D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 Bull's Strength

[Silver Griffon]

I don't think Empower was abusive in 3.0 either. There are a lot of better things you could have done with that same 6th or 8th level spell slot. (Personally I use feats like these mainly during item creation, ie maximized empowered wands.) I do however think that it implies that an effort has been made to knock down the potency of the stat boost spells. Is this a good or a bad thing? I will wait to see the rules as a whole first before developing an opinion either way.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I guess we can all agree to disagree

I think it may not have been a problem in a 25 point buy game, but if your wizard already had an Int of 18 to start and Spell Focus, it made it really difficult to resist a spell.

 

[Kraedin]

You can only get a triple-Empowered fox's cunning at level 15. At level 15, you should have a headband of intellect +6. It costs 18000 gp and 1440 XP, or 9% of our wealth and 1% of our XP, so it's a small expense. This means that a triple-Empowered fox's cunning is giving a +1 bonus on save DC compared to what we already have, on average. Not really worth the 8th level spell slot, is it?

 

[hong]

The 8th level spell slot is more valuble than the magical item, so I would hope so.

At 15th level, you have 1 8th level spell and 200,000 gp. Which one would you rather expend to get a bonus to an abilty score?

If I was a wizard or sorc, probably the 8th level spell. Getting a possible +10 to my spellcasting stat, for a +5 to save DCs, is very, very good.

 

[Darklone]

I would spend both. That 8th level spell is much more likely to be dispelled.

 

[hong]

I would spend both. That 8th level spell is much more likely to be dispelled.

IME, dispelling is something you encounter once in a blue moon. Heck, even when you're fighting other spellcasters, they'll typically have more than enough to worry about, without having to dispel stuff as well.

 

[Darklone]

IME, dispelling is something you encounter once in a blue moon. Heck, even when you're fighting other spellcasters, they'll typically have more than enough to worry about, without having to dispel stuff as well.

I'd say it depends on your campaign... it might be useful, it might be not, but in my games you're usually ALWAYS dispelled first

The DM doesn't seem to like our buffs.

 

[Zogg]

Getting somewhat back on subject - the reduction of the spell's duration is ok by me.

And I play a cleric.

With a strength of 8.

So obviously bull's strength is an important spell for me. Nevertheless, I think it's ridiculous that a (3E) 4th level cleric could walk around for the better part of a day with +2 - +5 to their strength...by only spending one 2nd level spell.

It's not the end of the world. It's just one spell. Divine Power is FAR better and pretty much makes bull's strength obsolete - as it should.

 

[Kraedin]

Divine Power is abusive. If it exists in it's present form in the revision, I'm not buying it. Seriously.

+2 - +5 to their strength

Good god! The clerics were getting a +1-3 bonus to attack and damage rolls! It's as abusive as it comes!

 

[Kraedin]

If I was a wizard or sorc, probably the 8th level spell. Getting a possible +10 to my spellcasting stat, for a +5 to save DCs, is very, very good.

Remember that you should already have a headband of intellect +6, if only for the bonus spells. The best possible result from a triple-Empowered fox's cunning is a +3 to spell DCs, not a +5. It's just not that good.

Actually, the possible results of a triple-Empowered fox's cunning are 5, 7, 10, and 12. That gives a bonus to spell save DCs of +0, +0-1, +2, and +3. Compared to the use of your best spell slot, it's simply not as good as some people claim. For some mages, it doesn't even give a bonus a full 50% of the time!