Can You Empower Claws of the Beast?

[starwed]

A natural weapon is defined in the game system.

Yes. And all natural weapons have a damage range associated with them. This damage range is not variable, even though the damage caused by any particular hit is.

The power does not really define the damage caused by the weapon. The power defines the damage range of the weapon. Any particular hit will still be modified by all the normal rules for weapon attacks. I'm curious, would you include sneak attack or power attack damage in the empowerment?

So is the Flaming Sphere not a weapon? If the Flaming Sphere was shaped like a whip and appeared to originate from an intangible whip in the caster's hand that otherwise did all the same things (sweeping across the ground for damage) would that change things?

Flaming sphere is no more a weapon than the fireball spell is. If flaming sphere stated in the description that it created a weapon, then yes, I would change my decision on it. (It would need more than simply the appearance of a weapon. Spiritual hammer, claws of the beast, and flame blade are all named as weapons in the spell description.)

 

[Rystil Arden]

No, what I am saying is that acid arrow is very clear that its damage is part of the spell description. Acid arrows have no description outside that spell for effect or damage.

If you check the damage on Augmented Claws of the Beast chart, it is not the same as the damage you would get from continually increasing the size of a normal natural weapon (to wit, the chart goes from 4d6 to 5d6, and weapon size increases go from 4d6 to 6d6)

 

[Nail]

I'm curious, would you include sneak attack or power attack damage in the empowerment?

That's an interesting question.

 

[KarinsDad]

That's an interesting question.

Not really. The power specifies the damage via augmentation, creature size, and strength. Nothing else.

So, only claw damage + strength is empowered, everything else just adds on like always.

 

[Dracorat]

If you check the damage on Augmented Claws of the Beast chart, it is not the same as the damage you would get from continually increasing the size of a normal natural weapon (to wit, the chart goes from 4d6 to 5d6, and weapon size increases go from 4d6 to 6d6)

That much I completely agree on, which is part of the reason I feel as I do.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Not really. The power specifies the damage via augmentation, creature size, and strength. Nothing else.

So, only claw damage + strength is empowered, everything else just adds on like always.

It says, "Your claws are natural weapons, so you are considered armed when attacking with them, and they can be affected by powers, spells, and effects that enhance or improve natural." Assuming you agree that Power Attack is an 'effect' and that the sentence intended to finish with 'weapons', why isn't Power Attack specified in the power description? So, let's say you have claws of the beast and then get a greater magic fang. Isn't the greater magic fang bonus to damage part of the empower?

 

[Nail]

It says, "Your claws are natural weapons, so you are considered armed when attacking with them, and they can be affected by powers, spells, and effects that enhance or improve natural." Assuming you agree that Power Attack is an 'effect' and that the sentence intended to finish with 'weapons', why isn't Power Attack specified in the power description?

I2K beat me to it.

 

[wildstarsreach]

In 3E, I don't see any reason that you couldn't.

In 3.5 in my own game, it's prevented by my rule of thumb. The dice expressed in the spell description are merely reminders of values defined in the Equipment chapter.

Outside of my own game, it will depend on how the DM reads 'variable numeric effects of the spell'.

-Hyp.

House rules are what we are trying to avoid. I agree with the idea of your rule of thumb but this is a power that appears can be augmented. It is only at 9th level manifester that this becomes worthwhile for spending the additional 2 PP for empower. You don't get as much bang for the buck as you would with empowering other powers. I would allow it because of that. It is not overbalancing to allow it. But let us take at 17th level.

Claws of the Beast 4d6+Empowered = 21pts per hit + Str
Add Dissolving Touch 10d6+Empowered = 52pts per strike and PP's spent
Add Greater Psionic Fist 4d6 = 14 pts per focus expended
Total you could get in one strke 87 points for one hit on the average Plus Strength and magic?.

This is not so overbalancing when compared to other classes at this same level.

I've seen fighters and barbarians that continuously 90-120 pts a level with 4 hits at this level. Most have some kind of haste and other benefits. If the PsyWar can do this with 2 additional hits, then he would be in the 120pt range. And he could only do this a limited number of times based PP's and how often he sacrifices a round to get the psionic focus back. The other classes can do this all day.

Whereas my initial gut reaction and vote was to say no, further research indicates yes and that it is not imbalancing if campared to other classes.

 

[Artoomis]

House rules are what we are trying to avoid...

We are not really talking about House Rule (as in a variation from the rules) as we are a way to make the rules work. Any consistent method you choose will work just fine to cover the uncertain situations with Empower.

 

[Nail]

Claws of the Beast 4d6+Empowered = 21pts per hit + Str

Can I get a clarification?

It looks as if everyone is assuming that the empower would only apply to the "1d4" listed in the power description. Yet empower has been clarified to include any static bonus also listed in the spell/power description (like pseudo-caster level, for instance in Burning Hands). Is not Strength listed? Would it not also be included in the empowered part?

IOW:

Empowered = (1d4 + Str) * 150%