|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 10:26AM
#51
|
|
|
Chiilling clouds are not enlargeable as you do not roll damage dice.
You're right
(Bad reading of enlarge feat - I was under the idea that feat aplpies only of you deal damage - dice or not)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 10:48AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2008
|
Your 'ratings' are very confusing, because people are used to the Sky blue=best, blue=good, red=crap, etc.
You just dump each power into a single category based on the TYPE of build, which isn't really a rating.
I am not saying that is bad, but it will cause confusion and many powers are equally good for various roles. So shoehorning em into 1 role is confusing.
My Sorc Guide Link:
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19649162/Joes_Sorcerer_Guide_AP_update_51509
My Genesi Wizard Blaster Link:
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/25082729/Miniguide_to_Genesi_LightningThunder_Blaster_Wizard_%2806-2010%29
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 11:03AM
#53
|
|
|
Your 'ratings' are very confusing, because people are used to the Sky blue=best, blue=good, red=crap, etc.
You just dump each power into a single category based on the TYPE of build, which isn't really a rating.
I am not saying that is bad, but it will cause confusion and many powers are equally good for various roles. So shoehorning em into 1 role is confusing.
I agree. I also think the styles you chose, while all valid builds for a Wizard, are a little confusing, and require some odds fits like lumping Summoners in with Bleed Mages. IMHO, you're best off sticking to the identifiable WotC builds (Control Wizard, War Wizard, Summoner, etc.), as those are what people will most likely be looking to build. The best way to do the ratings is to give each thing an overall rating on the standard scale (red to sky blue) and then note if it may be a higher rating for particular builds.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 11:48AM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Dec 19, 2003
|
Storm Pillar – wall and zone with auto-hit damage when an enemy enters a zone. Good for blocking a small corridor, useless out in the open where enemies can just go around it. Does not do damage to those who start their turn in the zone
Why would it be considered useless out in the open? Put it in front of the enemy (or enemies depending how close together they are). Now they have to either go through and take damage from EACH SQUARE in the area they move through, or go around it which means they burn up some of their movement. Case in point, an enemy is 4 squares away from you or an ally, has a speed 6, and you throw down a storm pillar two squares in front of it. It now has a 3x3 area that either it goes through one or more squares and automatically takes the damage or uses two extra squares of movement for moving around each corner of the area to get to the intended target. While it does shine in dungeons, its not 'useless' in the open. It still controls in the fact that it forces the enemy to make a decision of 'take damage or not get to make an attack this round'.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 11:54AM
#55
|
|
|
I like the idea of having categories of different styles of wizards, but have also come to get used to the colour coding of values, from amazing (cyan) to awful (red).
For my two coppers worth, I would also have to agree with Drax Hoak on his point about lumping bleed mages in with summoners. Both are way different. A bleed mage will be making bad monsters, well, bleed. They will be taking ongoing damage, as well as possible ongoing status effects; thus, the bleed mage is in the camp of control via damage, but also dips into control via status conditions. They can also stray into blast territory, as their spells can be both aoe and highly damaging (by wiz standards).
Now, the best way to bleed a monster is to lockdown a hard save penalty stacked with improved orb of imposition. This leaves them real angry. The bleed effect will be made via a daily spell. So, you don't get many of them, but when you do, the monster sits there like a bunny in a microwave.
Here is where my issue comes in. The summoner uses his dailies to summon things (not to put bunnies in mircrowave ovens). This prohibits them from selecting bleed style dailies, or perhaps more accuratley, dailies that can be exploited nicely by Bleed Style wizards. In other words, to be a good summoner, you need to summon things, which means you won't be spending time with ongoing damage (the staple of the bleed mage). It seems like the two are radically different. They would also have a different focus when it came to the types of implements that help them in what they do best. That is another story though. I hope this messy confusion helps a bit.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 12:23PM
#56
|
|
|
On the reverse side of the coin, there's relatively little reason to not combine ongoing damage effects and status effect... effects on the same wizard. A wizard that does a lot of ongoing damage is going to be looking for accuracy and penalties to saves. A wizard that specializes in disabling status effects is going to be looking for the exact same things. While there's gear like the Earthroot staff that is good for one of those builds but not the other, the primary reasons to stick to save-ends status effects or save-ends damage effects are thematic. They're good with very much the same feats and gear, and in fact a wizard is likely better off with a mix of both than by sticking to one or the other. (Once someone is immobilized (save ends), you don't get much out of immobilizing him again, but you do get something out of setting him on fire.) Summoners, on the other hand, rely on a different set of character options than bleeders. Save penalties do nothing for their dailies, and they've a considerable incentive to take ToB, which is pointless for bleeders. Trying to combine summoning with bleeding makes far less sense than combining bleeding with disabling status effects. Wizards don't suffer from "two classes in one" syndrome like clerics, paladins or rangers; any character can get good use out of the majority of the spells available, and it's very frequently better to take a powerful off-spec power than a mediocre on-spec one. (Something that's not true of more strongly fissioned classes like cleric.) I really thing that coloring powers based on their utility is the way to go, and just mentioning in the descriptive text if there's special reason that some build or another would rate it higher or lower.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer.
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 1:21PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2009
|
I also agree to adhering to the standard formatting. People can pick out which powers match certain builds pretty easily (hint: look for your build option in the rider effects of the power). The hard part is knowing which options are truly good. That's what the handbook is for, and I think you should focus on that.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 3:09PM
#58
|
|
|
Just an aside on Staff Fighting feat.
I was messing around with builds in Character Builder, and the staff is treated as 2 implements with Staff Fighting. I actually had the idea before I tried it in CB, and this makes sense to me, as you are essentially wielding a staff in each hand. So with a Staff of Ruin and Dual Implement Spellcaster, each +1 gives you +3 to damage.
This seems pretty decent to me if you want to save money for any reason, though I also realize wizards gain versatility by having multiple implements. With Staff Fighting your off-hand implement would have only an enhancement bonus, which is all you care about (sometimes) with Dual Implement Spellcasting. And your offhand implement would keep up in damage, making dual implements viable, earlier.
Granted this could change when the character builder gets updated again, however this seems RAW and RAI.
Daag
P.S. I forward the motion to keep the old format, and suggest having different colors for the various builds, much like the Bard handbook does on the CO boards.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 4:10PM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Jul 15, 2008
|
Just an aside on Staff Fighting feat.
I was messing around with builds in Character Builder, and the staff is treated as 2 implements with Staff Fighting. I actually had the idea before I tried it in CB, and this makes sense to me, as you are essentially wielding a staff in each hand. So with a Staff of Ruin and Dual Implement Spellcaster, each +1 gives you +3 to damage.
This seems pretty decent to me if you want to save money for any reason, though I also realize wizards gain versatility by having multiple implements. With Staff Fighting your off-hand implement would have only an enhancement bonus, which is all you care about (sometimes) with Dual Implement Spellcasting. And your offhand implement would keep up in damage, making dual implements viable, earlier.
Granted this could change when the character builder gets updated again, however this seems RAW and RAI.
Daag
P.S. I forward the motion to keep the old format, and suggest having different colors for the various builds, much like the Bard handbook does on the CO boards.
Taking another look at that handbook, I do like that format, and will try to do it in that format. This does, however, mean more work, so progress on what isn't there already will be slow. Be patient, I will be doing what I can to get to all the suggestions, as well as those that come in.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
May 07, 2009 - 4:35PM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Apr 22, 2001
|
"Dragonborn – Bad choice, CHA only lines up for Orb of Deception, will be unable to use the secondary racial traits because that stats don’t line up (For example, Dragon Breath uses STR/CON/DEX, which you won't have much of)"
With Draconic Spellcaster and Arcane Implement Proficiency (to either access to rod that turns all damage into the same type as their breath weapon or a frost/flaming/whatever weapon), Dragonborn can actually be very good wizards. A dragonborn with Int 16, those two feats, and the appropriate item will have the same accuracy as an Int 18 character until 15th level, after which it will have more accuracy (reaching 2 points ahead at 25th). The only catch is it only works with damaging powers, so no use to non damage status effect powers. Still great for a blast mage, since being one point of damage down is more than made up for by having +1-2 to hit for half the levels. They can get some use out of their attribute bonuses through qualifying for armor/shield feats and spell focus, and a Con based tome or staff wizard gets good synergy with the dragonborn breath weapon and healing surge bonus.
|
|
|
