Can You Empower Claws of the Beast?

[KarinsDad]

And is also affected by Augmentation. A more powerful version of the power results in the claws dealing more damage. Why should 'more magic' from augmentation make the damage greater, but 'more magic' from Empower not be applicable?

It's a mystery.

 

[pawsplay]

So it's a non-Conjuration spell that targets an object, doesn't allow SR, but deals Empowerable damage to something that isn't the target.

Scorching ray affects one or more targets, Flame Arrow affects arrows.
Scorching ray causes magical damage, Flame Arrow causes fire damage.
Scorching ray won't work on a golem, Flame Arrow likely will.
Scorching ray is a ray spell that causes an attack, Flame Arrow is a spell that simply augments an arrow.
Scorching ray allows you to cast and blast, attacking with Flame Arrow is done as per any other projectile weapon.



And is also affected by Augmentation. A more powerful version of the power results in the claws dealing more damage. Why should 'more magic' from augmentation make the damage greater, but 'more magic' from Empower not be applicable?

-Hyp.

It is a lot more similar to flame arrow than it is to scorching ray. But I think it is more similar yet to polymorph.

Flame arrow causes the arrows to do burning damage, magically. As far as I know, claws of the beast cause damage simply by being claws.

Would a spell that caused an arrow to do damage as though it were one size larger be empowerable?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Would a spell that caused an arrow to do damage as though it were one size larger be empowerable?

According to my rule of thumb, no - this is, effectively, Shillelagh.

On the other hand, I'd allow the 3E version of Shillelagh to be Empowered.

-Hyp.

 

[Cheiromancer]

My rule of thumb is "Hypersmurf is never wrong." So I'll vote yes.

[edit] At least with D&D rules questions. I'm not sure how far his infallibility extends.

 

[DaveyJones]

when they added empower and the other metamagic feats to the game what spells did they have in mind. did they change the level of some of those spells from the previous editions to accomodate them being empowered/extended/etc...

in playtesting is this weighed?

if empower only cost 1 slot and fireball is third lvl normally. wouldn't everyone fill their 4th lvl slots with empowered fireballs. thus playtesting found empower to be worth 2 higher. yet it still has a DC of a 3rd lvl spell for saves.

what has playtesting shown so far for Claws of the Beast?

 

[KarinsDad]

what has playtesting shown so far for Claws of the Beast?

Medium sized:

1 PP = 2.5 average damage
3 PP = 3.5 (or Empowered 3.5)
5 PP = 4.5 (or 5)
7 PP = 7 (or 6.5)
9 PP = (10.25)
11 PP = 10.5
13 PP = (15.5)
15 PP = 14
17 PP = (20.75)
19 PP = 17.5
21 PP = (26)

() - Empowered

So at level 19, one could average 3.25 (times 1.05 counting criticals) more average points of damage per successful attack for 2 PP less at the cost of a feat. Hardly game breaking.

 

[Psion]

My rule of thumb is "will it break the game and does it make sense?"

No, and yes, to me at least.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Wow, I just can't decide on this one. It vexes me. I'm terribly vexed.

 

[Dracorat]

Couldn't you just as easily claim that the claws are the effect of the Claws of the Beast power, and that any damage someone happens to inflict with them is a side effect?

Yes, which is why I voted no.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

I voted no for many of the reasons explained above. To my way of thinking the power creates soem claws. As Summon spells and the like do not get augmented, then the empower would not work. It needs to ahve a direct link from spell to damage to be empowered or maximized.

Or course I am leaving durations out of the whole story, which in my mind is another troublesome area where durations written atthe top of th spell layout are not affected but some would argue spell durations in the text *cough Timestop*cough* can be maximized.

But back on topic, it sems clear to me that the claws cannot be maximized or empowered.