What Empowered value gets multiplied?

[Barcode]

When you empower a spell that has a variable, numeric effect, but with a constant added, is just the roll multiplied by 1.5 or is the entire (variable and numeric) amount multiplied?

For example, cure serious wounds heals 3d8 + caster level hit points of damage. Is the empowered effect (1.5*3d8) + CL, or 1.5 * (3d8 + CL)? Technically, 3d8+CL is a variable and numeric value, so I don't think it is clear.

If it is the latter, has it occurred to anyone that an empowered spell applied to something with a large constant can be more effective than a maximized version of the same spell?

I could swear that I saw this clarified (as the former) before, but I can't seem to find it.

Your help is appreciated...

-B-

 

[Pielorinho]

Check the example of multiplying magic missile: you multiply (1d4+1)*1.5, not (1d4*1.5)+1. In other words, you get the stronger benefit, not the weaker benefit.

Daniel

 

[Pielorinho]

As for the question about whether it can be better than maximizing, that's definitely true. A regular magic missile does an average of 3.5 points of damage. 1.5*3.5 is, unless my math skills have gone totally out the window, 5.25. A maximized magic missile does 5 points of damage.

So for certain spells, empowering is better than maximizing. Obviously, for other spells, it's not. Your average 10d6 fireball does 35 points damage; empowered is 52.5 points damage; maximized is 60 points damage.

Daniel

 

[nhl_1997]

I could swear that I saw this clarified (as the former) before, but I can't seem to find it.


-B-

Check the 3.0 FAQ. We've had this discussion in our group (maybe you're event in the same group since I don't know anyone's login ID.) Our GM has said that the wording in 3.5 is nearly identical to the wording in 3.0, and the 3.0 FAQ clarified the feat so that only the die (dice) rolled are multiplied by 1.5.

I did check the math on empowering some spells versus maximizing them (at high caster levels.) For magic missile, ray of enfeeblement, cure light wounds, and false life, an empowered version where you include the bonuses before multiplying will, on average, be more effective than a maximized version. Those were the only spells I checked.

 

[apsuman]

There are statistical words for what I am about to say, but the larger the die, the more maximize is better than empower.

There is a spell in tome and blood that does d4 per caster level +1 per caster level so the range for a tenth level caster is 20-50 (10d4+10), average is 35 just like a fireball. Empowered this new spell does an average of 52.5 (just like fireball) but Maximized it only does 50, 10 less than the fireball.

If there were another spell that did 1d8-1 per level, then average damage and average empowered damage would be the same but the maximized damage would be greater.

 

[apsuman]

Check the 3.0 FAQ. We've had this discussion in our group (maybe you're event in the same group since I don't know anyone's login ID.) Our GM has said that the wording in 3.5 is nearly identical to the wording in 3.0, and the 3.0 FAQ clarified the feat so that only the die (dice) rolled are multiplied by 1.5.

I don't think so. The 3.0 PHB was pretty clear that "you heal half again as much damage with an empowered cure light wounds spell" or some such verbage. It was pretty clear to me that you calculate all effects as normal then multiply by 1.5 at the end.

 

[Pielorinho]

Check the 3.0 FAQ. We've had this discussion in our group (maybe you're event in the same group since I don't know anyone's login ID.) Our GM has said that the wording in 3.5 is nearly identical to the wording in 3.0, and the 3.0 FAQ clarified the feat so that only the die (dice) rolled are multiplied by 1.5.

The 3.5 FAQ doesn't have anything on the empower spell feat. The 3.0 FAQ does have a passage on creating an empowered wand of magic missiles, ending with this sentence:

For that price, you get a wand that produces 3 magic missiles (a 5th-level caster creates 3 missiles with a magic missile spell), each dealing 1d4+1x1.5 points of damage [emphasis added]

That statement would benefit from parentheses; as it currently reads, each missile does 1d4 points of damage plus 1.5 points of damage, which is obviously not right. However, it definitely doesn't say that each missile does 1d4 x 1.5 + 1 point of damage; the only reasonable interpretation, I think, is that it should say (1d4+1)x1.5 points of damage.

Daniel

 

[nhl_1997]

Yes, the PHB clearly states in its example that an empowered magic missile does (1d4+1)*1.5 points of damage per missile. It's my guess that this example is simply wrong. My argument for this guess is that in my opinion, an empowered spell should never, on average, be more effective than the maximized version. This is why an empowered spell takes up a slot two levels higher and a maximized spell takes a slot three levels higher.

However, that is only my opinion. Perhaps the rules were in fact written with the intention of making some spells more effective at a +2 cost than the same spells at a +3 cost.

If, instead, only the actual die (dice) rolled are multiplied by 1.5, then on average, a maximized spell will always be more effective than the empowered version regardless of the number of dice, number of sides on each die, and regardless of modifiers.

 

[Lamoni]

However, that is only my opinion. Perhaps the rules were in fact written with the intention of making some spells more effective at a +2 cost than the same spells at a +3 cost.

It just so happens that those spells that are more effective with empower are the ones that you would probably never want to maximize. Actually, there are a lot of spells that fall somewhere in-between. If the spell does most of the damage by a constant +X, no one will raise it 3 levels for only 3-4 more points of damage. That is where empower is beneficial. Empower helps spells that maximize would not... that doesn't mean maximize is being overshadowed. It still has its uses.

To put it another way, widen also uses up a spot 3 levels higher, but there are MANY spells and even more circumstances where using almost any other metamagic feat (or none at all) would be better. Just because it has a higher level cost doesn't mean it needs to be better in every situation.

 

[nhl_1997]

However, that is only my opinion. Perhaps the rules were in fact written with the intention of making some spells more effective at a +2 cost than the same spells at a +3 cost.

This was actually intended as a perfectly reasonable intention by the designers. I apologize if it seemed sarcastic.

Suppose a spell caster wants to select one of the two feats but not both. How can you decide which one to take? One way to answer that question depends on the spell-caster. Are you throwing a lot of fireballs (or any XdY + 0 spells)? If that's the case, then maximize is the better selection (if you're willing to pay the extra slot.) If instead, you're mostly using spells with bonuses, then empower is the much better choice.

However, I'm still convinced that that was not the actual intent of the designers.