Should a spell that gives +2 to hit and to damage, which is better than Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization combined, last for more than one encounter? Is that really that useless? I know not all versions of the stat spells affect strength, but no one's going to put the stat spells at different levels.
It sounds reasonable for a 2nd lvl spell. Seems kind of good for a 1st level spell. It's not as good as before, but it doesn't seem useless to me.
E.B. has pointed out several times that bless is better because it affects the whole party. It is first level. I realize that bless is rounds and BS is minutes, but it amounts to the same thing one encounter.
The probability is 50% for normal statbuffs--the kind which can be extended to last most of the day and still not cause the wizard to say "forget it, I want to cast cone of cold" or the cleric to say "I'm prepping a flame strike instead" (and both of them to be right in their estimation that, not only will that choice enable them to seem to do more in combat, it will be a better choice in terms of the party's ability to deal damage to their opponents)--and 75% for empowered statbuffs.
OK, I was going to bow out, but this is just plain incorrect.
You have a 25% chance of rolling a "1" on 1d4, yielding a stat boost of +2 from a regular stat buff spell. You thus have a 75% (count it) chance of rolling something better. And yes, a 3 is better than a 2, E_B; characters do have odd ability scores.
Really, I think the crux of our disagreement comes down to whether there was anything broken about empowered stat buffs. The long duration seems to primarily concern you when attached to empowered and extended spells.
No, it's just that I was saying that at lower levels, where those 4th-level slots aren't affordable, the stat buffs entail too large a cost in spell slots to be "broken." At higher levels, when you can spend spell slots and get them back the night before adventuring, the spell slots have a negligible cost.
OK, I was going to bow out, but this is just plain incorrect.
You have a 25% chance of rolling a "1" on 1d4, yielding a stat boost of +2 from a regular stat buff spell. You thus have a 75% (count it) chance of rolling something better. And yes, a 3 is better than a 2, E_B; characters do have odd ability scores.
OK, with odd ability scores, there is a 75% chance for a nonmodified stat buff to be as good or better than a +4 item.
With even ability scores, there is only a 50% chance for the 2nd level spell to be as good or better than a +4 item.
Whether odd or even ability scores are more common will depend upon your character generation method and character level, (Iconic spread characters will tend to have odd stats from levels 1-3 and 8-11; 28 point characters will more commonly have odd scores from levels 4-7 and 12-15; etc).
No, it's just that I was saying that at lower levels, where those 4th-level slots aren't affordable, the stat buffs entail too large a cost in spell slots to be "broken." At higher levels, when you can spend spell slots and get them back the night before adventuring, the spell slots have a negligible cost.
I think then we also disagree on the nature of typical adventures. IME, the "day 0 or day 1?" problem and the "day 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6" factor prevent the slot cost from commonly being negligible. I figure the ability to be super buffed to be an inherent mitigating factor for the difficulty one day adventures where the party knows the day of their coming combat in advance and has time to prepare.
Actually, unless it's been changed in the revision, bless is min/level as well.
Prayer is round/level however it also adds to damage, skill checks and saving throws and penalizes enemies at the same time.
rangerjohn said:
E.B. has pointed out several times that bless is better because it affects the whole party. It is first level. I realize that bless is rounds and BS is minutes, but it amounts to the same thing one encounter.
