Question on Empower Spell

[Saph]

I asked this one in the Simple Q&A thread, but had slightly differing opinions on the answer (not surprising, as it's quite confusing).

When using the Empower Spell metamagic feat on a spell, which bits get multiplied by 1.5?

Empower Spell's text reads:

All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half. 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.

So how does this apply to a spell like, say, Ray of Enfeeblement cast at CL 10? Does the +5 from caster level get multiplied by 1.5 as well, or not?

If yes, the result is (1d6+5) * 1.5 = an average of ~13 or so.
If no, the result is (1d6*1.5) + 5 = an average of ~11 or so.

Argument in favour of yes: The PHB 3.5 entry for Empower Spell gives Magic Missile as an example, and says that you multiply each missile, 1d4+1, by 1.5. This includes the +1.

Argument in favour of no: Any +x value isn't variable, since you're not rolling a dice (though it is numeric).

If you rule yes, Empower Spell becomes more powerful than Maximise Spell for a lot of effects. For Ray of Enfeeblement, under the first interpretation, an empowered version is significantly more powerful on average than a maximised version. Ditto for False Life: maximised at CL 10, it gives 20 HP; empowered, an average of 23. The same applies for all the Cure spells, assuming you're casting them at maximum caster level. This leads to particularly weird effects with prestige classes like Radiant Servant of Pelor, which has the ability to automatically empower and later maximise healing spells - they actually get worse at healing as their class features upgrade!

The Magic Missile example makes me think the rules support the 'yes' answer, but this seems to make Maximise Spell significantly worse than Empower, which is a bit odd. I'm wondering if there's an official ruling on this anywhere in the FAQ or Sage Advice columns. Since it's a core-only issue, it must come up quite a bit.

What does everyone think?

- Saph

[Jasdoif]

The PHB example provides the best RAW interpretation: That empower applies to the whole effect, including any linear bonus.

Personally though, I prefer that it only applies to dice, because otherwise those spells combining dice with linear bonuses (like +1 per caster level) in their effects get out of hand. Like your false life example shows.

[Reel On, Love]

What Jas said.

It really gets ridiculous with, oh, Fire Seeds.

[Saph]

So has this ever come up in an official WotC ruling, or the FAQ, or something? It's hard to believe it hasn't - these are all from the PHB, after all. It's not like it's some obscure combination from a new splatbook.

- Saph

[Reel On, Love]

So has this ever come up in an official WotC ruling, or the FAQ, or something? It's hard to believe it hasn't - these are all from the PHB, after all. It's not like it's some obscure combination from a new splatbook.

- Saph

I don't recall ever seeing it--presumably because it's clear from the text--you can tell by the example that it does multiply the things added to the dice.

[Jasdoif]

I checked the FAQ, and saw nothing about the calculation aspect of Empower Spell.

[Kurald Galain]

Given the example with magic missiles, I'd say that yes, it also increases that part. Even without that, it's sometimes better than Maximize, depending on the type of dice rolled. Doesn't the RSoP get spells that are both maximized and empowered?

[Lord Lorac Silvanos]

When using the Empower Spell metamagic feat on a spell, which bits get multiplied by 1.5?

Empower Spell's text reads:

All variable, numeric effects...

...

Argument in favour of yes: The PHB 3.5 entry for Empower Spell gives Magic Missile as an example, and says that you multiply each missile, 1d4+1, by 1.5. This includes the +1.

...

An effect of a spell, say the STR penalty from RoE, is the total numerical value that is to be applied as a penalty.

It is not two separate effects, one from a random random variable (die roll) and one from the linear level dependent addition, but one penalty to STR (That happens to be a function of a fixed part and a variable part).

The magic missile example just stress that this is the correct interpretation and is hopefully why it was chosen.

Claiming otherwise is rather silly and the aberration on the Simple Q&A thread that did does not deserve any popcorn. (The arrogant fool probably did not even bother to check the PHB.)

[Saph]

Claiming otherwise is rather silly and the aberration on the Simple Q&A thread that did does not deserve any popcorn. (The arrogant fool probably did not even bother to check the PHB.)

I'm sure the answerer was just picking the interpretation that made the most sense, and probably didn't have time to look up the PHB given the number of questions he has to deal with. ;)

Well, seems settled.

- Saph