|
I believe the Intensified Spell feat should at least take up a spell slot two levels higher that just one. You are getting 5 more levels of damage added on to a spell, this would come close to actually benefiting from two spells. That's a potential 30 more points of damage with a Fireball for example. That would be a max of 90 points of damage for a 4th level spell in a 20 foot radius burst. I know other spells can be used to even better effects but I was just using this one as an example.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The balancing issue here is you need the appropriate caster level to enable such damage. While the feat won't do much for a level 10 wizard casting fireball, a level 15 would benefit from it quite alot.
Just like Power Attack, it's one of those feats that keeps getting better the higher level you are.
But but, it's a +1 spell level adjustment! That's the RAW! and as we all know, RAW is the only thing that matters and must mean the intent too! They're the rules for a reason!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the Intensified Spell feat should at least take up a spell slot two levels higher that just one. You are getting 5 more levels of damage added on to a spell, this would come close to actually benefiting from two spells. That's a potential 30 more points of damage with a Fireball for example. That would be a max of 90 points of damage for a 4th level spell in a 20 foot radius burst. I know other spells can be used to even better effects but I was just using this one as an example.
Is this another of your posts that requires us to come armed with fire and acid, Shallow?
Intensified spell does not even come close to producing the effects of 2 more spell levels. For one, it doesn't increase the save DC, and for another, it doesn't actually increase the damage that a spell does, but increases the caster level cap, which in turn may result in higher damage. As FireclawDrake points out, a 10th level wizard using it on Fireball gets absolutely no benefit, but could get some benefit moving shocking grasp up, making it a 2nd level spell comparable to scorching ray.
Also, it's generally a very bad idea to be assuming that you roll maximum damage. The average damage increase for +5d6 is 17.5. One could just as easily claim only a +5 increase as readily as a +30 increase. Incidentally, blasting isn't very good at dealing a lot of damage anyway, and Empower sucks; so perhaps the devs were trying to Stealth-patch blasters a bit with Intensified Spell.
I would also point out that Intensified Spell simple wouldn't be as appealing as Empowered spell if they had the same level adjustment. Intensified spell would really only be better for 1st level spells, roughly as powerful for high level casters with 2nd-5th level spells, and weaker for 6th and higher level spells. The fact that it only adjusts one spell level is really the only reason to take it.
|
|
I'm having a huge brain fart right now but what are the ways for an arcane caster to up his CL without leveling?
Fireball was a bad example actually.
Spells that benefit more are the damage dealers that require an attack roll because of the crit factor. When you crit it adds an extra 10 hit dice to the spell, now I know it doesn't happen often but that 10 extra dice does make a big difference.
In my opinion the feat is only barely worth taking as it is, and only for casters above 10th level (or thereabouts). If it was costed at +2 spell levels, I would never even consider it.
Spells both requiring an attack roll and dealing damage dice per caster level are few and far between.
|
|
Hmmmmmm by the wording of the feat it looks like it could actually work for a Ray of Enfeeblement.
Your spells can go beyond several normal limitations.
Benefit: An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 5 levels. You must actually have sufficient caster levels to surpass the maximum in order to benefit from this feat. No other variables of the spell are affected, and spells that inflict damage that is not modified by caster level are not affected by this feat.
Level Increase: +1 (an intensified spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell’s actual level.)
Ray of Enfeeblement
School necromancy; Level sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
330
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect ray
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Fortitude half; Spell Resistance yes
A coruscating ray springs from your hand. You must succeed on a
ranged touch attack to strike a target. The subject takes a penalty
to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5).
The subject’s Strength score cannot drop below 1. A successful
Fortitude save reduces this penalty by half. This penalty does not
stack with itself. Apply the highest penalty instead.
Okay we have a damage dice which is 1d6 and the damage done is modified by caster level (+1 per two caster levels). Now I guess the roadblock here would be the (damage) part.
I believe the Intensified Spell feat should at least take up a spell slot two levels higher that just one. You are getting 5 more levels of damage added on to a spell, this would come close to actually benefiting from two spells. That's a potential 30 more points of damage with a Fireball for example. That would be a max of 90 points of damage for a 4th level spell in a 20 foot radius burst. I know other spells can be used to even better effects but I was just using this one as an example.Is this another of your posts that requires us to come armed with fire and acid, Shallow?
He has cold, sonic and electricity immunity?? What are we going to do?
17.5 damage would hardly be worth 2 spell levels. The only way to reliably turn it into +30 damage is to apply maximize as well...
Hmmmmmm by the wording of the feat it looks like it could actually work for a Ray of Enfeeblement.
The feat doesn't work for ray of enfeeblement. Ray of enfeeblement doesn't deal any damage.
If it dealt ability damage, it would work fine. But it doesn't. It imposes a penalty to an ability score. Effects that deal ability damage specify that it's damage.
|
|
If it dealt ability damage, it would work fine. But it doesn't. It imposes a penalty to an ability score. Effects that deal ability damage specify that it's damage.
I tried to look up a "Strength Penalty" to see if it was any different than "Strength Damage" and I couldn't find a thing.
They could be the same thing.
Benefit: An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 5 levels. You must actually have sufficient caster levels to surpass the maximum in order to benefit from this feat. No other variables of the spell are affected, and spells that inflict damage that is not modified by caster level are not affected by this feat.
As far as I can tell, this only increases the maximum number of damage dice. It even specifically says that it doesn't increase other variables.
The subject takes a penalty
to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5).
Ray of Enfeeblement doesn't increase damage dice per level. It only increases a static bonus per level. Without a variable number of damage dice, this spell is inapplicable to Intensify the way I understand it.
|
|
Benefit: An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 5 levels. You must actually have sufficient caster levels to surpass the maximum in order to benefit from this feat. No other variables of the spell are affected, and spells that inflict damage that is not modified by caster level are not affected by this feat.As far as I can tell, this only increases the maximum number of damage dice. It even specifically says that it doesn't increase other variables.
Ray of Enfeeblement doesn't increase damage dice per level. It only increases a static bonus per level. Without a variable number of damage dice, this spell is inapplicable to Intensify the way I understand it.The subject takes a penalty
to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5).
Read it again
There is a damage dice of 1d6: check
Damage is modified by caster level (+1 per two levels): check
Now it's about the damage part.
I've posted a new thread about that in the rules forum.
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
Ability penalties are essentially the same thing as ability damage, but there are a few key differences.
The biggest is the one quoted above; ability damage lead to unconsciousness or death when you receive enough of it, while ability penalties can never do that.
Also, most of the effects that impose ability penalties specify they can't stack with themselves. Ability damage, however, stacks.
There is a damage dice of 1d6: check
Damage is modified by caster level (+1 per two levels): check
Now it's about the damage part.
I've posted a new thread about that in the rules forum.
You are indeed correct on this, but the damage die is not variable. It is a static damage die count. The additional bonus is the variable that changes by spell level.
If the damage die was variable, it would read "(maximum 5d6+5)". Since the damage die count is not variable, increasing the maximum number of dice through the feat would be meaningless, as you never increase the number of damage dice beyond 1.
Nah, it wouldn't have, but I guess the point is moot now. :P
Intensify Spell only applies to spells that deal damage in dice per caster level. Ray of Enfeeblement is not such a spell -- even if it actually dealt damage, there is only one damage die whether you're at caster level 1 or 10. At caster level one, the maximum number of damage dice is one, and at level ten, the maximum number of damage dice is still one.
|
|
Intensify Spell only applies to spells that deal damage in dice per caster level. Ray of Enfeeblement is not such a spell -- even if it actually dealt damage, there is only one damage die whether you're at caster level 1 or 10. At caster level one, the maximum number of damage dice is one, and at level ten, the maximum number of damage dice is still one.
For the sake of argument, if the spell did contain strength damage then you would be looking at either 6d6 + 1 per two levels or 1d6 + maximum of + 7.
Just like magic missile or acid arrow or scorching ray. Intensified Spell doesn't increase the damage for those spells either.
Master Arminas
|
|
Just like magic missile or acid arrow or scorching ray. Intensified Spell doesn't increase the damage for those spells either.
Master Arminas
That's because Magic Missile is damage per missile and scorching ray is damage per ray.
Now if scorching ray was 4d6 + 1 per two levels then yet or is Magic Missile was 1d4 + 1 per level then yes.
As long as there are dice and the damage is modified by level such as the phrase
The ray and missiles themselves never change their damage by level, only the mount of rays and missiles are affected by level.
at level 5 the spell cause 1d6+1 of strength penalty, at level 10 the spell cause 1d6+1 of streng penalty.
Don't you mean 1d6+5 at level 10?
Shallowsoul:
Hmm, I think you misunderstand something. You are very correct about Magic Missile and Scorching Ray, but those were also not examples that truly exemplify that point. (This is still assuming the spell does damage and not just a penalty, for the sake of argument)
Let's try this another way!
XdY is a method of writing die rolls.
X - The number of damage dice
Y - The die type
Xd6 is the number of d6 dice to roll.
Benefit: An intensified spell increases the maximum number of damage dice by 5 levels. You must actually have sufficient caster levels to surpass the maximum in order to benefit from this feat. No other variables of the spell are affected, and spells that inflict damage that is not modified by caster level are not affected by this feat.
Okay! The number of damage dice is X. Intensify increases the maximum of X.
It does not make X change if it doesn't change however. Let's look at Ray of Enfeeblement a little closer:
The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5).
Using our X, X = 1 in this spell. In the maximum, we get to increase the maximum to 6. Neat, let's look at that again:
The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 6d6+5).
If we stop our logic there, we might make the incorrect assumption that we can do 6d6+5. However that has a logic fallacy, for you see, the spell STILL doesn't increase the number of damage die per level.
Let's look at the important line of this new, meta-magicked, spell:
The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 6d6+5).
You see, Intensify didn't change that part, it only changed the maximum bit. You still are not gaining more damage die per level.
At level 4:
1d6 + 1/(2 caster levels) = 1d6 + 2
At level 6:
1d6 + 1/(2 caster levels) = 1d6 + 3
etc.
Do you see what the distinction is?
I suppose it's also worth pointing out that this isn't a completely useless argument. We're oddly using Ray of Enfeeblement as our example despite the fact that it doesn't technically do damage.
Finger of Death, on the other hand, does do dice damage if you fail the saving throw. So there are reasons to clarify why Finger of Death also does not benefit from Intensify.
Edit: Oops, I spoke too soon! Finger of death doesn't have a maximum at all, so it has another reason that it doesn't benefit. I should do a more thorough search to find a good example spell, but I need to go for now. >.>
Heal and Harm on the other hand...
Magic missile doesn't benefit? But I thought that is 1 missile + 1 missile every two levels.
Wouldn't an intense magic missile increase the number of missiles? Ex 13th level caster: 7d4+7?
Not per RAW. Magic Missile increase the number of missile the spell creates when you get higher CL. Intesify only increases the max caster level applied to the number of damage dice the spell deal.
The damage per missile does not change.However, applying intensify to magic missile and numbers of ray has been houseruled before, and IMO it isn't an unreasonable one.
I actually find it a little annoying that you can only apply a metamagic spell to a spell once. Honestly, Intensify Spell would be more attractive if you could take spells like shocking grasp and fireball up to 20d6 and higher; as would metamagic feats that increase the AoE, duration, and so forth. Even Extend Spell would be kind of amusing.
I actually find it a little annoying that you can only apply a metamagic spell to a spell once. Honestly, Intensify Spell would be more attractive if you could take spells like shocking grasp and fireball up to 20d6 and higher; as would metamagic feats that increase the AoE, duration, and so forth. Even Extend Spell would be kind of amusing.
I partly agree. Some metamagic feats could be done this way, but I would be concerned about the balance. As we already see people tweaking blasters using lower level spells, multiple instances of intensify might make those more attrative than higher level spells.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
I actually find it a little annoying that you can only apply a metamagic spell to a spell once. Honestly, Intensify Spell would be more attractive if you could take spells like shocking grasp and fireball up to 20d6 and higher; as would metamagic feats that increase the AoE, duration, and so forth. Even Extend Spell would be kind of amusing.
This was changed between 3.0 and 3.5, as part of a battery of changes to prevent some broken combos. I distinctly remember a conversation in a high level 3.0 game that went like this:
Metamagic caster: "Hey you want a cat's grace?"
Archer player:"No thanks, I already have a +6 item."
Metamagic caster: "I'll just cast it on you anyway. *rolls d4* Have a +22 dex for the next 36 hours."
Archer player: *eyes bug out*
There's about 3 reasons this wouldn't work in PF and one of them is that you can't stack the same metamagic multiple times.
(The other two are the stat boost spells are no longer 1d4+1, and that there are no longer effects that reduce the spell level cost of metamagic by 1 per metamagic. They were very certain to nerf-crush this combo at the 3.0-3.5 transition.)
I actually find it a little annoying that you can only apply a metamagic spell to a spell once. Honestly, Intensify Spell would be more attractive if you could take spells like shocking grasp and fireball up to 20d6 and higher; as would metamagic feats that increase the AoE, duration, and so forth. Even Extend Spell would be kind of amusing.This was changed between 3.0 and 3.5, as part of a battery of changes to prevent some broken combos. I distinctly remember a conversation in a high level 3.0 game that went like this:
Metamagic caster: "Hey you want a cat's grace?"
Archer player:"No thanks, I already have a +6 item."
Metamagic caster: "I'll just cast it on you anyway. *rolls d4* Have a +22 dex for the next 36 hours."
Archer player: *eyes bug out*
There's about 3 reasons this wouldn't work in PF and one of them is that you can't stack the same metamagic multiple times.
(The other two are the stat boost spells are no longer 1d4+1, and that there are no longer effects that reduce the spell level cost of metamagic by 1 per metamagic. They were very certain to nerf-crush this combo at the 3.0-3.5 transition.)
Incidentally, you actually demonstrate a reason why metamagic feats should stack. Barring some sort of free metamagic abuse (which we will assume is impossible for the moment), in 3.0, you rolled 1d4+1 when you used a buff spell like Cat's Grace. Now you could apply metamagic feats like Maximize/Empower, raising the slot required for the spell appropriately. That means even at higher levels when everyone is walking around with +4 or better enhancement bonuses, you still had relevant buffs.
For example, if you empowered a Bull's Strength say 3 times, you'd be looking at an 8th level spell slot, but you'd get 1d4+1 * 4.5, which results in an average of about +13 enhancement to a single ability. Seems perfectly reasonable for an 8th level spell to me; especially since you're only going to be getting benefits from half of it (since it's effectively equal to 13 minus your magic item's enhancement bonus).
Looking at it from a simple "blaster" angle, the spells don't exactly line up with a straight stacking of Intensify, even if it were legal.
Shocking Grasp - 1st level Spell (maximum 5d6)
Fireball - 3rd level spell (maximum 10d6)
Dragon's Breath - 4th level spell (maximum 12d6)
Cone of Cold - 5th level spell (maximum 15d6)
Chain Lightning - 6th level spell (maximum 20d6)
Now, certainly the area of effect is changing between these spells, but if you could stack Intensify, you could make Shocking Grasp do 20d6 damage as a 4th level spell.
Normally, you could do 10d6 damage only one spell level lower at 2nd level, with the big difference between Fireball being an AoE burst versus a single touch attack.
If you wanted to make a house rule for stacking Intensify, my house ruling would be: For each additional use of a metamagic feat beyond the first, increases the spell level adjustment by one (example, Twice Intensified Shocking Grasp = 1st level spell + 1 Intensify + 2 Intensify = 4th level spell that maximizes at 15d6 damage).
This would let our touch attack level 1 spell remain 1 level lower than the AoE spells of equivalent damage, but the AoE spells line up perfectly otherwise.
I skimmed several posts (at work) so someone might have mentioned intensified is also good for a multiclassed caster. I have a sorc/wizard who uses a lot of evocation, and it helps his concept
I skimmed several posts (at work) so someone might have mentioned intensified is also good for a multiclassed caster. I have a sorc/wizard who uses a lot of evocation, and it helps his concept
How on earth is it good for multiclassed characters, unless you're stacking a lot of traits and magic items to buff your effective caster level somehow? It doesn't raise the damage by +5 dice, it's still based on caster level. A 15th level wizard / 5th level sorcerer is still only CL 15 and CL 5. You could get a fireball to 15d6, but your sorcerer's shocking grasp would only be 5d6 forever.
Well, he's a wiz8/sorc1. I didn't mean it to sound like it was effective for both classes, that wasn't my intent. He has varisian tattoo and specialization fireball, so he can cast 11d6 fireballs at his level rather than 8, and I hardly think that's super focused on stacking caster levels, although not possibly super optimized either.
Although now that I've thought on it, it really isn't any different from anyone else who would make use of the feat... *shrug*
I removed a post. The dismissive tone is not helping.