Is there any reason that Rituals can't just be Utility Powers?

The Witch's Augury power is basically a ritual disguised as a utility power. The Magister ED hasn't blown up 4e.

Keeping track of ritual books and gold costs is an unnecessary hassle.


I entirely agree.  Rituals were a reasonable idea in concept (utility magic that anyone could access with proper training), but in practice a better way to implement them would have been for them to be utility powers instead of utility powers being a mix of ritual-like things and combat buffs.  Taking away the gold cost and making it so each class gets access to an array of truly utility effects would have gone a long way towards alleviating the "combat-only" impression people get from 4E.
There is really only one problem with doing that. The highly specific utility powers won't get picked unless people have a lot of utility slots, and if they do that then the optimizers are just going to load up those slots with back door combat powers. Things like water breathing and find object get chucked so that more shield and expeditious retreat can be loaded up.

Essentially, the separation between utility powers and rituals serves as a sort of combat/non-combat resource pool division. Something the game probably needs more of in character powers, not less.

The Witch's Augury power is basically a ritual disguised as a utility power. The Magister ED hasn't blown up 4e.

Keeping track of ritual books and gold costs is an unnecessary hassle.



Characters had a specific number of AEDU.  Rituals were a completely separate resource that allowed group participation as opposed to just one character casting the spell.

While I do agree that the gold cost is quite the hassle, the very fact that rituals are non-combat options that, for once, does not significantly consume combat resources -- often appearing as a free feat -- makes it a very interesting option indeed.

I'd rather that most utility spell be thrown into multi-round rituals actually

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
One houserule I thought up a while back was to allow Arcanists (PH1 Wizards) to prepare Arcana-based Rituals in their Utility spell slots (of equal level or lower), acting as Daily spells with no GP cost and reduced casting time. I figure it fits into the prep-casting flavor.

On the other hand, Templars (PH1 Clerics) would instead get one cost-free Religion-based Ritual per day. Other classes that grant Ritual Casting as a bonus feat would likewise get some way of casting free rituals (if they don't have that already). They'd also all get more free mastered Rituals as they gain levels.
4e D&D is not a "Tabletop MMO." It is not Massively Multiplayer, and is usually not played Online. Come up with better descriptions of your complaints, cuz this one means jack ****.
I'd like this too. However, every ritual which has a tangible, long term effect needs a check. Money is a bad one, but at least it is one check. Take Fabricate for instace: if you're familiar with the 3.5 spell you probably know at least SOME abuses of it. The normal check to its power is the fact that you "need to prepare it" (AKA it's Vancian magic). Problem is, when you have, say, two months downtime, devoting your 1/3rd of your spell slots to stuff like Fabricate can become quite a deal. Even with D&D Next's supposedly heavily reduced number of spells per day, casting Fabricate twice a day can lead to some "nice" exploits, if you have the time to do it.

Problem is, almost every campaign I ever DM'd had that kind of downtime. Which is what leads me to say that I want a check on long-lasting spell effects, whatever they are, from divinations to creations and transmutations, that serves the purpose of limiting abuses. 
Are you interested in an online 4E game on Sunday? Contact me with a PM!
Show
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Ideas for 5E
No, they shouldnt. Not ever. They are a very flavorful option and one my favorite features. They provide options for magic that has no actual combat application or takes too long to complete in order to be useful in battle. Buuuut, i do agree with the ritual costs was a bit lame initially. Rituals that do not create items were fine to have mixed costs depending on the ritual like healing surge costs and a focus item for creating lets say a glyph of warding, or a scrying ritual. If they are removed from the game i would homebrew them back in. Also they shouldnt take up a spell slot either. How do you use a ritual as a utility power that takes 1 hour to complete. Memorized spells are supposed to be spells you can cast quickly in the heat of battle.

In short:
-They represent magic that would otherwise take way to long to be combat viable, or span multiple rounds.
- They are flavorful and fun addition to a campaign
-They dont make sense as utility powers
-The credit card funded adventure is easily solved by requiring other costs than a gold cost for rituals, like healing surges, mana points, actual components that require searching.
I'd like this too. However, every ritual which has a tangible, long term effect needs a check. Money is a bad one, but at least it is one check. Take Fabricate for instace: if you're familiar with the 3.5 spell you probably know at least SOME abuses of it. The normal check to its power is the fact that you "need to prepare it" (AKA it's Vancian magic). Problem is, when you have, say, two months downtime, devoting your 1/3rd of your spell slots to stuff like Fabricate can become quite a deal. Even with D&D Next's supposedly heavily reduced number of spells per day, casting Fabricate twice a day can lead to some "nice" exploits, if you have the time to do it.

Problem is, almost every campaign I ever DM'd had that kind of downtime. Which is what leads me to say that I want a check on long-lasting spell effects, whatever they are, from divinations to creations and transmutations, that serves the purpose of limiting abuses. 



I much prefer the cost of rituals being healing surges, since those generally don't change in amount and scope unless a character is leveling up their Con as they go.  They could base it around the number seven, the average amount of healing surges a class can expect regardless of their con score, with more important rituals requiring more surges and some requiring less.

At least that's one way to do it.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- ) Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right.
fun quotes
58419928 wrote:
You have to do the work first, and show you can do the work, before someone is going to pay you for it.
69216168 wrote:
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?[/quote]
I'd like this too. However, every ritual which has a tangible, long term effect needs a check. Money is a bad one, but at least it is one check. Take Fabricate for instace: if you're familiar with the 3.5 spell you probably know at least SOME abuses of it. The normal check to its power is the fact that you "need to prepare it" (AKA it's Vancian magic). Problem is, when you have, say, two months downtime, devoting your 1/3rd of your spell slots to stuff like Fabricate can become quite a deal. Even with D&D Next's supposedly heavily reduced number of spells per day, casting Fabricate twice a day can lead to some "nice" exploits, if you have the time to do it.

Problem is, almost every campaign I ever DM'd had that kind of downtime. Which is what leads me to say that I want a check on long-lasting spell effects, whatever they are, from divinations to creations and transmutations, that serves the purpose of limiting abuses. 



I much prefer the cost of rituals being healing surges, since those generally don't change in amount and scope unless a character is leveling up their Con as they go.  They could base it around the number seven, the average amount of healing surges a class can expect regardless of their con score, with more important rituals requiring more surges and some requiring less.

At least that's one way to do it.



Mmmm, no. Not if surges come back daily as in 4E. That's practically the same as using spell slots. In fact, it pretty much is the same, except for a few minor details.

The problem is when you are able to take an otherwise completely appropriate ritual or spell and turn it into a world-breaking mechanism just because you can spam it. Explosive Runes turning into city-wall annihilating bombs, Fabricate mithral armor to bankrupt dwarf armories, Flesh to Salt cows to sell for profit... Even just spending three months' worth of spells while travelling to divine information about the next plot point. There are quite a few examples, in 3.5, of similar exploits. I don't want to see them back: I want something - I don't care what - that limits the possibility to just spam spells like those. Casting cost is... not that good a way to handle it.

What I'd do? I'd give every character a plot currency they can spend to influence the story, both with rituals and with normal abilities. Balanced, fun, incentivates creativity... only drawback I can see is that it's a little bit detatched from game reality ;)
Are you interested in an online 4E game on Sunday? Contact me with a PM!
Show
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Ideas for 5E
Healing surges was a great idea. You cant use a ritual like that unless your DM is horrible. No sane DM will allow the use of ritual exploitation to explode bombs. If you want to massacre cows to turn into salt and sell it, you could just butcher the cows and sell the meat. Become a cowboy. The idea behind rituals was to pretty much replace the endless spell lists that wizards and other casters had letting them be your versatile spells. I run into far more problems being stonewalled by a DM than i do laughing while i exploit my rituals. "Your ritual fails he is protected by anti scrying wards" you get there its an orc warlord whose never used magic in his life. They require some DM cooperation, using explosive runes to take down a city wall might fly in some games but in most the DM will just say, they arent strong enough to take down the city walls. Or maybe it turns into an adventure all together to place them strategically a feat that can be easily replicated by an alchemist building lots and lots of actual bombs.

Alternative to spell slots, mana points equal to say your highest mental stat if you have ritual caster. This represents your capacity for magic. You spend them on said ritual as a sort of spells, either way funding them by gold is a bad idea. And removing them/turning them into actual powers that take up spell slots is a bad idea. Ritual casting is one of the best things 4e did so i hope it stays for 5e. Just only opinions on it is that 1) stop asking for gold to cast rituals. it makes no sense. 1:1 ratio for ingrediants is the same as putting actual gold in there. They should require a focus item of some kind, some perhaps some require monetary ingrediants, like enchant magic item should require some kind of item equal to about 80% of what you are trying to make, and use healing surges or some other mana/ritual surges of some sort.

Reason i like healing surges so much as a cost is because rituals are complex and most importantly taxing on the caster. They require time and effort, more so than a combat spell becaus eyou have to channel for several hours. So spending healing surges represents the tax on the your energy that you are using to cast the spell. This can cripple or weaken the caster if he runs into too much trouble later that same day and runs out of surges because he spent half of them on a ritual cast that morning.  I dont know if 5e will keep healing surges i have mixed feelings abou them. But some kind of point system used to regulate the number of rituals you can cast in a set period of time would be good.
If it's a ritual, it's available to any class. That's a good enough reason to have them as rituals in my opinion.

I would much rather have some kind of daily resource for rituals that isn't money. The only problem is with spells that you can use during your downtime like divination. If you add a meaningful material component, even these spells should be fine.  
You cant use a ritual like that unless your DM is horrible. No sane DM will allow the use of ritual exploitation to explode bombs.



I disagree strongly with the bolded. Imagine that you, as a DM, have laid out a siege scenario. Now a player comes up and says "well I use this spell in this way to break the castle walls so our army can swarm in". If you say no to that perfectly reasonable plan, even though it is an exploit of a flaw in the gaming system, you will encounter resentment by your players, especially if the siege scenario is tough. Why didn't it work? Spell A is Spell A after all...

This kind of thing is what I want the game system to esplicitly avoid. Some people like it; they say it is a creative way to use a spell and should be rewarded. I think a creative way to use a spell should be rewarded, but shouldn't void the need for an entire adventure arc. Spell abuses of all kinds should be restricted, and this category in particular needs some kind of restrictions. Daily reset is a horrible restriction for the above reasons.

If you want to massacre cows to turn into salt and sell it, you could just butcher the cows and sell the meat. Become a cowboy. The idea behind rituals was to pretty much replace the endless spell lists that wizards and other casters had letting them be your versatile spells. I run into far more problems being stonewalled by a DM than i do laughing while i exploit my rituals. "Your ritual fails he is protected by anti scrying wards" you get there its an orc warlord whose never used magic in his life. They require some DM cooperation, using explosive runes to take down a city wall might fly in some games but in most the DM will just say, they arent strong enough to take down the city walls. Or maybe it turns into an adventure all together to place them strategically a feat that can be easily replicated by an alchemist building lots and lots of actual bombs.



First, I was just listing some of the common exploits that I remembered off of the top of my head, not of rituals, but of 3.5's spells. The kind of spell that should have been a ritual, but wasn't, could be spammed, and led to caster imbalance. Those are some, but the problem is systemic: take divinations. As you mentioned, either you have horrible DM fiat or you end up with divinations voiding numerous possible plots, and a DM that needs to strongly consider what a caster can do before laying out his adventure. Which sucked, and was a good riddance IMO.

Are you interested in an online 4E game on Sunday? Contact me with a PM!
Show
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept. Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new. Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept. Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Ideas for 5E
Assign rituals a "mana cost" and have your primary stat be the "maximum" mana you can spend. Make sure level 1 rituals that you're not trying to stop from daily use (Tenser's Disc) cost only 1 or 2 mana. Mana restores at 1/day in heroic tier, 2/day in paragon, and 3/day in epic, or whatever equivilent. Sure you can cast explosive runes, it's 14 mana, now wait two more weeks to do it again. Even with 3 months, that's 6 casts, and no Salt Cows. (Expanded from Ocules idea)

Mind you, this is just a way to clearly slap a longer cooldown on the spell, you could always quite literally say "you've cast this ritual, you don't feel like you are ready yet to cast it for a while, perhaps focus on something else for tomorrow." aka, given it an X day cooldown. A bit MMO-ish, but it's a rememdy.

Admittedly, probably not the best, but it's an answer.
I think expanding the uses for Action Points could do the trick. One use, of course, being the casting of rituals quickly and/or for free. Kinda like what Mormegil said.

Maybe there could also be a p.42-eqsque section or module that shows one how to use a Spellcraft check to replace/reduce some of the ritual limiters (surge, components, casting time).
My opinion is that there were far too many rituals in the game. A ritual, if everyone can do it, should be non-magical. Otherwise you turn every character and npc in the game into a half wizard. 

Examples: Someone wants to burn candles and incense while sacrificing a living being to summon a demon/devil.

A group of warriors beat their weapons to their shields while shouting DEATH before charging the enemy to demoralize them. 
My opinion is that there were far too many rituals in the game. A ritual, if everyone can do it, should be non-magical. Otherwise you turn every character and npc in the game into a half wizard. 



I feel the opposite way. You only need one person that can cast Rituals. Since Rituals don't use your combat resources, they become a group commodity. It doesn't matter anymore who casts these Rituals, the group just has them at their disposal. You still have magic at your disposal regardless of your party composition.

I think magic to solve out-of-combat is an essential part of D&D and that's why I think rituals should be magical and not mundane.
I think requiring the use of 2 action points to do any rituals would keep the cheese down to a minimum...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
My opinion is that there were far too many rituals in the game. A ritual, if everyone can do it, should be non-magical. Otherwise you turn every character and npc in the game into a half wizard. 



I feel the opposite way. You only need one person that can cast Rituals. Since Rituals don't use your combat resources, they become a group commodity. It doesn't matter anymore who casts these Rituals, the group just has them at their disposal. You still have magic at your disposal regardless of your party composition.

I think magic to solve out-of-combat is an essential part of D&D and that's why I think rituals should be magical and not mundane.



Mixed feelings on both counts.

On the one hand, I don't want class to be the sole limiting factor in determining who can use magic and who can't.

On the other hand, I don't want magic to be the answer to out-of-combat problems once again.

I do want rituals, and I want it as a class-independant feature once more, but I'd also like for some mundane problems to be more difficult or impossible to solve with magic.

I think requiring the use of 2 action points to do any rituals would keep the cheese down to a minimum...



Cheese? What cheese?

I think requiring the use of 2 action points to do any rituals would keep the cheese down to a minimum...



Cheese? What cheese?




Well if it takes only 1 point then if they are out for a month they can use their rituals to create lots of sellable items or whatever. If they require 2 they can't do it without passing a milestone...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
You cant use a ritual like that unless your DM is horrible. No sane DM will allow the use of ritual exploitation to explode bombs.



I disagree strongly with the bolded. Imagine that you, as a DM, have laid out a siege scenario. Now a player comes up and says "well I use this spell in this way to break the castle walls so our army can swarm in". If you say no to that perfectly reasonable plan, even though it is an exploit of a flaw in the gaming system, you will encounter resentment by your players, especially if the siege scenario is tough. Why didn't it work? Spell A is Spell A after all...

This kind of thing is what I want the game system to esplicitly avoid. Some people like it; they say it is a creative way to use a spell and should be rewarded. I think a creative way to use a spell should be rewarded, but shouldn't void the need for an entire adventure arc. Spell abuses of all kinds should be restricted, and this category in particular needs some kind of restrictions. Daily reset is a horrible restriction for the above reasons.

If you want to massacre cows to turn into salt and sell it, you could just butcher the cows and sell the meat. Become a cowboy. The idea behind rituals was to pretty much replace the endless spell lists that wizards and other casters had letting them be your versatile spells. I run into far more problems being stonewalled by a DM than i do laughing while i exploit my rituals. "Your ritual fails he is protected by anti scrying wards" you get there its an orc warlord whose never used magic in his life. They require some DM cooperation, using explosive runes to take down a city wall might fly in some games but in most the DM will just say, they arent strong enough to take down the city walls. Or maybe it turns into an adventure all together to place them strategically a feat that can be easily replicated by an alchemist building lots and lots of actual bombs.



First, I was just listing some of the common exploits that I remembered off of the top of my head, not of rituals, but of 3.5's spells. The kind of spell that should have been a ritual, but wasn't, could be spammed, and led to caster imbalance. Those are some, but the problem is systemic: take divinations. As you mentioned, either you have horrible DM fiat or you end up with divinations voiding numerous possible plots, and a DM that needs to strongly consider what a caster can do before laying out his adventure. Which sucked, and was a good riddance IMO.




I think you missed my point on the first bit. There is nothing wrong with using explosive glyphs in a siege or something, i think what i was replying to was doing stuff that is beyond a rational scope of a players ability because of a flaw in warding. In 4e, blowing up an entire city with thousands of wards would be impractical to even attempt. Further i said using those rituals would be no different than using actual bombs, there is a restriction on how many times you can use it. The second part was DMs just not planning properly for player abilities ahead of time. It really takes fun off being a ritual caster and investing in that as an ability.

@ last two posts, keep in mind that not everyone is half wizard only those who invested in skill training for the propper skill and the ability to cast rituals so essentially they would half caster.
 

Reason i like healing surges so much as a cost is because rituals are complex and most importantly taxing on the caster. They require time and effort, more so than a combat spell becaus eyou have to channel for several hours. So spending healing surges represents the tax on the your energy that you are using to cast the spell. This can cripple or weaken the caster if he runs into too much trouble later that same day and runs out of surges because he spent half of them on a ritual cast that morning.  I dont know if 5e will keep healing surges i have mixed feelings abou them. But some kind of point system used to regulate the number of rituals you can cast in a set period of time would be good.



The problem with healing surges .. they are not much of a limit except on those occasions where you do get in a fight.. if you are fighting every day that is one thing but the rest of the time, a limit which is no limit well, gains you no benefit you can have the cost for fluff but that is all they amount to. In effect you are spending a combat resource on an activity which is most of the time not relevant to combat.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Rituals should stay Rituals.  It is a good way to seperate combat magic and other fast types of magic from the more powerfull plot magic, and that the time element should definintely stay as is.  I would however agree that the gold cost was a little bit annoying. My idea is that Ritual Casters get to cast a number of rituals each day equal to the higher of their Int or Wis Mods.
The Witch's Augury power is basically a ritual disguised as a utility power. The Magister ED hasn't blown up 4e.

Keeping track of ritual books and gold costs is an unnecessary hassle.






Totally agree. The ritual caster is a zillion utility powers in one. You pay the gold/time premium. This is the thing people ignore. Rituals let you do things you cant hope to accomplish otherwise, and are grant incredibly versatility.

I'd allow pretty much any ritual as an equivalent level utility power, since you only get a few of them (utilities).
 

Reason i like healing surges so much as a cost is because rituals are complex and most importantly taxing on the caster. They require time and effort, more so than a combat spell becaus eyou have to channel for several hours. So spending healing surges represents the tax on the your energy that you are using to cast the spell. This can cripple or weaken the caster if he runs into too much trouble later that same day and runs out of surges because he spent half of them on a ritual cast that morning.  I dont know if 5e will keep healing surges i have mixed feelings abou them. But some kind of point system used to regulate the number of rituals you can cast in a set period of time would be good.



The problem with healing surges .. they are not much of a limit except on those occasions where you do get in a fight.. if you are fighting every day that is one thing but the rest of the time, a limit which is no limit well, gains you no benefit you can have the cost for fluff but that is all they amount to. In effect you are spending a combat resource on an activity which is most of the time not relevant to combat.



Action points or milestones are a much better resource, since those are encounter driven.
The Witch's Augury power is basically a ritual disguised as a utility power. The Magister ED hasn't blown up 4e.

Keeping track of ritual books and gold costs is an unnecessary hassle.



Keeping some spells as rituals that can only be cast out of combat while other non-combat spells can be cast on the fly during combat is a useful idea so I'm not in favor of simply making everything castable in combat. On the other hand I think having all out-of-combat-only spells cost gold to cast is a little much. Rather you could simply have rituals only be castable once per day and make learning or finding new rituals more difficult to restrict their use. So for instance you might make a level 4 ritual have the same market price and availability as a level 4 magic item but once you learn the ritual you can cast it once per day for free. Wizards could still learn rituals for free as they advance in level but might get fewer free rituals than they do in 4e, that sort of thing.

So basically I'm for keeping the idea of non-combat only ritual spells in the game but I think the system could use a little tweaking. 

I think requiring the use of 2 action points to do any rituals would keep the cheese down to a minimum...

Go a step further with this suggestion.Use 2 action points for the main ritual participant and 1 action point from each character helping with the ritual.That way you do not get siilyness like 3 people with the same ritual still trying to spam it.


Is this kind of spamming abuse common place in games?I would strongly hesitate to play with others who actively try to do exploitive things like this.I mean just because it is within the rules does not mean it should be done.I would say that if someone's game has this kind of problem everyone should take a step back and talk about it.Either agree as a group to not do such things period or just play the game in the exploitive fashion.  
I think requiring the use of 2 action points to do any rituals would keep the cheese down to a minimum...

Go a step further with this suggestion.Use 2 action points for the main ritual participant and 1 action point from each character helping with the ritual.That way you do not get siilyness like 3 people with the same ritual still trying to spam it.


Is this kind of spamming abuse common place in games?I would strongly hesitate to play with others who actively try to do exploitive things like this.I mean just because it is within the rules does not mean it should be done.I would say that if someone's game has this kind of problem everyone should take a step back and talk about it.Either agree as a group to not do such things period or just play the game in the exploitive fashion.  



I like your idea.

The thing about it is if the DM doesn't allow stuff that is in the rules (no matter how broken), then they accuse them of house ruling instead of playing RAW.

Really if you just had a line at the bottom that said items/materials created by this ritual last until this ritual is performed again, then that would knock half the cheese out right there...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
I think requiring the use of 2 action points to do any rituals would keep the cheese down to a minimum...

Go a step further with this suggestion.Use 2 action points for the main ritual participant and 1 action point from each character helping with the ritual.That way you do not get siilyness like 3 people with the same ritual still trying to spam it.


Is this kind of spamming abuse common place in games?I would strongly hesitate to play with others who actively try to do exploitive things like this.I mean just because it is within the rules does not mean it should be done.I would say that if someone's game has this kind of problem everyone should take a step back and talk about it.Either agree as a group to not do such things period or just play the game in the exploitive fashion.  



I like your idea.

The thing about it is if the DM doesn't allow stuff that is in the rules (no matter how broken), then they accuse them of house ruling instead of playing RAW.

Really if you just had a line at the bottom that said items/materials created by this ritual last until this ritual is performed again, then that would knock half the cheese out right there...

Thank you


Well someone has to lay down the law so to speak when it comes to things of this nature.That responsibility falls to the group as a whole.I think house ruling or raw just simply falls to the group of players and the gm.Agree as a group to house rule certain things or to play things loosely.If everybody is on the same page and of the same mind then there should not be a problem.


Agreed,sometimes just some simple words at the end of a rule can make so much difference lol.    
The Witch's Augury power is basically a ritual disguised as a utility power. The Magister ED hasn't blown up 4e.

Keeping track of ritual books and gold costs is an unnecessary hassle.



what makes Augury a utility power is it's casting time of 1 standard action.
and that it has no cost to cast.
and that is limited by being a utility daily powers instead of a ritual that you can preform as often as you want during a day.

Personaly i would like to see more dangerous rituals.
If you miss the DC by more then a certain number bad things start to happen.
The component cost would still be there but as an optional way to reduce the DC of the ritual.



Sign In to post comments