Intensify Spell is an Epic WASTE!!!!

[Petrosian]

rats... he beat me to it by seconds...

Anyway, the rules on multiplying from the SRD are fairly straightforward.

'nuff said...

and note that for some, the faq is far from irrelevent.

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

"and note that for some, the faq is far from irrelevent."

I said that with toung firmly entrenched in cheek, trust me.

"MULTIPLYING
Sometimes a special rule makes you multiply a number or a die roll. As long as you’re applying a single multiplier, multiply
the number normally. When two or more multipliers apply, however, combine them into a single multiple, with each extra
multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. Thus, a double (x2) and a double (x2) applied to the same number
results in a triple (x3, because 2 + 1 = 3)."

This only applies to things like Criticals, not MM. If it did, Empower would lose potency as it was used more times.

 

[mikebr99]

I said that with toung firmly entrenched in cheek, trust me.

MULTIPLYING
Sometimes a special rule makes you multiply a number or a die roll. As long as you’re applying a single multiplier, multiply
the number normally. When two or more multipliers apply, however, combine them into a single multiple, with each extra
multiple adding 1 less than its value to the first multiple. Thus, a double (x2) and a double (x2) applied to the same number
results in a triple (x3, because 2 + 1 = 3).

This only applies to things like Criticals, not MM. If it did, Empower would lose potency as it was used more times.

I am sure I've seen this used for everything d&d related... including Meta feats... but I couldn't tell you where...

 

[Ristamar]

So an Empowered spell that does 15 points of damage would do an additional 7 points for each time it is Empowered, as the multiplier affects the base spell. "You can apply most metamagic feats more than once. Just stack up the costs, and remember to apply the additional effects to the basic spell.

The man speaks the truth.

 

[drowdude]

Indeed he does.

 

[HEL Pit Fiend]

YOUR homework is to re-read my post.

Ok boss

First of all, I must point out that all of the calculations on Empowered spells are incorrect.

No they are not.

A 10d6 fire ball double empowered does not equal an enhanced fire ball, as the damage is not in dice, but the final result is multiplied 1.5.

double empowered fireball (+4 levels) ---> 20d6 = 10d6 x(1+.5+.5) = x2
enhanced fireball (+4 levels) ---> 20d6 = 10d6 +10d6

and if looking at it by dice clouds your logic, lets look at it in points

dbl powered fireball (ave dam) = 70 = 35 +17.5 +17.5
enhanced fireball (ave dam) = 70

20d6 = 20d6 = 70 = 70

they look the same to me.

So an Empowered spell that does 15 points of damage would do an additional 7 points for each time it is Empowered, as the multiplier affects the base spell.

Again, you are incorrect

a die roll of 15 empowered multiple times would look like this:
empower once --> 15 +7.5 = 22.5 = 22
empower twice --> 15 +7.5 +7.5 = 30
empower thrice --> 15 +7.5 +7.5 +7.5 = 37.5 = 37
and so on
of course there is NO rounding down on an EVEN roll.

round down ONLY on the final result...

My understanding, both from the description of MM feats in the PHB, the Empower feat description, AND the FaQ, is that all feats modify the BASE spell. You even quoted that Extend used twice results in 3 times the duration, not 4.

Let me clairify what they are really talking about in the FAQ. Some people were getting confused as to the stacking of MM feats so the question was, if you stack 2 empowers does it:
---> 1. base x1.5 x1.5 = x2.25
or
---> 2. base x(1 +.5 +.5) = x2
of course, we find out it was the latter (x2)

That FAQ has to do with the way the multipliers stack, as it is shown they are added and not multiplied, it has nothing to do with how or when to round down a die result.

Secondly, it is SOOOOO obvious by the ELH MM feats that were added that spellcasters are supposed to take the improved meta magic feat.

No.

Other epic feats do not require 2 or 3 other epic feats to make them useful, for example:
Improved Mayshot
Mighty Rage
Epic Prowess
Vorpal Strike
Blinding Speed
Epic Spellcasting
Distant Shot
Dragon Wildshape
Epic Toughness
Improved Spell Capacity
and on and on........

NONE of them require the need for 2 or 3 other epic feats to make them great. They are great by themselves, but Enhanced Spell feat is not, even you will agree that Enhance Spell ABSOLUTELY REQUIRES at least 2 improved metamagic feats to make it compete with other metamagic.

...spellcasters are supposed to take the improved meta magic feat. Just take it three times,

Feat slots don't grow on trees IMC. Three slots is a heavy price for practically no improvement...

...spellcasters are supposed to take the improved meta magic feat. Just take it three times, and then observe...

Fire ball

10d6
10d6 x 1.5 (empowered)
60 (maximized)
20d6 (enhanced)

SEE!!! A no brainer, must have combo. Since all of the above are now only at +1 spell slots, it is obvious that WotC meant for all spellcasters to take Enhanced MM, so as to make their new epic feats worth while. Duh!

No!

Career wizard players are smarter than that. The slots you BURN in taking Improved Meta three times will put you behind the curve in raw damage dealing power.

Let me demonstrate:

A typical 30th level player character Wizard.
--average wealth: 4.3 million gold
--intelligence: 34 = (16 +5 *inherent* +6 *headband* +7 *one every 4 levels).
--fort, reflex saves: 21 (6 +5 *epic* +5 *cloak* +5 dex/con *20 ability scores*)
--save vs 3rd level spells: 25
--save vs 8th level spells: 30
--hit points: 225 = (7.5 x 30)
--magic items may include, rings of evasion, elemental resistances/immunity (you get the picture)

The Enhanced/Improved Meta wizard feat progression:
21st-- Improved Spell Cap (10th)
23rd-- Improved Spell Cap (11th)
24th-- Improved Spell Cap (12th)
26th-- Enhanced Spell
27th-- Improved Metamagic (-1)
29th-- Improved Metamagic (-2)
30th-- Improved Metamagic (-3)

The Enhanced happy wizard casts superheated fireballs:
Fireball at 12th level, Enhanced (x1), Maximized (x1), Empowered (x8)
A scorching 365 damage, but take a look at this:


The Empower wizard feat progression
21st-- Improved Spell Cap (10th)
23rd-- Improved Spell Cap (11th)
24th-- Improved Spell Cap (12th)
26th-- Improved Spell Cap (13th)
27th-- Improved Metamagic (-1)
29th-- Improved Spell Cap (14th)
30th-- Improved Spell Cap (15th)

Enhanced wizard casts superdry horrid wiltings:
Wilt at 15th level, Empower (x7)
A whopping 506 damage

Not only that, if these 2 wizards face off and throw these 2 mega spells at each other, lets see what happens:

Wizard saving vs the 12th level superheated fireball = 25 - 21 = 4 or better ===> 85% survival chance

Wizard saving vs the 15th level superdry wilting = 30 - 21 = 9 or better ===> 0% survival chance, half damage is enough to kill the wizard anyway (506/2 damage > 225 hit points)....

After the dead wizard is looted, who's laughing all the way to the bank now?

Empower BEATS Enhanced

If you take it six times, take a fresh look at intensify. Granted it would be a feat heavy investment, but at +1 spell level, your simple fire ball does 120, period.

Don't even get me started on this one. By the time you get Intensify Spell down to +1/level, I will be throwing around 800 hit point Wiltings at 18 to 21st level slots. This one is a loser all the way around.

Remember, Horrid Wilting, not fireball, is the spell of choice when you reach high levels. Here I will list the reasons:
--1. Fireball has 3rd level saves (i.e. they suck)
--2. Creatures of CR 21+ typically have all kinds of elemental resistances, your fire/acid/cold balls are even less effective
--3. Horrid Wilting covers an area twice that of Fireball, ouch!

Where Horrid Wilting is concered, you will have to be 40th level before Enhanced, Maxed, Empowered, Horrid Wiltings surpass straight Empowered Wiltings.

Empower is still the champ.........

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Yeah, the empower guy wins in max damage in those cases. Though there are tons of other reasons to take multiple epic imporved metamagics. I'd very likely take at least two, and probably 3. Why sure my damage dealing drops a bit, but persistent is a one level boost so is quicken, maximize etc. And so yeah your guys 14th level slot blasts everything into oblivion, while my 5th level slot always does 60 and is a free aciton, my 4th level slot gives me a free action haste spell, my second level slot is a persistent shield spell etc.

And if I'm going to take 3 improved metamagics anyways then enhance spell is better for me than empower. Now I still don't think enhance metamagic is a epic feat, but for a powerful wizard I'd much rather not throw around gagillion dice fireballs and instead have mad versatility because every metamagic feat I can use only is one spell level higher.

 

[HEL Pit Fiend]

Yeah, the empower guy wins in max damage in those cases. Though there are tons of other reasons to take multiple epic imporved metamagics.

I agree

Now I still don't think enhance metamagic is a epic feat

Again, I agree

 

[Marshall]

And if I'm going to take 3 improved metamagics anyways then enhance spell is better for me than empower.

Even at ImpMM+3 Empower is still a better choice. As you need to spend another feat to get Enhance to +20dice and, its unclear, but it looks like the +20 Enhance would still be +5 spell levels with ImpMM+3. ie +30=+9 levels, +40=+13 levels. Even bought multiple times, its not clear weather Enhance stacks or becomes a 'new' feat.

 

[Petrosian]

Ok, first off, a point that has to be made...

Let me ask an example question, if a troll runs completely around your prepared fighrt will the fighter get a free swing (AoO) wih his longsword if he has not already done so this round?

The answer is YES or NO. Its "yes" if playing DND 3e. its "no" if playing Fantasy HERO.

Ok before you start throwing things, the point is there are people here holding a rules discussion who are playing under two seriously different rules sets.

Group A is playing by the DND rules plus the FAQ. They consider the FAQ to be relevent to their game rules and discussions thereof. They have clear and in print direct answers to many vauge or ill defined or sometimes just plain absent areas of the game.

Group B is playing by the DND rules without the FAQ. They consider the FAQ to be irrelevent and thus none of its information impacts their game.

(In either group, there are likely a few ne'er-do-wells who even stoop so far as to actually make their own rules, called house rules.)

group A KNOWS whether you can doubly empower or not. The FAQ is clear.

Group B is probably divided with some reading multiple feats as a "only different" and others reading it as "doubling up is cool."

Group A, if they see multi-empower as trumping enhance, probably will chalk it up to "yet another case where the new stuff guys did not pay attention to what can be done with feats" and figure that it will either fall to being the next "toughness" or will be erratted. (Anyone remember the MotW cold spells where they gain a dice per round and extend the lesser beats the larger one hands down... the new stuff guys surely forgot existing feats on that one!)

Group B, in part, may see this as making perfect sense because you cannot put empower twice.

IF someone were talking 'but in HERO" we could all say "OK, different game systems have different rules."

Well for those who choose to NOT USE the FAQ, they are playing a different game system than those who do.

There can be no consensus here.

Anubis is NOT wrong. He is just deciding to play a different game system.

let him.

If he doesn't want the FAQ or the sage as a resource provided by wotc to be a factor in HIS play, thats his call. its been helpful for me.

He is being forthright enough to identify, often in CAPS for emphasis, that his ruling is indeed based on "FAQ denial" so hardly anyone will be confused between his rules and DND rules. So there is little danger from his posts.

Thany you, Anubis, for posting so diligently the group B "faq denial" side of the argument. its always good when other game styles are heard from.

That fact alone means that either I'm right or the authors don't know what the heck they're doing. One or the other, no room for a middle point on that.

Or it means simply that they made an error. It does happen. Even though you have your "FAQ does not exist for me" blinders on, even you admit there is erratta, right? in order for there to be erratta, there must have been errors.

Do you have ANY reason to believe that the ELH, all new materials, will be different from all other products and thus be error free? i don't

In MOTW we have a pair of spells.

One provides a three round spell which hits you with 1d6 and states that the damage grows by 1d6 each round. Several levels higher we have the four round spell doing the same. But, if i know FEATS, i use extend on the lesser and now FOR A LEVEL LESS than the big one i get a six round spell doing twice the damage.

Now i saw those two and immediately knew there was an error. Sooner or later they would fix these two. i did not suddenly leap to the conclusion that "extend spell must be wrong and this "last published" thing proves it!" i did not suddenly conclude the designers did not know what they were doings in some grand way. i just reached the conclusion that MotW, like all their other products, had errors and this was one.

However, that is explicative of how i reason things, and i have been known to be wrong at times.

enjoy your games, under whatever game system you decide to play.