|
5 years ago ::
May 29, 2008 - 9:09PM
#41
|
|
|
For example, only a Ranger can take the Ranger paragon paths.
Or anyone with the Ranger multiclass feat.
A lot of the power requirements make multiclassing unreasonable. For example, a Fighter/Wizard - the traditional multiclass, will have serious problems hitting with his Wiz powers unless he gets a proper level implement as well as a proper level weapon.
The bonus from an implement isnt that huge. I would be more worried about his Int not being high enough.
Power effects are misleading. Eyebite is pretty horrible as an encounter power, and yet there are already Rogue/Warlocks who think it's the way to go.
I don't see anything wrong with Eyebite as an encounter power for a rogue. It's one more way to turn invisible and get combat advantage for those times you can't get it some other way. It's a useful thing to have in one's toolbox.
The (Archery) Ranger's only option when approached is to flee. It'd be great if she could draw a sword and defend herself... but her applicable archery powers require her to dual-wield.
Or she could move, making some use out of that nifty Defensive Mobility feat that you said was useless, or using any number of powers that let you shift before your attack, and then shoot people in the face. 
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 29, 2008 - 9:13PM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2007
|
Or anyone with the Ranger multiclass feat.
Hmm, actually Sophismata did have a point here. How is someone who picks up the Ranger multiclass feat going to be able to pick up a fighting style, which is another prereq for all of the Ranger's PPs?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 29, 2008 - 9:39PM
#43
|
|
|
Hmm, actually Sophismata did have a point here. How is someone who picks up the Ranger multiclass feat going to be able to pick up a fighting style, which is another prereq for all of the Ranger's PPs?
You know, I hadn't noticed the fighting style requirement. So yeah, as written only actual rangers can take those. My bad.
I wonder if that was intentional or just an oversight. Perhaps the early revision of the ranger multiclass feat let you pick a fighting style, and it was changed late in the process and they didnt change the PPs to match?
I can't imagine they specifically decided that only rangers would have PPs you can't multi into.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 29, 2008 - 10:14PM
#44
|
|
|
I can't speak to all of it (don't have my books yet), but such easy access to nearly infallible lie detection ruins entirely too many non combat adventures.
ANY intrigue setting is just about trashed unless you have ludicrously blind cells operating under a criminal mastermind with so much magical protection they're going to break the campaign when the players get around to looting his stores. Either that or he TPKs groups showing up.
Seriously, have you thought about having to tell the truth all the time? Or how to ask questions such that you get the answer no matter their response?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 29, 2008 - 10:30PM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Jun 12, 2007
|
I think the unsynergy is my least favorite thing about the edition. The inability to make a sneak attacking warlock, and way key blood mage abilitys require wizard powers, and how all rogue moves require certain weapons are major examples of just what I don't like.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 30, 2008 - 8:44AM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jul 23, 2005
|
Yes did. He basically told that those who have any complaints at all ("those who insist on complaining") shouldn't post on the forums ("than posting here!"), have personal problems ("because life has kicked you around"), and should watch dr.phil more ("you'd be better off watching Dr. Phil").
To be clear, you weren't the person I even quoted in my first post on this subject. I am very suspcious when someone comes on with a screen name that implies displeasure or discomfort and their join date happens to be the very same month as their entirely negative post. My BS detectors go up and I get angry that someone is polluting this forum.
Now, since you chose (most likely unconsciously) to identify with my Dr. Phil comment, I will provide you with some insight:
The world is not, as most people commonly assume an objective reality we view much like watching a movie, but actually a subjective experience that we project our own unconscious belief systems onto. We tend to screen out sensory data that belies our beliefs and enhance sensory data that supports it.
Therefore, when someone criticizes Wotc's products without offering any redeemable points, no constructive insights, it tells me nothing about Wotc's products, but that they have a pretty difficult life, are constantly internally criticizing and belittling themselves and are generally unhappy. While I have empathy for their situation, I don't come to this forum to read about people's unhappiness. I'm looking for information and impressions and to share about Wotc's products.
I have been critical of Wotc in the past and will undoubtedly be so in the future, but I do so in a positive manner with an intent to help give feedback that will make the products that Wotc puts out even better. However, people who come on here and are just negative with no positive are, IMO, going to make Wotc employees less likely to read these boards and get the constructive criticism and praise that helps them create even better products.
So, I realize this post is off-topic in terms of discussing 4th edition, but I get tired of skimming through the "beat-down-by-life" posters who come here and pollute the forums with their emotional baggage, while trying to find the genuine interesting comments by those who are here with a positive intent to discuss a game they overall enjoy playing and perhaps have ideas on making even better.
If you really like 3.5 better and don't like 4th edition, then Paizo is offering a genuine alternative and they have their own message boards.
Give a Hoot! Don't Pollute! 
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 30, 2008 - 9:40AM
#47
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2005
|
To be clear, you weren't the person I even quoted in my first post on this subject. I am very suspcious when someone comes on with a screen name that implies displeasure or discomfort and their join date happens to be the very same month as their entirely negative post. My BS detectors go up and I get angry that someone is polluting this forum.
Now, since you chose (most likely unconsciously) to identify with my Dr. Phil comment, I will provide you with some insight:
The world is not, as most people commonly assume an objective reality we view much like watching a movie, but actually a subjective experience that we project our own unconscious belief systems onto. We tend to screen out sensory data that belies our beliefs and enhance sensory data that supports it.
Therefore, when someone criticizes Wotc's products without offering any redeemable points, no constructive insights, it tells me nothing about Wotc's products, but that they have a pretty difficult life, are constantly internally criticizing and belittling themselves and are generally unhappy. While I have empathy for their situation, I don't come to this forum to read about people's unhappiness. I'm looking for information and impressions and to share about Wotc's products.
I have been critical of Wotc in the past and will undoubtedly be so in the future, but I do so in a positive manner with an intent to help give feedback that will make the products that Wotc puts out even better. However, people who come on here and are just negative with no positive are, IMO, going to make Wotc employees less likely to read these boards and get the constructive criticism and praise that helps them create even better products.
So, I realize this post is off-topic in terms of discussing 4th edition, but I get tired of skimming through the "beat-down-by-life" posters who come here and pollute the forums with their emotional baggage, while trying to find the genuine interesting comments by those who are here with a positive intent to discuss a game they overall enjoy playing and perhaps have ideas on making even better.
If you really like 3.5 better and don't like 4th edition, then Paizo is offering a genuine alternative and they have their own message boards.
Give a Hoot! Don't Pollute!
Lol, you obviously didn't see that my join date is May 2005. I've had this account for 3 years...
My disagreement with you is that there is little to no useful point in saying positives about a product. If everyone is saying that a product is perfect then why would any changes would be made?
Changes can only be made to the game (via errata) if people complain about the game. Why would wizards change the game if everyone is saying the game is perfect?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 30, 2008 - 11:01AM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Jul 25, 2003
|
To me (and I've played plenty of wizards in the past), Arcana has been and always will be a "luxury" skill. When there's a full party, there's no reason not to have it, but it's never indispensable. Instead of getting a cheat-sheet of the monster's abilities, you can find out the hard way of getting toasted by it first.
Compare that to Diplomacy or Streetwise (based on CHA), which is strictly necessary for a party for roleplaying purposes. Or compare to Perception/Insight (based on WIS), which is almost necessary to not get wiped out by a clever ambush. Vs. DEX, initiative is important, and frankly no party really can go without a wizard, and no party needs more than one master of Arcana.
So all in all, INT is the new CHA.
Here's the thing, Detect Magic is now a trained only use of the Arcana skill, so if you want to be able to distinguish between the magic equipment and the mundane equipment in the monster's horde, someone needs to be trained in Arcana. On top of that, about 90% of the rituals are based off the Arcana skill, and many of them get increasingly powerful effects up to a DC 40 Arcana check. As Arrrrgggh has pointed out, you need a DC 35 Arcana check to be able to use Comprehend Languages to speak a language fluently.
I agree that the application of knowledge skills to learn monster stats is a luxury skill (after all, knowing is only half the battle), but Arcana has quite a bit more going for it than that, and a high Int is necessary to get the most effect out of those rituals.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 30, 2008 - 11:23AM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Jul 23, 2005
|
Lol, you obviously didn't see that my join date is May 2005. I've had this account for 3 years...
I wasn't talking about you. I believe (hope) if you reread my post you can see that I am referring to the poster, "Arrrrgggh", whose join date was this month and wrote the negative post that I was first referring to as an example of polluting the boards.
My disagreement with you is that there is little to no useful point in saying positives about a product. If everyone is saying that a product is perfect then why would any changes would be made?
Changes can only be made to the game (via errata) if people complain about the game. Why would wizards change the game if everyone is saying the game is perfect?
This is not how human psychology works. The most reliable way to effect change in a direction you desire is to start with what you like, because that engages your audience into interacting with you. If you just start criticizing and complaining and that's all that you offer, your audience is either going to quickly disengage or ignore you. If you don't believe me, try, the next time you are socializing with someone, to completely criticize everything they do and see what happens. (but don't blame me for the results!) Better yet, ask someone to complain and criticize you and see how you respond.
There is something called constructive criticism and it offers positive ideas for change and has an underlying intent of being positive. Here is a link for a more information on different types of criticism, including Destructive and Constructive. I am angry at the destructive criticism that I see pollute these boards and I am supportive of the constructive critics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_criticism
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 30, 2008 - 4:18PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
May 21, 2008
|
I think the big thing you're missing here is the casting time and duration of the spell. It's not really the gold cost (which is still extreme, especially in the levels when you can first get it) nor the feat requirement nor the chance of failure. It's that you have to sit there and spend ten minutes performing the ritual in front of the guy you want to learn the truth from then pray -- pray -- that after you finish the ritual he decides to even open his mouth for the next five minutes. It's not even useful as a forced interrogation method for that very reason; they just have to keep quiet for five minutes after watching you dance around in a circle or whatever else the ritual entails.
Zone of Truth was horrible unbalanced it was either Must Have or not needed at all. Dungeon crawls didn't need it, who cares if the minotaurs dying words or true or not, SMASH IT!
However if you ran a game in Birthright (or other high politic game) zone of Truth was probably amongst the most important spells to have, as knowing who is lying to you is important (not as important as the Why, but still). Disercn Lie is much more palpable and useful to that style of game, which is the only kind of game Zone of Truth came into serious play with. Its level six, so that means 5 for class, 3 for level, 1 for intelligence we will say +9 on Religous checks. Typically you get a bonus +19 to insight checks for truth seeking. (Its the full check bonus to insight), though in reality you have a 5% chance of getting a +29 And lets not forget assisting in the ritual. They don't get to help you with the insight bonus, but guess what, they do with the religion check. so suddenly the high priest and four acolytes cast this ritual, the bonus is going to jump to mid twenties to low thirties (+8 from the acolytes) easily. basically it means that for one particular person you will know if they lie. Much more palatable to me then Zone of Truth ever was. It means that once they get the person they suspect of Whatever they can determine by directed questions who was behind it.
As a side note I am glad you don't find the feat requirement (Ritual Caster) a hindrance as both Clerics and Wizards get that as a bonus feat, and thus its more 'if someone multi'd into Wizard/Cleric wish to cast rituals they have one more step they must take' then 'EVERYONE must have a feat'.
It's just insanely overcompensated for the "problems" it used to cause. Making it a Daily Power with a short duration ("until the start of your next turn") would have solved most of those and still keep it as a functional ability; yeah, once per day you can get a bonus to tell if someone is lying to you. Big whoop. But this? It's asinine.
Thats basically what it is. From a scroll it takes 5 minutes (a short rest heh), and you get a +X bonus to insight for the next 5 minutes to me its not that Big of a deal.
There's quite a few ritual spells that just make you go "huh?" Phantom Steed is another one. You basically have to blow 430gp (including the cost to buy the ritual) in order to summon up to eight horses that last twelve hours (assuming they take no damage). Keep in mind a riding horse only costs 75gp. Sure, once you approach the epic tier the horses gain some advantages such as waterwalking and flying (a whole ten feet off the ground). I mean, sure, it's so-so if someone comes along and steals/kills your mounts while you're off in a dungeon or something... but still? Making it a ritual with such extreme limitations and requirements?
Heh.
Level 6 wizard is at the least going to have
Arcana trained 5+3+4 +12 to Arcana. If you are in the city you can pay a handful of fellow wizards a small pittance to aid on the arcana roll, up to 4
+20 BASE to Arcana. Thus given time to prepare your Phantom Steeds will at the least be able to ignore hard terran (would anyway 12 times out of 20 or 60% of the time), and will typically Move on Water (DC 30) (which again you will hit 8 times out of 20 anyway (40%), and finally at level 6 given 4 people with at least a +9 to Arcana you have 1/20 chance of hitting being able to fly. A more maxed out INT wizard is going to have correspondingly increased chances.
Knock is yet another example. Instead of having it as a Daily power (so as not to constantly get in the way of a Rogue or other master of Thievery having their moments of glory), it's another ten-minute ritual that costs 35gp and a healing surge. I'm not even sure why it costs a healing surge, but it does. And on top of that, all it does is let you use Arcana +5 in place of Thievery for trying to open a door (and you have to succeed at multiple checks in some situations). That's basically a +5 bonus for ten minutes of wasted time and a handful of gold. At least this ritual has a tangible benefit that can't be had any other way (it allows you a chance to unlock things that Thievery alone couldn't)... but yikes.
so for 35gp and a healing surge I can open a door as a rogue 10 levels higher than me? I don't see why this is a problem. There are not a lot of ways to get bonuses to skill in 4e (yet) like there were in 3.X, a +5 to a skill is immensely powerful, you get +1/2 levels. +5 is the equivalent of gaining 10 levels.
Just... they just went crazy with limiting stuff. It's completely out of hand in many, many areas. Game balance works both ways; you can't just cripple something completely and call it balanced.
Game Balance is an illusion. always has been. Smart players will always 'out perform' weaker ones. Equity not equality should be the rallying cry.
To me Knock a second level spell negating the need for a rogue is not equity.
Zone of Truth eliminating a murder mystery adventure is not equity.
Spending XP to make items, is Stupid.
I like the rituals, they still produce what is considered 'classic' affects (knock, detect lies) while making it where they don't negate the need for a class, or eliminate an entire genre of the game.
|
|
|
