, very clearly, not just blasting. This is a powerful area attack debuff that removes actions from an entire enemy party, and very likely it will be cast as a standard action (come on, if you're already a metamagic-focused sorcerer, you're going all the way with it). Yes, it certainly costs feats. Because it is the build.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-04-26, 06:11 PM
Do you personally consider the above combo as cheesy

"Cheesy" is a horrendously ill-defined word and any answer I could give would be painfully subjective and arbitrary. Ask your GM; his/her opinion is the only one that matters

Akal Saris
2010-04-26, 06:16 PM
And I'm saying: so what? A spellcaster can pour 4 feats into just about anything metamagic-related and do something faintly cool with it. The sorcerer could raise his spell DCs by 6 with those 4 feats instead, or cast quickened orbs of fire with +1 metamagic cost, or make twinned echoing fell drain magic missiles, or save 4 feats and just cast aoe save-or-suck damaging spells like evard's black tentacles, cyclonic blast (SpC), prismatic ray, howling chain, etc.

Compared with all the options a sorcerer has, 4 feats on making an AOE damage spell have a chance to stun opponents vulnerable to that effect just isn't that broken in my opinion. Odds are that some of the opponents will be immune to the effect, or will make one or both saves. It's good, but it's not broken.

(Celerity, with or without daze, on the other hand...)

sofawall
2010-04-26, 07:29 PM
I am fair in my rulings. My players would have revolted long ago it not.

I am Godwin's Lawing you, sir. I also seem to recall a comic saying something along the lines of "If you can compare you opponent to Hitler, you win", but I cannot find it. I strange feeling it was xkcd.

Anyway, Binder provides fast healing for ability scores. They suffer it for 1 full round. If 1 full round was not measurable and didn't count, well, golly, all my spells would last forever!

Eldonauran
2010-04-26, 07:51 PM
I am Godwin's Lawing you, sir. I also seem to recall a comic saying something along the lines of "If you can compare you opponent to Hitler, you win", but I cannot find it. I strange feeling it was xkcd.

:smallannoyed: And your point? This has little bearing on anything aside from me considering myself fair. So I called myself fair. Big deal. Likes that's a crime. :smallwink:


Anyway, Binder provides fast healing for ability scores. They suffer it for 1 full round. If 1 full round was not measurable and didn't count, well, golly, all my spells would last forever!

Since they suffer the effect, I have no problem with it, since they paid the cost, aside from what I called before... 'a non-mechnical problem'. I did say I would have to address the binding situation again at the table. I have not yet had that chance.

sofawall
2010-04-26, 08:01 PM
:smallannoyed: And your point? This has little bearing on anything aside from me considering myself fair. So I called myself fair. Big deal. Likes that's a crime. :smallwink:

Moreso, it was you saying you were fair because your players haven't rebelled. Hitler was not fair. Germany (by and large) by not revolt.

Runestar
2010-04-26, 08:13 PM
And your point? This has little bearing on anything aside from me considering myself fair. So I called myself fair. Big deal. Likes that's a crime.

I think the point is more that other groups may not necessarily share your definition of just what "fair" constitutes. I feel you are right in explaining clearly your stance as to why you feel the drawback of using born of 3 thunders should not be circumvented under any circumstances. I do not think it is proper to imply that yours is the one right interpretation which everyone ought to abide by because you deem yourself a fair DM. Just because.

For example, I for one know of DMs who frown upon multiclassing, or enforce prcs very stringently. Personally, I could care less. If you need to multiclass aggressively to flesh out a certain concept better, go ahead by all means. Take 2-3 classes and 3-4 prcs if you need to.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-04-26, 08:33 PM
Wings of Flurry does uncapped untyped AoE damage and dazes on a failed save for no feat investment as a simple standard action 4th level spell. Just saying.

sofawall
2010-04-26, 08:41 PM
Wings of Flurry does uncapped untyped AoE damage and dazes on a failed save for no feat investment as a simple standard action 4th level spell. Just saying.

I believe it does Force damage. Also, you can exclude allies, if you so choose, so it's even slightly better then advertised.

Downside: Unlike Fireball (over 600 ft. range), it's centered on you.

Pechvarry
2010-04-26, 08:46 PM
I'd rather ban Wings of Flurry than this combo.

Eldariel
2010-04-26, 08:48 PM
I'd rather ban Wings of Flurry than this combo.

I'd rather ban neither and focus on things that are actually problematic, than slightly-less-sucky-but-still-blasting blasting.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-04-26, 11:47 PM
I'd rather ban neither and focus on things that are actually problematic, than slightly-less-sucky-but-still-blasting blasting.Well, metamagic reduction and caster level pimping can make Wings of Flurry pretty damn powerful, but I suppose Wings of Flurry isn't the major culprit there.

Sofawall: Good catch on the ally exclusion, and the range issue is fair, but unless there's errata I've missed WoF does untyped damage. From RotD pg. 119 "dealing 1d6 points of damage per caster level to all designated targets..." I am blind and can't read descriptors on spells. Still, force is a very nice damage type.

Eldariel
2010-04-27, 12:07 AM
Well, metamagic reduction and caster level pimping...

Yeah, I think you've got your problem right there.

TheMadLinguist
2010-04-27, 02:27 AM
Yeah, I think you've got your problem right there.

If you don't use metamagic reducers, metamagic is pretty useless, with the occasional sculpt or invisible spell. Metamagic as a system is pretty poorly designed.



As for the binding, as I said, I will have to readdress it. The inclusion of a third entity in the agreement between player and 'hellfire warlock' ability might cause some non-mechanical problems. Not sure how the demon/devil will take to a third entity interferring. Besides, as above, if the warlock doesn't take an HP hit for any measurable time, he did not suffer the effects. That would be my ruling on it. I'll just need to do some more research on the subject. I am fair in my rulings. My players would have revolted long ago it not.
I don't just allow it - I even suggested it to my warlock player. Heck, I even let him choose Naberius as being the patron providing the hellfire. If you're going to get power from an extradimensional entity, might as well pick a good one.

Eldariel
2010-04-27, 02:47 AM
If you don't use metamagic reducers, metamagic is pretty useless, with the occasional sculpt or invisible spell. Metamagic as a system is pretty poorly designed.

Oh, there's a handful of useful metamagics: Sculpt, Invisible, Extend, Split Ray, Ocular Spell, Chain & Quicken all have plenty of uses without reducers and even Persistent Spell has few uses here and there (most notably, arcane Sniper with half a dozen 1 round-duration Archery-spells persistent). And then there's Sanctum Spell which is just borked.

But you're right, stuff like Empower, Maximize, Reach, Rapid, Enlarge, Widen, Twin, Energy Admixture, etc. which tend to be mediocre without ways to mitigate the level adjustment at all; indeed, you can often just use higher level spells to better effects and as most of those are numeric buffs, that's kinda meh. Twin and Admixture are decent, and Empower is good on like...Enervation, but overall, they aren't all that good. Though Metamagic Rods again kick ass but...meh.

Runestar
2010-04-27, 06:00 AM
But you're right, stuff like Empower, Maximize, Reach, Rapid, Enlarge, Widen, Twin, Energy Admixture, etc. which tend to be mediocre without ways to mitigate the level adjustment at all; indeed, you can often just use higher level spells to better effects and as most of those are numeric buffs, that's kinda meh.

Except that more often than not, higher lv equivalents rarely exist. It is all a matter of using each metamagic feat on the spell which benefits the most.

For example, a twinned enervation deals 2d4 negative lvs, and is a 8th lv spell. Energy drain does the same thing, but is a 9th lv spell. The chance of permanent lv loss is irrelevant when you don't expect your foe to live that long. If you can manage a twinned wish somehow, you get 2 wishes while only needing to pay the xp cost of one.

Empower is best used on spells with a XDY+Z component, and the larger Z is, the better. Say I cast an empowered ray of enfeeblement. It normally inflicts a 1d6+5 str penalty, but when empowered, the penalty is increased to 1.5*(1d6+5), not (1.5*1d6)+5. I am looking at a 12-13 point str penalty which I am sure even dragons and giants will find hard to stomach, especially when your further stack it with waves of exhaustion.

Similarly, an empowered fireball deals 1.5*10d6 at 10th lv. A cone of cold deals only 10d6 at that lv, albeit with a higher save DC.

Maximize is numerically inferior to empower, but I like how it saves me the trouble of having to roll and tally the total. No need to roll 15d6 for my orb of acid, then further multiplying it by 1.5. Simply say - I deal 90 damage, minus resistance.

It is all a matter of know what spells to complement each feat. :smallsmile:

Eldariel
2010-04-27, 09:38 AM
It is all a matter of know what spells to complement each feat. :smallsmile:

I did single out Enervation. Crap like Wings of course works too, but by and large they don't give that great returns and could probably stand to be a bit better/cheaper. And Energy Drain could easily be level 8.

Runestar
2010-04-27, 04:20 PM
I did single out Enervation. Crap like Wings of course works too, but by and large they don't give that great returns and could probably stand to be a bit better/cheaper. And Energy Drain could easily be level 8.

Of which empower is a fairly poor choice, IMO. I wouldn't mind preparing maximized enervations, just for the thrill of being able to cause a mage to lose his 4 highest lv spells.

Just be careful of using this on the PCs though...:smalleek:

jiriku
2010-04-27, 04:42 PM
Of which empower is a fairly poor choice, IMO. I wouldn't mind preparing maximized enervations, just for the thrill of being able to cause a mage to lose his 4 highest lv spells.

Just be careful of using this on the PCs though...:smalleek:

This is a total thread derail, but I must say that the during our last game session, my druid player walked into a twinned split ray enervation thrown from a wand by an enemy artificer, and the look on his face when I told him "you take 9 negative levels and loose your 9 highest-level prepared spells" was truly gratifying. :smallamused:

Runestar
2010-04-27, 04:45 PM
the look on his face when I told him "you take 9 negative levels and loose your 9 highest-level prepared spells" was truly gratifying.

You got to roll 4d4 and only managed a 9? Though I suppose if you had gone on to maximize it (for 16 negative lvs), your friendship would likely have been in jeopardy. :smallamused:

That said, back to the original topic, maybe you could also look at how optimized the rest of the players are?

This reminds me. If I born of 3-thunders a spell with a duration, such as lightning ring, does this mean I remain dazed for 1 round/caster lv? But not too shabby, twice a round, I can fire 2 small bolts with a chance of stunning and knocking foes prone. As free actions, no less. :smalltongue:

Boci
2010-04-27, 04:54 PM
You got to roll 4d4 and only managed a 9? Though I suppose if you had gone on to maximize it (for 16 negative lvs), your friendship would likely have been in jeopardy. :smallamused:

Could have missed some of those ranged touch attacks.


This reminds me. If I born of 3-thunders a spell with a duration, such as lightning ring, does this mean I remain dazed for 1 round/caster lv? But not too shabby, twice a round, I can fire 2 small bolts with a chance of stunning and knocking foes prone. As free actions, no less. :smalltongue:

I'm pretty sure its been established that the stunning/prone saves are only required when the spells end. Splitray seeking ray. Yeah, just incase I find a DM who okays the initial combo...

Myou
2010-04-27, 06:46 PM
You got to roll 4d4 and only managed a 9?

The mean roll is only 10. The odds of a 9, 10 or 11 are about 50%.