How is Eldritch Blast balanced in the slightest???

I already think spell damage is a bit much compared to others, but at least spells are on a per day timer. Warlocks can use Eldritch Blast till they're blue in the face, and then they can still use it. A fighter with a very high Dex (lets say an 18) deals 1d8+4 (average 8.5) with a hit from a longbow (I'd use a crossbow, but it requires reloading). A warlock has the same attack bonus with Eldritch Blast, and deals 3d6 no matter their Intelligence score; 3d6 averages to 10.5 damage. And an 18 Dex is hard to get, it requires a Human; other races can only count on a 16 or 17, which means 7.5 damage vs. 10.5 ...

This means, on average, an Eldritch Blast will drop almost any 1st level PC unless they have obscenely stacked Con. If, for some reason, you were playing a hill dwarf fighter with a 16 Con and the Survivor specialty, you could have 23 HP at max; an Eldritch Blast could still drop you in 2 hits. Without Survivor, your 15 hp could be taken out by a single good roll. More normal characters will be looking at 6 to 12 hp, in which case you are very much in danger of an Eldritch Blast.

I know PCs aren't supposed to be balanced against each other, but what level threat would a 1st level human Warlock be, anyway?


Human Warlock
Medium Humanoid
Armor Class 13 (leather)
Hit Points 13 (1d6+2+1d8)
Speed 30 ft.
Str 9 (-1) Dex 14 (+2) Con 15 (+2)
Int 18 (+4) Wis 13 (+1) Cha 11 (+0)
Alignment Evil
Languages Common


Traits
Bounty Hunter: Stealth (+3), Spot (+3), Streetwise (+3)


Specialty: Survivor


Actions
Ranged Attack-Eldritch Blast: +4 to hit (range 50 ft.; one creature). Hit: 3d6 force damage.


Warlock Invocations: The warlock can use any combination of the following invocations twice per encounter.
Area Attack-Baleful Utterance: 15 ft. cone; each creature in cone. 2d6 thunder damage and deafened until end of warlock's next turn; Constitution save DC 15 for half damage and no deafened. Unattended objects in cone take maximum damage.
Ethereal Stride: The warlock becomes ethereal until the end of its next turn. An ethereal warlock has a spectral appearance, takes half damage from non-ethereal sources and deals only half damage to non-ethereal targets (neither effect applies to force damage), and the warlock can pass through non-ethereal creatures and objects (but is blinded while in an object and cannot target anything but the object).



So, again, I know players aren't built on the same track as monsters, but that's a very challenging foe compared to other creatures. 3d6 damage is a ton.

Poe's Law is alive and well.

A fighter with a very high Dex (lets say an 18) deals 1d8+4 (average 8.5) with a hit from a longbow 


+1d6 Combat Superiority (Deadly Strike) for an average of 12 damage at 1st level and increasing at 3rd and 5th levels.  Additionally, the longbow Fighter has much better range.

The Fighter deals more damage on average than the Warlock's Eldritch Blast.
Add to that their ability to use 2 damaging spells per encounter and your talking about outclassing both the Wizard and the Fighter in 'fighting'...
"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.
Woops, forgot about Combat Superiority. Then, throw my hat into the "HP are too low" ring. I'm going to go work on some 4E for now ...

Poe's Law is alive and well.

A fighter with a very high Dex (lets say an 18) deals 1d8+4 (average 8.5) with a hit from a longbow 


+1d6 Combat Superiority (Deadly Strike) for an average of 12 damage at 1st level and increasing at 3rd and 5th levels.  Additionally, the longbow Fighter has much better range.

The Fighter deals more damage on average than the Warlock's Eldritch Blast.



Show some numbers please...

Even counting CS (DS) you are in at an average of 12. The Warlock is doing 3.5 * 3 = 10.5 every round except for two that they deal 7 damage to 2-6 creatures. So yeah they still beat the fighter for damage over the course of a 4-5 round fight, which is the average a fight is supposed to take. At 3rd they up their damage by 3.5 to 14 points average per round and 9 to 2-6 creatures which blows the fighter out of the water at that point...

Wait until we see higher level stuff... the Quadraticness is well in play...
"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.
A fighter with a very high Dex (lets say an 18) deals 1d8+4 (average 8.5) with a hit from a longbow 


+1d6 Combat Superiority (Deadly Strike) for an average of 12 damage at 1st level and increasing at 3rd and 5th levels.  Additionally, the longbow Fighter has much better range.

The Fighter deals more damage on average than the Warlock's Eldritch Blast.



Show some numbers please...

Even counting CS (DS) you are in at an average of 12. The Warlock is doing 3.5 * 3 = 10.5 every round except for two that they deal 7 damage to 2-6 creatures. So yeah they still beat the fighter for damage over the course of a 4-5 round fight, which is the average a fight is supposed to take. At 3rd they up their damage by 3.5 to 14 points average per round and 9 to 2-6 creatures which blows the fighter out of the water at that point...



If the Warlock chose Baleful Utterance as an invocation, had 10 minutes to rest since the last time they used up their favors, they don't need/want to spend any favors on things like teleporting around the battlefield or giving the opponent disadvantage on an attack, and have multiple enemies they can target with a 15 foot cone, then you are correct that the Warlock has the potential of outdamaging the Fighter. 

There are a lot of "ifs" there.  Most likely what we will see is the Warlock outdamaging the Fighter in some encounters, and the Fighter outdamaging the Warlock in other encounters.

Wait until we see higher level stuff... the Quadraticness is well in play...


I think we are all very curious as to what types of high level types abilities will be available.  Unfortunately, nothing but pure speculation at the moment.  I do, however, remain convinced that the designers are fully aware of linear Fighter/quadratic Wizard.
A fighter with a very high Dex (lets say an 18) deals 1d8+4 (average 8.5) with a hit from a longbow 


+1d6 Combat Superiority (Deadly Strike) for an average of 12 damage at 1st level and increasing at 3rd and 5th levels.  Additionally, the longbow Fighter has much better range.

The Fighter deals more damage on average than the Warlock's Eldritch Blast.



Show some numbers please...

Even counting CS (DS) you are in at an average of 12. The Warlock is doing 3.5 * 3 = 10.5 every round except for two that they deal 7 damage to 2-6 creatures. So yeah they still beat the fighter for damage over the course of a 4-5 round fight, which is the average a fight is supposed to take. At 3rd they up their damage by 3.5 to 14 points average per round and 9 to 2-6 creatures which blows the fighter out of the water at that point...



If the Warlock chose Baleful Utterance as an invocation, had 10 minutes to rest since the last time they used up their favors, they don't need/want to spend any favors on things like teleporting around the battlefield or giving the opponent disadvantage on an attack, and have multiple enemies they can target with a 15 foot cone, then you are correct that the Warlock has the potential of outdamaging the Fighter. 

There are a lot of "ifs" there.  Most likely what we will see is the Warlock outdamaging the Fighter in some encounters, and the Fighter outdamaging the Warlock in other encounters.

Wait until we see higher level stuff... the Quadraticness is well in play...


I think we are all very curious as to what types of high level types abilities will be available.  Unfortunately, nothing but pure speculation at the moment.  I do, however, remain convinced that the designers are fully aware of linear Fighter/quadratic Wizard.



Out of six choices the Warlock knows 3 at first and 5 by 4th, so yeah its about a 66% chance that a Warlock can out damage the fighter at level one and goes up from there. By level 3 the Warlock is easily out damaging the fighter even if they only use their damage spell once per encounter...
"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.


Out of six choices the Warlock knows 3 at first and 5 by 4th, so yeah its about a 66% chance that a Warlock can out damage the fighter at level one and goes up from there. By level 3 the Warlock is easily out damaging the fighter even if they only use their damage spell once per encounter...



The warlock gets 2, repeat 2 favors.  There is nothing at the moment to indicate they get anymore at any other level(which is a ridiculous oversight anyway, but not here nor there).  You have to use your favors to gain the benefits of any pact boons you get as well as the lesser invocations.  Out of the invocations listed only two are minors and cost no favors, eldritch blast and shadow veil.  Eldritch blast at 1st lv does on average 9 damage, 12 at lv 4.  The only other invocation that does damage is the lesser invocation Baleful utterance.  BU costs a favor, and costs an action to use so it isn't like you'll be using eldritch blast and BU during the same turn.  Anyway BU only does 2d6 for an average of 6 damage and deafening again, at the cost of one of two favors.  At level 3 it goes up to 2d8, so 8 average.  Still less than eldritch blast's damage at lv 1.  So really a fair waste to even use BU.

The fighter with say a d8 weapon, +3 Str mod, and the d6 Combat die will do 10 damage on average doing just over the warlock at level one and yeah maybe just under the warlock at lv 4 but then there's stat increases so maybe another +1 str mod, and if the fighter is using a d10 weapon that makes their average 11.

The fighter will get some increases while the warlock's damage is basically static except at certain levels when the dice increase.  After that, they're done.  It really isn't this big deal that you seem to make it out to be, the fighter might be a point or two under on average after level 3 but the warlock is squishier than the fighter so a lot easier to take out of the fight if he doesn't stay away while the Fighter wont be nearly as easy to beat.  They're basically on par with each other.   
Out of six choices the Warlock knows 3 at first and 5 by 4th, so yeah its about a 66% chance that a Warlock can out damage the fighter at level one and goes up from there. By level 3 the Warlock is easily out damaging the fighter even if they only use their damage spell once per encounter...


Admittedly the playtest packet has a truncated list of available invocations. 

Maybe we play differently.  When I DM, characters routinely do not have 10 minutes to rest up between encounters (particularly if they are using an ability like Baleful Utterance which would alert pretty much everyone in the Caves of Chaos).  When the Warlock uses up his 2 favors, there will be no guarantee he can get them back any time soon; it all depends on the in-game situation.  I foresee lots of in-game time spent with the Warlock only having access to his minor invocations.

When the Fighter uses up her Combat Superiority, she automatically gets it back next round.  The Fighter has far less opportunity cost when playing around with her non-damage Combat Superiority abilities than the Warlock has with his incantations. 

By a 3rd level Warlock easily outdamaging the Fighter, I assume you are referring to Eldritch Blast going up to 4d6 (average 14). 

3rd level heavy weapon Fighter with a 16 strength pumps out 1d12 weapon +3 strength + 1d8 CS (average 14).  Warlock does have better range, but is not dealing more damage.

3rd level longbow Fighter with a 16 Dexterity pumps out 1d8 weapon +3 dex + 1d8 CS (average 12).  Giving up 2 points of average damage for greater range.



Out of six choices the Warlock knows 3 at first and 5 by 4th, so yeah its about a 66% chance that a Warlock can out damage the fighter at level one and goes up from there. By level 3 the Warlock is easily out damaging the fighter even if they only use their damage spell once per encounter...


Admittedly the playtest packet has a truncated list of available invocations. 

Maybe we play differently.  When I DM, characters routinely do not have 10 minutes to rest up between encounters (particularly if they are using an ability like Baleful Utterance which would alert pretty much everyone in the Caves of Chaos).  When the Warlock uses up his 2 favors, there will be no guarantee he can get them back any time soon; it all depends on the in-game situation.  I foresee lots of in-game time spent with the Warlock only having access to his minor invocations.

When the Fighter uses up her Combat Superiority, she automatically gets it back next round.  The Fighter has far less opportunity cost when playing around with her non-damage Combat Superiority abilities than the Warlock has with his incantations. 

By a 3rd level Warlock easily outdamaging the Fighter, I assume you are referring to Eldritch Blast going up to 4d6 (average 14). 

3rd level heavy weapon Fighter with a 16 strength pumps out 1d12 weapon +3 strength + 1d8 CS (average 14).  Warlock does have better range, but is not dealing more damage.

3rd level longbow Fighter with a 16 Dexterity pumps out 1d8 weapon +3 dex + 1d8 CS (average 12).  Giving up 2 points of average damage for greater range.






Yeah, except all casters get to add their casting stats to their spells damage which throws the Warlock ahead of the fighter.

And yes, they get 10 minute rests between encounters, otherwise its the same encounter. The caves of chaos is a horribly put together 1-2 encounter adventure...
"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.
Yeah, except all casters get to add their casting stats to their spells damage which throws the Warlock ahead of the fighter.



Spellcasters add their casting stat to damage?  That could change my opinion.  Where does the playtest say that?

And yes, they get 10 minute rests between encounters, otherwise its the same encounter. The caves of chaos is a horribly put together 1-2 encounter adventure...



The Caves of Chaos is very similar to hundreds of sessions that I've DMed over the years and is my standard formula = there is an adventure location with unsavory folk who live there pursuing their agendas; it is up to the party to decide what to do about things. 
Spellcasters add their casting stat to damage?  That could change my opinion.  Where does the playtest say that?



It's in the damage rolls section of "how to play".  But...

I dunno... 1d12 + 2d8 > 4d6 even if we add +3 to both.  1d12+2d8 avg's to 15.5 and 4d6 avg's to 14.  So at +3 18.5 vs 17.  Baleful Utterance looks like a nice little burst  but I wouldn't necessarily offer 10 minute rests between every encounter either.

If the invocations gain significantly in power I would be recommending to WoTC they scale eldritch blast back to just 2d6 (maybey 3d6) to keep it more in line with other minors.  Right now it looks to me like the direction they'll be heading is wizards with weaker minors but more potent spells compare to invocations.

Glancing blow, or cleave, or jab help too.

A person might also want to consider the damage mitigation from armor and better hit points on the fighter, as well as some of the abilities to protect other party members that we're not seeing on the warlock.  Damage isn't everything. 
Spellcasters add their casting stat to damage?  That could change my opinion.  Where does the playtest say that?



It's in the damage rolls section of "how to play".  But...



Wait a minute, so all those damaging spells, casters add their ability modifier to them?

So fireball is actually 5d6 + Int mod? Magic missile is 1d4 + 1 + Int mod? Eldritch Blast is 3d6 + Int mod?

Wow. I was wondering why they removed the ability modifier from the spells. I guess they just made it a general rule. This makes a big difference!   
Spellcasters add their casting stat to damage?  That could change my opinion.  Where does the playtest say that?



It's in the damage rolls section of "how to play".  But...



Wait a minute, so all those damaging spells, casters add their ability modifier to them?

So fireball is actually 5d6 + Int mod? Magic missile is 1d4 + 1 + Int mod? Eldritch Blast is 3d6 + Int mod?

Wow. I was wondering why they removed the ability modifier from the spells. I guess they just made it a general rule. This makes a big difference!   



The general consensus is that its a typo, however RAW yep... Which makes the Damage order of classes given the 4 encounter day and the 4-5 round encounter go like this:
Warlock
Wizard
Sorcerer
Fighter
Rogue
Cleric
"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.
Spellcasters add their casting stat to damage?  That could change my opinion.  Where does the playtest say that?



It's in the damage rolls section of "how to play".  But...

I dunno... 1d12 + 2d8 > 4d6 even if we add +3 to both.  1d12+2d8 avg's to 15.5 and 4d6 avg's to 14.  So at +3 18.5 vs 17.  Baleful Utterance looks like a nice little burst  but I wouldn't necessarily offer 10 minute rests between every encounter either.

If the invocations gain significantly in power I would be recommending to WoTC they scale eldritch blast back to just 2d6 (maybey 3d6) to keep it more in line with other minors.  Right now it looks to me like the direction they'll be heading is wizards with weaker minors but more potent spells compare to invocations.

Glancing blow, or cleave, or jab help too.

A person might also want to consider the damage mitigation from armor and better hit points on the fighter, as well as some of the abilities to protect other party members that we're not seeing on the warlock.  Damage isn't everything. 



If there is only 4 encounters per day with a max of 5 rounds per encounter with each round being 6 seconds, how do you possibly not get a 10 minute break between encounters? Just do the math you'll see what I'm talking about...
"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.
The general consensus is that its a typo, however RAW yep...


Thanks for pointing it out.  It has all the traits of being a typo (or rather, left over from an earlier draft), and when I get the time to do some playtesting it will not include adding the ability mod to spell damage.


If it stands and we are supposed to be adding the ability mod to spell damage, however, I'm willing to eat some crow and agree that the Warlock is overpowered for it.
If there is only 4 encounters per day with a max of 5 rounds per encounter with each round being 6 seconds, how do you possibly not get a 10 minute break between encounters? Just do the math you'll see what I'm talking about...



I have no idea what you are getting at.  Nothing requires 4 fights per day.  Nothing requires a max of 5 rounds per fight.  Nothing prevents having a fight, 2 minutes of not fighting, then another fight.

How does math guarantee a 10 minute break between fights?
If there is only 4 encounters per day with a max of 5 rounds per encounter with each round being 6 seconds, how do you possibly not get a 10 minute break between encounters? Just do the math you'll see what I'm talking about...



I have no idea what you are getting at.  Nothing requires 4 fights per day.  Nothing requires a max of 5 rounds per fight.  Nothing prevents having a fight, 2 minutes of not fighting, then another fight.

How does math guarantee a 10 minute break between fights?



The play test suggests that the average day has 4 encounters of 4-5 rounds. That's what I'm talking about. I mean maybe you have all of your encounters all in the same half hour or something, but otherwise you are going to have a bunch of time between encounters...
"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.
Wait, that would only 2 minutes of actual skirmish time per day.  That does not make sense. 


A siege on a castle make take hours and hours.  Now, the players might not engage in the entirety of the fight – it would be hours and hours and many other soldiers fighting in those interims, but the players would certainly fight and be prepared for more than just 4 30 second skirmishes within that time span. 


I don't know about your characters, but mine would fight 8-10 combats per day, probably.  10 minute interludes likely, but still, not just 4 combat encounters.  4 combat encounters is 2 minutes total of combat, or .5+10+.5+10+.5+10+.5 =32 minutes in the day set aside for combat encounters and recovery from them.  8 would be 74 minutes, 10 would be 95 minutes.  An hour and a half makes a bit more sense, especially if we're doing other things as well, like climbing the walls, debating with the king to try to get him to flee his keep and get his people out of there into the mountain passages, and navigating falling castle terrain and all that jazz. 


But I wouldn't give my characters only 32 minutes of combat and recovery.  They wouldn't have a chance to just, "let's go to sleep after only working for 32 minutes!" That wouldn't happen.  They wouldn't have a chance to take a long rest.  Sorry.

Before posting, why not ask yourself, What Would Wrecan Say?

IMAGE(http://images.onesite.com/community.wizards.com/user/marandahir/thumb/9ac5d970f3a59330212c73baffe4c556.png?v=90000)

A great man once said "If WotC put out boxes full of free money there'd still be people complaining about how it's folded." – Boraxe



Warlock
Wizard
Sorcerer
Fighter
Rogue
Cleric




this seems like it is working as intended to me.


this is a doomed argument in the first place, if the warlock wasn't top damage, people would be complaining that whatever class is top damage is OP.

so wizards fixes it, everybody does roughly the same damage, sounds great right? wrong.

now people are complaining that the fighter and the cleric do the same damage as everybody else - AND - they are more suvivable (maybe even the sorc is in there who knows)

so wizard fixes it again, now everybody has the same survivability

well crap, now it's world of warcraft, not DnD. i for one don't want bland sameness in my classes. if the warlock is doing WAY too much damage, yeah, tone it down, or make some other cost to it, but we have to be careful that we understand that somebody has to be the top damage class.
Out of six choices the Warlock knows 3 at first and 5 by 4th, so yeah its about a 66% chance that a Warlock can out damage the fighter at level one and goes up from there. By level 3 the Warlock is easily out damaging the fighter even if they only use their damage spell once per encounter...


Admittedly the playtest packet has a truncated list of available invocations. 

Maybe we play differently.  When I DM, characters routinely do not have 10 minutes to rest up between encounters (particularly if they are using an ability like Baleful Utterance which would alert pretty much everyone in the Caves of Chaos).  When the Warlock uses up his 2 favors, there will be no guarantee he can get them back any time soon; it all depends on the in-game situation.  I foresee lots of in-game time spent with the Warlock only having access to his minor invocations.

When the Fighter uses up her Combat Superiority, she automatically gets it back next round.  The Fighter has far less opportunity cost when playing around with her non-damage Combat Superiority abilities than the Warlock has with his incantations. 

By a 3rd level Warlock easily outdamaging the Fighter, I assume you are referring to Eldritch Blast going up to 4d6 (average 14). 

3rd level heavy weapon Fighter with a 16 strength pumps out 1d12 weapon +3 strength + 1d8 CS (average 14).  Warlock does have better range, but is not dealing more damage.

3rd level longbow Fighter with a 16 Dexterity pumps out 1d8 weapon +3 dex + 1d8 CS (average 12).  Giving up 2 points of average damage for greater range.






Yeah, except all casters get to add their casting stats to their spells damage which throws the Warlock ahead of the fighter.



They do?  I thought it was just the attack roll.

The general consensus is that its a typo, however RAW yep... Which makes the Damage order of classes given the 4 encounter day and the 4-5 round encounter go like this:
Warlock
Wizard
Sorcerer
Fighter
Rogue
Cleric



out of curiosity, do you know how the math/list looks if you don't include the magic attributes for +damage on spells?

I'd do it myself, but I'd rather crowdsource if possible Wink
Show
I am White/Black
I am White/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and selfish. I act mostly for my own benefit, but I respect and help my community - Specially when it helps me. At best, I'm loyal and dedicated; at worst, I'm elitist and shrewd.
What Clan are you? There is no equality. There exists only equity.
Actually, are you sure Fighter isn't the second highest (assuming he uses his *most* powerful attack every time, and hits every time), especially with their expertise dice? 1d12+1d6+x = 10+x damage per round at lvl 1, if he's using Deadly Strike. At lvl 3 this goes up to 11+x, and at lvl 5, 15+x.

The Warlock at lvl 1 is doing (assuming he uses his *most* powerful attack every time, and hits every time) deals 10.5+x damage. At lvl 3 this becomes 14+x damage.

The Wizard doesn't have any direct damage spells to deal close to that much damage. Neither does the Sorceror. They may have AoE spells, but that's very different from what the fighter and Warlock are doing.

The warlock gets rituals and other stuff that he could be doing, and so does the fighter (parry, jab, etc). Furthermore, if the Fighter misses, he has other options for what else he could do. If the Warlock misses, he's stuck. The fighter gets better armor and more HP, the Warlock gets rituals. All in all, the fighter is still going to fight better than the warlock, and the warlock will cast spells which the fighter cant.
I want to point out a couple things about adding stats to damage rolls:

From "How to Play", page 12:

Each weapon and spell indicates the damage it deals, such as 1d8 or 2d8. Roll the dice, add any modifiers (including the ability modifier you used to make the attack), and apply the damage to your target. Magic weapons, special abilities, and so forth can grant a bonus to your damage.


Note that is says "ability modifier you used to make the attack.  That would eliminate using stat bonuses on damage resulting from attacks that didn't have to hit first.  Unfortunately, for Eldritch Blast, that means, yes, it seems it does get the INT added.

Honestly, I would prefer that they went back to the 4E style of writing up spells and powers where it clearly stated that you did specific damage with specific modifiers, like 3d6+Int Mod or 2d8+3 (with no ability modifier), etc.  It would be clearly defined and easier to understand.
Oh, I also wanted to point out one inconsistancy with their write-ups, that further confuse the point.

From "How to Play", Dexterity, page 4:

Attacks
You add your Dexterity modifier to your attack rolls and damage rolls for finesse weapons and missile weapons.


and Strength, page 3:


Attacks
You add your Strength modifier to attack rolls and damage rolls when using a variety of Strength-based weapons, such as the longsword and the battleaxe.


and then Intelligence, page 5:


Magic Ability
Certain classes, such as wizards, use Intelligence as their magic ability. If Intelligence is your magic ability, you add your Intelligence modifier to the attack rolls of your spells, and the modifier helps determine the saving throw DCs of your spells.


Now the wording in each is significant because it clearly shows that STR and DEX add to weapon attack damages of the appropriate types, but for Intelligence (and wisdom, charisma, etc), you only add the bonus to attack rolls.

That would seem to indicate that Magical Attacks never use their associated stat bonus for damage, just for the attack rolls (and DCs).

Honestly, I think that makes more sense at this point based on how the game appears to be balanced and intended.
I want to point out a couple things about adding stats to damage rolls:

From "How to Play", page 12:

Each weapon and spell indicates the damage it deals, such as 1d8 or 2d8. Roll the dice, add any modifiers (including the ability modifier you used to make the attack), and apply the damage to your target. Magic weapons, special abilities, and so forth can grant a bonus to your damage.




The language you quoted from "How to Play" is identical to the first playtest.  In the first playtest, attack spells did add the ability modifier to damage and is noted out in each of the spells.

For the second playtest, the spells have clearly been changed to remove the ability modifier to damage. 

Looks like a straight-forward example of copy-pasting from the first playtest's "How to Play" without properly editing.  The second playtest should not be adding the ability modifier to attack spell damage.
Yeah, which is why I interpreted it more along the second set of indicators (from the ability scores themselves) than that first one.
For the second playtest, the spells have clearly been changed to remove the ability modifier to damage.

Not so clear. Even if you take your lead just from the Intelligence entry, the damage entry only talks about what attack stat is used. It's hard to say that because of identical phrasing that it's wrong. My guess would be that it IS an editing mistake but I wouldn't say it was clearly one.

Personally, I'd rather drop the set number bonus to damage and go back to the first playtest and add just in the stat. 

For the second playtest, the spells have clearly been changed to remove the ability modifier to damage.

Not so clear. Even if you take your lead just from the Intelligence entry, the damage entry only talks about what attack stat is used. It's hard to say that because of identical phrasing that it's wrong. My guess would be that it IS an editing mistake but I wouldn't say it was clearly one.

Personally, I'd rather drop the set number bonus to damage and go back to the first playtest and add just in the stat. 



Read the spells from the first playtest.  The attack spells say "1d8+Intelligence modifier damage".

The attack spells from the second playtest say "1d8 damage".

Given everything that has changed in various spells, the designers obviously put a lot of thought into them and purposefully changed how damage is calculated.  Possibly testing the waters to see if people like one way or the other better, or to see if people even care.

The only thing in the entire second playtest that could possibly add the ability modifier to damage is the one vague-ish sentence in "How to Play" that was straight copy-pasted from the first playtest.
i would agree with Ole here,

it is possible, lord knows there was enough errors in 3.5 PH1
i would agree with Ole here

Same.

On the original topic: I do have a problem with the warlock getting an unlimited ranged attack that is even close to the potency of a fighter's abilities.  Straight-up combat is the fighter's bread and butter; it's what s/he does.  The warlock has other utilities and applications in the game and shouldn't be almost as good as the fighter in what is supposed to be their arena.
On the original topic: I do have a problem with the warlock getting an unlimited ranged attack that is even close to the potency of a fighter's abilities.  Straight-up combat is the fighter's bread and butter; it's what s/he does.  The warlock has other utilities and applications in the game and shouldn't be almost as good as the fighter in what is supposed to be their arena.

Since when has the fighter been the leader in damage? Please point out what edition they outdamaged the average caster? I'm drawing a black...

The only thing in the entire second playtest that could possibly add the ability modifier to damage is the one vague-ish sentence in "How to Play" that was straight copy-pasted from the first playtest.

Well one of them is right and one is wrong. Me, I'm more than willing to drop the static bonuses and let the 'vague-ish sentence' ride.

On the original topic: I do have a problem with the warlock getting an unlimited ranged attack that is even close to the potency of a fighter's abilities.  Straight-up combat is the fighter's bread and butter; it's what s/he does.  The warlock has other utilities and applications in the game and shouldn't be almost as good as the fighter in what is supposed to be their arena.

Since when has the fighter been the leader in damage? Please point out what edition they outdamaged the average caster? I'm drawing a black...




Pretty much every edition but 3e. 3e broke the game, turning spellcasters into gods. It was not always the case. 

In any case, you cannot expect casters (Wizards) to have highest everything. They are the best at AoE damage. They are the best in terms of utility. There is somewhere they need to be inferior to everyone else. That should be single target damage and survivability. And while it is fine if other types of casters (different classes) are built to fill a different role, the warlock also has high degrees of utility. As a result, the fighter should surpass the warlock in damage. Of course, I think (based on current numbers) it does, no?


 

On the original topic: I do have a problem with the warlock getting an unlimited ranged attack that is even close to the potency of a fighter's abilities.  Straight-up combat is the fighter's bread and butter; it's what s/he does.  The warlock has other utilities and applications in the game and shouldn't be almost as good as the fighter in what is supposed to be their arena.

Since when has the fighter been the leader in damage? Please point out what edition they outdamaged the average caster? I'm drawing a black...




Pretty much every edition but 3e. 3e broke the game, turning spellcasters into gods. It was not always the case. 

In any case, you cannot expect casters (Wizards) to have highest everything. They are the best at AoE damage. They are the best in terms of utility. There is somewhere they need to be inferior to everyone else. That should be single target damage and survivability. And while it is fine if other types of casters (different classes) are built to fill a different role, the warlock also has high degrees of utility. As a result, the fighter should surpass the warlock in damage. Of course, I think (based on current numbers) it does, no?


 


5th level 1E fighter with a 19 str with +3 frostbrand 2-handed sword deals 1d10+9 per round, 19 max. 5th level wizard deals 5d6 with a max 30 and a druid does 5d8 with call lightning max 40... It only gets worse for the fighter and I was VERY forgiving with the equipment and str for the fighter. Give the wizard a wand of fire (not as good as the frostbrand) and the wizard can cast all day... So where again is the fighter better at damage? It isn't 1E. Do you want me to dig out the 2e books too?
Actually, are you sure Fighter isn't the second highest (assuming he uses his *most* powerful attack every time, and hits every time), especially with their expertise dice? 1d12+1d6+x = 10+x damage per round at lvl 1, if he's using Deadly Strike. At lvl 3 this goes up to 11+x, and at lvl 5, 15+x.

The Warlock at lvl 1 is doing (assuming he uses his *most* powerful attack every time, and hits every time) deals 10.5+x damage. At lvl 3 this becomes 14+x damage.

The Wizard doesn't have any direct damage spells to deal close to that much damage. Neither does the Sorceror. They may have AoE spells, but that's very different from what the fighter and Warlock are doing.

The warlock gets rituals and other stuff that he could be doing, and so does the fighter (parry, jab, etc). Furthermore, if the Fighter misses, he has other options for what else he could do. If the Warlock misses, he's stuck. The fighter gets better armor and more HP, the Warlock gets rituals. All in all, the fighter is still going to fight better than the warlock, and the warlock will cast spells which the fighter cant.



Based on average damage over an encounter counting multiple targets spells, yeah the Wizard trumps the fighter. If you go single target the fighter will trump the Wizard by a few points...
"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.
For the second playtest, the spells have clearly been changed to remove the ability modifier to damage.

Not so clear. Even if you take your lead just from the Intelligence entry, the damage entry only talks about what attack stat is used. It's hard to say that because of identical phrasing that it's wrong. My guess would be that it IS an editing mistake but I wouldn't say it was clearly one.

Personally, I'd rather drop the set number bonus to damage and go back to the first playtest and add just in the stat. 



Read the spells from the first playtest.  The attack spells say "1d8+Intelligence modifier damage".

The attack spells from the second playtest say "1d8 damage".

Given everything that has changed in various spells, the designers obviously put a lot of thought into them and purposefully changed how damage is calculated.  Possibly testing the waters to see if people like one way or the other better, or to see if people even care.

The only thing in the entire second playtest that could possibly add the ability modifier to damage is the one vague-ish sentence in "How to Play" that was straight copy-pasted from the first playtest.



Nowhere does it say "don't add the stat mod to damage." and there is one place where it says "add the stat modifier to damage". So using basic logic, you do in fact add the mod to damage. Now it could entirely be a mistake, but RAW you do add the damage...
"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.
Nowhere does it say "don't add the stat mod to damage." and there is one place where it says "add the stat modifier to damage". So using basic logic, you do in fact add the mod to damage. Now it could entirely be a mistake, but RAW you do add the damage...


Actually, because under STR and DEX it clearly states add the stat modifier to weapon damage of appropriate types, and under INT, WIS, and CHA, it clearly only uses add stat modifier to attack roles for magic attacks, but does _not_ include damage rolls like it does for STR and DEX, I think that's a pretty clear indication that you aren't supposed to add stat modifiers to damage on magic attacks.
On the original topic: I do have a problem with the warlock getting an unlimited ranged attack that is even close to the potency of a fighter's abilities.  Straight-up combat is the fighter's bread and butter; it's what s/he does.  The warlock has other utilities and applications in the game and shouldn't be almost as good as the fighter in what is supposed to be their arena.

Since when has the fighter been the leader in damage? Please point out what edition they outdamaged the average caster? I'm drawing a black...




Pretty much every edition but 3e. 3e broke the game, turning spellcasters into gods. It was not always the case. 

In any case, you cannot expect casters (Wizards) to have highest everything. They are the best at AoE damage. They are the best in terms of utility. There is somewhere they need to be inferior to everyone else. That should be single target damage and survivability. And while it is fine if other types of casters (different classes) are built to fill a different role, the warlock also has high degrees of utility. As a result, the fighter should surpass the warlock in damage. Of course, I think (based on current numbers) it does, no?


 




In all editions the Wizard outdamaged every other class, but they had to pay dearly for it though extremely low hit points and AC. They would go down very quickly or have some other negative effect from using the spell that supposedly balanced it out, but from a pure DPR standpoint they did...
"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.
Evidence in favor of adding magic ability to damage: the one vague sentence in 'how to play'
Evidence in favor of not adding it:
- the spell descriptions themselves include set bonuses (+4, +1, etc)
- the descriptions of what the abilities are used for, where it indicates how str/dex ARE added to atk/damage, but int to atk/DC 
- the pregenerated characters that came with the newest packet do not add their casting ability to damage


Did I miss any?

I mean.. you can play it however you like, and maybe it would be good to playtest with both, but I think the RAW is clearly against the RAI.
Nowhere does it say "don't add the stat mod to damage." and there is one place where it says "add the stat modifier to damage". So using basic logic, you do in fact add the mod to damage. Now it could entirely be a mistake, but RAW you do add the damage...


Actually, because under STR and DEX it clearly states add the stat modifier to weapon damage of appropriate types, and under INT, WIS, and CHA, it clearly only uses add stat modifier to attack roles for magic attacks, but does _not_ include damage rolls like it does for STR and DEX, I think that's a pretty clear indication that you aren't supposed to add stat modifiers to damage on magic attacks.



It's a clear indication that there is a mistake in the play test. By RAW you add the stat mod...
"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.
Evidence in favor of adding magic ability to damage: the one vague sentence in 'how to play'
Evidence in favor of not adding it:
- the spell descriptions themselves include set bonuses (+4, +1, etc)
- the descriptions of what the abilities are used for, where it indicates how str/dex ARE added to atk/damage, but int to atk/DC 
- the pregenerated characters that came with the newest packet do not add their casting ability to damage


Did I miss any?

I mean.. you can play it however you like, and maybe it would be good to playtest with both, but I think the RAW is clearly against the RAI.



Or we can give feedback on the RAW and tell them there is a mistake, and get them to fix 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.
Sign In to post comments