PDA

View Full Version : Empower Spell



Eronai_Jantig
2010-06-29, 10:31 PM
Okay, forget for a minute that the example of Empower Spell shows using 1d4+1 for Magic Missile. How do your tables deal with it? The text refers to the variable effects of the spell, meaning dice only. Thats how I feel it should work, but I want to know the Playgrounds opinion/official rulings/clarification if they exist.

Hague
2010-06-29, 10:33 PM
Take the total result of the dice rolls with bonuses and multiply it by 1.5?

Claudius Maximus
2010-06-29, 10:34 PM
Yeah, so if you roll 3 (total 4), you deal 6 damage with that missile.

Aeromyre
2010-06-29, 10:34 PM
I'm not sure what you're getting at, it's a very simple feat, all variables = 150% normal. 10 damage becomes 15.

EDIT: Oh I see your point, and yeah it does say variables. So yes I agree

Runestar
2010-06-29, 10:36 PM
Exactly as the magic missile example shows.

Granted, it does seem a tad too strong on spells with a huge static bonus, such as ray of enfeeblement.

Il_Vec
2010-06-29, 10:36 PM
Duration, range and number of targets are also "Variables", by some interpretations. What do you guys feel about it?

Runestar
2010-06-29, 10:41 PM
Duration, range and number of targets are also "Variables", by some interpretations. What do you guys feel about it?

So long as die-rolling is involved, it is a variable which is affected by empower.

So heal spell cannot be empowered.

PId6
2010-06-29, 10:44 PM
It's been debated, but based on examples, apparent intent, and common sense, I think the consensus has been that the entire number (1d4+1) is a variable amount, and so is multiplied by 1.5 when you Empower it.

Eronai_Jantig
2010-06-29, 10:45 PM
So long as die-rolling is involved, it is a variable which is affected by empower.

So heal spell cannot be empowered.

I had a player argue with me about that once, I was a player as well, so I said that maybe the static/caster level +s could be allowed but there was no chance in hell I was going to play with Heal being empowered like that.

jokey665
2010-06-29, 10:48 PM
[1d4+1] is a variable number that ranges from 2 to 5.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-06-29, 11:06 PM
On the spell magic missile, damage is a variable effect, a 10th level wizard will not always produce the same damage each time he/she cast the spell.
1d4+1=X is a variable number. It doesn't matter that the +1 is fixed, the result if a variable 2-5.


Duration, range and number of targets are also "Variables", by some interpretations. What do you guys feel about it?

But not by the interpretations that apply. When they say variable, numeric effects. They mean random variable numeric effects. Which is why spells without random variables can't be empowered.

Using your example interpretation find a spell that couldn't be empowered in the PHB.

Duration, range, targets are not random variables. They are predetermined by your level thus they can never meet the qualifications. As your level is more or less fixed from one spell to the next they aren't even fixed.

As an above poster said while I was writing mine, If you roll a die its a variable.

Il_Vec
2010-06-29, 11:08 PM
To be more specific:



Empower Spell [Metamagic]
Benefit
All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half.

Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables. An empowered spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell’s actual level.

EDIT: What I mean is, they are variables in the sense that they are not fixed, they have a x + Y formula normally. But I clearly see your point. It just seems like the feat does not clarify on Random variables at all, except for limiting what spells can be affected by it.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-06-29, 11:09 PM
To be more specific:



Duration and range are variable numeric effects under some interpretations...

And you've been told why they aren't by the ones that apply. They aren't variable numeric effects because they are set by your caster level.
The example empowered magic missile sites the damage as a variable effect not the number of targets.

Your going to have to cite why you think duration and range are variable numeric effects under the rules good Sir.

Hague
2010-06-29, 11:11 PM
They aren't variable when the spell is cast. By that logic all spells are variable because they all have the inherent variable of caster level.

Edit: Which means that technically, all Wild Mages can empower some really strange spells...

Il_Vec
2010-06-29, 11:13 PM
Sorry, you posted while I was writing that. Edited it to make more sense and not sounding like I ignored you.

PId6
2010-06-29, 11:14 PM
And you've been told why they aren't by the ones that apply. They aren't variable numeric effects because they are set by your caster level.
Though, to play devil's advocate for a moment, by that logic wouldn't that mean that spells with close/medium/long range would still be of "fixed range" for the purposes of Persistent Spell, since the variability on their range is only because of caster level?

Hague
2010-06-29, 11:16 PM
No, they are still variable. You can choose to reduce your caster level intentionally to reduce the possible range. But those ranges aren't 'fixed' in the sense of being a single de facto number. Standard ranges are formulaic, not fixed.

PId6
2010-06-29, 11:23 PM
No, they are still variable. You can choose to reduce your caster level intentionally to reduce the possible range. But those ranges aren't 'fixed' in the sense of being a single de facto number. Standard ranges are formulaic, not fixed.
Couldn't you apply the same logic to Empower then? If you choose to cast Heal at a lower CL, then the amount healed changes, making it variable. If you say that effects based off of CL are variable rather than fixed, shouldn't Empower get the same treatment?

Il_Vec
2010-06-29, 11:23 PM
Your going to have to cite why you think duration and range are variable numeric effects under the rules good Sir.

Because of their X + Y nature. I mean, they take quite a while to "vary", and are not random, but the feat doesn't call out random while at it, and they are most definetly not fixed numbers.

I have never used them this way in a game and do not think it is RAI, but the feat's text makes this a quite potent interpretation, don't you think?

Lord Vukodlak
2010-06-29, 11:25 PM
Though, to play devil's advocate for a moment, by that logic wouldn't that mean that spells with close/medium/long range would still be of "fixed range" for the purposes of Persistent Spell, since the variability on their range is only because of caster level?

Your missing part of my logic so I'd ask you re-quote my post and include the whole argument.

Empower Spell means "random variable, numeric effects." Which is why spells without random variable, numeric effects are not effected.

Fixed means unchanging, random variable means it does change but its random. 400ft+40ft level is a predetermined number but not a fixed range.


Couldn't you apply the same logic to Empower then? If you choose to cast Heal at a lower CL, then the amount healed changes, making it variable. If you say that effects based off of CL are variable rather than fixed, shouldn't Empower get the same treatment?

No because spells without random variable numeric effects are not effected by empower spell. Caster-level pre-determines many of those effects. So its not a random variable effect.

Empower for example doesn't make you roll 15d6 on a fireball, you roll 10d6 and multiply the result by 1.5

sofawall
2010-06-29, 11:25 PM
What if you're a Wild Mage or whatever that class was, and you have a variable CL. Does that make Range something empowerable?

Hague
2010-06-29, 11:28 PM
Yes, the word variable means that the number is capable of changing, but it doesn't mean that it is random, it's a formulaic variable. A fixed number is incapable of changing, it's always the same. When the spell is cast, those formulaic variables don't shift from one casting to the next with the same parameters.

Now, were you to become a Wild Mage... Well that's a whole other can of wax balls there...

Lord Vukodlak
2010-06-29, 11:29 PM
What if you're a Wild Mage or whatever that class was, and you have a variable CL. Does that make Range something empowerable?

Empower works on the random variable effects of the spell. Wild Mage doesn't change the spell. I'd say no flat out, but its certainly the best argument to expand empower spell so far.

Runestar
2010-06-29, 11:30 PM
Couldn't you apply the same logic to Empower then? If you choose to cast Heal at a lower CL, then the amount healed changes, making it variable. If you say that effects based off of CL are variable rather than fixed, shouldn't Empower get the same treatment?

The spell should vary based on its own merits, and not because of something else you changed.

For example, if I cast magic missile at the same caster lv 9 100 times, it will do a variety of damage because I will keep getting different results on the d4.

Conversely, if I cast heal 100 times at the same caster lv, there is no change in the amount healed. It will always be the same.


It's been debated, but based on examples, apparent intent, and common sense, I think the consensus has been that the entire number (1d4+1) is a variable amount, and so is multiplied by 1.5 when you Empower it.

Another example.

Say I cast ray of enfeeblement at caster lv11, it will deal 1d6+5 str penalty, which means a number between 6 and 11.

Is there a difference between these 2 methods of generating the result?

1) Roll a normal 6-sided die to get a number between 1 to 6, then add 5 to this result.

2) Roll a custom painted die with the numbers 6 to 11 on it.

If the latter can be empowered, there is no reason why the 1st example cannot be empowered. Of course, it is troublesome to get such a special die with a limited scope of use, so wotc broke down die expressions so they are compatible with run of the mill die. :smallsmile:

lsfreak
2010-06-29, 11:30 PM
The SRD lacks any such example text. I might be wrong, but I think SRD, being the most recent printing, overwrites the PHB publication listing the 1d4+1 as a 'variable.'

Even ignoring that, example text, such as the case with empower + magic missile, is not part of the rules, any more than laughably-inaccurate statblocks, or mage armor being an abjuration spell (abjurant champion).

Il_Vec
2010-06-29, 11:31 PM
Your missing part of my logic so I'd ask you re-quote my post and include the whole argument.

Empower Spell means "random variable, numeric effects." Which is why spells without random variable, numeric effects are not effected.

Fixed means unchanging, random variable means it does change but its random. 400ft+40ft level is a predetermined number but not a fixed range.

So, this is classically called RAI (Rules As Intended). Yes, I know it is how it should work. But read the text, in the SRD. It says All variable, numerical effects. Nothing about random there. There is, later on... Limiting the usage of the feat. That is the RAW (Rules As Written). That is what I am pointing out here. That, by oversight of designers, maybe this feat can affect little more numeric variables in some all-RAW games.

Lord Vukodlak
2010-06-29, 11:33 PM
The SRD lacks any such example text. I might be wrong, but I think SRD, being the most recent printing, overwrites the PHB publication listing the 1d4+1 as a 'variable.'

Even ignoring that, example text, such as the case with empower + magic missile, is not part of the rules, any more than laughably-inaccurate statblocks, or mage armor being an abjuration spell (abjurant champion).

The SRD doesn't really contain any examples of how stuff works. If we ignore examples of how things work quite a bit of the game would fall apart.
We wouldn't know how a lot of things worked if not for the examples.
Examples tell us what the heck they mean.

Your argument the example isn't RAW is BULL and based on nothing an example is them explaining the rule. Just because they can make a mistake on abjurant champion doesn't invalidate everything. By that logic everything is a mistake and there is no RAW.
You can show that the abjurant champion example contains a mistake because they call mage armor abjuration instead of conjuration. But its an easy mistake to make.
Unless you can provide evidence of a mistake in Empower Spell example we can take it as RAW.

The SRD is a reference guide that happens to include errata. thus the term System Reference Document.

1d4+1 is a variable number until you can prove its not a variable the whole number is multiplied by 1.5. Empower spell multiplies the RESULT of the spell. 1d4+1=X and X is the result.

mobdrazhar
2010-06-29, 11:45 PM
just something that happened into my head whilst reading this thread... wouldn't maximising a spell remove the rendom veriable factor from the equation and thus it couldn't be empowered?

Il_Vec
2010-06-29, 11:47 PM
just something that happened into my head whilst reading this thread... wouldn't maximising a spell remove the rendom veriable factor from the equation and thus it couldn't be empowered?

Yes, but the text on Maximize spell calls that out and explains how it should be handled, making it a case of specific trumping the general.

mobdrazhar
2010-06-29, 11:49 PM
Yes, but the text on Maximize spell calls that out and explains how it should be handled, making it a case of specific trumping the general.

Fair enough

Lord Vukodlak
2010-06-29, 11:51 PM
just something that happened into my head whilst reading this thread... wouldn't maximising a spell remove the rendom veriable factor from the equation and thus it couldn't be empowered?

Edit: Dang beaten to the punch in that response. Don't you just hate when you miss a new post while you were typing.

Akal Saris
2010-06-30, 12:04 AM
If I recall, the Sage also ruled as the magic missile example did - that a 2d4+2 magic missile would become 3d4+3, for example, rather than 3d4+2.

Which if you accept that reading, makes it quite handy to empower spells that have a small variable and large bonus damage, such as fire shield (1d6+15 would become 1d6+1d3+22).