It functions as the Empower Spell metamagic feat. Flat, unvariable bonuses are not effected by the increase in damage. It is pretty much just the dice you are rolling that get their total Empowered.
1.5(3d6)+3+4(Con)+2(DA)+2(EO)
Hmm, I was not aware of the FAQ for the Empower Spell, however, I still disagree with you on adding the CON bonus and the Elemental Overflow to the damage dealt. Those are not 'variable effects' based on the character level, or the kinetic blast itself. They are rider effects, like Deadly Aim.
So, after re-evaluation: 1.5(3d6+3)+4 Con +2 EO + 2 DA
That's my final answer, barring any other FAQ I am unaware of.
|
Hmm, I was not aware of the FAQ for the Empower Spell, however, I still disagree with you on adding the CON bonus and the Elemental Overflow to the damage dealt. Those are not based on the character level, or the kinetic blast itself. They are rider effects, like Deadly Aim.
So, after re-evaluation: 1.5(3d6+3)+4 Con +2 EO + 2 DA
That's my final answer, barring any other FAQ I am unaware of.
CL is not based on character level either.
CL is not based on character level either.
Your point? In most cases, it is, and even when it is not, there are very few instances of it being variable (ie, left up to the dice roll).
I'm pointing out that CL bonuses are modified by empower, and are -not- tied to character level. Which means your argument doesn't work. UNless I misunderstood your statement.
If replacing 'character level' with 'caster level' resolves the problem for you, then do so.
|
|
I'm pointing out that CL bonuses are modified by empower, and are -not- tied to character level. Which means your argument doesn't work. UNless I misunderstood your statement.If replacing 'character level' with 'caster level' resolves the problem for you, then do so.
Then why does "caster level" work differently from other numeric modifiers?
It functions as the Empower Spell metamagic feat. Flat, unvariable bonuses are not effected by the increase in damage. It is pretty much just the dice you are rolling that get their total Empowered.
1.5(3d6)+3+4(Con)+2(DA)+2(EO)
Umm... no.
Benefit: All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by half including bonuses to those dice rolls.
A physical simple blast deals nd6 + n + Con, where n = level/2 rounded up.
At 3rd level, a kineticist’s body surges with energy from her chosen element whenever she accepts burn, causing her to glow with a nimbus of fire, weep water from her pores, or experience some other thematic effect. In addition, she receives a bonus on her attack rolls with kinetic blasts equal to the total number of points of burn she currently has, to a maximum bonus of +1 for every 3 kineticist levels she possesses. She also receives a bonus on damage rolls with her kinetic blast equal to double the bonus on attack rolls.
You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all ranged attack rolls to gain a +2 bonus on all ranged damage rolls.
Thus, OP's empowered kinetic blast will deal (3d6+11)x1.5 damage.
|
|
Generally, Deadly Aim is a net negative for Kineticist anyway since it only applies to a physical blast which targets regular AC and doesn't contribute enough damage to be worth the penalty to hit.
This is true maybe of earlier/mid levels, but I think it is well worth it at later levels for ranged blasts. You only get one blast, so you are working with full BaB. Your to hit will normally be "high enough" that it can take the to hit penalty.
but thats a different thread.
Benefit: All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by half including bonuses to those dice rolls.A physical simple blast deals nd6 + n + Con, where n = level/2 rounded up.
I feel like I need to explain the difference between a 'dice' roll and a damage roll, and what 'variable, numeric' effects are within that damage roll but realize that I've said all that I want to say on the matter.
I stand by my last calculation offered. My advice won't change unless further clarification via FAQ is revealed.
|
|
so... you are saying that a dice roll (broad category) and a damage roll (specific category) are mutually exclusive things?
If you roll a die... whether for damage, or for healing, is that not a dice roll?
Note I'm not necessarily saying you are incorrect. I am unsure, which is why I made this thread. I'm just having a hard time understanding how you are differentiating which numerical modifiers get modified by the empower ability.
...does the feat affect the numerical bonus?
Yes.
I don't understand why there is any remaining question.
There is a die roll with a numerical bonus. So, the numerical bonus is affected by the feat. Honestly, that ruling surprises me, but the wording of the FAQ is clear.
Edit: Actually, I do see a point of contention that the feat affects the “spell” and so probably doesn’t cover modifiers that are not part of the spell itself. The constitution and level bonus are baked into the text of the blast so are covered. The overflow bonus is outside the blast’s own text and so isn’t.
It might be nice to know how empower works with something like a draconic sorcerer’s damage increase. That bonus is outside the spell, so is it modified by empower?
so... you are saying that a dice roll (broad category) and a damage roll (specific category) are mutually exclusive things?
If you roll a die... whether for damage, or for healing, is that not a dice roll?
Since you asked politely, I will attempt an explanation.
A die roll is the role of a single dice, which can (and often is) part of the overall calculation of damage, healing, chance of X happening, etc.
As far as the Empower Spell metamagic feat is involved, we have to look specifically at the variable, numerical aspects of the spell (and the kinetic blast). This is not variable OR numeric, but both, of the DICE rolls. A fireball, for instance: Those values are the 10d6. For a sorcerer with damage added to the dice, that is the 10d6+10 (each VARIABLE part of the spell is the 1d6+1 dice roll, which varies from 2 to 7). A kinetic blast is similar, because you have the d6 dice, plus the 1/2 kineticist level. Those are the variable effects of the DICE rolls.
The Constitution modifier does not affect the variable nature of the dice rolls, only the overall damage of the effect. The same goes for the Deadly Aim feat. These things might be variable on one level, and I do not argue against that fact. I only state that they are not variable to the individual dice rolls. They don't change the result of each die, only the total sum of the effect.
I hope that explanation helps.
It might be nice to know how empower works with something like a draconic sorcerer’s damage increase. That bonus is outside the spell, so is it modified by empower?
As long as the effect modifies the individual dice rolls within the effect of the spell, Empower will work with it.
|
|
Okay I see, I do disagree, since spells with +x per CL effects effect the base damage of the spell, but are not variable based on the spell, it is variable based on the caster level of the one who cast the spell.
Con mod/elemental overflow both modify the spell(blast) just like CL modifies the spell effect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as the Empower Spell metamagic feat is involved, we have to look specifically at the variable, numerical aspects of the spell (and the kinetic blast). This is not variable OR numeric, but both, of the DICE rolls.
https://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9o71
Empower Spell: If I use Empower Spell on a spell that has a die roll with a numerical bonus (such as cure moderate wounds), does the feat affect the numerical bonus?
Yes. For example, if you empower cure moderate wounds, the +50% from the feat applies to the 2d8 and to the level-based bonus.
2d8 is variable, numeric.
Lv is non-variable, numeric.Both are empowered, per this FAQ.
The Constitution modifier does not affect the variable nature of the dice rolls, only the overall damage of the effect. The same goes for the Deadly Aim feat. These things might be variable on one level, and I do not argue against that fact. I only state that they are not variable to the individual dice rolls. They don't change the result of each die, only the total sum of the effect.
I hope that explanation helps.
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2ueey?empower-spell-kineticist-metakines is-and-burn#3
2. An empowered infusion multiplies the total damage by 50% on the blast, not the actual damage die (Your blast does not go up to 4d6). You would roll 3d6+8 (Or whatever your actual total is, see #1) and add half of that total again to get the final result.
Now, to be fair, there are old dev quotes from when the matter was in debate. The FAQ settled those in favour of empowering the whole result, not just the pips.
I have disagreed with the developers and their FAQs before, and been proven correct after sufficient time has gone by. I am not saying this to imply that I know better than the developers at what they intended. Each time I have been correct, it has been with a system or concept that was pulled from the OGL of D&D 3.5e and implemented in the Pathfinder game itself. Empower Spell is one such feat that came from 3.5e D&D. I am merely attempting to keep the reading and application of the effects concise and consistent so as to prevent misused and abuse, and later disappointment when the issue is corrected.
So, I'll leave it at that. Do what you think is best. You've heard my stance on the topic.
Lol, as if we are ever going to get any further dev involvement in PF1. At absolute best, we might get an unofficial Mark Seifter comment. The rules we have now are all the rules we will have. The numerical bonus to a spell gets increased by 50% as well as the dice according to that FAQ. No further official comment should ever be expected.
I have disagreed with the developers and their FAQs before, and been proven correct after sufficient time has gone by. I am not saying this to imply that I know better than the developers at what they intended. Each time I have been correct, it has been with a system or concept that was pulled from the OGL of D&D 3.5e and implemented in the Pathfinder game itself. Empower Spell is one such feat that came from 3.5e D&D. I am merely attempting to keep the reading and application of the effects concise and consistent so as to prevent misused and abuse, and later disappointment when the issue is corrected.
So, I'll leave it at that. Do what you think is best. You've heard my stance on the topic.
If this were D&D3.5e then you might be correct. However this is pathfinder, and there is a very distinct difference between 3.5e empower and pathfinder empower.
All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half. An empowered spell deals half again as much damage as normal, cures half again as many hit points, affects half again as many targets, and so forth, as appropriate. For example, an empowered magic missile deals 1-1/2 times its normal damage (roll 1d4+1 and multiply the result by 1-1/2 for each missile). Saving throws and opposed rolls (such as the one you make when you cast dispel magic) are not affected, nor are spells without random variables. An empowered spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.
All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by half including bonuses to those dice rolls.
Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables. An empowered spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell's actual level.
3.5e empower is unclear as to if it affects bonuses, but pathfinder empower directly states that it does in fact affect bonuses. It doesn’t make any exclusions on bonuses. There is no “except ability score modifiers” or “except bonuses from other spells and abilities.” No it simply says “including bonuses to those dice rolls.” That means everything is multiplied, all bonuses from all sources.
3.5e empower is unclear as to if it affects bonuses, but pathfinder empower directly states that it does in fact affect bonuses. It doesn’t make any exclusions on bonuses. There is no “except ability score modifiers” or “except bonuses from other spells and abilities.” No it simply says “including bonuses to those dice rolls.” That means everything is multiplied, all bonuses from all sources.
This 'difference', as you call it, is precisely why I made a distinction between what dice rolls were and the total damage rolled. When you roll 10d6, you are rolling 1d6 ten times. Each d6 is it own specific dice roll. Any bonuses that are added to the individual dice are empowered with the die roll. 1d6+1 (2 to 7) becomes 1.5(1d6+1) or (3 to 10.5).
Tell me... these bonuses 'from all sources' ... Do they include sneak attack damage? Is that consistent with what you are telling me? Sneak attack is just as applicable to the situation as Deadly Aim is.
Lol, as if we are ever going to get any further dev involvement in PF1. At absolute best, we might get an unofficial Mark Seifter comment. The rules we have now are all the rules we will have. The numerical bonus to a spell gets increased by 50% as well as the dice according to that FAQ. No further official comment should ever be expected.
Lack of future support has no meaning to me in this situation. My post was merely an example of my past experience with FAQs and developer comments. Mostly, they were positive and accurate. I dont disagree with them often, but when I do, it is not flippantly.
Tell me... these bonuses 'from all sources' ... Do they include sneak attack damage? Is that consistent with what you are telling me? Sneak attack is just as applicable to the situation as Deadly Aim is.
It has been debated to death as to if sneak attack can be empowered, and the answer now as it has always been is no. Sneak attack is EXTRA damage, not a bonus to your damage. Sneak attack has its own rulings and FAQs that preclude it from benefiting from effects such as empower.
It has been debated to death as to if sneak attack can be empowered, and the answer now as it has always been is no. Sneak attack is EXTRA damage, not a bonus to your damage. Sneak attack has its own rulings and FAQs that preclude it from benefiting from effects such as empower.
Seems to me that if my reading of how Empower Spell is correct, Sneak attack would never had needed to be debated at all in this context, or any kind of special differentiation between being 'extra' damage or 'bonus' damage.
But, for the sake of clarity, do you have a link to the ruling on Sneak attack and Empower spell? Specifically, that is.