PROOF that Empower Spell should not be allowed to stack with itself!

[IceBear]

Anubis,

Run your experiment again, but don't use empower at all. Who wins? I bet it's still the wizard. What does that tell me? It's the spellcasters that are outshining the non-spellcasters, not the feats. Wizard wins initiative, wizard casts timestop, wizard buffs, casts fly and improved invisibilty. By the time the fighter can act the wizard is now 50ft in the air and can rain devestation down on the fighter. Even if it comes out as being close, people here have already shown you that if the wizard could lose the battle with the fighter if he has some bad luck on the dice rolls.

Anyway, I say again, nothing you have shown mean has convinced me that stacking empower is horribly broken. Sorry.

IceBear

 

[James McMurray]

Using one broken rule to throw out an argument about another broken rule not being broken just makes you look silly.

And using the word broken three times in the same sentence just makes you look like a guy in severe need of a thesaurus.

Get a life.

 

[kreynolds]

Using one broken rule to throw out an argument about another broken rule not being broken just makes you look silly.

Hardly. I was merely pointing out that you were wrong. Come to think of it, you might find these useful...

Grow Up And Live With It [General]
Your personality has developed into something more akin to that of an adult.
Benefit: You can now make decisions and have opinions that are based upon logical thought processes instead of irrational behavior and temper tantrums when something goes wrong or when you see something you don't like.
Normal: Without this feat, a character is immature, pissy, winey, and complains all the time about how life just isn't fair because they took the wrong feat at the wrong level. The character also tends to bitch about how they are entitled to an additional +1 BAB increase to get that extra attack as well.
Special: Without this feat, your DM may hurt you and many people on the message boards won't like you.

It’s Not Over Yet [General]
You have more options than you think, so cheer up.
Benefit: By selecting this feat, you no longer must shoot yourself in the head, as this feat gives you access to other feats that may improve upon your personality and wits.
Normal: Without this feat, a character is such an idiot that he must simply kick his own bucket and put himself out of the rest of the world’s misery. Characters like this can often be easily identified by their stupid as hell DM rulings, or their constant crying because they suck so bad.
Special: This feat can only be taken upon character creation. If you do not take this feat at that time…well…it was nice knowin’ ya’.

Lesser Idiocy [General]
People are more tolerant of you on message boards.
Prerequisites: Int 3+, It’s Not Over Yet.
Benefit: When you participate in an active thread, you get one free post before the flaming begins.
Normal: Every character is an idiot and rubs everyone the wrong way. When a character without this feat posts on a message board, he might as well be walking down the street coated in gasoline.
Special: This feat does not offer you any protection when you post a second time in an active thread.

Piss & Moan [General]
Self explanatory.
Benefit: Absolutely none. There is nothing that can change your abhorrent personality.
Normal: You’re just as bitchy as you were before, if not worse. Get a life.
Special: There is absolutely nothing special about this feat, or you for that matter.

Thick-Headed [General]
You are never wrong on a message board, unless you want to be.
Benefit: When you take this feat, all of your arguments are immune to the attacks of others and your ego is in no danger of being bruised by such attacks. No matter how many people say your argument is full of holes, your argument is still undefeatable.
Normal: Generally, you have to actually formulate a solid argument that is capable of turning people to your way of thinking. Characters that do not have this feat generally suck at convincing anyone to see their point of view.
Special: Technically, this feat doesn’t actually make your arguments undefeatable. In fact, this feat only makes you think your arguments are undefeatable. Hey, a feat can only do so much.

 

[Al]

You can't damage an opponent during Time Stop.

Your argument does still hold up, however, by the fact that the Wizard can not only buff himself up to ridiculous levels of power in that time, but also have several Metamagic Delayed Blast Fireballs ready to blow.

Although you can of course set the Magic Missiles and then they will go off later...

But, to be fair, having read IceBear's posts, he's right. This isn't clear proof that Empower Spell is broken, but that spellcasters are clearly superior to nonspellcasters. A similar trick of mine can be played with Intensify, giving ten rounds: again, enough to totally obliterate the hapless fighter.

And, in all honestly, the wizard doesn't even need Improved Spellcasting Capacity, Improved Metamagic or other epicness. Otto's Irresistable Dance, follow up with various 'blast' spells (Fireball et al.). Repeat when OID runs out (NB if you're concerned about the touch attack, a Quickened True Strike does wonders.)

 

[apsuman]

High level wizards mop the floor with high level fighters all the time.

Almost as often as low level fighters mop the floor with low level wizards.

All you have done is to demonstrate that you can substitute a spell empowered a few times in place of other spells that would kick the fighter in the rear end.

The fact that you can still use a third level spell at epic levels to me is a strength of the multiple empowers, not a weakness.

And, all of your examples seem to revolve around EPIC levels. Maybe that is the problem you are really experiencing.

I have not played at epic levels (yet) so my experience with multiple empowers are at "normal" levels. At levels 20 and below I see no problem with the multiple empowered spells. The fact that you have to go to level 30 to find how something is broken does not (imho) prove anything. The epic rules were created after the core rules, and as such are a retro-fit add-on. As good as they are they (being made by man) are an imperfection added onto an imperfect original system.

Really, if the ONLY way your wizard might be able to beat an opponent was through the use of multiple empowers, then I might re-evaluate it's brokeness. But I really doubt my opinion would change.

g!

 

[Dr_Rictus]

NO, in the round you Haste yourself, you can only take a partial action.

Which is why the fighter would be a fool to activate his boots, when he could be opening up with his full attack and very likely killing the wizard instead. So let's just forget about silly plans that involve a jillionth-level fighter, standing right next to a wizard who just tried to take 200 of his hit points, not taking his full attack for some bizarre reason.

 

[apsuman]

Until someone can show me ANY situtation in which Empower Spell DOESN'T sway EVERYTHING toward Wizard against ANY of the other NPCs presented in the ELH (since that is the only true way to test, using "equal" characters.), there is no way to show that it isn't broken.

My logic is not that strong, but I thought it impossible to disprove certain assertions.

Basically, you are staying that he is guilty, now prove him innocent.

It seem slike many people think the multiple empowered spells are just fine. Many have commented that perhaps the improved metamagic might be a problem (I wold still say no), and some have pointed you to the EPIC rules being the source of your concern.

I do think there are things in the game that are broken, time stop is one, harm is another. If I am picked to be one of the ten semi-finalists in the fantasy world submission, I will include them there. But this multiple empowered stuff is just fine.

g!

 

[James McMurray]

Until someone can show me ANY situtation in which Empower Spell DOESN'T sway EVERYTHING toward Wizard against ANY of the other NPCs presented in the ELH (since that is the only true way to test, using "equal" characters.), there is no way to show that it isn't broken.

Here's three:

Using the Sorcerer:

round 1: Sorcer wins initiative (+9 vs. +8). He casts haste and moves up. Partial Action: Temporal Stasis, or Power Word, Stun, Or Otto's Irresistable Dace, etc.

round 2: Does whatever he has to do to finish you off, up to and including non-empowered spells.

round x: loot your corpse

Using the Rogue (but we'll switch out Superior Initiative for Blinding Speed, because Haste as a free action is more useful than a +4 to intiative when you've already got +13):

round 1: Rogue wins inti. (+13 vs. +8). Activates blinding speed and moves up as his partial action. He then full attacks. All three attacks hit, dealing 48d6 + 24 (average damage 192).

round 2: loot your corpse

Using the Ranger (we'll drop to-weapon rend and Improved Favored Enemy for Multi-shot and Improved Multishot:

round 1: Ranger wins init (+12 vs. +8). Activates Blinding speed and fires 6 arrows at the wizard using his highest bonus. All hit, for 111 damage. As his haste action, he readies another Multi-shot for when you try to cast a spell. You try to cast haste, and he blasts you for another 111 damage.

round 2: loot your corpse.

It seems to me that initiative plays a much greater role in who wins the battle than empower did.

 

[CRGreathouse]

Here's three:

Beautiful examples.

 

[Shalewind]

Alright... Anubis's argument is that Stacking Empower should not be allowed, correct? I can think of only one scenario in which this can truely be tested.

Send to IDENTICAL wizards, both with Empower, up against one another. Allow one of the wizards to stack his empowers. Now, if the stacking wizard wins more than 75% of the time, yes, I think stacking empower might be a little high on the end of the scale, even for epic duels.

I have neither the expertise nor the will to pull off such a match up. A number may try, but remember, no ONE scenario will prove the point.

I think the lines are pretty much drawn on this one already. But good luck for those that want to continue this little duel. --End Bite--