Rulings on Ray of enfeeblement

[Infiniti2000]

Your first level caster lowers his enemy strength by an average of 4.5 on a successful hit, causing a -2 to hit and damage. This is hardly out of line with other spells, and unlike some of them, only affects one creature.

Compare that with the level of the spell that grants +2 on attack rolls and damage. And, you cannot ignore the encumbrance penalties which are potentially severe (max dex of +3 and speed of 20ft on a high Dex character could significantly hurt his AC and movement, and that's only medium. If you drop him into a heavy load (quite easily done), then it's max Dex +1.

 

[frankthedm]

I thought it was only 6-14. Only the 1d6 is multiplied by the 1.5, right?

That is my standpoint. BUT the fact empower lists magic missile's being empowered as [1d4+1] x 1.5 will make arguing that more difficult than i feel is worth.

In my own game, I dropped the touch, made it auto hit and made it fort save for 1/2 the penalty.

 

[frankthedm]

You just look at it from the wrong angle, I think. There is only the spell effect, and it is either variable, numeric, or it is not. You don't look at partial effects, or somesuch. The effect is 1d6+5, not one effect of 1d6 and another of +5.

Character level, is more than constant enough not to be treated as a variable, thus it should be ineligible for the x150%. Reading it your way makes empower significantly better than maximize for some spells.

 

[Thanee]

Character level, is more than constant enough not to be treated as a variable...

That doesn't matter, since it is not the spell effect. The whole thing is the spell effect, and it is either variable or it is not.

[Xd6+Y] is variable.

Bye
Thanee

 

[SlagMortar]

Reading it your way makes empower significantly better than maximize for some spells.

I agree with this and I think empower is already the better in most situations. Even a 1d6 x 1.5 rounded down still averages 5.

However, saying empower multiplies the entire number makes empower equally good for a 1d4+1 spell and a 1d6 spell, which I think is a good thing.

 

[Thanee]

Empower and Maximize both have their niche, which is only partially overlapping.

Empower is to get more out of a spell, usually.
Maximize is to get the most out of a spell... for certain!

Similar, but not quite the same.

There are a handful of spells, where Empower is than factually better than Maximize, but that's really only a few, so hardly a big deal (and those are not really spells, where you would normally use Maximize on, anyways).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Infiniti2000]

There are a handful of spells, where Empower is than factually better than Maximize, but that's really only a few, ...

It's basically cure spells or, more generally, any spell with some number of dice plus some number per level, and the maximum limit on the additive is not too low (like it is for ray of enfeeblement). The poster child for picking empower over maximize is cure serious wounds. Caster Level = 15.

Average Roll: 28 (range 18-39)
Empowered Average Roll: 42 (range 27-58)
Maximized Result: 39

On average, empower is 8% better than maximize and costs a whole spell level less. On its best day, empower is 49% better and on its worst day 31% worse. So, you may gain something for consistency with maximize, but I personally don't think consistency is worth another spell level.

 

[Thanee]

While this is certainly true, I don't see where it has any practical effect.
How often do you see empowered and maximized cure spells in play, anyways?

You could just cast Heal instead.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Diirk]

Compare that with the level of the spell that grants +2 on attack rolls and damage.

2nd ? Or 1st in the case of a cleric of sufficient level, but to be fair by then the ray of enfeeblement will be doing more than -2 attack/damage.

 

[Stalker0]

As others have stated, at low levels, it perfectly reasonable with other 1st levle spells, probably fairly weak even. What's the point of weakening a creature when you can kill it it in a few hits, or knock it out with sleep or color spray. But at higher levels its very very effective.