"This update reflects an effort to restore the power to its classical form"

482 posts / 0 new
Last post
Someone mind explaining to me how this is related to fixing a misprint in a book or rebalancing a broken or overpowered option?   How exactly are we suppose to take these things seriously when they start putting in some random dev's personal opinion of how a power should into the official Errata? 



Even I can't defend WotC here.  This is blatantly misuse of rules updates.
Even I can't defend WotC here.  This is blatantly misuse of rules updates.


Agreed
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)
I'm still not sure how I feel about the change and its effects, but I see that as a valid rationale. I mean, what D&D forum doesn't have threads talking about what's wrong with 4E's magic missile and how to fix it?
...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.
I missed the change; can someone fill me in on what happened?
Achievements: 06/28/10 - MODERAT0WND!!11 06/30/10 - A Friendly Nod 07/04/10 - Troll Infiltrators 11/16/10 - RIP CB (What you are paying for should work; is it?) 12/20/10 - "No Way! That's Great...*chuckle*...WE'VE RERELEASED GAMMA WORLD!" Scapegoat of the Month for November: Pirates
...and how to fix it?


I maintain that to "change" or "fix" a power is completely different from gutting its mechanics, and replacing them all with something almost completely different.
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)
I missed the change; can someone fill me in on what happened?



Magic Missile now just has an effect line, no attack roll required, and does fixed damage (plus INT mod and implement/feat bonuses, etc).

I agree that I don't like the precedent this sets, but I must also admit that it doesn't affect me, so I can't get too nerdrageous over it.  I never took MM with my wizards before, and I still won't take it.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I missed the change; can someone fill me in on what happened?



Magic Missile now just has an effect line, no attack roll required, and does fixed damage (plus INT mod and implement/feat bonuses, etc).

I agree that I don't like the precedent this sets, but I must also admit that it doesn't affect me, so I can't get too nerdrageous over it.  I never took MM with my wizards before, and I still won't take it.



I am printing the July updates now to add to my books.  So, the MM is an auto hit now but with a set damage instead of rolled damage? 

Bah!  I kind of liked MM not being an auto hit.  Oh, well.

@greatfrito: 

When its mechanics are the thing being viewed as problematic, then removing those and replacing them with something else would be exactly what's called for.

Mind you, I'm not of the mind that this needed to happen. To me the iconic element that magic missile lost was the ability to shoot more of them at higher levels, not that it autohit. From looking at various forum discussions apparently the hit roll was seen as more of a shocking departure than the single missile was, so it would feel like sour grapes for me to be complaining about this change when I would have been dancing in the streets if they'd done something like kept the base damage the same at epic but added another target per tier, or let you split each d4 up among different targets at the expense of damage bonus, or otherwise let you emulate the old school multiwarhead magic missile.

"Fans complained. We listened." just isn't an abuse of the update process to me. 
...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.
Hmm.  I suppose that's another reason I don't care that much.  'Iconic' just isn't that big a deal to me.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Updates should have two purposes: fix a printing error, fix a broken mechanic for purpose of game balance.  "I'm changing this to something I like better" is NOT a valid reason for an update.
T-Mack: Well, it's your opinion that those are the only two valid reasons for an update. It's also your opinion that this change was made to reflect what one individual didn't like about a power. My opinion is that it was made in response to widespread and ongoing discussion among the player base about something that was wrong with a power, and that this is a perfectly valid use of the update process, though I'd prefer it happens rarely (once after two years? Rare enough.)

Though I do have to add a cynical caveat to my cheerleading: I can't help but think that the reason the developers are suddenly acting on a complaint that's been there since the beginning is that they hope the Essentials line will draw old players back to the game, and they think this version will help with that rather than forcing them to deal with the initial backlash all over again.

...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.
I (think) I'm with AlexandraErin. I'm not a fan of this change, but admittedly there were other changes that might have excited me.

And this is a change that (some) people were clamoring for. I read those threads, but didn't care enough about the subject to express my disapproval or create an alternative thread. It might be nice, though, to have opinions "officially" solicited (by way of public poll) prior to a change. Had I known any of those threads were going to be considered by WotC, I would have put forth my two cents.
Is there a link somewhere to this version of magic missile?
The problem with this really amounts to the fact that now there is technically no "hit" with this power. It is just an effect. So does that mean that it won't work with bonuses granted by leaders that trigger "when an ally hits the target?"


Also, let's assume (without doing any math) that the fact that it is an auto hit means that the average damage over an encounter, or maybe a session, of play will end up being equal or higher to 2d4 + INT if you consider that you won't always hit with an attack roll. The bigger issue is that this is not fun. You don't roll anything.  Isn't the core of DND that it is fun to pretend and it is fun to roll dice?

Lame

Magic Missile is about to become the most retrained power in the history of 4th edition.
So that means no more crits with a magic missile?  Who needs to roll the dice.  Missing is no fun, so hit every time!
@craftygamergirl: [Link]
End of page 2, beginning of page 3.

Magic Missile is about to become the most retrained power in the history of 4th edition.

Or people who aren't in RPGA games can just keep using it the way it was.
@craftygamergirl: [Link]
End of page 2, beginning of page 3.

Magic Missile is about to become the most retrained power in the history of 4th edition.

Or people who aren't in RPGA games can just keep using it the way it was.

Thanks. I'm actually pleased. It seemed weird to have a power pretty much famous for automatically hitting suddenly...didn't.


Lame

Magic Missile is about to become the most retrained power in the history of 4th edition.



I don't think so especially for human wizards.  20 INT means my MM auto hits for 7 points of damage plus feats that add to FORCE damage with a range of 20.

Anyway, I finally read the MM update.  I have to say while I appreciated the first version of MM in 4E.  I think I may like the new version over it.

WotC needs to send Chris to do another Acquisitions INC podcast.  Think how big Jim's head will be when Jim's Magic Missile auto-hits.

Btw, I saw an acronym in another MM thread.   I can't think of what it stands for.  I know it is a power or a feat but my mind is a blank.  What does CoD stand for?

Do you need to roll dice to pretend? I don't. I thought the core "fun" idea in 4E is that everybody has something to do every turn, not that everybody gets to manipulate polyhedrals to generate pseudorandom numbers every turn. Look at the Lazy Warlord build: never make an attack roll, never make a damage roll.

The new magic missile introduces a situation where one class will not roll for hit or damage in certain situations. Is it really such an appealing choice in terms of damage that the devs could reasonably believe that anybody would use it every single round? If not, then suggesting that the idea is that  "missing is no fun so never miss" is clearly wide of the mark.

The appeal/usefulness of magic missile as a power before (aside from being a RBA) was that it let you reach out and touch someone at arrow range. Now you can do so reliably. It's still no Thunderwave. It's not going to be used any more often, except possibly as a minion-mopper. 
...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.
Thanks. I'm actually pleased. It seemed weird to have a power pretty much famous for automatically hitting suddenly...didn't.

I've helped the enemy! Gah! 


Man I am so glad they finally fixed Magic Missile! Boy was that power always bringing problems at my table. Tongue out

I think they changed it just to appeal to the old gamers in preparation for Essentials. Why don't they fix fireball as well to be like it's classical form? Wink
[

Btw, I saw an acronym in another MM thread.   I can't think of what it stands for.  I know it is a power or a feat but my mind is a blank.  What does CoD stand for?




Cloud of Daggers, another wizard at-will.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Do you need to roll dice to pretend? I don't. I thought the core "fun" idea in 4E is that everybody has something to do every turn, not that everybody gets to manipulate polyhedrals to generate pseudorandom numbers every turn. Look at the Lazy Warlord build: never make an attack roll, never make a damage roll.

The new magic missile introduces a situation where one class will not roll for hit or damage in certain situations. Is it really such an appealing choice in terms of damage that the devs could reasonably believe that anybody would use it every single round? If not, then suggesting that the idea is that  "missing is no fun so never miss" is clearly wide of the mark.

The appeal/usefulness of magic missile as a power before (aside from being a RBA) was that it let you reach out and touch someone at arrow range. Now you can do so reliably. It's still no Thunderwave. It's not going to be used any more often, except possibly as a minion-mopper. 



Half joking is hard to pull off in text, so I forgive your snippiness. Smile
Man I am so glad they finally fixed Magic Missile! Boy was that power always bringing problems at my table. 

I think they changed it just to appeal to the old gamers in preparation for Essentials. Why don't they fix fireball as well to be like it's classical form? 



By classic, you mean the FB in AD&D 1/2E  that could backlash on the caster in the wrong/right sized room?   That made casting it interesting.

Lightning bolt was fun too if you didn't correctly gauge your distance from the stone wall.

Thanks. I'm actually pleased. It seemed weird to have a power pretty much famous for automatically hitting suddenly...didn't.

I've helped the enemy! Gah! 



Haha, not really. I play a rogue, not a wizard. I just like the idea of an autohit.
[

Btw, I saw an acronym in another MM thread.   I can't think of what it stands for.  I know it is a power or a feat but my mind is a blank.  What does CoD stand for?




Cloud of Daggers, another wizard at-will.




Ok...thanks.  
Here's my perspective, as a player who's current main character is a level 7 Wizard:

For me, MM currently does 2d4 +6 damage, with a +9 to hit.  I took arcane reserves, so I get a +2 to damage if I've used all my encounter attacks.  It's a pretty decent go-to power when I want to focus on a single target.

Upside of the change: It's a guaranteed hit, which is nice.

Downside:  On average, it will do much less damage (8-18 vs 8-10), and I get no potential crit bonus.

Possible breaker:  I could retrain and take Wizards Fury, which would give me a daily power that allows me to do a guaranteed 16-20 dmg per round for the entire encounter.  Ouch. 

Btw, I saw an acronym in another MM thread.   I can't think of what it stands for.  I know it is a power or a feat but my mind is a blank.  What does CoD stand for?


Call of Duty?
Cleric-or-Druid(-zilla)?
Wink

As a feat or power... nothing really springs to mind for me.

EDIT: Oop, ninja'd. Cloud of Daggers it is =J
Chandrak's awesome solutions to the 5-minute workday 'problem'
97183719 wrote:
Seeing as there is a disconnect between balance (quantifiable) and fun, (subjective and personal) discussing fun in a thread about balance because you find one system more enjoyable than another is as helpful as discussing religion in a thread about architectural engineering because you think cathedrals look prettier than outhouses.
Now MM works as it always worked.

Plus Automagic Damage Spells aren't new, MM isn't the first one created in this fashion. It's the first At-will though. Dragon 381 had introduced similar Powers in November 2009, Arcane Bolt, Arcane Arrow and Arcane Volley, all Encounter Powers though but nothing new here.

Dragon 381 Automagic Damage

This article introduces some powers that automatically deal damage to one or more enemies.
Keep in mind that because the damage is in the “Effect” line, the powers don’t hit, and therefore can’t benefit from effects that trigger off of a hit. Also, since the damage is a flat number, it isn’t considered a damage roll, and therefore it doesn’t benefit from effects that increase the result of a damage roll (but can still benefit from extra damage that doesn’t require a roll).

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter


Btw, I saw an acronym in another MM thread.   I can't think of what it stands for.  I know it is a power or a feat but my mind is a blank.  What does CoD stand for?


Call of Duty?
Cleric-or-Druid(-zilla)?


As a feat or power... nothing really springs to mind for me.



Cloud of Daggers....Salla answered my question.
Wow... now that Arcane Volley's been brought up, I have to say that I like this change... because now Arcane Volley can be spun as being a once-per-encounter technique for doing multi magic missiles. Between that and Wizard's Fury and all the ways you can get free RBAs at higher levels and you've got potential for magic missiles going all over the place.
...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.

Downside:  On average, it will do much less damage (8-18 vs 8-10), and I get no potential crit bonus.



When you factor in the possibility of missing with the original MM, the damage lost isn't that bad.  Average on 2d4 is 5; if you hit half the time (about where the game's math's at, give or take), then your average damage is 2.5.  If you round down to two, then you're about even.  of course, you lose out on anything that expressly boosts damage rolls ... that's where the kick comes in.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Hm.... I'd hoped we go a little longer before the devs started nailing together 4th EDs coffin.  I recall magic missile being one of the things they specifically changed in order to have attack rolls for every power.  They seem to be violating more and more of their design concepts.  Power points, hybrids and now attack rolls are all falling by the wayside...

I knew it was bound to happen eventually.  That they'd start putting out things that hacked chunks out of the systems balance in order to satisfy certain factions of the playerbase.  And it's a required part of the RPG life cycle.  But it's the part that eventually leads to rules collapse, and I'd figured they could have gone a good two or three more years before starting the decline.

Oh well, at least they have a lot of ballance to chew through before the whole thing tumbles.  That should make the tail end enjoyable.  And maybe they'll wise up and patch things a bit to keep it running longer, though I'm not seeing signs of that.
Well... At least we got custom avatars....
I'd say Wizard's Fury isn't even worth the daily power slot now at  paragon or epic .   Hell, Flaming Sphere will probably give you more damage at paragon or epic now.  
Eh. I think there's enough options now that stick to the original core ideals that they don't tear the game to pieces when they add a power here and there that does damage without an attack roll... I'd bet that some point someone said, "At this point, don't you think we have room to add a Wizard at-will that works like the old magic missile?" and they came to the point of: why call it something else?
...and that's the news from Lake 4th Edition, where the Gnomes are strong, the Half-Orcs are good-looking, and all the PCs are above average.
I think it was pointed out that the reason that MM was not auto-hit is one of the testers just used that instead of other powers.  The developers were afraid of abuse.

It may also be that they thought minion killing was going to be this overly powerful thing, but it being 2 years, have seen that taking out a lot of minions as not a bad thing.

Overall, I think the change is good.
All I can say is, its about time.  

. . . 


Umm, yep that covers  it ;) but I just had to say it.

/\ Art 
/\ Art

When you factor in the possibility of missing with the original MM, the damage lost isn't that bad.  Average on 2d4 is 5; if you hit half the time (about where the game's math's at, give or take), then your average damage is 2.5.  If you round down to two, then you're about even.  of course, you lose out on anything that expressly boosts damage rolls ... that's where the kick comes in.


Maybe.  I think when you factor in the effects of other players in the party, like attack bonuses from the leader, I tend to hit more than 50% of the time already.

Regarding Magic Missile, is there any bonus to damage that doesn't require a damage roll?  As far as I know, all of them does.

That means that the new magic missile now only adds the enhancement bonus of your implement (due to the wording of the power).  That's it.  No crits either.

That's a nerf.

Much better to retain the attack roll, make it do some variable damage (no Int mod) and just add a miss line to do the same damage.
Check out my free online comic! Familiar Ground Fantasy Humor, Familiar Point of View
I think it was pointed out that the reason that MM was not auto-hit is one of the testers just used that instead of other powers.  The developers were afraid of abuse.

It may also be that they thought minion killing was going to be this overly powerful thing, but it being 2 years, have seen that taking out a lot of minions as not a bad thing.

Overall, I think the change is good.


Besides, the role of controller -- and the Wizard, who is supposed to be the epitome of said role -- has evolved to such a point where autodamage can only barely be considered a controller function, and there are so many more controller-y at-wills out there, only the more striker-oriented people would have wanted the old MM in the first place... and this could be considered as a downgrade for them.... although it would definitely be much more interesting for those who either tend to have poor to-hit rolls, or want their ranged 20 minion-clearing at-will.

[ Cloud of Daggers would definitely be a more interesting option for group coordination, especially with Orb of Imposition ;) ]


Since I used to reflavor the normal projectile to "beam spam" -- instead of one bolt with a roll to hit, it's 1 bolt per point in damage, with a complete miss equivalent to none of the bolts doing damage (which, after 2+ rounds of missing, can easily devolve into Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy *facepalm*) -- now it's "improbable aiming skills" to "beam spam" + "improbable aiming skills", able to dish out at least 5 never-miss bolts to a target [5 damage mechanically of course]. And of course, "there is no kill like overkill", should the enemy be "minionized" *evil grin*

Show

You are Red/Blue!
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.

You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.

D&D Home Page - What Monster Are You? - D&D Compendium

57047238 wrote:
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
I Don't Always Play Strikers...But When I Do, I Prefer Vampire Stay Thirsty, My Friends
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery. What I hope to be my most useful contributions to the D&D Community: DM Idea: Collaborative Mapping, Classless 4E (homebrew system, that hopefully helps in D&D Next development), Gamma World 7E random character generator (by yours truly), and the Concept of Perfect Imbalance (for D&D Next and other TRPGs in development) Pre-3E D&D should be recognized for what they were: simulation wargames where people could tell stories with The Best Answer to "Why 4E?" Fun vs. Engaging
Sign In to post comments