Best Spell to Maximize

[hong]

My point: I think +7 or +8 to a stat (better than any non-artifact magic item can do!) for 15 hours is pretty bloody powerful for a 15th level cleric's spell!

And have you seen what the other spells are that a 15th level cleric has? Mass heal, holy aura, earthquake, fire storm, greater planar ally (summon a planetar, if not a solar, to do your bidding), empowered blade barrier, etc, etc. A triply-empowered bulls strength is the least of your worries.

Assuming you're not just laying out flamebait, after two years, you still seem to be having trouble readjusting to 3E. Stop torturing yourself. Go back to 2E, where you were happy.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Where do you get the idea that the author didn't intend this? The Cleave feat states that if you drop a creature you get an immediate, extra attack. It doesn't state that this happens only on a full attack action. The only limitation is once per round.
It seems pretty obvious that it works any time you drop someone, with any attack, once per round.

You are the one adding extra limitations to the feat, and trying to claim that you know the authors intentions better than anyone else.

Probably from the statements made by the authors that any time you have more than one attack in a round it is a full attack action. Cleave being a standard action is highly inconsistent with the rules, since they mention in the rules more than one attack=full attack. I always assumed it required a full attack action since the rules give the general rule more than one attack = full attack, and cleave is not listed as an exception.

 

[Caliban]

Probably from the statements made by the authors that any time you have more than one attack in a round it is a full attack action.

Cleave is not an "attack per round".

Cleave being a standard action is highly inconsistent with the rules, since they mention in the rules more than one attack=full attack.

You haven't read the relevent text closely enough then. Cleave is not even an action, standard or otherwise. You can cleave on an AoO, and this is entirely consistent with the core rules.

I always assumed it required a full attack action since the rules give the general rule more than one attack = full attack, and cleave is not listed as an exception.

You assumed incorrectly then.

Cleave is not an action, and is not subject to the "if you have more than one attack per action you have to make a full attack action to get the extra attacks" rule. That rule only applies to your normal attacks and cleave is not part of your normal attacks per round. Like an AoO or Speed weapon, it is in addition to the number of attacks you can normally make

 

[Jeremy]

Caliban is correct.

Cleave is and has always been a feat granted special ability. Anytime you slay an opponent, anytime, you get your cleave IF you have another foe in your threatened area and IF you have not used your cleave already that round OR if you have great cleave.

You can cleave on a partial charge, you can cleave on an AofO, you can cleave in a surprise round, you can cleave while slowed. You just have to meet the requirements of having a foe in reach (you cannot 5' step to cleave normally), having a cleave attempt left, and having slain your previous target.

 

[Xarlen]

You can cleave on a partial charge, you can cleave on an AofO, you can cleave in a surprise round, you can cleave while slowed. You just have to meet the requirements of having a foe in reach (you cannot 5' step to cleave normally), having a cleave attempt left, and having slain your previous target.

Will you cleave on a log, will you cleave against some Trogs?
I shall not cleave on a log, I wound not could not cleave some Trogs.

 

[Bonedagger]

Damage through the roof? Nay I say.

4x Empowered Magic Missle takes a 9th level slot.
Can do an average damage of 52.5 [(5d4+5)* 3] to a single target and allow no save.

Uhm... I'm not that much experienced in the rules of 3 Ed. yet but wouldn't that piece of math have to be done something like this?

Average MM damage with 5 missiles: (2,5+1) *5 = 17,5

That then needs to be multiplyed with: 1,5^4 =5,0625

17,5 * 5,0625 = 88,59375 Average damage

Note:
(1,5 * 1,5 * 1,5 * 1,5 = 1,5 ^4)

______________________________

Max damage = 126,6

Min damage = 50,6

 

[S'mon]

And have you seen what the other spells are that a 15th level cleric has? Mass heal, holy aura, earthquake, fire storm, greater planar ally (summon a planetar, if not a solar, to do your bidding), empowered blade barrier, etc, etc. A triply-empowered bulls strength is the least of your worries.

Assuming you're not just laying out flamebait, after two years, you still seem to be having trouble readjusting to 3E. Stop torturing yourself. Go back to 2E, where you were happy.

Hong accuses _me_ of flamebait - o tempora, o morales...!

I hated 2e. I quit AD&D because of it. I came back because of 3e. I like it, but clerics are clearly a lot more powerful than other classes, even without Skip's rules changes.

BTW Hong, I've never met an Aussie I didn't like, until I met you. All my players are Australians, they're a great bunch.

 

[S'mon]

Probably from the statements made by the authors that any time you have more than one attack in a round it is a full attack action. Cleave being a standard action is highly inconsistent with the rules, since they mention in the rules more than one attack=full attack. I always assumed it required a full attack action since the rules give the general rule more than one attack = full attack, and cleave is not listed as an exception.

It's not worth arguing Shard, they don't give a damn about what it says in the PHB.

The approach of "always interpret feats/powers in the most liberal possible interpretaion" to make them as powerful as possible seems to be new in 3e. Often this seems to involve disregarding all statements to the contrary within the rules themselves. Eg:

"It doesn't say we can't stack Empowers - therefore we can."

"It doesn't say we need a Full Attack to cleave - therefore we can Cleave anytime we make an attack roll."

I doubt the author ever even considered the possibility of stacking multiple Empowers on the same spell, it seems totally alien to the whole Feats approach. As for Cleave, there is a specific rule that ALL feat-granted extra attacks require a full attack action.

But that would mess with your fun. So it won't do at all.

 

[Caliban]

It's not worth arguing Shard, they don't give a damn about what it says in the PHB.

Actually we do. We care a great deal, and we spend an endless amount of time discussing it until we are pretty sure we understand it. You might try it sometime.

The approach of "always interpret feats/powers in the most liberal possible interpretaion" to make them as powerful as possible seems to be new in 3e. Often this seems to involve disregarding all statements to the contrary within the rules themselves.

No, because if there were a clear statement to the contrary, we wouldn't interpret it that way.

Eg:

"It doesn't say we can't stack Empowers - therefore we can."

Exactly. There is no statement to the contrary, the PHB says you can layer metamagic feats, and one of the game designers (Skip Williams in this case) has confirmed that by rules, there is no reason to treat multiple instances of the same metamagic feat on the same spell any differently than multiple instances of different metamagic feats on the same spell.

"It doesn't say we need a Full Attack to cleave - therefore we can Cleave anytime we make an attack roll."

Especially since the cleave feat specifically states that you get an immediate, extra melee attack, which you keep ignoring.

I doubt the author ever even considered the possibility of stacking multiple Empowers on the same spell, it seems totally alien to the whole Feats approach.

And I think they did consider it, and they did the math, and determined that it really doesn't affect the game balance.

As for Cleave, there is a specific rule that ALL feat-granted extra attacks require a full attack action.

No there isn't, as I pointed out. But you have chosen to ignore that as well.

But that would mess with your fun. So it won't do at all.

Are you really this narrowminded?

 

[hong]

Hong accuses _me_ of flamebait - o tempora, o morales...!

It takes one to know one.

I hated 2e. I quit AD&D because of it.

Hm, so did I.

I came back because of 3e. I like it, but clerics are clearly a lot more powerful than other classes, even without Skip's rules changes.

The fact that clerics are overpowered is a known wart, possibly because the designers needed something with which to bribe players into being the party medic. However, that's a completely separate issue to the multiple-empower thing.

BTW Hong, I've never met an Aussie I didn't like, until I met you.

Tell me again why I should give a damn whether or not you like me.