|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:22AM
#111
|
|
|
With 4e I saw caster supremacy burned at the stake: nothing could happen unless a power's effect said it happened. This was probably the reason why I saw the players that liked to use imagination in their games shy away from 4e and stick with previous editions.
Really? So casting "Solve Problem" is now considered imaginative? How sad. See, I like 4E because you actually have to think to overcome problems now, as opposed to reaching into your spellbook of infinite resources to tie your shoes and wipe your hiney after a nice rope trick nap.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:25AM
#112
|
XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek
Date Joined:
May 31, 2003
|
I know a lot of rogues that use the hell out of UMD for scrolls and wands, or did people suddenly forget they can use them as well.
Oh yeah, they can also use "any" magic item. They can use cleric,paladin, ranger, druid, sorcerer, wizard, bard or any other spellcaster I may have forgotten type items with UMD. You don't hear any complaints about this except for the few that will throw in about them having to rely on magic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:26AM
#113
|
|
|
Let us assume a rogue has a 75% chance to open a lock. Once they fail they cannot try again. Let us say a rogue is only faced with 2 locks a day. That is only a 56% chance to successfully open both locks. Once past a certain level, 2nd level spellsllots serve a purely utility function. In combination with scrolls 2 knock spells a day come at almost no opportunity cost. If a rogue has to devote 1/8 of his skill points per level to opening locks and only has 56% chance to get 2 open a day as well as put himself in considerable danger then yes, it makes more sense for the wizard to do his job for him. If knock performed only as good or slightly worse than the rogues lock picking ability this of course would not be an issue. Just make knock a 5 minute cast ritual that allows the Mage to use arcana instead of lock picking. Do that for all utility spells that can replace skills.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:27AM
#114
|
|
|
With 4e I saw caster supremacy burned at the stake: nothing could happen unless a power's effect said it happened. This was probably the reason why I saw the players that liked to use imagination in their games shy away from 4e and stick with previous editions.
Really? So casting "Solve Problem" is now considered imaginative? How sad. See, I like 4E because you actually have to think to overcome problems now, as opposed to reaching into your spellbook of infinite resources to tie your shoes and wipe your hiney after a nice rope trick nap.
This, so much this.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:32AM
#115
|
Date Joined:
Feb 12, 2009
|
Fictional Space - I disagree here a lot. It sounds good but my experience differs. My high level fighters in all previous editions felt like gods.
Emerikol, this isn't about your previous edition fighters. I know you liked them, I did too. I'm a chump that way, I'll play anything you label "Fighter" even if the mechanics are a steaming pile pressed against a page. But this isn't about fighters. It's about wizards being everything, and getting away with it because arcane magic in D&D only has one limit: Don't touch the heals.
The dark necromancer with an army of undead. The fickle enchantress spinning a web of lies and glamours. The wise oracle divining the future. The shapeshifting master. The summoner with a pack of enslaved creatures at his beck and call. The blaster with the forces of nature crackling at his fingertips. The grand trickster with his illusions. The warder, with his counterspells and alarms and wards. These are wildly different characters, each one has enough fictional space(as Cirno put it) for an entire class. But they aren't eight classes. They're one class. Wizard mixes all these together and can go between them from day to day.
Try to put that in fighter terms for a moment. It would be like if I presented you with one class, we'll call it "Hero". Hero can:
- Be the best defended guy in heavy armor.
- Be the best defended guy in no armor.
- Be the best(most accuracy, damage and amount of tricks) with melee weapons
- And with Ranged weapons.
- And with no weapons.
- Be the strongest in terms of feats of strength like breaking down doors or lifting boulders.
- Be the stealthiest
- Pick locks
- Find tracks
- Survive the wilderness
- Have an animal companion
- Brew and use poisons
- Get a hefty bonus for attacking an unaware or distracted foe
- Scale walls
- Be as swift as the coursing river
- With all the force of a great typhoon
- With all the strength of a raging fire
- Mysterious as the dark side of the moon
- Be the master of social situations
- Act as an expert scholar
- Create alchemical items that can put people to sleep, stick them in gunk, or blow them up
- And anything else cool we can ever, ever think of, and print in a supplement.
It'd be flat out ridiculous. No one would be cool with it, ever. You'd turn your nose up in disgust, and I wouldn't even be able to blame you. But that is what Wizard does, and the only difference is that when we're talking about the Wizard, well, it's magic. That trumps any other concern, apparently.
So, so, SO MUCH this.
I can't find anything there that I don't completely agree with. Break the wizard into separate classes. The wizard is Ma Bell, it's time to bring the anti-trust laws down on his robed behind.
Winner winner chicken dinner. Beguiler, Warmage, Shadow mage, , etc. Its what they were aiming for at the end of 3.5. Casters need to be themed, and only have access to their theme powers. Generalists should be severely limited in upper level effects they can do.
it's called mongoose publishing. read it love it. also am i the only nerd to catch the mulan referance in palishik's post
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:36AM
#116
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2012
|
Let us assume a rogue has a 75% chance to open a lock. Once they fail they cannot try again. Let us say a rogue is only faced with 2 locks a day. That is only a 56% chance to successfully open both locks. Once past a certain level, 2nd level spellsllots serve a purely utility function. In combination with scrolls 2 knock spells a day come at almost no opportunity cost. If a rogue has to devote 1/8 of his skill points per level to opening locks and only has 56% chance to get 2 open a day as well as put himself in considerable danger then yes, it makes more sense for the wizard to do his job for him. If knock performed only as good or slightly worse than the rogues lock picking ability this of course would not be an issue. Just make knock a 5 minute cast ritual that allows the Mage to use arcana instead of lock picking. Do that for all utility spells that can replace skills.
Uhm since when can a rogue not try again?
A rogue can try a lock again and again. So a wizard that casts Knock when the party has a rogue with Open Lock, is basically just wasting his resources, unless it's a lock with a DC that's too high for the rogue, or if it's an Arcane Lock.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:38AM
#117
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
Fictional Space - I disagree here a lot. It sounds good but my experience differs. My high level fighters in all previous editions felt like gods.
Emerikol, this isn't about your previous edition fighters. I know you liked them, I did too. I'm a chump that way, I'll play anything you label "Fighter" even if the mechanics are a steaming pile pressed against a page. But this isn't about fighters. It's about wizards being everything, and getting away with it because arcane magic in D&D only has one limit: Don't touch the heals.
The dark necromancer with an army of undead. The fickle enchantress spinning a web of lies and glamours. The wise oracle divining the future. The shapeshifting master. The summoner with a pack of enslaved creatures at his beck and call. The blaster with the forces of nature crackling at his fingertips. The grand trickster with his illusions. The warder, with his counterspells and alarms and wards. These are wildly different characters, each one has enough fictional space(as Cirno put it) for an entire class. But they aren't eight classes. They're one class. Wizard mixes all these together and can go between them from day to day.
Try to put that in fighter terms for a moment. It would be like if I presented you with one class, we'll call it "Hero". Hero can:
- Be the best defended guy in heavy armor.
- Be the best defended guy in no armor.
- Be the best(most accuracy, damage and amount of tricks) with melee weapons
- And with Ranged weapons.
- And with no weapons.
- Be the strongest in terms of feats of strength like breaking down doors or lifting boulders.
- Be the stealthiest
- Pick locks
- Find tracks
- Survive the wilderness
- Have an animal companion
- Brew and use poisons
- Get a hefty bonus for attacking an unaware or distracted foe
- Scale walls
- Be as swift as the coursing river
- With all the force of a great typhoon
- With all the strength of a raging fire
- Mysterious as the dark side of the moon
- Be the master of social situations
- Act as an expert scholar
- Create alchemical items that can put people to sleep, stick them in gunk, or blow them up
- And anything else cool we can ever, ever think of, and print in a supplement.
It'd be flat out ridiculous. No one would be cool with it, ever. You'd turn your nose up in disgust, and I wouldn't even be able to blame you. But that is what Wizard does, and the only difference is that when we're talking about the Wizard, well, it's magic. That trumps any other concern, apparently.
So, so, SO MUCH this.
I can't find anything there that I don't completely agree with. Break the wizard into separate classes. The wizard is Ma Bell, it's time to bring the anti-trust laws down on his robed behind.
Winner winner chicken dinner. Beguiler, Warmage, Shadow mage, , etc. Its what they were aiming for at the end of 3.5. Casters need to be themed, and only have access to their theme powers. Generalists should be severely limited in upper level effects they can do.
it's called mongoose publishing. read it love it. also am i the only nerd to catch the mulan referance in palishik's post
I saw it and loved it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:43AM
#118
|
Date Joined:
Feb 12, 2009
|
Let us assume a rogue has a 75% chance to open a lock. Once they fail they cannot try again. Let us say a rogue is only faced with 2 locks a day. That is only a 56% chance to successfully open both locks. Once past a certain level, 2nd level spellsllots serve a purely utility function. In combination with scrolls 2 knock spells a day come at almost no opportunity cost. If a rogue has to devote 1/8 of his skill points per level to opening locks and only has 56% chance to get 2 open a day as well as put himself in considerable danger then yes, it makes more sense for the wizard to do his job for him. If knock performed only as good or slightly worse than the rogues lock picking ability this of course would not be an issue. Just make knock a 5 minute cast ritual that allows the Mage to use arcana instead of lock picking. Do that for all utility spells that can replace skills.
Unless he critcally fails the rogue can always try to pick the lock again. Hell so long as he doesn't fail disabling the trap by a certain ammount he can retry that as well. Also because of UMD your rogue example is faulty. It never makese sense to prep that many knocks when there are far better spells to grab from 2nd level. Your rogue can't comaplain about wands of knock because he can use them as well.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:44AM
#119
|
Date Joined:
Feb 12, 2009
|
Let us assume a rogue has a 75% chance to open a lock. Once they fail they cannot try again. Let us say a rogue is only faced with 2 locks a day. That is only a 56% chance to successfully open both locks. Once past a certain level, 2nd level spellsllots serve a purely utility function. In combination with scrolls 2 knock spells a day come at almost no opportunity cost. If a rogue has to devote 1/8 of his skill points per level to opening locks and only has 56% chance to get 2 open a day as well as put himself in considerable danger then yes, it makes more sense for the wizard to do his job for him. If knock performed only as good or slightly worse than the rogues lock picking ability this of course would not be an issue. Just make knock a 5 minute cast ritual that allows the Mage to use arcana instead of lock picking. Do that for all utility spells that can replace skills.
Uhm since when can a rogue not try again?
A rogue can try a lock again and again. So a wizard that casts Knock when the party has a rogue with Open Lock, is basically just wasting his resources, unless it's a lock with a DC that's too high for the rogue, or if it's an Arcane Lock.
fun part the rogue can pick those locks by himself as well.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 10:44AM
#120
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Let us assume a rogue has a 75% chance to open a lock. Once they fail they cannot try again. Let us say a rogue is only faced with 2 locks a day. That is only a 56% chance to successfully open both locks. Once past a certain level, 2nd level spellsllots serve a purely utility function. In combination with scrolls 2 knock spells a day come at almost no opportunity cost. If a rogue has to devote 1/8 of his skill points per level to opening locks and only has 56% chance to get 2 open a day as well as put himself in considerable danger then yes, it makes more sense for the wizard to do his job for him. If knock performed only as good or slightly worse than the rogues lock picking ability this of course would not be an issue. Just make knock a 5 minute cast ritual that allows the Mage to use arcana instead of lock picking. Do that for all utility spells that can replace skills.
Uhm since when can a rogue not try again?
A rogue can try a lock again and again. So a wizard that casts Knock when the party has a rogue with Open Lock, is basically just wasting his resources, unless it's a lock with a DC that's too high for the rogue, or if it's an Arcane Lock.
Trying again is worthless. Rogues can take a 20 to open a lock and you can't roll any better than that. Locks also cap out at 40, and a rogue with an 18 dex, masterwork tools and nimble fingers can open those 100% of the time at level 9. Most locks won't be anywhere near 40. Take 10 off of that and you can have a +15 to open those DC 30 locks at level 4. Knock is only ever needed to open a magically locked door.
|
|
|
