|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
had players sit down at a table that i ran that were used to the GM running empowered spells as 50% more dice.
empowered 10th caster level magic missile: 7d4+7 force.
empowered scorching ray: 6d6 fire.
citing that it was up to the gm or not defined well in the rules/ the james jacobs thread has it listed as "how he'd do it".
I'm a GM that has always been: roll what you're supposed to. add half that result. that's your final number.
empowered 10th caster level magic missile: 5d4+5 ( get number, add half )
because if you have any static bonuses from abilities that give you some net bonus per die ( like some sorcerer bloodlines ), having your empowered ability with bonuses per die, scale widely.
an empowered dragon bloodline lightning bolt at 10th level is 10d6+10 (average of 35 + 17.5 = 52 dmg) my way, 15d6 +22 the other way ( rolling half as many additional dice, at +1 damage per die is +15. plus half the numerical bonus like the FAQ on cure moderate wounds indicates you do for an additional +7, works out to 52.5 + 22 = a higher average of 74 damage because of the additional points per die.
its just disturbing to me that there's possibly table variation on this out there. that empowered spells are only adjucated my way at my table, and that at other tables these players will go back to the other way of rolling empowered spells.
its disturbing on the low end too , that a 5d4+5 magic missile (min 10, avg 17.5, max 25)
empowered my way: min 15, avg 25, max 37
empowered the +50% more dice way: 7d4+7 : min 14, avg 24.5, max 35, isn't a true +50% because you can't roll 7.5 dice for magic missile.
are there other people doing this??
|
The problem I have with adding half the dice is this, it allows some instances where spells do more damage on average Empowered then Maximized, your example of 10d6+10 lightning bolt becoming 15d6+22, the max damage before empower is 70 damage, which would be the damage with maximize, the average of 15d6+22 is higher then that by 4.5 points of damage, where as your way empower averages at 67.5 (you forget to add the +10 for the empowered lightning bolt). 74.5 vs 67.5 isn't a large difference, but the fact that more then 50% of the time empower would be better then maximize is not something I like, considering maximize is +3 while empower is +2.
The only metamagic that should affect the # of dice rolled is Intensify.
By the rules you multiply the final number. It is also explained in the rules. Well actually in the FAQ which does it the same way 3.5 did.
So, if you multiply, how would you handle a Maximized, Empowered spell?
They work separately. Maximize provides maximum from the base roll, which you add to the bonus damage Empower provides based on the base roll.
For instance, a maximized and empowered 10d6 lightning bolt would deal 60 from maximize, plus half of a 10d6 roll.
That's also what the Maximize Spell feat itself states:
An empowered, maximized spell gains the separate benefits of each feat: the maximum result plus half the normally rolled result.
So, if you multiply, how would you handle a Maximized, Empowered spell?
An empowered, maximized spell gains the separate benefits of each feat: the maximum result plus half the normally rolled result.
So if damage for spell X is 10d6, an empowered maximized spell X does [60 + (whatever you roll on 10d6)/2] damage.
Edit: So very ninja'd.
|
|
an empowered dragon bloodline lightning bolt at 10th level is 10d6+10 (average of 35 + 17.5 = 52 dmg) my way, 15d6 +22 the other way ( rolling half as many additional dice, at +1 damage per die is +15. plus half the numerical bonus like the FAQ on cure moderate wounds indicates you do for an additional +7, works out to 52.5 + 22 = a higher average of 74 damage because of the additional points per die.
This is not how it works - you've added 50% twice!
A dragon bloodline lightning bolt, non-empowered at 10th level does 10d6+10.
An empowered dragon bloodline lightning bolt does 1.5*(10d6+10). If you want to roll the extra dice, you distribute that across the parentheses for 1.5*(d6) + 1.5*(10) = 15d6+15, NOT 15d6 + (15*1.5).
Either way, 1.5*(10d6+10) or 15d6+15, you have min 30, avg 67.5, max 105
It does become a problem when you have an odd number of dice to empower, which is why I like to roll first and multiply the total by 1.5, but with an even number of dice the only difference is the probability distribution - the odds of an average result go up when you increase the number of dice rolled.
|
|
This is not how it works - you've added 50% twice!A dragon bloodline lightning bolt, non-empowered at 10th level does 10d6+10.
An empowered dragon bloodline lightning bolt does 1.5*(10d6+10). If you want to roll the extra dice, you distribute that across the parentheses for 1.5*(d6) + 1.5*(10) = 15d6+15, NOT 15d6 + (15*1.5).
Either way, 1.5*(10d6+10) or 15d6+15, you have min 30, avg 67.5, max 105
It does become a problem when you have an odd number of dice to empower, which is why I like to roll first and multiply the total by 1.5, but with an even number of dice the only difference is the probability distribution - the odds of an average result go up when you increase the number of dice rolled.
*I* haven't added the 50% twice.
Dragon bloodline states that it deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.If people are going out and adjucating that empowered is +50% the number of dice, +50% the static bonus, then the 15d6 method of rolling the empowered dragon bloodline lightning bolt w/ matching shoes , by definition of the bloodline arcana, starts with a +15 static modifier. that static modifier then gets +50% according to empower, hence i arrived at 22.
i've had people in NY ask me if i roll extra dice for empower, and now people in texas. so I know its getting into peoples heads to roll extra dice instead of just adding half the total. and i don't get why!
Morgen: exactly. thats why you should always take the final result, and add half of it. so a caster level 1 wizard with magic missile and a rod of lesser empower, would deal 1d4+1 +50% . so if they roll a 3+1 = 4, they add half the 4 for a total of 6.
|
|
All right, I should have said "in your example the 50% is added to the static number twice."
I agree with your method because of the problem with multiplying an odd number of dice by 1.5, and because it means I have to keep track of and add together less dice. But if you have an even number of dice and you do your math right they do come out the same.
Dragon bloodline states that it deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.
If people are going out and adjucating that empowered is +50% the number of dice, +50% the static bonus, then the 15d6 method of rolling the empowered dragon bloodline lightning bolt w/ matching shoes , by definition of the bloodline arcana, starts with a +15 static modifier. that static modifier then gets +50% according to empower, hence i arrived at 22.
The FAQ states that the benefit of Empower affects / applies to / improves the numerical bonus of a spell. It does not say that under any circumstances the bonus applies twice.
Start with 2d8+4 (or whatever caster level)
1) Roll dice, get avg 13
2) Add 50%, get 19.5.
Start with 2d8+4
1) Add 50% (both items), get 3d8+6
2) Roll dice, get avg 19.5
For something like lightning bolt with the dragon bloodline, you have three things: roll dice, add +1 per die, and add 50%. You can do this in whatever order you want, as long as the numerical bonus is included in the +50%.
Your way:
Start with 10d6
1) Add +1 per die, get 10d6+10
2) Roll dice, get avg 45
3) Add 50%, get avg 67.5
Or, their way:
Start with 10d6
1) Add +1 per die, get 10d6+10
2) Add 50% (both items), get 15d6+15
3) Roll dice, get avg 67.5
Or alternative their way:
Start with 10d6
1) Add 50%, get 15d6
2) Add +1 per die, get 15d6+15
3) Roll dice, get avg 67.5
You don't get an extra +50% just because you decided to apply that step first. Because the +1 per die is based on the number of dice, it's still affected by step 1 and thus the FAQ ruling that Empower affects the static bonus has been fulfilled.
1.5(xd# + y) can be calculated by calculating xd# + y (by rolling first) and multiplying the result by 1.5.
Or, it can be calculated by the distributive property: 1.5(xd# + y) = 1.5xd# + 1.5y. Then you roll your dice and add your increased numerical bonus.
If y = x (the caster level), 1.5xd# + 1.5y = 1.5xd# + 1.5x = 1.5(xd#+x). The second half doesn't get multiplied by 1.5 twice just because x is multiplied by 1.5 in the first half.
|
|
i agree, done right, for even dice dice pools, it works out right, as long as players don't add bonus damage for the extra dice being rolled.
but the third verbal way you've listed is inconsistent. you're empowering the ability, and running it verbatum as +1/die, but failing to empower the flat bonus. its not commutative when the flat bonus is based on the # of dice instead of the caster level.
for abilities that add x/die it can be confusing to players if they view the empowered dice pool as the total dice pool to add x/die to.
I can see people thinking of them as just extra dice, and adding flat bonuses to the extra dice they roll.
you're saying 1.5(xd# +y) = 1.5(xd#) + 1.5y
and you're presuming that y = x ( the caster level )
but in the case of dragon bloodline sorcerers y isn't a direct factor of the caster level.
cure moderate wounds varies in that x = a set number of dice for the spell, while y varies with the caster level from 1 to a max based on the spell. the bonus being added is based on the caster level, not the number of dice being rolled.
lightning bolt varies in that x = the caster level with a limit of 10.
in the case of Intense spells, we see that limit increase up to 15, limited by the caster level. the bonus is based on the number of dice being rolled. if you were to change x, the number of dice, you'd alter the bonus being added to the roll.
1.5(xd# + y)
where x is the caster level subject to the limit.
and y is the number of dice being rolled.
1.5(xd#) + 1.5(y)
y = 1.5x ( 1.5 * the number of dice rolled. x. )
1.5(xd#) + 1.5(1.5x)
1.5(xd#) = 2.25(x)
There's an order of operations in the verbal one, that I can't wrap my head around in the mathematical explanation.
that being the value being empowered is based on the number of dice.
so as the number of dice increase, that value increases, before the flat value is multiplied by the empowered amount, due to the correlation between x and y.
|
|
for example if i were to empower cure serious wounds at caster level 5
3d8+5
i can say 1.5(3d8 + 5) is equal to 1.5(3d8) + 1.5(5).
because the 5 and 3 truely x and y, independent of eachother.
but if i made up a rule that cure spells gained 1hp per die rolled
i'm adding a relation between x and y.
i need to determine x, before i can account for y.
thats why when i then take 1.5(3d8) i determine x, and can then figure out y.
I am definitely guilty of having Empower increase the dice and not the total back in 3rd edition (hasn't come up in Pathfinder), and I was even sure it was supposed to be that way despite feeling wrong.
I know why, too. It's because of the way 3rd edition changed critical hits and multiplication in general.
Maybe I was doing it wrong, but in AD&D 2nd edition, I doubled the final result of the damage roll on a crit (as I did with Backstab).
When 3rd came around, I was given contrary instructions: roll the damage dice multiple times. I had to multiply the variable, not the result. It was weird. In the past, if I crit with my long sword and I rolled an 8, boom, 16 damage before modifiers. Awesome!
In 3rd edition, though, I was explicitly instructed to roll 2d8 instead. Lame--but regardless of lameness, I had to make a mental adjustment. I changed my brain so that when I saw multiplication, I multiplied the variable before rolling.
Hence why, when I saw Empower raise damage by 50%, I saw x1.5 and thought I had to raise the variables by 50%. 6d6 Empowered became 9d6. 15d6 Empowered became 22d6+1d6/2. It was awkward, but I did it anyway because it's what I was trained to do by their weird crit system.
|
|
I suppose rolling d6 and dividing by 2 would work for the odd-dice case.
you're saying 1.5(xd# +y) = 1.5(xd#) + 1.5y
and you're presuming that y = x ( the caster level )
No, I'm saying y = x = number of dice rolled which in this case = caster level. Sorry, I didn't make that clear.
lightning bolt varies in that x = the caster level with a limit of 10.
in the case of Intense spells, we see that limit increase up to 15, limited by the caster level. the bonus is based on the number of dice being rolled. if you were to change x, the number of dice, you'd alter the bonus being added to the roll.
Yes, and altering the bonus added to the roll fulfils the requirement that the bonus be improved by the Empower Spell feat. So we don't need to increase it again.
but if i made up a rule that cure spells gained 1hp per die rolled
i'm adding a relation between x and y.i need to determine x, before i can account for y.
thats why when i then take 1.5(3d8) i determine x, and can then figure out y.
Yes, but once you've taken 1.5(3d8), you have already completed the operation "multiply by 1.5" and do not repeat that operation.
Functions:
Empower(ad#+b) = 1.5(ad#+b) = 1.5ad# + 1.5b
Dragon(ad#+b) = ad#+a+b
Empower(Dragon(xd#+y)) = Empower(xd#+(x+y) ) = 1.5xd# + 1.5(x+y) = 1.5xd# + 1.5x + 1.5y
**Note: b = x+y
Dragon(Empower(xd#+y)) = Dragon(1.5xd# + 1.5y) = 1.5xd# + 1.5x + 1.5y
**Note: a = 1.5x
For the lightning bolt example, d# = d6, x = 10, y = 0, 1.5xd# + 1.5x + 1.5y = 15d6 + 15.
In this case, even though Dragon makes the constant a function of the dice rolled, it works out the same. Both Dragon and Empower are applied to the entire dice expression as required by FAQ. Either Dragon adds a constant that has been increased by Empower (via increased number of dice), or Empower increases a constant added by Dragon. The order is irrelevant to the final result.
I can see why someone might argue otherwise, but it doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.
|
|
altering the bonus added to the roll fulfills the requirement that the bonus be improved by the empower spell feat, but it does not fulfill the rule that they get to add 1 point per die.
1.5 (Xd + Y) just empowers the spell. it doesn't take into account that they get extra points per die.
you're saying that empowering takes that into effect. it doesn't. you have to re add that in.
if i intensify a 10d6 fireball at caster level 15, i'm rolling 15d6+15 before any other modifiers. if i'm a half orc, with the right traits, i'm adding an additional 7 or 8 points of fire damage.
if i then empower all of that, at base, i have 15d6+23. but when i change 15d6 into 15d6 + 7d6 for empower via dice, i have to add 7 to the flat numerical bonus, before i empower the numerical bonus because the number of dice has changed. you end up with 22d6+45.
my argument is that because there are mechanics in the game that change based on the # of dice rolled, you can't simply add the dice anymore as an alternate way of using the empower mechanic, because the formula is no longer 1.5(x + y).
|
|
Dragon(Empower(xd#+y)) = Dragon(1.5xd# + 1.5y) = 1.5xd# + 1.5x + 1.5y
with that. at x = 10
15d6 + 15 + 15 isn't right.
you're coming up with formulas that aren't right, because they're based on dice math. but its not being determined right:
hard rule: roll all your supposed to, add half of that in the end.
stop the madness. no more dice empowerment.
|
|
I agree with your rule for simplicity and because of the issue with an odd number of dice. However, the math is correct.
1.5 (Xd + Y) just empowers the spell. it doesn't take into account that they get extra points per die.
you're saying that empowering takes that into effect. it doesn't. you have to re add that in.
Yes it does. If you have Empowered the dice, you have Empowered the dice-based bonus.
if i intensify a 10d6 fireball at caster level 15, i'm rolling 15d6+15 before any other modifiers. if i'm a half orc, with the right traits, i'm adding an additional 7 or 8 points of fire damage.
if i then empower all of that, at base, i have 15d6+23. but when i change 15d6 into 15d6 + 7d6 for empower via dice, i have to add 7 to the flat numerical bonus, before i empower the numerical bonus because the number of dice has changed. you end up with 22d6+45.
No, you get 1.5(15d6+23) = 1.5(15)d6 + 1.5*23 = 22d6+34. Distributive property of multiplication.
my argument is that because there are mechanics in the game that change based on the # of dice rolled, you can't simply add the dice anymore as an alternate way of using the empower mechanic, because the formula is no longer 1.5(x + y).
The formula is still 1.5(x+y) where y = x /(d#). The distributive property still applies.
Dragon(Empower(xd#+y)) = Dragon(1.5xd# + 1.5y) = 1.5xd# + 1.5x + 1.5y
with that. at x = 10
15d6 + 15 + 15 isn't right.
Not for Empowered Dragon Bloodline Lightning Bolt CL 10, because in that case y = 0 (because there is no constant bonus to the dice roll before applying Dragon). With y = 0, you get 15d6 + 15, which is correct.
For a case like the half-orc casting intensified empowered dragon bloodline fireball, y has a non-zero value. And it still works!
Dragon(1.5xd# + 1.5y) = 1.5xd# + 1.5x + 1.5y
(for x = 15, y = 8, # = 6):
Dragon(1.5(15)d# + 1.5(8)) = 1.5(15)d6 + 1.5(15) + 1.5(8) = 22(d6)+22+12 = 22d6+34
Not 22d6+45
The "x" gets exactly one +50%
you're coming up with formulas that aren't right, because they're based on dice math
Dice math is fine. Treat d# as a variable that can be substituted with any integer in its range and you get the same answer. The only difference is in the probability distribution.
Not only is empower still causing discussions, there isn't a single aspect of the game that discussions ever entirely cease.
As long as there are rules, there will always be at least 2 people arguing over them.
I wish to argue that point...hang on, that only proves it! Doh, beaten by my own logic.
|
|
you don't get it.
when 1.5x extra dice are added, 1.5x extra points can be added before figuring how much the flat bonus is. changing the # of dice alters the per dice bonus.
10d6+10 to 15d6+15 empowered has only empowered the spell, not added extra damage for the five new dice that are being added to the pool.
and i don't know why i'm arguing how players might confuse/abuse the system, when i rather they not use extra dice method anyway.
|
|
We're repeating ourselves. We both got invested in a debate that isn't going anywhere.
Perhaps we can agree that whether or not the math works out the same, it is preferable to roll and total everything, then Empower the total, because in that case the issue of the dice-based bonus does not even come up.