Embrace Destiny + maximize + empower


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

What happens when I maximize and empower embrace destiny?

Quote:

Embrace Destiny

School divination; Level oracle 1, sorcerer/wizard 2, witch 2

CASTING

Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S

EFFECT

Range personal
Target you
Duration 1 round/level (see text)

Upon completing this spell, roll a single d20 and record the result. At any point during the duration of this spell, you may use that roll for a single ability check, attack roll, initiative check, saving throw, or skill check, using the recorded result in place of a roll. This spell cannot be used to replace a roll that has already been made; the recorded result must be used instead of a roll. Once you have used this recorded result or the duration of the spell ends, the spell's effect ends. You can't have more than one instance of embrace destiny active on you at the same time.


You would roll 1d20, take half of that result, and add it to your maximized value of 20?

"Yay I rolled a 30!"

I'd probably go with it not being a nat 20 though unless the actual roll for empowered was a nat 20. Also consider being an evil aasimar with Consecrate Spell; it's more efficient than going Maximized as it is only a +2 level adjustment.


The maximized result would be a nat 20 though, right?


chaoseffect wrote:

You would roll 1d20, take half of that result, and add it to your maximized value of 20?

"Yay I rolled a 30!"

I'd probably go with it not being a nat 20 though unless the actual roll for empowered was a nat 20. Also consider being an evil aasimar with Consecrate Spell; it's more efficient than going Maximized as it is only a +2 level adjustment.

Oh hey, that's great. You can grab the two metamagic reducing feats and cast it as a level 1 spell as an oracle.


CWheezy wrote:
The maximized result would be a nat 20 though, right?

To be honest I have no idea if it would or should work like that; knee jerk response is no, but at the same time spending a 3rd or 4th level spell slot for an auto-crit? Meh, why the hell not. That's hardly a RAW answer though.

LoneKnave wrote:
Oh hey, that's great. You can grab the two metamagic reducing feats and cast it as a level 1 spell as an oracle.

Eventually get Spell Perfection so you can Quicken for free. Blow a 1st level spell slot as a swift action to get a 20 on a roll? Oh hell yes.


Grab your scythes gentlemen!

It's harvest time.

EDIT: actually, go samsaran, grab it as a warpriest with mystica past life, use fervor to quicken it on yourself. Too bad that doesn't stack with the evil aasimar/consecrate combo.


Holy cow! That's quite the catch!
With Spell perfection, I already see some magus with scythes coming to wreck the house.

But I'm very interested in those "metamagic reducing" feats. Can you provide links please ?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

wayang spellhunter
magical lineag


1 person marked this as a favorite.
HectorVivis wrote:

Holy cow! That's quite the catch!

With Spell perfection, I already see some magus with scythes coming to wreck the house.

But I'm very interested in those "metamagic reducing" feats. Can you provide links please ?

He is referring to the traits Metamagic Master (or Wayang Spell Hunter depending your source) and Magical Lineage. If you choose the same spell for both you can apply 2 levels of metamagics to said spell without increasing the effective level. The Extra Traits feat will do it for ya if you didn't get any by default. It's a popular choice for Magi as they do love their metamagic'd Shocking Grasps/Snowballs.


I knew Magic Lineage, not the other one, but we don't use Companion feats in our circle of friends.

I'm not sure a magus can use spell perfection, it seems to me you need to be a spontaneous caster (speaking about spell slot and casting time), but it's late and I probably need to sleep. And I'm not sure about the 9th level slot limitation on a magus.

But an arcanist can absolutly. The blade adept archetype with a heavy pick and the spell strike Adept Exploit became even more potent.

At high level, I already see some scary stuff incoming. Huuuuu!


Any caster can use spell perfection, for prepared casters it just affects spells when you prepare them


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Magus can Spell Perfection all day.

That said, by my reading this doesn't work. The d20 rolled isn't a variable of the spell, I don't think. Not entirely sure though.


I think RAI would be no, maybe even RAW if you consider this language in both feats:

Quote:
Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables.

Most of the rolls you would replace would seem to fall under saving throws and opposed rolls.

Clever thinking, though.


In this case the best ruling before an FAQ would be that you can use the metamagic roll on some things, but the actual d20 roll for others.

If this is FAQ'd it would likley be ruled that the metamagic feats don't work at all for this spell, just to keep things simple.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

in any cases a 20 is not a "natural" 20
it would be a "magical" 20


I think the maximise feat text is being quoted out of context there. That is refering to the variables in saving throws and/or opposed rolls within the spell variables which aren't maximised.

Saying you can't use a maximised effect FOR a saving throw/opposed roll is kinda like saying you can't use a maximised fireball to inflict a massive damage fort save (if using those rules), because 'saving throws are not affected'. There's a logical disconnect.


Just like maximize and empower don't help dispel magic, they don't help here either.


Pirate Rob wrote:
Just like maximize and empower don't help dispel magic, they don't help here either.

the difference here is that in your example you are casting a spell that grants a specific check, in the above case the stored d20 roll is the purpose of the spell of the spell. And while I wouldn't treat it as a natural 20, I would still think you could maximize that result.

Maximize says: All variable, numeric effects of a spell modified by this feat are maximized. Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables.

This spell does not grant saving throws or opposed rolls (though the value may later be used for one, the specific use isnt part of the spell) so we don't have to worry about those. All we are left with is a variable and numeric affect, which seems like it fits with the metamagic pretty well


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"roll a single d20 and record the result" is not a variable numeric effect.

1d4 rounds
3d6+1 damage
2d4 HD
are variable numeric effects.

a d20 is a real world physical object, not a "variable, numeric effect”"


Is it a variable? Yes
Is it numeric? Yes
Is it an effect of the spell? Yes

which of these is not yes

Sczarni

Pirate Rob wrote:

"roll a single d20 and record the result" is not a variable numeric effect.

1d4 rounds
3d6+1 damage
2d4 HD
are variable numeric effects.

a d20 is a real world physical object, not a "variable, numeric effect”"

So by this logic, this spell couldnt be maximized either, correct?

Occult Mysteries wrote:

Cleromancy

School divination; Level arcanist 3, cleric/oracle 2, druid 3, hunter 3, inquisitor 3, sorcerer/wizard 3, warpriest 2

Casting Time full-round action
Components V, S, F/DF (a set of 64 chicken bones)
Effect
Range personal
Target you
Duration 1 round/caster level
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no

Description
Cleromancy involves casting bones and interpreting the results. Those able to arrive at the proper interpretation are granted knowledge of coming events. Roll 1d4 per caster level. Group the dice by like results, and choose one of the groups. For the duration of cleromancy, you can apply a luck bonus equal to the result of the selected dice to any d20 roll. You can apply this bonus to a number of rolls equal to the number of dice in the group. If cleromancy expires before you are able to allocate the total number of allotted bonuses, the remaining bonuses are lost.


yes. because there isn't a variable in it. Roll 1 die per caster level. There's nothing to maximize in this spell.


You must have a very interesting definition of "variable".


I agree with Pirate Rob in what variable means.
Fireball has a variable amount.
deals 1d6 points of fire damage per caster level.
How much damage are you dealing? any value 1-6 at lv1. 5-30 damage at lv5. There's a variable amount.

In Cleromancy, Roll 1d4 per caster level. How many do I roll at lv 1? 1 die. How many at lv 5? 5 dice. Nothing variable about it, it's set values.

in Embrace Destiny, roll 1d20. How many at lv 1? 1. how many at lv 5? 1. This isn't even a changing amount, but it's definitely not a variable amount.


You know the only difference is that one deals (variable) damage, the other adds a (variable) bonus, right?


no. that's not the only difference. You are vastly changing what the spells do. Roll 1 die per caster level or just roll 1 die. Neither of those have variable effects. Now the rest of the spell has you do something with that die/dice roll(s).

for Cleromancy it has you group those dice, pick a group, and you can add that value to a roll a number of times equal to the number in the group. Where is the variable amount?

Set number of dice rolled
set rule on how to group them
set bonus based on group picked
set number of times to use based on group picked.

I see no range of options that empower or maximize would work on.
because there isn't a "variable, numeric effects of a spell." the spell has a set effect based on the level.


Variable affects or values are any affects that can change between every casting of a spell when no other element changes.

In fireball its the damage you do. You roll a number of dice and that numeric value translates to damage. If every aspect of the environment and casting stays the same you can still get a different damage value. That's why they are variable. Maximize treats it as if you did the maximum value on damage.

In cleromancy its a bonus value for a duration. All of of these numbers change variably. With maximize you get treat the spell as having the maximum value for duration (your cl in rounds) and the maximum bonus (4). It is important to note that the number of groups, while variable, is not an effect of the spell (like bonus for a duration) and as such is not considered by maximize (though as it is the inverse of duration and the duration is maximized you could consider it to be 1).

The same goes for any roll that translates into a variable and numeric effect. In this case the numeric value is the number the spell let's you substitute for a d20 roll and can range between 1 and 20. Maximize makes this a 20. Though it does not mean you rolled a nat 20, just that the value the spell provides is a 20.


See and I don't think that's how variable affects of a spell work. Since you roll a set amount for the spell. Then the spell has you do something on those results. I see this as different from doing d6 of damage, or lasting dX rounds. Cleromancy spell will always have you roll X dice, never a different amount. I don't see any random variables in this spell. I don't feel that the results of the die rolls are counting for this. The value of the die roll is outside the scope of the spell.


Ah, so you're saying that variable applies only when the number of dice can change?


I feel the claromancy spell has a
Set number of dice rolled
set rule on how to group them
set bonus based on group picked
set number of times to use based on group picked.

I don't see a variable amount dealing with this spell. Opposed to

Fireball

deal Xd6 damage, what does the spell do? X to X*6 damage. Variable amount.

or color spray

The creature is blinded and stunned for 1d4 rounds

so the creature is stunned for 1 to 4 rounds, again variable.

So yes I know the dice rolled for claromacy won't be the same, meaning there will be different groups and different effects depending on the group you pick. But I don't see any variables on what the spell is actually doing.


Chess Pwn wrote:

I agree with Pirate Rob in what variable means.

Cleromancy has a variable amount.
Roll 1d4 per caster level.
What value are you getting? any value 1-4 at lv1. 5-20 at lv5. There's a variable amount.

In Fireball, Roll 1d6 per caster level. How many do I roll at lv 1? 1 die. How many at lv 5? 5 dice. Nothing variable about it, it's set values.

I changed the names of your examples to show the doublethink you are pulling off here


CWheezy wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

I agree with Pirate Rob in what variable means.

Cleromancy has a variable amount.
Roll 1d4 per caster level.
What value are you getting? any value 1-4 at lv1. 5-20 at lv5. There's a variable amount.

In Fireball, Roll 1d6 per caster level. How many do I roll at lv 1? 1 die. How many at lv 5? 5 dice. Nothing variable about it, it's set values.

I changed the names of your examples to show the doublethink you are pulling off here

Your example and change doesn't work.

You aren't totaling or adding the cleromancy rolls, the rolls are used for a separate part of the spell. The dice rolls go into pools and then you pick a pool to have an effect for the rest of the spell. so you don't have 5-20 somethings at lv5. You have 5 dice that you will sort into pools based on what was rolled on them.

While you fireball change doesn't work either. how much damage are you doing? THAT is why it is a variable effect, the actual outcome of the spell is variable. If it had the wording of roll Xd6 and put them into pools. Pick a pool and deal damage equal to the number * the number in the pool. Then I'd say that it doesn't have a variable effect to modify either.


Okay, so you are saying if fireball was worded like:

-Throw 1d6 for every caster level up to 10d6. A ball of fire explodes dealing that much damage.

Then that wouldn't get maximized?


The spell is granting X bonus for Y rounds.

The actual variables are X bonus for Y rounds across Z groups where X is 1-4, Y is 0 - (dice in X group) and Z is number of groups.

Are there lots of variables and are some of them dependent, YES. Is it more mathematically complicated than adding up the dice, VERRY YES. Fortunately only X and Y are related to the effect and as such interact with maximize.

Maximize means all of X is 4, and that all dice are in the 4 group, which makes Y your CL.

Just because the rules on how you come up with your variable effect are complicated doesn't mean that the effect isn't variable. The rules don't say numeric variable affects that can be arrived at using only addition or subtraction.

By your take fireball doesn't qualify because the rules on how fireball works aren't variable. You always roll a number of dice set by CL, and you always put them in a group, and you always add them up. There aren't any variables in what the spell is actually doing, its damage over an instant period of time, even though the value is variable.

In the same way cleromancy always has me roll dice, always group them by number, and always use the value of the dice as a bonus, and the number of dice as a duration. Again there aren't any variables in what the spell is actually doing, its just a bonus over a period of time a number of times.

If one works and the other does not then the assumption can't be true based only on the above.


No, because that is just rewording what is written.
I said if it was worded like roll 1d6 per caster level. Group the dice by like results, and choose one of the groups. Deal damage equal to the number on the die times the number of dice in the group.

Something like that would also not have a variable effect for the spell.


Chess Pwn wrote:

No, because that is just rewording what is written.

I said if it was worded like roll 1d6 per caster level. Group the dice by like results, and choose one of the groups. Deal damage equal to the number on the die times the number of dice in the group.

Something like that would also not have a variable effect for the spell.

But the only difference between that and fireball is that fireball is group by all results. Surely you don't think a spell telling you to group can't be what makes it variable.

Variable is defined as "not consistent or having a fixed pattern; liable to change."

Any numeric effect of a spell (damage, duration, bonus, etc) that is not consistent or having a fixed pattern" is a variable numeric value. If it also fits with the other maximize rules you can do just that.


Look I've explained my view and my points. And I'm done. I don't feel that maximize effects the die rolls because I don't feel that empowered would work for this. Since you don't have variable numeric effects to be boosting. I've explained my view and nothing you're saying is any different than what you've already said. You're example of trying to use my words against me aren't working. Fireball does not say set the dice into a group, nor does it say "Roll 1d6 per caster level." It says "deals 1d6 damage per caster level." So I feel that cleromancy saying roll a number of dice and then do something to those dice to get an effect doesn't have variable numerical values to modified with empowered or maximize.

Dice rolling isn't a numerical effect of the spell.
Dealing Xd6 damage is a numerical effect of a spell.
Maximize doesn't say get max die rolls, it says the numerical effects of the spell are maxed. The bonus that claromancy gives aren't variable, they are set on a choice you make. It just as well could say gain a bonus equal to the amount of allies you have for a number of rounds equal to enemies. This doesn't have variable numeric effects either. Just because the effect can have different effects based on your choice doesn't mean it qualifies for maximize.


Amrel wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

No, because that is just rewording what is written.

I said if it was worded like roll 1d6 per caster level. Group the dice by like results, and choose one of the groups. Deal damage equal to the number on the die times the number of dice in the group.

Something like that would also not have a variable effect for the spell.

But the only difference between that and fireball is that fireball is group by all results. Surely you don't think a spell telling you to group can't be what makes it variable.

Variable is defined as "not consistent or having a fixed pattern; liable to change."

Any numeric effect of a spell (damage, duration, bonus, etc) that is not consistent or having a fixed pattern" is a variable numeric value. If it also fits with the other maximize rules you can do just that.

Oh my gosh can you guys not read? what I'm saying is you'd roll 10 dice.

1 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6

Then you'd group them
1
2
3 3 3
4 4
5 5
6

Then you'd pick a pool and do damage equal to the number on the dice times the number of dice in the pool.
1=1*1=1
2=2*1=2
3 3 3=3*3=9
4 4=4*2=8
5 5=5*2=10
6=6*1=6

I'd pick 5 and do ten damage with the spell.

If you honestly think this is only different from a normal fireball because of grouping then any reasoning is useless.


In fireball you roll 10 dice

1 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6

Then group them
1 2 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6


To put Chess Pwn's arguments in another light:

He (and I) believe that for something to qualify for Maximize/Empower/etc., it should be a result of the spell. How many creatures summoned, how much damage dealt, etc. Rolling 1D4 per caster level for the purpose of determining something that in turn determines the result fails this on two fronts:

1. The number of dice rolled is not directly tied to the spell result. Thus it is a variable, but not a variable of the spell. In the same way, one can't Maximize the attack roll of Enervation. Is the attack roll a non-fixed numerical value that determines some of the spell's effect? Yes. It is a variable of the spell? No.
2. The difference between "1d6 damage per caster level" and "roll 1d4 per caster level" is in the context of the spell, which is being ignored here. 1d6 damage in the case of Fireball is a variable (1d6) tied to a static term (damage). 1d4, in the case of Cleromancy, is a non-random variable term (1) tied to a static term (d4). Thus one would apply Maximize to the "1" and come back with 1. By the rules of Empower, a non-random variable term cannot be Empowered, so that doesn't work.

Feel free to correct me if I misinterpreted you Chess Pwn, but that was the best simplification I had.


No, thank you so much kestral287. That is exactly what I think. The 1d4 is an object in the case of cleromancy, not a value for the spell.


I can see your reasoning though I don't agree with it. I don't see how a roll being a variable of the spell changes anything. Maximize says all variable numeric "effects" of a spell are set to their max value.

At that point you look at the end result of cleromancy, a bonus for a duration, and you figure out the maximum value for those effects, and you're done.

I agree the die rolls of either spell aren't spell effects. The damage of fireball and bonuses for a duration of cleromancy are however. Or are you claiming that damage and bonus over time aren't spell effects of those spells?

Also, attack rolls don't work because they are opposed rolls, not because they aren't variable.


The bonus isn't variable though, it's set to what you chose. That's why I feel it doesn't count for maximize.


A good comparison would be Prismatic Spray. That spell has a random variable (the effect chosen). But Maximizing it in the sense of making the d8s rolled all 8 doesn't make sense, does it?

And yet it's having you do the same thing when you boil it down to core components. Roll dice, then use that to determine something that in turn determines the spell result.


Ah I see! So even though the die roll is variable, because you can pick any of your available results it doesn't qualify.

Whereas in fireball you get what you get.

I would only say that I feel that since the available options are variable, the choices you can make are variable. I can choose from what the spell gives me, but what that is, and thus what the end results of the spell may be, are variable "or not consistent or having a fixed pattern"


Chess Pwn wrote:


If you honestly think this is only different from a normal fireball because of grouping then any reasoning is useless.

Sorry I should have said the only difference was grouping and picking.

I was implying that you pick a group, with the difference being that there is normally only one group to pick from in fireball, hence group all.

I see now that having a choice was your disqualifying condition.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think the distinction for me is that the variable entity in this spell isn't really "Total" and it's not really the result of the die. It's "Number of 1s", "Number of 2s", "Number of 3s", and "Number of 4s". Each die roll isn't really its own entity. Because of the order of operations in this, it becomes ambiguous. Also, the parameters of the spell make it impossible to simultaneously maximize all of these.

Imagine a different (less powerful) spell. In this spell, we select the number before rolling. In this case, we could clearly make it work.

That said, imagine each of these were a suit from a deck of cards (if you'd rather make it in-universe, think of Harrow Deck spells). Your answer for whether you would allow Maximize here should be the same as if you said "number of spades drawn" gives you result A, etc.

Let me ask another question that I think might be illuminating. Would you allow a maximized confusion spell to always give a result of Attack Nearest?

Edit: I appear to have been ninjaed on Confusion by Prismatic Spray. I should refresh before posting...


Berinor wrote:

I think the distinction for me is that the variable entity in this spell isn't really "Total" and it's not really the result of the die. It's "Number of 1s", "Number of 2s", "Number of 3s", and "Number of 4s". Each die roll isn't really its own entity. Because of the order of operations in this, it becomes ambiguous. Also, the parameters of the spell make it impossible to simultaneously maximize all of these.

Imagine a different (less powerful) spell. In this spell, we select the number before rolling. In this case, we could clearly make it work.

That said, imagine each of these were a suit from a deck of cards (if you'd rather make it in-universe, think of Harrow Deck spells). Your answer for whether you would allow Maximize here should be the same as if you said "number of spades drawn" gives you result A, etc.

Let me ask another question that I think might be illuminating. Would you allow a maximized confusion spell to always give a result of Attack Nearest?

Each die roll isn't its own entity in fireball either, they're added to a total EFFECT which is damage. In the same way the numbers on the dice are matched/grouped to a total effect. As we are only maximizing effects, which in this case are duration and bonus, they can all be maximized at once (the number of groups is not an effect of the spell).

As to the spades, whatever value they were connected two would be treated as its maximum possible value of 13. It wouldn't matter how many spades you did or did not draw as we only care about the end effect that number is connected to. This is because maximize says only that the spell EFFECT is maximized and hints nothing at the method used to achieve those results.

That would not work in a confusion spell because the result of "attack nearest" isn't numeric. You use dice to get that value, but that value (the effect of the spell) isn't numeric. Now if it said confused for a number of rounds equal to a variable numeric value (such as a die roll) then its duration would be could be maximized.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Amrel wrote:

Each die roll isn't its own entity in fireball either, they're added to a total EFFECT which is damage. In the same way the numbers on the dice are matched/grouped to a total effect. As we are only maximizing effects, which in this case are duration and bonus, they can all be maximized at once (the number of groups is not an effect of the spell).

As to the spades, whatever value they were connected two would be treated as its maximum possible value of 13. It wouldn't matter how many spades you did or did not draw as we only care about the end effect that number is connected to. This is because maximize says only that the spell EFFECT is maximized and hints nothing at the method used to achieve those results.

Sorry, I should have been clearer about my cards example. What I meant was imagine there's a spell that says "draw 4 cards. For each spade, deal 5 damage to an adjacent foe. For each heart, gain +1 to hit for one round. For each diamond, heal 5 damage. For each club, gain +1 to AC for one round." How would Maximize work on this? I don't think it should deal 20 damage, give +4 to hit, heal 20 damage, and give +4 to AC.

My issue is there are actually 4 variables here that the spell cannot simultaneously maximize otherwise. My feeling of Maximize is that it doesn't do anything that would be impossible otherwise. Since Cleromancy almost collapses to something where it's possible, I wouldn't have problems with it, although I would let the caster choose which result they want (always 4, but still). I want to carve it out carefully, though.

I like your confusion answer and agree completely on the rounds bit. I presume that's the same as your answer to Prismatic Spray?


The way I have always interpreted Maximize is that you play the spell out normally, and then once that's done you look at all effects the spell gives you and if any are numeric variables you maximize those.

In the card case I would treat each card as a separate effect. At the end of the spell if any of those effects were variable then they could be maximized. In this case all of the effects are straight values not variables. Now if any effects were based on die rolls, say 2d6 damage per spade, then those could be maximized.

The issue though with the card example like you said is that there are competing values and no definition of what the max would be. And for spells like that I have no idea how you would maximize.

With cleromancy what values you would alter if you were to do so are pretty obvious, you can get a maximum bonus of +4, for a maximum number of rounds equal to your caster level.

As far as the spray question yes, I would think those would maximize. Number of rounds when based on a roll is variable, numeric, and in most cases not opposed, so it should work with maximize. If it didn't things like a maximized timestop also wouldn't work, and I am fairly certain it does.

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Embrace Destiny + maximize + empower All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.