Wizard Issue

I see a major issue with having cantrips being allowed to be casted all day because as playing many wizards in my time you learn to manage your spells and now you can blow all your spells with really no penalty. The way magic missile is currently written at 9th level you'll get 4 missiles doing 4d6+4 after he has dumped all of his other damage dealing spells, we are now giving a class more power that is powerfull enough and as a DM cantrips will come out and magic missile will again be a 1st level spell  as well as shocking grasp. Players really need to learn to play thier classes effectively not just be given more power to make the class easier to play. If people can't survive first level with 4 hit points plus a con bonus then they are just not using thier head and should be playing a fighter or maybe a cleric and leave the wizard for the seasoned players.
First off: Why does a wizard have to be left to seasoned players? What if a new player wants to play a wizard because he thinks they are cool? Should he be penalized for trying to have fun?

Secondly: No. A wizard does not spend his days shooting people with a hand crossbow because he has 1 magic missile at level 1 that deals 1d4 damage. That is not what I call a wizard.

You're asking for more of the same quadratic caster scaling and that is a terrible, terrible thing to put back in the game. 
First off if you give school specialization like the past and you a bonus spell in that school and you get bonus spells for INT then you tell me why it's a problem at first level having 3 castable spells? A wizard is not a frontline character he is a support/utility character and in the higher level the power shifts to the wizard and if you don't believe this then you haven't played enough wizards through 1st, 2nd, 3.0, 3.5 and pathfiner.
I'd rather see wizards casting spells than resorting to light crossbows all the time, which does not follow any example you see in fantasy literature.

And I agree with the second poster - why does a wizard have to be for seasoned players? Wizards appeal to lots of people, they shouldn't have to be experts to make them work.

I rather like the new wizard - lots of cantrips and then the occasional wow! spell. Good balance. 
look at it like this when they came out with 3.0 everything was made to be easier which is why we no longer have Thaco. AC goes up istead of down because having a higher armor class appeals more to kids, what sounds better I have an armor class or 24 or 2. now we going to make classes much easier to play just like video games. no thank you! I see promise with this so far but things think cantrips that are free need to go just like the fighters reaper damage needs to go because it makes no sense that you completely miss even on a 1 but still do 3 damage. Things were alot easier in 1st and 2nd and WOTC would do thems a favor to go back and model after those. the experience is of wack and is just going to cause players to level fast just like 3.0 and 3.5. This is what I'm saying, we are giving more power to an already powerfull class and it's not needed. you just need to use your head when playing this class because he is not a fighter and is not ment to be on the front line and if you are you deserve to die. the wizards place is in the back of the group giving support. remember he can cast from scrolls that he can write and he can also buy/find.
I don't have a problem with the Magic Missile cantrip. It gives the Wizard a way to attack with magic each round, that feels far more like a Wizard than resorting to a crossbow or darts (always my Wizard's preferred non-magic attack!).

At first level the Magic Missile does d4+1, compared with the playtest Fighter's greataxe damage of 2d6+7 or Light Crossbow of 1d8+5. If the Playtest Wizard resorted to throwing daggers he would do the same damage as the Magic Missile (d4 + Dex of 1), and if he whipped out a sling he would be doing a massive d6 damage! The magic missile at low levels doesn't seem like an "easy option", just an interesting one for a player that wants to be a spell-slinger. Even at 9th level, when doing 4d4+1 damage with Magic Missile, it does not seem over-powered compared with the playtest Fighter's level 1 damage.

Now, I know the Magic Missile does not require an attack roll, but at this point, the Fighter's "Reaper" ability kind of levels the field a bit (and I will leave discussion of that particular feat to later!).
I have to admit that a wizard dealing 4d4+4 or 4d6+4 damage at will is the least of my worries when it comes to high level vancian spellcasters. The damage will be significantly lower than a fighter's at-will attacks and your other spells.

In 3.5, a level 9 wizard usually had a wand of magic missile that dealt 4d4+4 or 4d6+4 with 50 charges (almost at-will) or a reserve feat that deals 5d6 damage.

Low-level vancian casters used to suck. The at-will powers are only there to make them more interesting at lower levels. Most people want class parity, that also includes casters on par with non casters at low levels.
I don't have a problem with the Magic Missile cantrip. It gives the Wizard a way to attack with magic each round, that feels far more like a Wizard than resorting to a crossbow or darts (always my Wizard's preferred non-magic attack!).

At first level the Magic Missile does d4+1, compared with the playtest Fighter's greataxe damage of 2d6+7 or Light Crossbow of 1d8+5. If the Playtest Wizard resorted to throwing daggers he would do the same damage as the Magic Missile (d4 + Dex of 1), and if he whipped out a sling he would be doing a massive d6 damage! The magic missile at low levels doesn't seem like an "easy option", just an interesting one for a player that wants to be a spell-slinger. Even at 9th level, when doing 4d4+1 damage with Magic Missile, it does not seem over-powered compared with the playtest Fighter's level 1 damage.

Now, I know the Magic Missile does not require an attack roll, but at this point, the Fighter's "Reaper" ability kind of levels the field a bit (and I will leave discussion of that particular feat to later!).



The reaper damage needs to be removed because it makes absolutely no sense, you can completely miss and still do 3 damage but magic missile is a spell that scales with level 1d4+1,2d4+2,3d4+3and 4d4+4 for free every round all day with no penalty? NO I dont think so.
Magic missile it's not so powerful since you can use it only with an "unobstructed" visual. for me thet means no cover of any tipe...no half cover, no darkness, maybe, when better coverde by rules, not even interposing character...
Magic missile it's not so powerful since you can use it only with an "unobstructed" visual. for me thet means no cover of any tipe...no half cover, no darkness, maybe, when better coverde by rules, not even interposing character...


That to me seems a pretty strict ruling. If itspell specified in the spell description, it might go some way to balancing the spell.
it's going to get out of hand 1 level of wizard for the free cantrips then fighter now you get your shocking grasp at 1d8+int plus your weapon damage+str for 10 rounds and this can be done every combat even if there are 5 in a day and I know what your going to say spell failure but that doesn't matter because he can cast it until it sticks, and the magic missile is not specific it just has to have an unobstructed path to the target creature so if you can see the creature and it's not in cover then you can hit it, meaning your missile can't travel through people or objects to hit target creature.
I would also hate to see wizard / fighters just so the fighters can have a slew of cheap, inexhaustible cantrips at the ready. I don't think shocking grasp is the worry, though -  why would my fighter (lets say, the playtest fighter took 1 level of wizard then 1 level of fighter) choose to attack using a d8 Shocking Grasp (which uses Int as the attack and damage mod), over a 2d6+5 greataxe? Even if the character had the best ability scores from both the playtest fighter and wizard (16 Str, 17 Int), both attacks appear to have +6 to hit, with the shocking grasp doing d8+3 damage and the greataxe doing 2d6+5.

However, I would have a concern about the fighter whipping off a magic missile or two at the start of every combat while he waits for the enemy to close. A point or two of damage to soften up the enemy before swinging that greataxe at them! Or for that matter, a ray of frost before moving in to attack - eek! Surprised

Mind you, until we see the character gen rules, who knows what limitations, restrictions or incentives will affect such a decision. Lets hope it is addressed.
I see alot of promise in 5E but I already see mistakes like the reaper for the fighter and cantrips with wizards. dont get me wrong I love wizards and I play a wizard when ever I get a chance but we dont need to be given free spells to just cast when ever.People think it's no big deal but if you think about it the wizard is a support class and even in 3.5 you started with the ability to cast 3 0's and 2 1st lvl spells or 3 if you were a specialized. I can count on 1 hand how many times I have died at first level in the last 28 years of playing D&D when I was a wizard, I died more often when  I was a fighter or a thief but not as a wizard because I understud that my role was not to be in the front but to be in the back and assit the group with spells, crossbow and/or daggers. as much as I love this game it has been going in the wrong direction since 3.0 and I'm hoping that WOTC does right and fixes 5E. 
look at it like this when they came out with 3.0 everything was made to be easier which is why we no longer have Thaco. AC goes up istead of down because having a higher armor class appeals more to kids, what sounds better I have an armor class or 24 or 2. now we going to make classes much easier to play just like video games. no thank you! I see promise with this so far but things think cantrips that are free need to go just like the fighters reaper damage needs to go because it makes no sense that you completely miss even on a 1 but still do 3 damage. Things were alot easier in 1st and 2nd and WOTC would do thems a favor to go back and model after those. the experience is of wack and is just going to cause players to level fast just like 3.0 and 3.5. This is what I'm saying, we are giving more power to an already powerfull class and it's not needed. you just need to use your head when playing this class because he is not a fighter and is not ment to be on the front line and if you are you deserve to die. the wizards place is in the back of the group giving support. remember he can cast from scrolls that he can write and he can also buy/find.




Your grasp of the english language hurts me.

Reaper is fine- if it hurts your feeling of verisimiltude remember that HP is not all (or even MOSTLY) real damage.  HP represents your reflexes, toughness, magical and supernatural ability to slip aside from blows or block them from your body before they CAN injure you.  All the damage from reaper represents is that even though the fighter didnt get a solid swing at you he is still knocking your weapon out of alignment, wearing you out just a little bit because he's just THAT good.

The main problem I have with mm is that it is auto damage, scaling at will attack which makes it hands down a better option than the other at wills unless you want to stop someone from running or stop them from getting to you.
 
First off if you give school specialization like the past and you a bonus spell in that school and you get bonus spells for INT then you tell me why it's a problem at first level having 3 castable spells? A wizard is not a frontline character he is a support/utility character and in the higher level the power shifts to the wizard and if you don't believe this then you haven't played enough wizards through 1st, 2nd, 3.0, 3.5 and pathfiner.



I beg to differ.

In 3.5E I played a high dex wizard that had bracers of defense +6 and would enter any battle casting displacement on themselves and stoneskin, they would then ready an action to cast hold person on any monster that got past him to the ranged focused fighter. Trust me an AC of 20 with a 50% miss chance tossed on top of DR 10 physical damage reduction is way better than a fighter could do...
"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 don't have a problem with the Magic Missile cantrip. It gives the Wizard a way to attack with magic each round, that feels far more like a Wizard than resorting to a crossbow or darts (always my Wizard's preferred non-magic attack!).

At first level the Magic Missile does d4+1, compared with the playtest Fighter's greataxe damage of 2d6+7 or Light Crossbow of 1d8+5. If the Playtest Wizard resorted to throwing daggers he would do the same damage as the Magic Missile (d4 + Dex of 1), and if he whipped out a sling he would be doing a massive d6 damage! The magic missile at low levels doesn't seem like an "easy option", just an interesting one for a player that wants to be a spell-slinger. Even at 9th level, when doing 4d4+1 damage with Magic Missile, it does not seem over-powered compared with the playtest Fighter's level 1 damage.

Now, I know the Magic Missile does not require an attack roll, but at this point, the Fighter's "Reaper" ability kind of levels the field a bit (and I will leave discussion of that particular feat to later!).



That doesn't take into account the fact that fighters get 2 extra action by level 3...
"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.
it's going to get out of hand 1 level of wizard for the free cantrips then fighter now you get your shocking grasp at 1d8+int plus your weapon damage+str for 10 rounds and this can be done every combat even if there are 5 in a day and I know what your going to say spell failure but that doesn't matter because he can cast it until it sticks, and the magic missile is not specific it just has to have an unobstructed path to the target creature so if you can see the creature and it's not in cover then you can hit it, meaning your missile can't travel through people or objects to hit target creature.



Uh, they can already do this by taking the theme that the wizard has...
"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 would also hate to see wizard / fighters just so the fighters can have a slew of cheap, inexhaustible cantrips at the ready. I don't think shocking grasp is the worry, though -  why would my fighter (lets say, the playtest fighter took 1 level of wizard then 1 level of fighter) choose to attack using a d8 Shocking Grasp (which uses Int as the attack and damage mod), over a 2d6+5 greataxe? Even if the character had the best ability scores from both the playtest fighter and wizard (16 Str, 17 Int), both attacks appear to have +6 to hit, with the shocking grasp doing d8+3 damage and the greataxe doing 2d6+5.

However, I would have a concern about the fighter whipping off a magic missile or two at the start of every combat while he waits for the enemy to close. A point or two of damage to soften up the enemy before swinging that greataxe at them! Or for that matter, a ray of frost before moving in to attack - eek! 

Mind you, until we see the character gen rules, who knows what limitations, restrictions or incentives will affect such a decision. Lets hope it is addressed.



Wait until that fighter get the 2 extra actions and whips off 3 of them per round until the enemies close...
"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.
Read the latest Legends & Lore column on the main D&D website. They are going to have the option of not using the at-will cantrips and running a campaign with a more "strictly vancian" theme. Nothing in the Playtest Packet is set in stone yet. That's why we're testing it - to see if it works.

EDIT: It's Rule of Three not Legends & Lore. Sorry.


Wait until that fighter get the 2 extra actions and whips off 3 of them per round until the enemies close...



Are you talking about the fighter surge?  The ability to take 2 actions on your turn twice per day does not equal "whiping off three of them per round until enemies close".  2 times per day the fighter can take AN extra action on his turn.



Wait until that fighter get the 2 extra actions and whips off 3 of them per round until the enemies close...



Are you talking about the fighter surge?  The ability to take 2 actions on your turn twice per day does not equal "whiping off three of them per round until enemies close".  2 times per day the fighter can take AN extra action on his turn.




Oh, I must have misread it then, I thought it was per round. If its per day, then that's not much of a power/feat.

I mean the wizard starts with 3 powerful spells a day and by 3rd they have what 5 spells, and by that time the fighter can do 2 extra actions per day?
"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.
An interesting discussion about Magic Missile and the reaper damage.

I like unlimited MM cantrips specifically for low levels.  However, it needs to be an attack on AC and not be automatic.  I think it should do 1d4+Int bonus damage if it hits.

I don't like the "you do damage even if you miss" reaper attack at all.  I'm better with it if it was an exhaustable power, maybe used once a day, but not all the time. 
-------------------- D&D Player/DM since 1975 - Veteran of Chainmail, AD&D, 2e, v3.5, DnD4e and now Next.
An interesting discussion about Magic Missile and the reaper damage.

I like unlimited MM cantrips specifically for low levels.  However, it needs to be an attack on AC and not be automatic.  I think it should do 1d4+Int bonus damage if it hits.

I don't like the "you do damage even if you miss" reaper attack at all.  I'm better with it if it was an exhaustable power, maybe used once a day, but not all the time. 



I'd rather it be tied to how much you miss, like if you miss by 5 points or less you get it...
"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.
Another solution for the fighter getting free magic missiles could be to deny cantrips/orizons to dual class characters, don't you think?

Supposedly a wizard/cleric can cast those spells freely because he has trained a lot in using them through his first steps in his career. The fghter get the second class later, during his adventuring years and he doesn't stop training his fighter skills, so not that much time to 'specialize' on these cantrips/orizons... 
Another solution for the fighter getting free magic missiles could be to deny cantrips/orizons to dual class characters, don't you think?

Supposedly a wizard/cleric can cast those spells freely because he has trained a lot in using them through his first steps in his career. The fghter get the second class later, during his adventuring years and he doesn't stop training his fighter skills, so not that much time to 'specialize' on these cantrips/orizons... 



Yeah, except you can already get magic missile as a fighter by taking the theme the wizard has...
"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.
An interesting discussion about Magic Missile and the reaper damage.

I like unlimited MM cantrips specifically for low levels.  However, it needs to be an attack on AC and not be automatic.  I think it should do 1d4+Int bonus damage if it hits.

I don't like the "you do damage even if you miss" reaper attack at all.  I'm better with it if it was an exhaustable power, maybe used once a day, but not all the time. 



I'd rather it be tied to how much you miss, like if you miss by 5 points or less you get it...




I rather like your idea
Another solution for the fighter getting free magic missiles could be to deny cantrips/orizons to dual class characters, don't you think?

Supposedly a wizard/cleric can cast those spells freely because he has trained a lot in using them through his first steps in his career. The fghter get the second class later, during his adventuring years and he doesn't stop training his fighter skills, so not that much time to 'specialize' on these cantrips/orizons... 



Yeah, except you can already get magic missile as a fighter by taking the theme the wizard has...




Hmmmm, we are not sure yet though how that really works, i mean the whole themes mechanic. are we?
Sorry, i don't have the rules yet, i am picking up what i can through the forums :P 
Another solution for the fighter getting free magic missiles could be to deny cantrips/orizons to dual class characters, don't you think?

Supposedly a wizard/cleric can cast those spells freely because he has trained a lot in using them through his first steps in his career. The fghter get the second class later, during his adventuring years and he doesn't stop training his fighter skills, so not that much time to 'specialize' on these cantrips/orizons... 



Yeah, except you can already get magic missile as a fighter by taking the theme the wizard has...




Hmmmm, we are not sure yet though how that really works, i mean the whole themes mechanic. are we?
Sorry, i don't have the rules yet, i am picking up what i can through the forums :P 



Between the articles and the playtest, you should be able to take that theme, future playtests might remove that though...
"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, as a DM, would not allow it to work like that. The fluff in the feat description may indicate the ability to do so, but the crunch of the benefit section can EASILY be interpreted otherwise, which I would be inclined to do in this case. I am a huge fan of tweaking and such, but decisions made to break the game and such are not allowed in the games we run around here.

But back to the original point. I am ok with at-will magic missile (and at-will) magics in general and agree that it is inline with other fantasy archetypes. I can agree with having an issue with magic missile scaling (only because it is the only cantrip that scales). The Fighter Reaper feat is a little overpowering (at first) and I can agree about it not making sense fluff-wise (also at first) but everything works out fine the more you look at and think about it (and balance with other character options).
I, as a DM, would not allow it to work like that. The fluff in the feat description may indicate the ability to do so, but the crunch of the benefit section can EASILY be interpreted otherwise, which I would be inclined to do in this case. I am a huge fan of tweaking and such, but decisions made to break the game and such are not allowed in the games we run around here.

But back to the original point. I am ok with at-will magic missile (and at-will) magics in general and agree that it is inline with other fantasy archetypes. I can agree with having an issue with magic missile scaling (only because it is the only cantrip that scales). The Fighter Reaper feat is a little overpowering (at first) and I can agree about it not making sense fluff-wise (also at first) but everything works out fine the more you look at and think about it (and balance with other character options).



I personally will make magic missile a first level spell and have it function like the old and scale like it did at 1,3,5,7,9 and shocking grasp do a 1d8+1 per wizard lvl. This game needs more of a 1E/2eE feel and not a 3.5/4.0
I, as a DM, would not allow it to work like that. The fluff in the feat description may indicate the ability to do so, but the crunch of the benefit section can EASILY be interpreted otherwise, which I would be inclined to do in this case. I am a huge fan of tweaking and such, but decisions made to break the game and such are not allowed in the games we run around here.

But back to the original point. I am ok with at-will magic missile (and at-will) magics in general and agree that it is inline with other fantasy archetypes. I can agree with having an issue with magic missile scaling (only because it is the only cantrip that scales). The Fighter Reaper feat is a little overpowering (at first) and I can agree about it not making sense fluff-wise (also at first) but everything works out fine the more you look at and think about it (and balance with other character options).



I personally will make magic missile a first level spell and have it function like the old and scale like it did at 1,3,5,7,9 and shocking grasp do a 1d8+1 per wizard lvl. This game needs more of a 1E/2eE feel and not a 3.5/4.0



Not to be rude, but I am curious: why do you even play anything other than 1/2e? Reading the thread you have only said (over and over), and I'm paraphrasing a little here, "This isn't 1/2e and therefore it's wrong!!!" Mind you, to be completely honest and transparent, I can agree that maybe Magic Missile is not the right choice for an at-will spell. Something new (ish) that fires out a ray that requires a ranged attack to hit and does 1d4 damage FLAT sounds much better (and if you make more cantrips that scale with level scale this one too). That sounds far more balanced and in line with the fantasy wizard archetype. (And if you don't want any at-will spells, make a base 4+Int score/bonus number of cantrips per day. Done.)
I think that he (Sampsompik) is trying to convey that the game balance in these prior editions was more to his liking, as at wills and auto damage was not part of the game. He also is trying to give examples of how these (reaper function & Magic missle that scales with level, endless cantrips) will likely be abused as written. As far as why he ever plays any other additions of the game due to his obvious prefernces toward 1st and second edition,that is his buisness and preference. Are you going to call him a "grognard" now and insult the guy for his references toward past editions? I hope that you realize that the past shapes the future. When the game system broke away from its roots it failed to garner the kind of sales and acceptance to keep that edition current. Hence we are here right now play testing what is obviously a return to a more classic ruleset. With that said not all of the past was a good thing. But from the lack of widespread intrest in the current incarnation neither is everything new. I see that you have your own ideas for balance for the magic missle cantrip and that is good- by the way you seem to be in agreement about a need for a reworking in the rules. I also think that is a valid point. The at wills or infinite auto damage features needs reworking. A clean miss should not harm your foe (perhaps you should have to hit a.c 10 + dex. mod. and sheild bonus). Nor should a magic missle be an at will cantrip that does damage that scales with level advancement as a built in auto damage machine gun.
When the game system broke away from its roots it failed to garner the kind of sales and acceptance to keep that edition current. Hence we are here right now play testing what is obviously a return to a more classic ruleset.


Do you actually have any evidence for this? Seems to me that 3e and 4e have both been highly successful. But we live in a different age now - D&D is much more a commercial venture than in was back in the days of 1e and TSR, not to mention the explosion of other RPG games that now compete for gamers attention. 

The thing I find rather tiresome, and I think what RisnDevil was getting at (though don't want to speak for them!), is that so many posters seem to be vehemently declaring what everyone else shouldn't be able to do, because it doesn't fit with their preferred play-style or favourite bit from an older system.

Wouldn't it be far better if we discussed things in terms of what we are trying to achieve - what's the big goal here? And then we can focus our (the fans) undoubted creativity to making it happen. I hope D&Dnext will be another successful incarnation of D&D, with it's own unique appeal, and not just a rehash of previous editions (which I can still play if that is my preference).
Do you actually have any evidence for this? Seems to me that 3e and 4e have both been highly successful. But we live in a different age now - D&D is much more a commercial venture than in was back in the days of 1e and TSR, not to mention the explosion of other RPG games that now compete for gamers attention.


Co-signed so much.
When the game system broke away from its roots it failed to garner the kind of sales and acceptance to keep that edition current. Hence we are here right now play testing what is obviously a return to a more classic ruleset.


Do you actually have any evidence for this? Seems to me that 3e and 4e have both been highly successful. But we live in a different age now - D&D is much more a commercial venture than in was back in the days of 1e and TSR, not to mention the explosion of other RPG games that now compete for gamers attention. 

The thing I find rather tiresome, and I think what RisnDevil was getting at (though don't want to speak for them!), is that so many posters seem to be vehemently declaring what everyone else shouldn't be able to do, because it doesn't fit with their preferred play-style or favourite bit from an older system.

Wouldn't it be far better if we discussed things in terms of what we are trying to achieve - what's the big goal here? And then we can focus our (the fans) undoubted creativity to making it happen. I hope D&Dnext will be another successful incarnation of D&D, with it's own unique appeal, and not just a rehash of previous editions (which I can still play if that is my preference).

The D&D franchise has a major competitor now that you may not be aware of, Pathfinder. That systems is taking off & based upon the 3.5 ruleset. Now suddenly we have a D&D next which is obviously based on that platform. Why? Money talks Sir & that's why. If 4th ed. has been so captivating to the pnp gamer why is Wizards following suite by way of platform? I do not want to have a carbon clone of prior editions either but some comprehensive rules to play by. No one likes being told you can or can't do this or that but sometimes your freedom of play must be moderated to insure the fairness and balance of the mechanics. I.E it's make believe but it has rules too. All I am saying is that your freedom of imaginative play has to be coupled with rules that make sense. I respect your aim, and I share it. It is my hearts desire that the game we all love live on for another 38 years and beyond. By the way, Play your own preference and I'll respect that, I'll do the same and ask the same of you.
The D&D franchise has a major competitor now that you may not be aware of, Pathfinder. That systems is taking off & based upon the 3.5 ruleset. Now suddenly we have a D&D next which is obviously based on that platform. Why? Money talks Sir & that's why. If 4th ed. has been so captivating to the pnp gamer why is Wizards following suite by way of platform?


The mere fact that Pathfinder exists doesn't mean that 4E didn't sell: to prove that, you'll need to (A) provide equivalent type(s) of sales figures for Pathfinder and 4E showing greater overall sales for Pathfinder; and (B) provide revenue figures for all other non-rulebook 4E accessories, such as DDI, showing that amount to be inconsequential.

And even then, that's just the money side of things: to tell which game is truly more popular, you'd have to know how many 4E games have ever been played vs. Pathfinder, which is a practical impossibility. (Money talks, but Pathfinder, 3.x,  and 4E buyers aren't mutually exclusive.)

Brightmantle, when you referred to the game's roots, I assume you meant 1e and so I was merely pointing out that editions post-1e have been very successful (you actually make my point for me with reference to Pathfinder; which I had heard of btw ;) ). All of which is beside the point, as any business must constantly 'grow' and show growth, lest the sacred shareholder be displeased. I referred to the success of 3e and 4e in the past tense (at least commercially) as obviously, Wizards must continue to iterate and compete.

Beyond the sales and acceptance comment, I wasn't really aiming my comments at you, just making a general point that I'd rather have more constructive comment towards a shared new goal than watch metaphorical volleys back and forth from one entrenched (in the past) position to another. I think, actually, that you and I are saying much the same thing: I'm all for rules that make sense and that mechanically support the creative vision and RP choices I make.

With regard the wizard specifically, I wonder if there is a new approach that builds on the good bits of the Vancian system (resource management) but which doesn't leave a wizard player with nothing to do once his limited resources are expended (At-Will approach), or potentially worse, have to resort to something that breaks the player's creative vision of his character (such as pulling out a crossbow) in order to continue to contribute to combat (meaningfully. I don't think we should assume that creative roleplaying and improvisation is an acceptable solution to this conundrum as this play style is clearly not universally embraced.

One suggestion may be some sort of spell point based system that simulated a access to, or amount of, a power source. This could open up some very interesting resource management decisions by allowing the wizard to expend more or less power to fuel his spells, thereby making choices about casting fewer more-powerful spells or more less-powerful spells. Then, this spell point pool could regenerate over time (e.g. after a short rest) to a degree (i.e. not fully or so much as to make the character overpowered). This would ensure that the wizard would at worst run out of magic only between short rest. I personally, would support a base level of spell points that were never depleted meaning the wizard could always power his weakest spells (cantrips, perhaps). Now we just need to argue where various effects fit in this power curve!

Fair enough. Now have fun play testing the 3.5 based ruleset which is very unlike 4th edition, I will let you pretend it is all just in my head.
Fair enough. Now have fun play testing the 3.5 based ruleset which is very unlike 4th edition, I will let you pretend it is all just in my head.



I don't really understand the point you are trying to make. I've played 1e through 4e (and enjoyed all of them). To me, this playtest (as much as we can judge it at this very very early stage) has more a feel of the pre-3.0 editions. Though, to be sure there are recognisable elements of 3.x and 4 in there.

But, that's kinda like two bald men arguing over a comb...pointless.




Brightmantle, when you referred to the game's roots, I assume you meant 1e and so I was merely pointing out that editions post-1e have been very successful (you actually make my point for me with reference to Pathfinder; which I had heard of btw ;) ). All of which is beside the point, as any business must constantly 'grow' and show growth, lest the sacred shareholder be displeased. I referred to the success of 3e and 4e in the past tense (at least commercially) as obviously, Wizards must continue to iterate and compete.

Beyond the sales and acceptance comment, I wasn't really aiming my comments at you, just making a general point that I'd rather have more constructive comment towards a shared new goal than watch metaphorical volleys back and forth from one entrenched (in the past) position to another. I think, actually, that you and I are saying much the same thing: I'm all for rules that make sense and that mechanically support the creative vision and RP choices I make.

With regard the wizard specifically, I wonder if there is a new approach that builds on the good bits of the Vancian system (resource management) but which doesn't leave a wizard player with nothing to do once his limited resources are expended (At-Will approach), or potentially worse, have to resort to something that breaks the player's creative vision of his character (such as pulling out a crossbow) in order to continue to contribute to combat (meaningfully. I don't think we should assume that creative roleplaying and improvisation is an acceptable solution to this conundrum as this play style is clearly not universally embraced.

One suggestion may be some sort of spell point based system that simulated a access to, or amount of, a power source. This could open up some very interesting resource management decisions by allowing the wizard to expend more or less power to fuel his spells, thereby making choices about casting fewer more-powerful spells or more less-powerful spells. Then, this spell point pool could regenerate over time (e.g. after a short rest) to a degree (i.e. not fully or so much as to make the character overpowered). This would ensure that the wizard would at worst run out of magic only between short rest. I personally, would support a base level of spell points that were never depleted meaning the wizard could always power his weakest spells (cantrips, perhaps). Now we just need to argue where various effects fit in this power curve!


I actually am in favor of your prior fix. Via Int. bonus and a set number of daily cantrips. Or choose different spells to be cantrips that do not scale with level so that the efective balance is as the same as the reaper function I just believe that function needs a pre req. number as a to hit to have an effect in combat. A ac.4 is not a near miss to a foe who is a.c.17. I really like the concept of a close call or near miss- getting hit in armor hurts ,but I just hate the idea of it being a "Whiff" and take auto damage effect. Some would argue that hitpoints are not all physical wounds I.E. when he swings on me it costs me h.p. to dodge the blow but in real life it hurts the person who misses via. a loss of energy as well. Hence I think the rule needs help to make it comprehensive and effective even when herioc fantasy is the goal.  I would appriciate your feedback Lionshanks. P.S. yes we are on the same wave length. I just hate edition wars. Let every player play to their style and have fun!