I've always found the notion that the knock spell makes rogues "obsolete" to be totally ridiculous. As if picking locks is all that rogues are good for. As someone who likes playing rogues, I find the idea that all that rogues are good for is opening locks and disarming traps to be quite insulting. For one thing, not every rogue should have to be skilled at picking locks. Maybe I'm more of a thug or assassin, and would rather spend my skills elsewhere. A rogue should no more be assumed to have lockpicking ability than a wizard should be assumed to know the fireball spell.
And I have always found the idea that wizard spells that replicate the areas of the game that other characters are supposed to be specialists in should also be better at performing those tasks to be ridiculous. You don't want to take skills related to trapfinding or lockpicking? Don't. But, if a rogue does, that is one of the areas of the game where rogues are meant to be the specialists.
Besides, picking locks hasn't been something that only rogues can do since 3rd edition, with the introduction of a universal skill system. In 4e, likewise, anyone could train in thievery if they wanted to. Then there's also the fact that picking a lock can be done at-will, while knock consumes daily spell slots.
2nd level daily spell slot is not exactly a rare commodity. It ends up being, for all intents and purposes, virtually being an at-will commodity. You are likely to have a spell slot that can be used to cast knock whenever you need to. And, as has been noted, you can use a ritual to open simple locks. Meanwhile, back when you first get a 2nd level spell slot and it actually is a big commodity rogues are far less effective at picking locks. They will only be rolling a d6 skill die. At that point in time, being able to open a DC 20 lock automatically will be worth the resource spent.
And while it is not something that only rogues can do in 3e and 4e, the mechanics of both editions gave rogues an advantage when it came to being trained at those tasks. What is more, DDN is also returning to various older paradigms.
And then there's the simple fact that the fighter or barbarian can also "make the rogue obsolete" by simply bashing down the door or breaking open the chest. It's probably going to make less noise than 5e's knock spell too. Heck, an adamantine weapon allows them to do so with ease, and is alot cheaper than having to keep buying wands of knock! Should we also nerf fighter and barbarian damage against objects, just so rogues don't get their feelings hurt?
Not all doors can be smashed down. Smashing down a door makes noise.
To those that think the knock spell should be inferior to picking locks with the skill, think about it. Daily powers should be better than at-will powers. This is just common sense. Also, what if my rogue multiclasses as a wizard? Should such a character never have a reason to get the knock spell, say for emergencies when I need to open something very quickly? I think they should. It's not something most rogue/wizards would do, but it should at least be an option. If the spell is flat out inferior to the skill, there's simply no point.
No, daily powers should not necessarily be better than at-will powers. Overall balance is the only context that matters. The sort of thinking you are using led to the god-wizards of 3e. Those god-wizards ended up turning a lot of people off the edition. To me, what ought to be common sense is that a task that specializes in a particular type of task should be the best at performing that task. Fighters should be the most survivable of characters. Rogues should be the best characters at hiding, picking locks, and the like. And so on and so forth.
And, the current knock is not hands down inferior to a rogue picking locks. No, it cannot be used to open doors of a DC higher than 20. But, it never fails to open a door with a DC of 20. That is something that a rogue can never say is true of his ability to pick locks. He can roll low. He can fail to pick a DC 20 lock. When your multiclass rogue does so, and he still needs to bypass the door quickly, your multiclass rogue will have a reason to use knock.
In the end, if a wizard really wants to spend a bunch of his very limited daily spells unlocking things, I say so what? If anything, I think such a wizard is a fool for wasting his spells if there's someone else in the party that can do it for free. If he wants to be an idiot, let him!
And I say that if the wizard starts looking like the 3e variant I walk away from this edition. I also say that a lot of other players feel the same way. Making another game with a 3e style wizard is a sure fire way to make this edition as big a failure as 4e.
In AD&D, 1st level wizards had no more than 4 starting hit points (unless they had an amazing Con) and had one spell per day, ONE. Specialist wizards could have two spells per day, but they were rather difficult to qualify for. There were no cantrips, either. "Cantrip" was a 1st level spell, and it couldn't inflict damage at all.
I'd say the 1st level 5e Wizard with at-will cantrips, two 1st level spells per day and at least 6 hit points is quite a bit better off than the poor 1st level 2e wizard. Playing a wizard at starting level in those days was quite the experience.
And I have always found the idea that wizard spells that replicate the areas of the game that other characters are supposed to be specialists in should also be better at performing those tasks to be ridiculous. You don't want to take skills related to trapfinding or lockpicking? Don't. But, if a rogue does, that is one of the areas of the game where rogues are meant to be the specialists.
Even if the knock spell is itself superior to a single use of the lockpicking skill, the wizard is still not better at that role than the rogue, who can do it at-will. This has always been the case, but it is especially true now that wizards get so few spells per day. I just can't see my wizard wasting his precious daily spells on knock, even if it was equal to or better than a rogue's lockpicking.
2nd level daily spell slot is not exactly a rare commodity. It ends up being, for all intents and purposes, virtually being an at-will commodity. You are likely to have a spell slot that can be used to cast knock whenever you need to.
What? A wizard gets no more than 3, THREE 2nd level spells per day in this edition. That's not even close to an at-will commodity. And even if you happen to have knock prepared and are willing to spend one of those precious few spell slots casting it, that's one less invisibility or some other good 2nd level spell you can cast that day. And every single lock you encounter after that is one more lost spell that could have been used for something else. Unlike rogues, wizards have to divide their resources between combat and other tasks. A rogue can pick locks all day long and never lose an ounce of combat capability. The same is not true of the wizard.
And, as has been noted, you can use a ritual to open simple locks. Meanwhile, back when you first get a 2nd level spell slot and it actually is a big commodity rogues are far less effective at picking locks. They will only be rolling a d6 skill die. At that point in time, being able to open a DC 20 lock automatically will be worth the resource spent.
The ritual version of knock can only open locks with a DC of 15 or lower. And even if that were not the case, there's nothing keeping the rogue from trying until he succeeds, other than time. A rogue can make 10 attempts in the time it takes to cast knock as a ritual. A rogue would have to be extremely unlucky to not pick the lock before the wizard finishes his ritual.
And while it is not something that only rogues can do in 3e and 4e, the mechanics of both editions gave rogues an advantage when it came to being trained at those tasks. What is more, DDN is also returning to various older paradigms.
And I say that if the wizard starts looking like the 3e variant I walk away from this edition. I also say that a lot of other players feel the same way. Making another game with a 3e style wizard is a sure fire way to make this edition as big a failure as 4e.
I don't know if you're familiar with my posts, but I have agreed with many of the nerfs that have been handed to the wizard class. I don't want wizards to be like they were in 3e, either. But in this case, I think this is one case of the pendulum swinging a bit too far in the other direction.
That said, the only major problems I have with the new version of knock are the punishment for using it as a ritual (as if the long casting time wasn't already punishment enough) and the loud noise, which I thnk is just ridiuclous. Why not just have the fighter bash down the door if knock is going to make as much or more noise? If those two things were to change, would the spell still be acceptable to you?
Picking disable device is a permanent resource investment. The character is preparing Disable device on a permanent basis over other abilities. Preparing knock is a fluid and non permanent choice. THAT is why you pay for it to take a spell slot to use. For the the utility and versatility. So you do not NEED to get extra powerful oomph on top of that cost.
On the other hand I agree that you are already pay the time price when casting the ritual, so no need to reduce oomph there.
Then there is the range issue. Being able to open at range makes you able to ignore most traps. You dont end up at the front line and there is probably more benefits I cant think of right now. Now we are again left with surplus oomph, but that is neatly taken care of by the noise.
Lastly the maximum DC is balanced with auto success.
I will repeat my suggestion to keep moving forward and embrace the next ideas: Add higher level options to it such as silent opening or higher DC.
And please stop comparing it to rogues only... everyone has access to all skills equally! This is spell vs skill balancing, not clas vs class.
Interesting point about being 'underpowered' from level 1-6. Compared to AD&D, where the conventional wisdom was that wizards were weak and puny at low levels to compensate their godly power at high levels; how do you think their relative power compares? Are they (at low level) more or less underpowered relative to the other classes when compared to an AD&D wizard's power relative to the other classes?
And are they, in your opinion, underpowered compared to all classes? Or just the Monk and Fighter (and now, Barbarian)?
Carl
They are underpowered from level 1-6 compared to all the classes except for, maybe, the cleric. I have zero interest in ever playing a cleric; as an artifact of that, I am not super familiar with the cleric, and I don't feel particularly comfortable commenting on their power level. It has been so long since I have played AD&D that I also can't really compare this wizard to that one. All I am left with, in regards to my memory of AD&D, are general impressions.
I was just curious.
I agree that they are underpowered relative to the other classes - especially the demigod barbarian, fighter and monk. Probably the rogue as well, but less so. Not so much the cleric - but there is also less overlap between their function and that of the cleric (clerics are often doing something other than just killing stuff).
But I think they are less underpowered at low levels (and less overpowered) at high levels) than in earlier editions (those prior to4E) - so it is a step in the right direction in my opinion. And with tricks like Scion and Tactician for the evocation wizard and the extra spells and rituals for the scholarly wizard, not to mention their cantrips, I'm not sure they are all that underpowered. Somewhat, perhaps. But not by an order of magnitude. And since there is a high consensus that the martial damage classes need have their damage brought down I'm willing to wait and see.
The illusion wizard worries me, however. I don't think the benefits attached to that school make muster unless the DM really uses a lot of illusions. I think that is a difficult class to make work well - I'd have rather seen Necromancy, SUmmoning or Conjuration rather than illusion. But the illusionist was the original specialist - so it needed to be done.
But their big benefit really just comes down to "your saves are tougher" which isn't very 'cool'.
Picking disable device is a permanent resource investment. The character is preparing Disable device on a permanent basis over other abilities. Preparing knock is a fluid and non permanent choice. THAT is why you pay for it to take a spell slot to use. For the the utility and versatility. So you do not NEED to get extra powerful oomph on top of that cost.
On the other hand I agree that you are already pay the time price when casting the ritual, so no need to reduce oomph there.
Then there is the range issue. Being able to open at range makes you able to ignore most traps. You dont end up at the front line and there is probably more benefits I cant think of right now. Now we are again left with surplus oomph, but that is neatly taken care of by the noise.
Lastly the maximum DC is balanced with auto success.
I will repeat my suggestion to keep moving forward and embrace the next ideas: Add higher level options to it such as silent opening or higher DC.
And please stop comparing it to rogues only... everyone has access to all skills equally! This is spell vs skill balancing, not clas vs class.
Honestly if I were a wizard I would only use it in emergencies or cast it as a ritual if we had no rogue. I think its dumb some people think that taking away versatility is fun. What if no one wanted to be the rogue?
Please read what you quoted. Noone is taking anything away from any CLASS. Knock is a spell that is going to be available to MANY classes, balancing it around 1 class is nonsense. Disable device is a SKILL and all skills are available to ALL classes via backgrounds.
This has nothing to do with who does or does not want to be a rogue.
Knock needs to be a viable choice ON balance with Disable device. The 3E version was far superior. The next version is in my opinion nearly right; higher DC as ritual and higher level options and we are there.
Even if the knock spell is itself superior to a single use of the lockpicking skill, the wizard is still not better at that role than the rogue, who can do it at-will. This has always been the case, but it is especially true now that wizards get so few spells per day. I just can't see my wizard wasting his precious daily spells on knock, even if it was equal to or better than a rogue's lockpicking.
The direr the situation the higher the chance that a wizard will end up casting knock. Likewise, the direr the situation the more a character shines when they bypass it. The wizard will be able to cast knock many, many times by 20th level. The only way for a character with Disable Device to shine as brightly is to be able to do something with that skill that cannot be achieved with the spell. Likewise, the only way to make the spell feel special/magical is to be able to do something with the spell that cannot be done with the skill. Right now Disable Device can be used to open up silently locks that cannot be opened with Knock, but there is always a chance that Disable Device will fail (whereas Knock always works when used against the appropriate type of device, but is noisy). That is as it should be.
And every single lock you encounter after that is one more lost spell that could have been used for something else. Unlike rogues, wizards have to divide their resources between combat and other tasks. A rogue can pick locks all day long and never lose an ounce of combat capability. The same is not true of the wizard.
Except a wizard doesn’t have to cast knock in any situation where the reward is not worth the expenditure. When they don’t cast knock they can use their resources on something else, including combat capability. When you pick Disable Device as a skill your spent resources are fixed, locked into place, and used up for the entire rest of that characters life. That is doubly true if you spent any feats on the skill. And, in the specific case of rogues, they have permanently given up a good deal of combat capability in return for Skill Mastery and 4 extra trained skills. So, what you are saying is not quite true.
The ritual version of knock can only open locks with a DC of 15 or lower. And even if that were not the case, there's nothing keeping the rogue from trying until he succeeds, other than time. A rogue can make 10 attempts in the time it takes to cast knock as a ritual. A rogue would have to be extremely unlucky to not pick the lock before the wizard finishes his ritual.
Which is neither here nor there. 3e was horribly imbalanced, so I could care less what it did. I won’t buy another edition of the game that has that same imbalance. 4e balanced combat well, but didn’t take out of combat activities into consideration in that balance. That too is a problem for me. Though, knock was not as much of a problem in 4e for a variety of reasons. I won’t get into them here because all that really matters right now is how DDN is balancing things.
I don't know if you're familiar with my posts, but I have agreed with many of the nerfs that have been handed to the wizard class. I don't want wizards to be like they were in 3e, either. But in this case, I think this is one case of the pendulum swinging a bit too far in the other direction.
That said, the only major problems I have with the new version of knock are the punishment for using it as a ritual (as if the long casting time wasn't already punishment enough) and the loud noise, which I thnk is just ridiuclous. Why not just have the fighter bash down the door if knock is going to make as much or more noise? If those two things were to change, would the spell still be acceptable to you?
I don’t agree that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. It would be a problem for me if the noise component was removed. The reason you don’t have a fighter “just bash down the door” is because some doors cannot be bashed down. As for the ritual, it really depends. I would rather the option to retry skill checks be removed. I think you should only be able to roll a skill check once. At best, I would like to see a “retry” mechanic that does not allow you to automatically succeed, or reroll, but gives you a chance to automatically roll X number with X amount of time (based on your d20 and your skill die). For example, I think you should get one skill roll. If you fail you can spend 20 rounds trying again, at which point you automatically roll 20 + ½ your skill die’s maximum value + your stat modifier. If that does not work you cannot succeed at the task until something about the situation changes. That being said, if they do allow retries then I don’t think the ritual version of Knock should lower the DC you can open; given that context, I think the time wasted casting the ritual is enough of a price.
The direr the situation the higher the chance that a wizard will end up casting knock. Likewise, the direr the situation the more a character shines when they bypass it. The wizard will be able to cast knock many, many times by 20th level. The only way for a character with Disable Device to shine as brightly is to be able to do something with that skill that cannot be achieved with the spell. Likewise, the only way to make the spell feel special/magical is to be able to do something with the spell that cannot be done with the skill. Right Disable Device can be used to open up silently locks that cannot be opened with Knock, but there is always a chance that Disable Device will fail (whereas Knock always works when used against the appropriate type of device, but is noisy). That is as it should be.
This is why I think Knock should require a roll instead of being automatically successful.
What? A wizard gets no more than 3, THREE 2nd level spells per day in this edition. That's not even close to an at-will commodity.
Except you can use a higher level slot to cast a lower level spell. That means that wizards actually receive 15 potential uses of knock per day.
And if you do that you're wasting more and more valuable spells. Do you really want to give up a 9th level spell to cast knock? The way you keep casually disregarding the spells per day limit as a if it were a non-issue makes me wonder if you've ever played a wizard.
Except a wizard doesn’t have to cast knock in any situation where the reward is not worth the expenditure. When they don’t cast knock they can use their resources on something else, including combat capability. When you pick Disable Device as a skill your spent resources are fixed, locked into place, and used up for the entire rest of that characters life. That is doubly true if you spent any feats on the skill. And, in the specific case of rogues, they have permanently given up a good deal of combat capability in return for Skill Mastery and 4 extra trained skills. So, what you are saying is not quite true.
Rogues also get more skills than any other class. Taking open lock as one of their skills is hardly a big sacrifice for them.
We also need to stop looking at this as a class vs. class thing. Anyone can be a thief in Next and have the open lock skill. Your skills have more to do with your background than your class. That's one of the things I love about it.
The new knock spell/ritual makes alot of noise. It's so loud that anything within 300 ft. can clearly hear it.
Anyone within 300 ft. would be able to hear someone smashing down a door as well.
So there's no reason to cast knock instead of bashing down the door. That is not acceptable. One takes a standard action, is free and at-will, the other is a spell that has to be found/learned, paid to be put in your spellbook, and either costs a spell slot or takes time to use as a ritual. Even if we can't agree that knock should be on par with picking a lock, can we at least agree that it should be a superior, or at least quieter option than bashing down the door?
I don’t agree that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. It would be a problem for me if the noise component was removed. The reason you don’t have a fighter “just bash down the door” is because some doors cannot be bashed down.
Such doors are few and far between. I doubt if the door is made from adamantine that it could be unlocked with a DC 15 check either, or even a DC 20 check. But for every other door in the game that can be broken down, the loud noise makes knock an absolutely useless alternative to brute vandalism. Maybe that's what you want, but if so we'll just have to agree to disagree.
This is why I think Knock should require a roll instead of being automatically successful.
No thanks. I want the way the spell works to feel different than the way the skill works. I like spell that work automatically as opposed to attacks/skill checks that require rolls (as long as the end result is balanced).
And if you do that you're wasting more and more valuable spells. Do you really want to give up a 9th level spell to cast knock? The way you keep casually disregarding the spells per day limit as a if it were a non-issue makes me wonder if you've ever played a wizard.
Hyperbole. You won't use a 9th level spell. You will use your 2nd level slots first. Then you will move up to your 3rd. Then to your 4th. And so on and so forth. The chances of you needing to unlock more doors than you have 2nd, 3rd, and 4th level spell slots is infinitesimal. The number I gave was the total number of spell slots that could potentially be used to cast knock. The point being, the wizard has enough that the spell is not exactly a rare resource. And if you think it is, then it is you who I think has not actually played a wizard.
Rogues also get more skills than any other class. Taking open lock as one of their skills is hardly a big sacrifice for them.
The rogue pays for those extra skills with hit dice, weapon proficiencies, and armor proficiencies. It is a very big sacrifice. Balanced! I am not complaining about the sacrifice. But still, a sacrifice.
We also need to stop looking at this as a class vs. class thing. Anyone can be a thief in Next and have the open lock skill. Your skills have more to do with your background than your class. That's one of the things I love about it.
I didn't make it just about rogues. Someone who is not a rogue has to sacrifice one out of four potential skill slots in order to be able to Disable Device. They should feel like their choice is useful, even if there is a wizard in the group. And a rogue gives up a lot of combat power to be the best at skill use. Disable Device is one of the thematic areas of the game that rogues have traditionally excelled at. A rogue who chooses to use his skill speciality on Disable Device should not ever feel like wizards overshadow him by magicing open all the tough locks they encounter.
So there's no reason to cast knock instead of bashing down the door. That is not acceptable. One takes a standard action, is free and at-will, the other is a spell that has to be found/learned, paid to be put in your spellbook, and either costs a spell slot or takes time to use as a ritual. Even if we can't agree that knock should be on par with picking a lock, can we at least agree that it should be a superior, or at least quieter option than bashing down the door?
Sorry, what!? You let fighters bash down doors with a standard action!!!? Have you ever actually tried bashing in a door? Unless it is a flimsy piece of crap, it takes time. Sometimes a lot of time. Usually a lot of time. So no, it does not take a single standard action.
