PDA

View Full Version : 4e- Cosmic Magic source for Sorcerers? (Arcane Power Preview)



Asbestos
2009-03-30, 12:25 AM
Over at WotC they put up another preview article for Arcane Power, it can be seen here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20090330).

Apparently they are sticking with the 'str and dex are secondary stats for sorcerers' bit introduced in the PHB2. But, what stands out to me here is that... I don't get it!

What is this 'cosmic magic', is it different than the sort of magic that Star Pact warlocks wield? Is this whole 'phases' mechanic interesting or is it simply needlessly complex?

Kletian999
2009-03-30, 12:40 AM
Warlock Star Pact the "Stars" are actually far Realm Aliens, and the effects are mainly illusions and light- it also had some ties to Fate (Horoscopes). Cosmic Magic is aimed toward the real astrometic bodies, it's physics magic: Gravity, orbits, meteors, etc. It's less random than Chaos but more varied than Draconic, I think it'll fit in well.

NPCMook
2009-03-30, 12:44 AM
I don't understand the phase thing...

Oracle_Hunter
2009-03-30, 01:46 AM
I don't understand the phase thing...

Basically after every rest, the Sorc picks one of the three phases (Sun, Moon, Stars) and gains the power listed below. However, the first time he is Bloodied in an Encounter, he loses whatever Phase Power he had and gains the next Phase Power in the order.

The Phases are ordered as such:
Sun -> Moon -> Stars -> Sun... and so on.

Example
Ralika the Sorceress wakes up in the morning and chooses the Sun Phase. Her first Encounter for they day is with a bunch of Orcs, and they discover that whenever they stand adjacent to Ralika, they take STR worth of Fire/Radiant damage. Ow.

Eventually an Orc drops Ralika down to Bloodied. Immediately her Phase shifts to the next one in the order (Moon) and instead of causing Fire/Radiant damage, she's gaining +1 AC per enemy adjacent to her.

The party finishes killing the Orcs, and take a Short Rest. At the end of the Short Rest, Ralika decides she'd like to go back to Sun Phase; she loses her Moon Phase powers, and begins inflicting Fire/Radiant damage again.

It's pretty neat.

EDIT:
Clearly, the first Cosmic Sorceress will be Half-Elven, wear a miniskirt, and start every battle with "In the name of the Moon (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InTheNameOfTheMoon), I will punish you!" :smallbiggrin:

Nu
2009-03-30, 01:55 AM
Given that this spell source uses Strength, I can't think of any other time when the phrase "Fist of the North Star (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fist_of_the_north_star)" would be more appropriate.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-03-30, 02:27 AM
Given that this spell source uses Strength, I can't think of any other time when the phrase "Fist of the North Star (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fist_of_the_north_star)" would be more appropriate.

I gotta say, I'm still having a bit of trouble getting the whole "muscle for magic" thing through my mind - particularly for "cosmic" magic - but it does allow you to make Bodybuilder Sorcerers who cast with their biceps :smallbiggrin:

Eldmor
2009-03-30, 02:56 AM
Alex Louis Armstrong (of Fullmetal Alchemist) would be proud. :smallbiggrin:

Townopolis
2009-03-30, 03:19 AM
Alex Louis Armstrong (of Fullmetal Alchemist) would be proud. :smallbiggrin:

Damnit! I wanted to say that.

TheOOB
2009-03-30, 03:20 AM
I see two reasons they use strength/dex for sorcerers. First is that it's an ability score array no one else uses. Second is that since sorcerer's channel pure arcane energy through their body, they need to be physically strong to channel it fully(or agile as the case may be). While charisma might determine how much raw powerful they can manifest, their strength/dexterity is a measure of how much they can control it while it flows throw there body.

Of course this is all just random speculation and guessing, but if a player needs a justification it works.

Dhavaer
2009-03-30, 04:15 AM
I see two reasons they use strength/dex for sorcerers. First is that it's an ability score array no one else uses.

Aren't Rogues Str/Dex/Cha as well?

Tengu_temp
2009-03-30, 05:01 AM
Damnit! I wanted to say that.

Don't worry, you're not the only one.

Asbestos
2009-03-30, 05:18 AM
Warlock Star Pact the "Stars" are actually far Realm Aliens, and the effects are mainly illusions and light- it also had some ties to Fate (Horoscopes). Cosmic Magic is aimed toward the real astrometic bodies, it's physics magic: Gravity, orbits, meteors, etc. It's less random than Chaos but more varied than Draconic, I think it'll fit in well.

I guess my issue with it is that with sorcerers X power flows through them. So, dragon, chaos, and sure storm magic all make sense to me. I don't get how the power behind the rotation of heavenly bodies can flow through you.

"Burn as I unleash the raw strength of astronomy and the natural laws!"

Tengu_temp
2009-03-30, 05:22 AM
Fantasy world. Stars aren't just astronomy, they have arcane power.

Oslecamo
2009-03-30, 05:37 AM
Spells dependant of strenght? Now I've seen it all.

Well the 4e paladin was hiting people in the face with charisma so I guess it's only fair the sorceror gets to make arcane blasts with his muscles.

Kurald Galain
2009-03-30, 06:10 AM
People should drop the associatition that the ability score "Strength" (or indeed, any of the other five) has a meaningful relation with what the word "strength" means in real life. It does not, it is just one of the six attributes. WOTC saw that one of the six attributes was used less often than the other five, so they made up a mechanic that uses it, because it is part of game balance to use all six attributes equally often.

That said, the sun/moon/stars mechanic strikes me as gimmicky for the sake of it. It seems to be a key point for sorcerers that they get arbitrary abilities that change at arbitrary moments. It's a bit like the old Wild Surge table only without the fun parts; I can't say I like the class much, even though it does a better job at arcane striking than the warlock.

shadowmage
2009-03-30, 06:15 AM
A Paladin using charisma is not hitting a person in their face, it is the paladins, I am bigger and badder then you scaring the will out of a person to fight. HP is not just physical health but the will to fight.

On the str from magic I can kind of see it but it is hard to put into words. The dex part is maybe being better able to make the gestures needed? In the same vein maybe making the geatures with more force add to their effects? :smallconfused:

Asbestos
2009-03-30, 07:11 AM
On the str from magic I can kind of see it but it is hard to put into words. The dex part is maybe being better able to make the gestures needed? In the same vein maybe making the geatures with more force add to their effects? :smallconfused:

Avatar: the Last Airbender

Dexterity would be for Fire, Air, and Waterbending.
Earthbending would be primarily strength.

Despite KG's claims, there is some precedence for using strength with magic.

FinalJustice
2009-03-30, 07:27 AM
Str based Cosmic Sorcerer? Finally I'll be able do roll up my own Knight of the Zodiac.

Tiki Snakes
2009-03-30, 07:30 AM
The way I see it, a sorerer requires strength or so for his casting because of the new flavour of sorcery. It is barely controlled, wild and potent. He's litterally wrestling with the cosmos to wring this power out of it, and even more literaly to control it. He requires strong arms as he guestures because otherwise he will end up flailing randomly, like a 90lbs weakling trying to control a fire-hose on his own.

Iroel
2009-03-30, 07:49 AM
Hmmm, that actually reminds me of the male channelers of WoT...

Myatar_Panwar
2009-03-30, 09:32 AM
People should drop the associatition that the ability score "Strength" (or indeed, any of the other five) has a meaningful relation with what the word "strength" means in real life. It does not, it is just one of the six attributes. WOTC saw that one of the six attributes was used less often than the other five, so they made up a mechanic that uses it, because it is part of game balance to use all six attributes equally often.

Doesn't mean you shouldn't try and justify it. And people have done so pretty nicely in this thread.

Kurald Galain
2009-03-30, 09:48 AM
Doesn't mean you shouldn't try and justify it.
Actually, it does. WOTC makes zero attempt to justify most of their rules from an in-world perspective; instead, everything is justified on game balance and ease of play.


And people have done so pretty nicely in this thread.
Not at all. People have given a few nonsensical or ludicrous ideas that are as much a justification as the Chewbacca Defense is. And funnily enough, none of those ideas have a relation to what the word "strength" means in real life, thus proving my point.

The existence of (very few) people who are strong and use magic (who almost without exception use magic to boost their strength, rather than vice versa) does not make it archetypical that being a body builder makes you better at pulling flames out of nowhere.

Any explanation that justifies everything, in fact justifies nothing. If an explanation makes the same amount of sense when you substitute "strength" by "constitution" (or for that matter, by "goldfish"), that only shows the explanation makes no sense, and you've only proven that magic use really has no meaningful relationship at all to "attributes".

Artanis
2009-03-30, 10:17 AM
Assuming that "meh, it's magic, roll with it" isn't acceptable, the closest thing to a coherent explanation of STR boosting sorcerer spells would be for dragon magic: higher STR implies more dragon in your blood which implies more power. It doesn't really work, but that's the closest I can come up with. Cosmic magic, I got nothin'.




Aren't Rogues Str/Dex/Cha as well?
I thought that Rogues were DEX + STR/CHA while Sorcerers were CHA + STR/DEX.

Asbestos
2009-03-30, 10:51 AM
Actually, it does. WOTC makes zero attempt to justify most of their rules from an in-world perspective; instead, everything is justified on game balance and ease of play.


Not at all. People have given a few nonsensical or ludicrous ideas that are as much a justification as the Chewbacca Defense is. And funnily enough, none of those ideas have a relation to what the word "strength" means in real life, thus proving my point.


Any explanation that justifies everything, in fact justifies nothing. If an explanation makes the same amount of sense when you substitute "strength" by "constitution" (or for that matter, by "goldfish"), that only shows the explanation makes no sense, and you've only proven that magic use really has no meaningful relationship at all to "attributes".

Seriously, KG, I've got some respect for you but you keep harping on this and ignoring points that have been made in the various threads that you have brought this up in.


The existence of (very few) people who are strong and use magic (who almost without exception use magic to boost their strength, rather than vice versa) does not make it archetypical that being a body builder makes you better at pulling flames out of nowhere.
As has been said many times before... Armstrong (who people keep bringing up as the best example of this) uses his strength to boost his magic, not vice versa (and don't anyone say that 'alchemy isn't magic') Does one dude make an archetype? No. But does it mean that you can just ignore the example because it doesn't fly with your interpretation that stats have no meaningful in-world application? Again, no. I already made an argument about this in another thread, I'll just go find and link the post, but I'm getting tired of seeing you continually bring this up; if you can't think of reasons it might make sense, then fine, play the game that way, but quit trying to shove this assertion of yours down everyone else's throat in every other thread that mentions "strength and magic" or "hitting people with charisma".

edit: I can't find my darn post, it must be buried pretty far. Found a previous one where this was being discussed and I pseudo-agreed (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5800434&postcount=148)? About fluff laziness at least.

Oslecamo
2009-03-30, 11:03 AM
A Paladin using charisma is not hitting a person in their face, it is the paladins, I am bigger and badder then you scaring the will out of a person to fight. HP is not just physical health but the will to fight.


So you're saying that D&D 4e uses the same rules for physical and social conflict? Is the paladin killing enemies just by scaring the crap out of them with glares while the rest of the party is shooting energy or stabbing with pointy things?

What hapened with oversized glowing swords being wielded by skinny blonde pretty boys?:smalltongue:

Reverent-One
2009-03-30, 12:02 PM
Not at all. People have given a few nonsensical or ludicrous ideas that are as much a justification as the Chewbacca Defense is. And funnily enough, none of those ideas have a relation to what the word "strength" means in real life, thus proving my point.

The existence of (very few) people who are strong and use magic (who almost without exception use magic to boost their strength, rather than vice versa) does not make it archetypical that being a body builder makes you better at pulling flames out of nowhere.

Any explanation that justifies everything, in fact justifies nothing. If an explanation makes the same amount of sense when you substitute "strength" by "constitution" (or for that matter, by "goldfish"), that only shows the explanation makes no sense, and you've only proven that magic use really has no meaningful relationship at all to "attributes".

Well, I'll leave aside how strange I find it that you don't seem to think being able to control one's muscles is a function of strength and just explain how I understand it.

So, a sorcerer gets his power from within. For one reason or another, being able to access arcane power is natural for them. However, they are tapping into a larger force and channeling it's raw power, unlike Wizards who use words to take control of arcane energies. This is the basic concept of their magic.

So why does strength help them? Well, they are channeling raw, untamed power through their bodies, so their strength helps them keep in control of themselves as all of this power rushes through them. More strength means they are able to adequately channel more power, which translates into more damage.

If you can buy into the idea that some people can say a few words that let them break the laws of physics or that some people love nature so much that the forces of nature let them change shape, appearance, and even their very mass, it's really not that strange.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-03-30, 12:19 PM
[S]ince sorcerer's channel pure arcane energy through their body, they need to be physically strong to channel it fully(or agile as the case may be). While charisma might determine how much raw powerful they can manifest, their strength/dexterity is a measure of how much they can control it while it flows throw there body.

I like this explanation.

CHA-casters have been associated with "force of personality" spells since 3E, so it's easy fluff to swallow. Since you're using CHA, you wouldn't use to CON to represent the reserve of energy; DEX is associated with fine movements / manipulation while STR is associated with raw power.

Consider me convinced :smallbiggrin:

X15lm204
2009-03-30, 10:15 PM
A lot of people have mentioned getting Anime vibes from this, but there's one that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned.

Defending yourself by recklessly and thoughtlessly beating attacks out of the way? Turning material power into spiritual power? Gaining skill and mental endurance from the hordes of enemies surrounding you? Making said hordes of enemies EXPLODE!!!!!! from the sheer force of your awesomeness? All of that screams (appropriately) Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann to me.

"This drill is my implement!!"

Multiclassing between this and Paladin could make an excellent Spiral Knight.

TheOOB
2009-03-31, 03:48 AM
Aren't Rogues Str/Dex/Cha as well?

Rogues are Dex-Str/Cha, Sorcerers are Cha-Str/Dex...or it's possible I forgot about this :)

Here is some other food for thought, another justification for why strength and or dexterity makes sense. Use or ignore to your taste.

Charisma is your individuality, your ability to perceive yourself and make an impression. Sorcerer magic comes from yourself, and your self image. Wouldn't it make some sense that a stronger self makes a stronger self image and thus stronger magic?

Edit: Great, now next time my warlord uses inspiring words on my cosmic sorcerer "Don't believe in yourself. Believe in me. Believe in me, who believes in you!"

Kurald Galain
2009-03-31, 06:26 AM
Wouldn't it make some sense that a stronger self makes a stronger self image and thus stronger magic?

Not if you're a emotiefling :smalltongue:

Seriously though, I consider it one of the stronger features of 4E that your str-score has no relation any more to how strong your character actually is. Why? Because this allows for wider scope in characters. You can make a scrawny little runt of a fighter, who can't lift a boulder but has done enough training to be completely awesome with a sword. This works because this character's high str-score doesn't mean he is muscular or mighty, it means he is good with fighter attack powers (and basic attacks, and climbing). Likewise, you can make a smart and knowledgeable ranger while keeping int as his dump stat, because his int-score doesn't refer to being clever or precocious.

Neither character is feasible in 3E without sacrificing your character's effectivity, because all fighters have to be strong and all wizards have to have an Einstein-level IQ. Bboth do work in 1E and 2E because they put much less emphasis on ability scores, but that's beside the point here.

OneFamiliarFace
2009-03-31, 07:33 AM
Seriously though, I consider it one of the stronger features of 4E that your str-score has no relation any more to how strong your character actually is.

I'm with KG on this one. Though I do like coming up with explanations and fluff for 4e (I like that it is left slightly more up to the player), I also like that the detachment of stats from specific physical or mental attributes makes it easier to do what KG is talking about in his post.

For me now, a good stat is more about denoting the areas in which you excel, rather than what your character's personality is like. For example, a Dragonborn's stat bonuses don't necessarily mean she is a leader of men or a ripped weight-lifter. They simply mean that Dragonborn tend to be more skilled Fighters, Paladins, and (Dragonblood) Sorcerers than, say, Gnomes.

And, indeed, when I am homebrewing new races, I don't think of what they are like physical, but rather in which classes I desire the race to excel.

For example, if I were to want a Tauren-like race, then I might want them to be accomplished Shamans, Druids, Fighters, and Rangers. To that vein, I would look to +2 Str and +2 Wis, since those stats would incline them towards the previous classes. This is different than the Minotaur, who uses Str and Con, and makes better straight bruisers than anything else.

Likewise, for the purposes of multiclassing, Dragonblooded Sorcerers are more apt in the ways of Fighting or Paladining (?) than a Wizard, who would make a better tactical leader or Swordmage.

I think it will be hard to get some of my old 3e players to see it this way, but players new to the game might have an easier time of dissociating their character from its sheet. Though, I suppose I will end up having to use the old terms to explain to what exactly the stats refer.

Oslecamo
2009-03-31, 07:43 AM
For me now, a good stat is more about denoting the areas in which you excel, rather than what your character's personality is like. For example, a Dragonborn's stat bonuses don't necessarily mean she is a leader of men or a ripped weight-lifter. They simply mean that Dragonborn tend to be more skilled Fighters, Paladins, and (Dragonblood) Sorcerers than, say, Gnomes.


The dragonborn still is a weight lifter and a leader of men humanoids. He naturally intimidates, diplomacy, climbs and can carry more weight than races that don't get STR and CHA bonuses.

Kurald Galain
2009-03-31, 07:53 AM
The dragonborn still is a weight lifter and a leader of men humanoids. He naturally intimidates, diplomacy, climbs and can carry more weight than races that don't get STR and CHA bonuses.
Only for individual dragonborn, and only if you want them to be.

Because, the PHB suggests you should ignore carrying limits anyway, and neither the intimidate nor the diplomacy skill has much of a relation to leadership ability. And indeed, the fluff for any setting I'm aware of does not mention dragonborn either winning a lot of weightlifting competitions, nor leading significantly more nations than other humanoids do. Sure, dragonborn can climb well, because they're friggin' big lizards, and I'm sure you've seen a lizard scurry quickly across rocks some time.

But I can also make a character who excels at weightlifting but sucks at hand-to-hand combat, because the str score is unrelated to the former; and I can make the ruler of a nation who is a crappy bard, because the cha score is unrelated to well of a leader he is. And neither has to be a dragonborn.

Reverent-One
2009-03-31, 12:14 PM
*shrugs*
While you are free to consider attribute points as some sort of affinity for class points, given that you are going against what the PHP says, it's no different than if you did so in 3.5.

OneFamiliarFace
2009-03-31, 12:18 PM
But I can also make a character who excels at weightlifting but sucks at hand-to-hand combat, because the str score is unrelated to the former; and I can make the ruler of a nation who is a crappy bard, because the cha score is unrelated to well of a leader he is. And neither has to be a dragonborn.

This exactly. Likewise, my Fighter with an Int of 8 can now be a fine weaponsmith or wheelwright or haberdasher or whatever, because these things are no longer tied to Int or Wis. Heck, he could be a scholar of Mathematics.

Essentially, I could have a group with two fighters with the exact same stats. One could be a lithe, sinewy, spear and shield wielding Troubadour who sings songs while he fights, while the other is a hulking monstrosity that swings about a greatsword as though he were beheading stone statues (which he very well may be). You could throw on a Halfling Rogue who just makes a minor switch in Dex and Str, and he might not win any weightlifting competitions, but he fights with a dirty and brutal efficiency.

Although saying all of this, Str still seems like a weird stat for the Cosmic Sorcerer. This is mostly because it makes sense to me that a Dragonblooded Sorcerer and a Fighter would use similar stats, or that a Wild Mage may share some things in common with a Rogue, but the Cosmic Mage seems more like he would fit with a cleric or other divine multiclass build than the fighter and basher types.

Reverent-One
2009-03-31, 12:37 PM
Although saying all of this, Str still seems like a weird stat for the Cosmic Sorcerer. This is mostly because it makes sense to me that a Dragonblooded Sorcerer and a Fighter would use similar stats, or that a Wild Mage may share some things in common with a Rogue, but the Cosmic Mage seems more like he would fit with a cleric or other divine multiclass build than the fighter and basher types.

Of course it is still a weird stat, because in 4e, the attribute points are still attribute points, not the "class affinity" points you want to consider them. A sorcerer channels raw power from other sources, using themselves as a conduit. Their force of will (CHA) determines the basics of what they are capable of and in the case of the cosmic sorcerer, their physical strength (STR) helps them control it, since their own bodies are the conduit of their power. But being wiser, having more common sense? That wouldn't help with that control.

Yakk
2009-03-31, 12:47 PM
You know, you can go right around the problem by saying "the arcane energy the sorcerer is channeling also happens to make the sorcerer stronger".

When the sorcerer "boosts her strength", she is actually boosting that kind of channelling of her arcane energy, which happens to boost her strength.

The New Bruceski
2009-03-31, 02:08 PM
I see charisma/strength for cosmic magic as channeling the cosmos into your enemies, using yourself as the fulcrum. Your sense of self and will allow the connection, and it's pure force to turn it where you want from its cosmic path. Constitution could be argued for somthing like this, but I don't see the issue as "how much you can endure" as much as "how much can you pull away from the stars".

Oslecamo
2009-03-31, 02:46 PM
But I can also make a character who excels at weightlifting but sucks at hand-to-hand combat, because the str score is unrelated to the former; and I can make the ruler of a nation who is a crappy bard, because the cha score is unrelated to well of a leader he is. And neither has to be a dragonborn.

Who said weightlifting had anything to do with hand-to hand combat? Of course strenght alone won't save you on that. Hand to hand combat can also be acomplished with smarts, wits, agility and/or shiny items, and heck, even the 4e wizards and warlocks are doing good hand-to hand combat nowadays. It's actually something everybody can do. But not weightlifting. You can't carry half a village's worth os loot whitout a good strenght. Sucking at something is easy.

As for the leader of a nation, my dragonborn leader will be a better leader than your nondragonborn, since he can intimidate his underlings into submission better than any other race.

Honestly, claiming that intimidate and diplomacy don't have anything to do with leadership qualities? How did you get the nation to follow you into a first place?

Yakk: Now that's a good idea. Thank you very much for making some sense on my head about the 4e sorceror.

Sebastian
2009-03-31, 03:18 PM
A Paladin using charisma is not hitting a person in their face, it is the paladins, I am bigger and badder then you scaring the will out of a person to fight. HP is not just physical health but the will to fight.


Mmh, interesting. And how that would work against, let's say, ozees, or mindless undead, or construct, that don't give a rat's ass how "bad" you are and don't have a will to fight because, well, they don't have a will at all?

Da Beast
2009-03-31, 04:27 PM
Spells dependant of strenght? Now I've seen it all.

Well the 4e paladin was hiting people in the face with charisma so I guess it's only fair the sorceror gets to make arcane blasts with his muscles.

Didn't 2E have rules for specialist wizards using other stats to cast? I think you you could have conjurers casting with their constitution and other things that were just as weird.

Edit: 3.0 psionics used every stat as a primary manifesting stat. Sure, the system as a whole was garbage, but it does show that this stuff predates 4E by a good number of years.

Kurald Galain
2009-03-31, 04:55 PM
You can't carry half a village's worth os loot whitout a good strenght.
You can't do that with a good strength, either. Oh, wait, unless you have a bag of holding. Or unless, as the PHB suggests, you waive encumbrance. Oh, guess that means carrying really is unrelated to the str attribute. Wow.



Honestly, claiming that intimidate and diplomacy don't have anything to do with leadership qualities? How did you get the nation to follow you into a first place?
If you really believe that leading a nation is that easy, how come you aren't president yet?


Didn't 2E have rules for specialist wizards using other stats to cast?
No. "Stats to cast" is pretty much a 3E invention. However, to become a specilist wizard you did need a high score (14-16, depending) in one statistic dependent on what you were specializing in. This was considered silly, which is why it was dropped in 3E.



Edit: 3.0 psionics used every stat as a primary manifesting stat.
Yes, this was also considered silly, which is why it was dropped in 3.5.

So, yeah, they're bringing something back that was proven to be ridiculous twice over in previous editions. That's pretty funny.

Doug Lampert
2009-03-31, 05:15 PM
Mmh, interesting. And how that would work against, let's say, ozees, or mindless undead, or construct, that don't give a rat's ass how "bad" you are and don't have a will to fight because, well, they don't have a will at all?
A complete list of every mindless undead in 4th ed follows.


That was easy. Now I'll do another for every Ooze or Construct without any will of its own.


Also easy.

Now, what was the alleged problem again?

Every 4th ed creature has every ability score. Mindless doesn't exist except for objects and things like plants that are treated as objects.

DougL

TheOOB
2009-03-31, 06:15 PM
Really, for NPC's ability score don't even mean anything unless an ability check comes up. A creatures attacks and defenses are based on their role and level, and doesn't follow player rules.

AgentPaper
2009-03-31, 06:18 PM
They're bringing back a concept that was good, but badly implemented. I would say they have done it pretty well this time around. I like the idea of the cosmic sorcerer linking himself to the physical force of the cosmos and planetary movement, and then grabbing that force with his bare hands and punching it into his foes.

Anyways, it's getting pretty tired of watching you pop up with every small grief you have with 4e. You don't like the system. We get it. Stop shoving that in our collective faces. :smallsigh: The PHB recommends ignoring the encumbrance rules because issues with it won't usually come up, and it tends to cause tedium. It is still there, and still dictates how much you can carry depending on your strength, but you can ignore it if it seems like it would hurt more than help.

Strength still means you're physically strong. Constitution still means you're tough as nails. Dexterity still means you have hand-eye coordination and a steady hand. Intelligence, wisdom, and charisma will still be debated to no end as to what they actually mean. They are not "class points", unless you want them to be in which case do what you will. But in the rules, they dictate, if not your personality, still your abilties. (hence the term "Ability Scores")

Da Beast
2009-03-31, 06:50 PM
Turns out pact magic from 3.5 uses constitution to cast. So now we've established that 2nd-4th editions all had some less than sensible stats for casting rules. Hooray, now we can all hold hands and sing songs in harmony.

OneFamiliarFace
2009-04-01, 02:16 AM
Of course it is still a weird stat, because in 4e, the attribute points are still attribute points, not the "class affinity" points you want to consider them.

You say this as though that is a problem. Watch: "I consider stats to be 'class affinity' points which have no relation to a character's actual physical or mental capabilities." I just did it. Because of the nature of the game, I can do pretty much whatever I want, and what I want is one of the more important things (usually top 4 or 5, next to the other players' wants) in determining how my game will go.

The reason I was saying it was a weird stat is not because I think it is weird that Cosmic Sorcerers are muscle-bound and strong. I said it was a weird stat, because this puts them in league with Fighters and Barbarians, when I usually envision the fluff they propose for the Cosmic guy to be more in line with Seers, Prophets, and Researchers (who tend to be Priests and Wizards respectively).

Either way, even assuming that the stats are related to one's physical and mental capabilities, I would still say it is better that they not. This is because I don't really care to have my players (or my characters) feel bound to play their statistics. If a Halfling Rogue with an Int of 8 wants to solve puzzles or win at chess, then I see absolutely no problem with it.

Likewise, if a Cha 8 Fighter proves that he has what it takes to be a strategic battlefield leader, then men will follow him. It doesn't matter that he can't intimidate them or diplomacize them. They follow him because he produces results (and heck, could be a really decent guy on top of that).

Or, for physical stats, if someone wants to play a Dex 18 human who is an overweight crossbow sniper with a limp, then I see no problem with saying his +4 AC and +4 Initiative come from a certain fighting style he has developed to compensate for his lack of mobility. You'll notice that you cannot make said sniper effective with a Dex 8 (to represent his leg-injury), no matter how hard you try.

So, in effect, the above solution is much simpler and easier than introducing a Skill&Powers form of flaws and half-stats to represent what the system can't (a physically average Martial Defender who uses skill instead of force, a sickly Infernal warlock, or a slow-but-sure sniper).

Kurald Galain
2009-04-01, 03:00 AM
Anyways, it's getting pretty tired of watching you pop up with every small grief you have with 4e. You don't like the system. We get it.

Hahahaha!

Nice jumping to conclusions there, but completely wrong. Have you read the 4E wizard guide in my signature lately? Is it so hard to understand that somebody might like a system while still being able to point out flaws in it?

Sebastian
2009-04-01, 03:02 PM
Turns out pact magic from 3.5 uses constitution to cast. So now we've established that 2nd-4th editions all had some less than sensible stats for casting rules. Hooray, now we can all hold hands and sing songs in harmony.

Pact magic? that would be binders, right? For what I remember binders don't really "cast", but they allow otherworldy spirits to take temporary and/or partial possession of their body and channel their powers through it. From that poinbt of view be better at it if you are though is perfectly appropriate and "realistic"

chiasaur11
2009-04-01, 07:22 PM
Hahahaha!

Nice jumping to conclusions there, but completely wrong. Have you read the 4E wizard guide in my signature lately? Is it so hard to understand that somebody might like a system while still being able to point out flaws in it?

Okay. Now you're just talking crazy person.