[4e] New Updates

[nightwyrm]

Here (http://wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateDec2009.pdf)

So they changed careful attack but not sure strike.

Footwork Lure + Polearm Momentum no longer works.

[Mando Knight]

Typo under the new statblock for Quicksilver Stance: "you can half your shift your speed" rather than the "you can shift half your speed" described in the text. :smalltongue: ...Actually, a lot of the blocks don't properly reflect the updated text. Looks like the WotC proofreader is napping on the job again. :smallsigh:

A lot of the updates this time have to do with sliding things around inordinately, something I hadn't thought of before. A cuff to the ear of the sap who found that break.

[nightwyrm]

A lot of the updates this time have to do with sliding things around inordinately, something I hadn't thought of before. A cuff to the ear of the sap who found that break.

Totally, who the heck thought that you could use footwork lure to slide someone all around the battlefield before ending up in your previous square.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Here (http://wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateDec2009.pdf)

So they changed careful attack but not sure strike.

Footwork Lure + Polearm Momentum no longer works.
I see their reason (aside from incrementalism).

Rangers are Strikers while Fighters are Defenders. Aside from having different powers, you'd want the Ranger form to do more damage.

Personally, I think Fighter Sure Strike should have a +WIS damage; less powerful than Careful Attack, but now worth taking.

[Kurald Galain]

Well...
Overall, good errata. Ironically enough, a thread started on the CharOp board after the november errata specifying "what else they should change". WOTC changed practically nothing thereof, so I take it that they disagree :smallbiggrin:


Careful attack: about time. After the fix it's still not top-notch, but at least it's viable.

Unbalancing parry: wow, interpreting "slide an enemy adjacent to you" as "slide the enemy 100 squares all over the battlefield as long as it ends adjacent" is completely ridiculous. Anyway, loophole closed.

Battle mage: good change, but doesn't make the PP any less mediocre.

Healer's sash: good idea, healing is a leader thing.

Footwork lure: that's stupid, they forgot to take reach weapons into account when writing the errata.

Quicksilver stance: so they errata'ed the previous errata. Good.

Visions of avarice: it esssentially requries two minor actions to sustain it now; that makes the power rather impractical.

Quickened spellcasting: another silly loophole closed.

Fleeting dweomer: ah, charop was all over this one. Predictable but good to have.

Claw fighter: now it's finally useful rather than mostly flavor.

Grasp of the Grave: wow, this one finally gets fixed. That's probably one of the most awaited fixes.

Sacrifice to Caiphon: I was not aware that this was old errata, perhaps it was a stealth one? Of course it should be warlock only to prevent MC cheese.

And, in the section on the Eberron Player's Guide, I think we have the first unambiguously official confirmation that the staff is really a one-handed implement. Strange place to put it, though.

[Jack_Banzai]

Here (http://wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateDec2009.pdf)

So they changed careful attack but not sure strike.

Footwork Lure + Polearm Momentum no longer works.

If you leave out "www." in the address, most wizards.com links don't work properly for several browsers. The correct link is here:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateDec2009.pdf

[gman]

As far as I understand it, by RAW, a Battle Mage's Arcane Riposte doesn't get any enhancement bonus to attack or damage, or any proficiency bonus. So even using INT at 11th level it's 5 points below par in terms of attack bonuses. By 30th it's 8 points below and pretty much misses everything. It should be written up as an At-will power and given the implement keyword, and either be an INT+2 vs AC or an INT vs REF attack, in my opinion.

[Yakk]

And they screwed up the description of the "super quarterstaff": the main head is defensive, but the defensive property only works on off-hand weapons. :) Hopefully that error won't propagate into DDI.

[Mando Knight]

And they screwed up the description of the "super quarterstaff": the main head is defensive, but the defensive property only works on off-hand weapons. :) Hopefully that error won't propagate into DDI.

Defensive works in the main hand. It just requires that you have two weapons, and the only non-double defensive weapon is the Parrying Dagger, which only a fool would use as his main weapon.

Also, the updated quarterstaff is roughly the same as a Double Flail, just cheaper unenchanted and compatible with staff-type things.

[AllisterH]

I'm of two minds.

1. I'm glad that WOTC is taking responsibility for its game.

2. WHY the hell didn't WOTC do the same for 3.X!!! ("Why yes Virginia there is a Santa Claus and, I'm a strange little man who plays both 3.x and 4e")

[Mando Knight]

1. I'm glad that WOTC is taking responsibility for its game.
Most everyone who plays 4e is.

2. WHY the hell didn't WOTC do the same for 3.X!!!
No one knows. Perhaps WotC was just trying to get the feel for writing RPG rules for a good half-decade before being serious about correcting flaws in the rules. Perhaps they thought that it would be worse to retract their rulings all the time than it would be to have horrible, unintentional breaks in the game. Perhaps they just didn't care. Perhaps they hated us before 2008. Perhaps the Elder Ones corrupted the playtesters' and editors' minds during 3.X's run, and their unholy tentacled grasp was only broken when WotC decided to try a new edition.

[Kurald Galain]

Most everyone who plays 4e is.

'cept the ones bemoaning their nerfed bloodclaw :smallbiggrin:

[Hashmir]

No one knows. Perhaps WotC was just trying to get the feel for writing RPG rules for a good half-decade before being serious about correcting flaws in the rules. Perhaps they thought that it would be worse to retract their rulings all the time than it would be to have horrible, unintentional breaks in the game. Perhaps they just didn't care. Perhaps they hated us before 2008. Perhaps the Elder Ones corrupted the playtesters' and editors' minds during 3.X's run, and their unholy tentacled grasp was only broken when WotC decided to try a new edition.

I think the Character Builder has something to do with it. Unlike in 3.5e, there is now a single, specific place where everything is arranged meaningfully and without redundancy, and where everything is always up-to-date right there.

* Please note that I'm not just extolling the virtues of the CB; it's still got plenty of issues. I'm just saying that I think its existence is why WotC feels comfortable releasing frequent errata.

[Colmarr]

Hmm, should I assume from the fact that nothing I have taken for my 8th level battle cleric has ever been erratad that I'm not trying hard enough? :smallsmile:

[RebelRogue]

2. WHY the hell didn't WOTC do the same for 3.X!!! ("Why yes Virginia there is a Santa Claus and, I'm a strange little man who plays both 3.x and 4e")
Probably because the game was already broken beyond belief at the time they realized this (and really, there's no easy fixes for 3.5, at least I've never seen any) the obvious solution would be to redesign the game from scratch. Which is exactly what they did (like it or not).

[TheEmerged]

I think the Character Builder has something to do with it. Unlike in 3.5e, there is now a single, specific place where everything is arranged meaningfully and without redundancy, and where everything is always up-to-date right there.

Please note that I'm not just extolling the virtues of the CB; it's still got plenty of issues. I'm just saying that I think its existence is why WotC feels comfortable releasing frequent errata.

Yeah, I think you're right here.

As for Careful Strike, I *love* it when something I was doing as a house rule becomes official :smallbiggrin:

As for the CB, my main complaint with it continues to be the fact that it doesn't update the power cards to reflect a lot of feats (key example: Pacifist Healer).

[cupkeyk]

yay, my footwork lure/polearm momentum with a greatspear still works!

[nightwyrm]

yay, my footwork lure/polearm momentum with a greatspear still works!

No it doesn't. Not unless you've got Rushing Cleats or Polearm Master PP or something that lets you increase the number of squares you can slide an enemy.

[Angelmaker]

No it doesn't. Not unless you've got Rushing Cleats or Polearm Master PP or something that lets you increase the number of squares you can slide an enemy.

The "Controlling" property from adventurers vault would work, would it? I am using that on my fighter.

[cupkeyk]

I have the cleats btw...

no controlling adds +1 to push or pull; you are thinking of staggering, +1 slide.