PDA

View Full Version : Artist's Interpration of the 4ed Wizard



Dhavaer
2007-12-16, 02:00 AM
Well, not so much 'artist's' interpretation, but what I think it might end up looking like (and how I hope it might end up looking like).

Basically, a combination of the Warlock, the Binder and the Wizard. Wizards will get three types of magical abilities: Invocations, Spells and Workings.

Invocations come in two types: activated and always-on. Activated invocations are usable 1/round, and normally take a Standard or Full Round action to activate. Most of them are single target offensive abilities, but some utility abilites are invocations. Examples of these are eldritch blast and prestidigitation. Always-on invocations are buffs and almost always personal, although some provide benefits to allies within a small radius from you. Examples are endure elements and see invisibility.

Spells are usable 1/5 rounds, and normally take a Full Round Action or 1 Round to cast. Spells are mostly multiple target buffs or debuffs, multiple target offensive or single-target removal abilities, although many utility abilities also fall into this category. Many spells are multiple use: they can have one of several differing effects at the option of the caster. An example is temporal manipulation: at lower levels it gives a haste or slow effect to a single target, at mid levels it gives a haste or slow effect to multiple targets, and at high levels it produces both effects; the wizard hastes their allies while slowing their enemies.

Workings are usable 1/hour at most, although most cannot be used this often. They take at least 1 Round to cast. Workings are mostly utility spells, but some very powerful combat spells fall into this category. Workings are distinguished by having disadvantages such as expensive components, negative status effects or backlash damage. Examples of workings are scrying and obliterate, a high level working that inflicts are large amount of many types of damage, but drains the cast utterly, preventing them from using magical abilities or several days after casting.

As in previous editions, Wizards have both prepared abilities and a spellbook. However, the spellbook is not required to refresh abilities already prepared. The spellbook is used when the Wizard wishes to change prepared abilities, a process requiring hours of rest and study.

Behold_the_Void
2007-12-16, 02:42 AM
If such is the case, then what is the Warlock going to be like?

Dhavaer
2007-12-16, 02:46 AM
If such is the case, then what is the Warlock going to be like?

I wouldn't have a clue.

Xefas
2007-12-16, 02:51 AM
Personally, I think it looks like the Warlock is going to assimilate the Binder, since they've alluded to making pacts with things.

The Wizard looks to have devoured the Truenamer and whatever the shadow-casters were called. Obviously the fluff would be different, but the mechanics would be similar. Truenaming, for instance, is infinite, but requires increasingly high checks and is weak.

Suzuro
2007-12-16, 02:52 AM
Is it just me, or does this make Wizards even more powerful? I mean, the major drawback of a wizard is the fact that they can run out of spells during the day, with this, though, they never run out, and can constantly use their most powerful abilities.


-Suzuro

Dhavaer
2007-12-16, 03:01 AM
Is it just me, or does this make Wizards even more powerful? I mean, the major drawback of a wizard is the fact that they can run out of spells during the day, with this, though, they never run out, and can constantly use their most powerful abilities.


-Suzuro

They can't constantly use their most powerful abilities. They can use, in a long fight, two spells. Workings mostly aren't combat related, and things like obliterate aren't what you'd want to use every fight.

Fuzzy_Juan
2007-12-16, 04:37 AM
hmm...since it seems like WoW is a big inspiration...perhaps warlock will be something akin to that...plenty of debuffs, necromancy spells, lifestealing, demonic pacts and summons...oooh....infernal familiars...talents that allow you to upgrade your familiar to something more powerful...fun.

could be fun...more limited than the mage, but plenty of wierd effects that noone else can do...and a happy fun demon pet. :smallbiggrin:

UserClone
2007-12-16, 06:25 AM
...The Wizard looks to have devoured the Truenamer and whatever the shadow-casters were called...

Ironically, the Shadowcaster.

Lyinginbedmon
2007-12-16, 06:48 AM
I'm still of the opinion that the "6-shot revolver mage" problem was eliminated the second that Reserve feats were published. The only change necessary would be to make some Reserve feats Core material and add them to the list of Wizard bonus feats. Then they can blame poor character creation if a Wizard runs out of spells in a dungeon crawl, not the game itself.

Swooper
2007-12-16, 11:59 AM
Sounds pretty interesting. Do you have any idea what the limits of their ability selection will be? Just the capacity of their spellbook and their funds, or will there be a hard cap on the number of spells/invocations/workings they can know per level? Also, do you know anything about how they will be ordered into power-levels? Because I heard a rumour (on a developer's blog sometime) about 25 levels of spells.

Finally, what's your source for this information? The new book, Races and Classes? Or some post over on wizards.com?

Morty
2007-12-16, 12:03 PM
Blech. With every new thing I hear, 4ed wizards look worse. They removed Vancian spellcasting, gave them "foci" they're dependent on and it looks like wizards will be relegated to the role of fireball tossers. Also, I heard metnions of wizard's "powers". Given that they use the word "powers" when referring to warriors' abilities, it doesn't sound promising.

jameswilliamogle
2007-12-16, 12:28 PM
Personally, I think it looks like the Warlock is going to assimilate the Binder, since they've alluded to making pacts with things.And the Incarnum-classes. They're pretty mechanically different, but the flavor is so close. Might as well, neh?

I think you are probably right about Wizards absorbing Truenamers. Honestly, Truenamers barely work in current games. Might as well, ya know? I think they also might get some of the Archivist Dark Knowledge type abilities. WotC already started putting similar abilities into feats in CChamp, for example.

I hope they get rid of the golden cow of alignment. It just doesn't feel right.

psychoticbarber
2007-12-16, 12:41 PM
Blech. With every new thing I hear, 4ed wizards look worse. They removed Vancian spellcasting, gave them "foci" they're dependent on and it looks like wizards will be relegated to the role of fireball tossers. Also, I heard metnions of wizard's "powers". Given that they use the word "powers" when referring to warriors' abilities, it doesn't sound promising.

They've said that they mean "powers" to be "whatever funky things the character class can do". Warriors are still going to hit things, spellcasters are still going to cast spells.

Citizen Joe
2007-12-16, 12:48 PM
I think they might be combining most of the magic using classes. So a wizard may have fewer 'spells' but would get a 'zappy' power ( probably using a focus, like a wand) that is similar to the warlock's eldritch blast.

There was talk about fighters being more specialized in their weapons. So I could see wizards favouring one aspect or the other. So maybe forego more prepared spell ability for better 'Blastiness' or making pacts with entities to gain other powers. I think that might be a bit WoW ish... where you have 3 different paths for each class. You could be moderately good at all three, but if you want to be really good you have to specialize. <sarcasm>Woohoo... yea, let's make DND just like WoW!</sarcasm>

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 12:54 PM
I really dread 4e

I've seen problems for a long time in 3e WotC I mean..ToB, Reserve Feats, Warlock (I really don't like them), and other such All the time i'm powerful stuff. I hate it. I can't help myself.

I like a Draining effect on your day's Resorces. And if as a DM i want the party to only be at half capasity and they are all Warlocks and ToB classes. The I'm SOL always as powerful as they are at the start of the day.

4e erks me..okay?

Morty
2007-12-16, 12:54 PM
They've said that they mean "powers" to be "whatever funky things the character class can do". Warriors are still going to hit things, spellcasters are still going to cast spells.

It's not what I mean. What I mean is, it looks like wizard's spells will be gained just like fighter's new ways to hit stuff- which means that wizards lose thieir variety and versatility that was the point of this class.
And I really, really, don't understand what's so dreadful about wizards running out of spells.

bingo_bob
2007-12-16, 01:27 PM
I think my only problem with this is the fact that the Warlock is apparently stealing the Binder's stuff. I just can't imagine that flavor of the Binder showing through if that's the case, and it's too good to just abandon. (Loss of PrCs is regrettable, too).

I don't have a problem with the changes to the Wizard. It doesn't seem like the changes will be bringing the class's power level below that of the other classes.

True, resource management is somewhat gone, now, but not too badly. Wizards and Clerics aren't too much weaker with half their spells gone than with full power. Their power level only really changes when they're dredging spells from the bottom of the barrel, and honestly, how often does that happen? True, you can put them in circumstances that involve that, but you can only do that so often.

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-16, 02:12 PM
I personally like the lack of resource management. That's one reason I liked ToB and why I like Warlock and Binder (amongst a few others). Why should the wizard not be able to use his magic consistently? Sure, everyone needs rest, but not to make magic, just for fatigue. With this you can actually have sieges and battles that last for weeks and never stop.

Ranthog
2007-12-16, 02:15 PM
Actually in the games I've been in even at 13th+ level I've had to dredge the bottom of the barrel for characters because as a wizard I have some utility spell and other things. Like real life, we've often had time constraints on our goals at times when it makes sense in characterly. Not to mention it provides the choice between wasting spells and getting through something or risking total defeat early on.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 02:17 PM
resource management is to me what seperates low level chartiors from high level charitors. A level 20 charitor can go for a LONG LONG time and still have nukes. a low level charitor has to much more careful with the big guns. If all you use is big guns (as in ToB and such) you will be more likly to be a one trick pony.

then again when I first saw the sorc..i was urked at the amount of magic. And None of the Gods of my world give anything but healing spells to clerics...

so...erm....there is alot of things I don't allow. and if i keep that stick up my butt (yes...yes I am a Druid/Paladin) then 4e isn't looking playable.

Xefas
2007-12-16, 02:34 PM
Everything

You're a psychopath, if you don't mind me saying.

Anyway, I'm interested to see how they change around the encounters/day formula, if everyone is going to be getting a few consistent abilities. Which reminds me, have they said anything about Challenge Rating? Keeping it? Changing it? Anything?

Lyinginbedmon
2007-12-16, 02:37 PM
Ah yes, "encounter/day" I'd forgotten about that idea.

HORRIBLE IDEA! The last thing I need is a spellcaster character who can use fireball or disintegrate effects without fail every encounter.

kamikasei
2007-12-16, 02:37 PM
resource management is to me what seperates low level chartiors from high level charitors. A level 20 charitor can go for a LONG LONG time and still have nukes. a low level charitor has to much more careful with the big guns. If all you use is big guns (as in ToB and such) you will be more likly to be a one trick pony.

That sounds... very strange.

If all a class had was one powerful ability that it could use every round of every day, then yeah, it'd be a one-trick pony. If it has several abilities it can use as the situation demands without fear of running out before the next combat, how does that make it a one-trick pony? I mean, a Fighter can attack, attempt to grapple, bull rush, trip etc., all day; and to the extent you'd call a Fighter a one-trick pony it's because he has to focus on one particular action with feats, items etc. to make it effective.

Seriously, if your mental model of a thing (ToB makes classes one-trick ponies!) doesn't match the experience of people using it (ToB gives you varied and interesting combat!), it might indicate you should revise the model.

It sounds as though you see ToB, warlocks, etc as giving classes highly powerful things they can do all day, on par with limited spells. This isn't so. Because they can do them all day, they're toned down considerably. A warlock's eldritch blast, for example, is only about as much damage as a sneak attack, which a rogue can do about as often.

I should also point out that, while a 20th-level caster can do much more than a 1st-level one, he's still expected to face as many encounters in a day. Those extra spells are supposed to go to day-long and/or pre-combat buffs, removing and countering higher-level effects that require magic and therefore don't crop up at low levels, and being used a) more quickly once you have the option to Quicken spells and b) over longer, more drawn-out combats. And in any case, both casters are going to want to rest and recover once they're past a certain point.


Ah yes, "encounter/day" I'd forgotten about that idea.

Xefas said "the encounter/day formula", as in "the party should face four encounters of their level in a day's adventuring". This is distinct from the concept of per-encounter and per-day abilities.


HORRIBLE IDEA! The last thing I need is a spellcaster character who can use fireball or disintegrate effects without fail every encounter.

Perhaps such effect will be per-day, while the new version of eldritch blast will be per-round and something else - on par with a team buff or status effect, perhaps - will occupy the per-encounter slot.


Which reminds me, have they said anything about Challenge Rating? Keeping it? Changing it? Anything?

Well, they have talked about how they're going to have monsters balanced for use against parties of a given level, with most being used one-monster-per-party, while others are intended to be sent as mobs of cannon fodder and others taking on half or all the party on their own. This all implies that a given monster must still have a "This creature is intended for 13th-level parties, aggressor discretion is advised" label.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 02:45 PM
ToB turns has the ability to give you some Semi-Magical stuff to your Martial charitor. that alone urks me. but it makes it so you can do it again and again in the same Battle, and that once an encounter stuff makes you think 'hey it's gone he won't do it again' but it happens. again, and again, and again, Recovery is a real problem. I think in 4e as far as I can see. Fireball will the just the same.
that disturbs me greatly. Afterall, Like i said. I don't like the Sorce for it's Large amounts of Spells per Day. and I simply won't allow them.

ToB is like a Sorc..add the Crack. me no likey

kamikasei
2007-12-16, 03:00 PM
ToB turns has the ability to give you some Semi-Magical stuff to your Martial charitor.

For the most part it's not very magical at all. This has been done to death on these forums, but look: I'm playing a ToB character now, a Warblade, and I planned out maneuver selections before I started play. I went almost entirely Diamond Mind / Iron Heart, two strong disciplines, and I picked what seemed to me good, solid abilities that would make me an effective fighter and complement one another well while covering weaknesses. Pretty much every single one is: "You swing your sword, ..." generally resulting in dealing extra damage or attacking extra targets. One of them involves chucking your weapon at a foe and having it return to your hand, and I'm considering dropping that because it would look silly.

Crusaders can have supernatural abilities, just like a Paladin does. Swordsages can have supernatural abilities, just like a Monk/Shadowdancer/Ninja... does.


that alone urks me. but it makes it so you can do it again and again in the same Battle, and that once an encounter stuff makes you think 'hey it's gone he won't do it again' but it happens. again, and again, and again,

I'm sorry, but who's the "you" here? The DM? If the DM can't keep in mind that an ability is per-encounter and not per-day, that's a lapse that's surely indicative of larger problems.

Seriously: if a Fighter can Power Attack every turn or Trip every second one, why shouldn't a Warblade use Sapphire Nightmare Blade or Steel Wind every other round (the most frequently that he could)?


ToB is like a Sorc..add the Crack. me no likey

It's more like a Sorceror... who is actually a Fighter with a varied selection of moves... none of which are anywhere near as powerful as a spell of the same level.

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-16, 03:06 PM
ToB turns has the ability to give you some Semi-Magical stuff to your Martial charitor. that alone urks me. but it makes it so you can do it again and again in the same Battle, and that once an encounter stuff makes you think 'hey it's gone he won't do it again' but it happens. again, and again, and again, Recovery is a real problem. I think in 4e as far as I can see. Fireball will the just the same.
that disturbs me greatly. Afterall, Like i said. I don't like the Sorce for it's Large amounts of Spells per Day. and I simply won't allow them.

ToB is like a Sorc..add the Crack. me no likey

The semi-magical stuff you speak of is limited to one class, and it doesn't have to do that. And you can always change the flavor. Teleport through shadows? I have the training to dash through shadows so as to not be seen and thereby ignore AoOs! Deal fire damage with my weapon? I coat my weapons in a flammable substance and light it, but I have to prepare it so I only do it once an encounter or I have to waste time during the encounter. The recovery mechanic makes lots of sense to me. I'm a warrior who knows a number of fancy maneuvers, I'm going to use them as much as I can because it is an advantage. However, I need to step back every once in a while to reevaluate the situation (regaining the maneuvers).

I highly doubt Fireball or any spell is going to be exactly the same. per encounter and at will spells are going to be weaker, but just as useful because you can use them without fear of losing them. Someone who has devoted their life to magic better be able to do a lot with it, not just cast a few spells a day, its too artificial.

I think your problem is that you're looking purely at the crunch and not the fluff and realism.

Morty
2007-12-16, 03:07 PM
Someone who has devoted their life to magic better be able to do a lot with it, not just cast a few spells a day, its too artificial.

Why? Why it is too artifical? Seriously, what's so wrong about wizard not chunking spells around like candy?


I think your problem is that you're looking purely at the crunch and not the fluff and realism.

It doesn't matter, as there's nothing wrong fluff-wise or realism-wise with wizards having limited spells/day.

mostlyharmful
2007-12-16, 03:08 PM
It seems a pretty good attepmt to solve the two biggest problems of using the wizard (aside from the power ratios which would need in game testing before I can comment)

1. Nova - with time lags on castings of more powerful stuff the sudden blasting of quickened spells, immediate spells, pamiliar loaned spells, etc... this is the one at the heart of much of the wizards overbearing tendancies, to be able to spend spell slots to get more actions into a round in essence. Having to wait 5 rounds before firing off anouther spell of mid to high level would curtail that immensely

2. Burn-Out - beyound the low levels the only thing that really stops magic empowered groups is running low on slots, it's not very interesting and it can make pacing hard, not to mention that anytime the group isn't on a tight schedule the casters will take a break after every major spell burn and be able to nova the next one

So, here's hoping the new version puts the Mage back into a team dynamic instead of being either overpowered or burned-out which seems almost the binary state of 3.5 Arcarnists.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 03:09 PM
Seriously: if a Fighter can Power Attack every turn or Trip every second one, why shouldn't a Warblade use Sapphire Nightmare Blade or Steel Wind every other round (the most frequently that he could)?

Yes, but Power Attack requires you loose attack bonus and both of those cast one of the feats. SwordSages get soo much with their stances and Manuvers it's just gets stupid

I have playtested the ToB classes, and as my campaigns were the fighters were able to take down spellcasters before it's introduction, this just made it worse, this is reminding me of when 2e came out with the skills and options book and I saw a single fighter take down 90% of the underdark without being able to be stoped.

to make a long story short I don't like ToB and anyone playing in my games will not be playing one of them anytime soon.

i'm sorry if you like the flavor I can't stand it and 4e is looking to make everyone into Goku and such.

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-16, 03:27 PM
Why? Why it is too artifical? Seriously, what's so wrong about wizard not chunking spells around like candy?
Not so much at the high levels, but at the low and medium levels. To truly participate in battles they need to cast spells every round, or every other round at least. You just can't keep that up in the longer battles and they become useless after awhile and need to rest. A wizard should be able to use magic like a fighter swings a sword, almost constantly because its what he is trained to do. The whole remember a spell and you can cast it once is just too artificial to me. Sure they've explained that "its the nature of magic". I just don't like it.



It doesn't matter, as there's nothing wrong fluff-wise or realism-wise with wizards having limited spells/day.
As I said above, the whole forgetting a spell after one casting and memorizing the same spell multiple times? That is just stupid.
[hr]

Yes, but Power Attack requires you loose attack bonus and both of those cast one of the feats. SwordSages get soo much with their stances and Manuvers it's just gets stupid
Firstly, you can trip without a feat. And you can trip very well without a feat if you know what you're doing. Swordsages get a larger variety, but less uses than any of the other classes in ToB. And though their stances are good, its just not enough. Swordsages are meant to be more effects, not damage and that's what happens, a Barb still out damages all the ToB classes.


I have playtested the ToB classes, and as my campaigns were the fighters were able to take down spellcasters before it's introduction, this just made it worse, this is reminding me of when 2e came out with the skills and options book and I saw a single fighter take down 90% of the underdark without being able to be stoped.
The problem with fighters is that they are boring, one-trick ponies. The ToB classes actually can do multiple things, though not as well as the fighter's single ability.If a fighter is facing stuff that he is built to fight, he'll win all the time, but that's all he can do. You can't surprise a fighter with something vastly different and expect him to be useful. With ToB classes, they can take variety, but don't spec against a single type of enemy to pwn.

Morty
2007-12-16, 03:34 PM
Not so much at the high levels, but at the low and medium levels. To truly participate in battles they need to cast spells every round, or every other round at least. You just can't keep that up in the longer battles and they become useless after awhile and need to rest.

That's why some kind of quick blast ability in addition to normal spells is required. But not complete overhaul of magic system.


A wizard should be able to use magic like a fighter swings a sword, almost constantly because its what he is trained to do.

Err... umm... what? Really, it doesn't make much sense. Wizard shouldn't cast spells with the same ease as fighter swings sword, because by casting spell, wizard is bending the laws of physics etc. It's supposed to be much more consuming and difficult than swinging a weapon.


The whole remember a spell and you can cast it once is just too artificial to me. Sure they've explained that "its the nature of magic". I just don't like it.

As I said above, the whole forgetting a spell after one casting and memorizing the same spell multiple times? That is just stupid.

"Memorizing"? "Remembering"? Wizards don't memorize or remember spells, they prepare them, which is a difference if you just have to pay attention to semantics. The way I see it, casting a spell actually takes long, so wizards prepare spells to cast them quickly later.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 03:36 PM
Once per Encounter turns into all the freakin' time out of Encounter..you realize that?

Lord T, I respect you I really do, I like your work. But ToB does more then give more dimition to the Fighter, the fighter is Iconic, Camaron, Lancealot, to name two, non-mystical warriors. You could use ToB to do that but it just doesn't feel right. The ToB feels very cartoony and not at all what I like about D&D if i want Cartoons i'll go watch Cartoons.

I just knew if I said what I thought about ToB i would open a can of worms but that is what I get for having a stone outlook on something

kamikasei
2007-12-16, 03:43 PM
SwordSages get soo much with their stances and Manuvers it's just gets stupid

This seems at odds with your earlier claim that the book made for one-trick ponies; now you just don't like that they can have a large number of options?


I have playtested the ToB classes, and as my campaigns were the fighters were able to take down spellcasters before it's introduction, this just made it worse,

From what you said earlier, your campaign is quite houseruled to advantage melee characters. I would suggest this may not have been a fair playtest. I would also be curious to know specifically how ToB classes outperformed Fighters in your experience. "They could do so much" isn't very meaningful unless "Mystic Theurges are so much more powerful than Wizards because they have more spells" seems compelling to you.


to make a long story short I don't like ToB and anyone playing in my games will not be playing one of them anytime soon.

You're under no obligation to like ToB, but I take issue with your arguments that it's actually bad or that things resembling it in 4e will necessarily be bad. For the most obvious example, it's very strange to argue that Wizards shouldn't be given (as-yet-unseen and therefore impossible to claim as definitely unbalanced) per-encounter abilities because in the hands of melee classes they seem too much like magic. In the hands of Wizards they are magic, so what's the problem?


i'm sorry if you like the flavor I can't stand it and 4e is looking to make everyone into Goku and such.

I didn't say anything about flavour; I pointed out that neither the description nor the effect of a great many maneuvers, enough to quite naturally build a character with, were magical or supernatural. That's simply mechanics. Not to mention that you've been arguing about the mechanics of giving characters at-will or per-encounter abilities, not the flavour of that. And to be honest, bringing up Goku is just weird; it strikes me as a comparison born of ignorance of both components, ToB and anime generally.


Once per Encounter turns into all the freakin' time out of Encounter..you realize that?

What a terrible problem it will be if a Warblade can attack two enemies at once while not fighting anyone, or the Wizard can blast things with magical energy all day long while not, y'know, having anything in particular to bother blasting.

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-16, 03:57 PM
Once per Encounter turns into all the freakin' time out of Encounter..you realize that?
Yep, and its never been a problem. The maneuvers are only useful in combat save 1, the stone dragon maneuver that ignores hardness and DR. But I don't mind because adamantine is just too expensive and if I don't want my players getting through something, I'll use something else. Oh, and if you're about to say Moment of Perfect Mind and its ilk, they do not work outside combat as is a the nature of immediate actions.


Lord T, I respect you I really do, I like your work. But ToB does more then give more dimition to the Fighter, the fighter is Iconic, Camaron, Lancealot, to name two, non-mystical warriors. You could use ToB to do that but it just doesn't feel right. The ToB feels very cartoony and not at all what I like about D&D if i want Cartoons i'll go watch Cartoons.
First off, thanks for the complement. I greatly respect this community and its members because we can have discussions such as this as debates, not attacks. You have your opinions, and I have mine and seeing as neither has yet swayed, neither shall and this debate is ended (for me at least). I personally, feel that ToB adds more realism to the game and the fighter is a joke. I have never understood how people feel ToB has an anime or cartoony feel, but then again, I only watch one such show (I bet you can guess which one it is).


I just knew if I said what I thought about ToB i would open a can of worms but that is what I get for having a stone outlook on something
Yes it is :smalltongue:
Thanks for the friendly debate :smallbiggrin:
[hr]

That's why some kind of quick blast ability in addition to normal spells is required. But not complete overhaul of magic system.
That's fine, as long as it shows constant, albeit limited, magical ability.


Err... umm... what? Really, it doesn't make much sense. Wizard shouldn't cast spells with the same ease as fighter swings sword, because by casting spell, wizard is bending the laws of physics etc. It's supposed to be much more consuming and difficult than swinging a weapon.
Well, I didn't say it just right. Not exactly as easy as a fighter swings a sword, but he should be able to use his magic consistently and constantly (as in every few rounds or something). That's just how I like my spellcasters.


"Memorizing"? "Remembering"? Wizards don't memorize or remember spells, they prepare them, which is a difference if you just have to pay attention to semantics. The way I see it, casting a spell actually takes long, so wizards prepare spells to cast them quickly later.
I always heard that preparing was memorizing. Sure, I can see the preparing thing for stuff that requires material components, but the verbal and somatic only? I just don't see what preparation is needed. If a wizard lives by his magic, he should have a least a few spells up his sleeve that he can use whenever needed for backup at least.

Morty
2007-12-16, 04:04 PM
That's fine, as long as it shows constant, albeit limited, magical ability.

I don't really think magical ability should be "constant". For me, fighters should be constant, but wizards should be more limited as to what and when they can do. That's one of the things that sets casters and non-casters apart.


Well, I didn't say it just right. Not exactly as easy as a fighter swings a sword, but he should be able to use his magic consistently and constantly (as in every few rounds or something). That's just how I like my spellcasters.

Then it's just a matter of taste, really. I prefer when spellcasters have to actually put effort into spellcasting, rather than sling spells around.


I always heard that preparing was memorizing. Sure, I can see the preparing thing for stuff that requires material components, but the verbal and somatic only? I just don't see what preparation is needed. If a wizard lives by his magic, he should have a least a few spells up his sleeve that he can use whenever needed for backup at least.

Few spells, yeah. Not the whole arsenal of 'em. And by "living by magic" wizard gets the ability to cast wide array of spells, which is already preety big thing. And from what I recall, preparing spells is described as "storing" them insinde caster's mind, ready to be fired off. Though I can't quite remember where I found it, so I may as well made it up myself.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 04:05 PM
Yep, and its never been a problem. The maneuvers are only useful in combat save 1, the stone dragon maneuver that ignores hardness and DR. But I don't mind because adamantine is just too expensive and if I don't want my players getting through something, I'll use something else. Oh, and if you're about to say Moment of Perfect Mind and its ilk, they do not work outside combat as is a the nature of immediate actions.

Acually i was thinking of the Crusader's um..Devoted Spirit stuff, what stops them from just hitting a rock till the whole party is full hp. ya know? it was one of the stances.

and if they plan the 4e wizard, or worse the cleric to be like that i'm pretty scared. you can see my fear can't you?

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-16, 04:13 PM
Acually i was thinking of the Crusader's um..Devoted Spirit stuff, what stops them from just hitting a rock till the whole party is full hp. ya know? it was one of the stances.

This seems to be a common misconception that requires clarification. All maneuvers that heal have the following as the first line in their description:
"As part of initializing this strike, you must make a successful melee attack against an enemy creature whose alignment has at least one component different from yours."
Firstly, it needs to be an "enemy creature", meaning a living thing that threatens you (i.e. hostile). Secondly, it has to have an opposite alignment. No swinging at rocks or dogs or innocent peasants.

NEO|Phyte
2007-12-16, 04:16 PM
This seems to be a common misconception that requires clarification. All maneuvers that heal have the following as the first line in their description:
"As part of initializing this strike, you must make a successful melee attack against an enemy creature whose alignment has at least one component different from yours."
Firstly, it needs to be an "enemy creature", meaning a living thing that threatens you (i.e. hostile). Secondly, it has to have an opposite alignment. No swinging at rocks or dogs or innocent peasants.

Unless there's been Eratta, the level 1 stance requires only a successful melee attack.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 04:18 PM
A rock is TN, and it might not like you....like..sitting on it...

Crusader: Lo, tis a rock...KILL IT! *proceeds to heal the party*

sadly...I can see such messed up cheese..

also the wording makes it so a party memeber can spar with you after each match to make everyone in the party all better...includeing himself afterward..sense you are clearly sparing with another memeber

Battle makes the whole party stronger...just doesn't have the realism you are saying it does.


P.S. there is that level 1 stance..as my freind ^ said.

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-16, 04:31 PM
Unless there's been Eratta, the level 1 stance requires only a successful melee attack.

Oh, yes that stance. I houserule it to work only against enemies. A sparring partner is an opponent, not enemy. Just like many spells and feats need some houseruling, a few maneuvers do as well. Though not very many.

@ Tialait: A TN alignment is not the opposite of anything, thus the healing effects don't work save the stance one, but that's still a big stretch to fight a rock that isn't fighting you.

Also, remember that the healing just doesn't match the amount of damage taken, it only prolongs the characters' lives a bit. Also, HP represents morale as well as physical damage. The healing strikes just boost morale.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 04:35 PM
I've seen the abuse the whole ToB can give, the least realistic one i've seen is the I think Blazing Wind or something...it annoyed me almost as much as the devoted spirit. flaming blades and such. Very powerful. i've seen like them going super nova, everyone keeps saying it's just 'swing your sword harder' and such but I see that as very Z fighter like. It annoys me so.

Mountain W/E it is has a few problems, Con damage without save. Even a Wizard can't do that.

when the swordsage or w/e is not only outshineing the fighter, but also the wizard we have problems.

Mewtarthio
2007-12-16, 04:45 PM
Once per Encounter turns into all the freakin' time out of Encounter..you realize that?

I'm assuming that most utility spells will be tied to the per-day mechanic ("workings," to use the OP's term). Healing and such seems to be written in such a way that you can only use it in combat (eg You must strike an enemy, where "enemy" is defined as "creature that poses a threat to you and actively desires physical harm upon you").

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 04:48 PM
sooo the after combat heal from the cleric and Reserection will be out...wow..that sounds interesting, ...or is taht to be a per day thing?

I don't know..but if it's eather 'at will' or 'per day' it scares me..

again not a fan of non-Vatican style casting

Reel On, Love
2007-12-16, 04:49 PM
I've seen the abuse the whole ToB can give, the least realistic one i've seen is the I think Blazing Wind or something...it annoyed me almost as much as the devoted spirit. flaming blades and such. Very powerful. i've seen like them going super nova, everyone keeps saying it's just 'swing your sword harder' and such but I see that as very Z fighter like. It annoys me so.
Sigh. Could you at least make an effort to read what you're talking about before you dismiss it?

First of all, only the Swordsage gets Desert Wind. The Swordsage has arcane flavor--check out the item identification they get at level 7. They're magical dudes doing magical things, if they pick Desert Wind... those fire maneuvers? They're Supernatural.

More importantly? Desert Wind is the weakest school. Everything and its mother becomes resistant or immune to fire damage. "Super nova?" Desert Wind maneuvers tend to do low damage for their level. The 9th level maneuver is a Ref-half 100-damage burst of fire. Do you have any idea of how lame that is at level 17?


Mountain W/E it is has a few problems, Con damage without save. Even a Wizard can't do that.
Stone Dragon maneuvers suck because you have to be standing on the ground to use them. At higher levels you want to be flying.
And everyone can do CON damage without a save (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#wounding) with a Wounding weapon. What's more, screw CON damage: wizards can impose negative levels (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/enervation.htm) with no save, which is a lot scarier.



when the swordsage or w/e is not only outshineing the fighter, but also the wizard we have problems.
If your swordsage is outshining your wizard, you have a problem... and that problem is an incompetent wizard.

Seriously. Swordsages are melee character. Their blasty Desert Wind maneuvers are (a) magic and (b) totally crappy.
What's the problem here?


I'm not saying you have to like ToB... but so far, everything you've said about it has been blatantly wrong.

Xefas
2007-12-16, 04:52 PM
i'm sorry if you like the flavor I can't stand it and 4e is looking to make everyone into Goku and such.

Right, because Wizards aren't flying, teleporting, laser-beam shooting people at all.

As opposed to the Swordsages, who stab people really hard.

Reel On, Love
2007-12-16, 04:52 PM
sooo the after combat heal from the cleric and Reserection will be out...wow..that sounds interesting, ...or is taht to be a per day thing?

I don't know..but if it's eather 'at will' or 'per day' it scares me..

again not a fan of non-Vatican style casting

Ummm, Vancian is per day.
Vancian casting is also a crappy system.

The way out-of-combat healing is likely to work is the same way the Dragon Shaman's vigor aura and the Touch of Healing reserve feat work in 3.5--you can heal somebody up to half HP; after that, you have to get into the daily resources.

Big out-of-combat healing spells, ressurection, et cetera are going to be actual per-day spells, which characters will get fewer of (now that they're getting at-will and per-encounter abilities).

FlyMolo
2007-12-16, 04:54 PM
I've seen the abuse the whole ToB can give, the least realistic one i've seen is the I think Blazing Wind or something...it annoyed me almost as much as the devoted spirit. flaming blades and such. Very powerful. i've seen like them going super nova, everyone keeps saying it's just 'swing your sword harder' and such but I see that as very Z fighter like. It annoys me so.

Mountain W/E it is has a few problems, Con damage without save. Even a Wizard can't do that.

when the swordsage or w/e is not only outshineing the fighter, but also the wizard we have problems.

Frankly, the fighter's a joke. Fighters are simply not effective relative to wizards, hence ToB giving them extra abilities. You've already stated that you nerf wizards in your campaign, so if the upgraded fighter beats the regular fighter, and the wizard you weakened until he was at the level of the fighter, I really don't see the problem. You can't make wizards as weak as fighters, then expect them to stand up to fighters meant to compete with regular wizards.

Also, I love warlocks. I've been wanting to play a CG one every since forever. They're just cool. (If any of you out there need another character in a PbP campaign...)

Morty
2007-12-16, 04:54 PM
Right, because Wizards aren't flying, teleporting, laser-beam shooting people at all.

As opposed to the Swordsages, who stab people really hard.

Now really, this argument makes no sense. Saying that something is alright because wizards do it too is ridiculous, as wizards are supposed to do things like this, but figters aren't.
It doesn't mean that anything implies that 4ed will turn fighters into characters from Dragonball Z, but let's not use strawman arguments.
4ed wizards are likely to suck big time, but fighters will most probably be better than those in 3.x(it's not like they can get any worse...).

Mewtarthio
2007-12-16, 04:58 PM
sooo the after combat heal from the cleric and Reserection will be out...wow..that sounds interesting, ...or is taht to be a per day thing?

I imagine there will still be expensive per-day healing spells, like heal, restoration, and resurrection.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 04:58 PM
First off, the Fact I didn't know that it was Desert Wind is the that I don't have the book in my house, it's my freind's book so he took it home with him..no way to check

Being on the Ground is VERY common for D&D charitors, they are usally in Dugeons, flying isn't Viable. Don't know what game you are playing. but a game where you go into lost underground Ruins and investigate long lost tombs to find gold and treasure is the Game i've played sense i was 8 years old.

Yes Wizards can give Negitive Levels with no save, but they can't do it 1,000 times a day. A Stone Dragon can do Con Damage a million if they want

1/Encounter can become every other round. very easy, just recover.

As for Desert Wind being Magical, that isn't quite exactly what they are if you read them. it's Chi, the same stuff that the monk has. are you saying the Monk is a magical class too?

Renegade Paladin
2007-12-16, 05:03 PM
Oh, for the love of... Look, if you're going to say it's broken, have an actual reason why. Run the numbers, do some playtesting, and then come here and say "this is broken, and here's why." Just saying it feels too powerful doesn't mean anything to game design. :smallannoyed:

Xefas
2007-12-16, 05:04 PM
Now really, this argument makes no sense. Saying that something is alright because wizards do it too is ridiculous, as wizards are supposed to do things like this, but fighters aren't.
It doesn't mean that anything implies that 4ed will turn fighters into characters from Dragonball Z, but let's not use strawman arguments.
4ed wizards are likely to suck big time, but fighters will most probably be better than those in 3.x(it's not like they can get any worse...).

I'm not saying it's "okay".

I'm saying it's stupid to complain that Tome of Battle has miraculously given us characters out of Shounen Fighting Anime (I specify this, because anime is a form of media, not a genre), when we already have classes that do all those things.

Give a default D&D wizard spiky hair and a poor voice actor, and you have exactly the fluff that everyone is complaining about already.

"Ancient Egyptian Laser Beam Attack!" *casts disintegrate*

Druids were already conjuring swords of fire.
Paladins were already channeling holy energy to heal/smite.
Shadowdancers were already becoming one with the shadows.

Reel On, Love
2007-12-16, 05:09 PM
First off, the Fact I didn't know that it was Desert Wind is the that I don't have the book in my house, it's my freind's book so he took it home with him..no way to check
That's not the problem. The problem is you talking about Desert Wind being "very powerful" and "going supernova" and being "better than the wizard", when it's the exact opposite


Being on the Ground is VERY common for D&D charitors, they are usally in Dugeons, flying isn't Viable. Don't know what game you are playing. but a game where you go into lost underground Ruins and investigate long lost tombs to find gold and treasure is the Game i've played sense i was 8 years old.
If all of your games take place in 10x10 rooms and corridors, sure, flying isn't viable. In normal games, flying is needed ASAP. Check out high-level monsters: they all fly and teleport. What's your Stone Dragon adept going to do against the dragon strafing him with a breath weapon, exactly? Flying is a huge advantage, and "dungeons" do NOT compose the majority of play. In my last two tabletop games, most of the time and encounters have been outside. Why? Because "let's go explore this dungeon hurr hurr" is trite, primitive, and played out.
And even dungeons have huge rooms. If the ceiling's 20' up, flying is great.


Yes Wizards can give Negitive Levels with no save, but they can't do it 1,000 times a day. A Stone Dragon can do Con Damage a million if they want

1/Encounter can become every other round. very easy, just recover.
Yeah, that's nice and all, but nobody HAS 1,000 fights a day. Maneuvers are weak compared to spells of their level.
Recovering a maneuver generally wastes your round. So every other round, you can do some CON damage. WOOOOO. How is that broken, again? CON damage


As for Desert Wind being Magical, that isn't quite exactly what they are if you read them. it's Chi, the same stuff that the monk has. are you saying the Monk is a magical class too?
The monk winds up TURNING INCORPOREAL a couple of times a day. He can also talk to anything and anyone, heal himself, and teleport once a day. YES, I think it's safe to say the monk sure as hell isn't MUNDANE.
You can call it "chi" (never mentioned in the Swordsage description AFAIK) or you can call it a different use of arcane energy, but whatever it is, it's Supernatural. So the Swordsage, who has studied *Supernatural* things, can make fire. Why is this a big deal? Why is this a bigger deal than the monk teleporting and becoming incorporeal?


You are totally failing to make *any* point about the ToB being too powerful (much less "more powerful than wizards") or cartoony.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 05:11 PM
Oh, for the love of... Look, if you're going to say it's broken, have an actual reason why. Run the numbers, do some playtesting, and then come here and say "this is broken, and here's why." Just saying it feels too powerful doesn't mean anything to game design. :smallannoyed:

ofcorse that is exactly what I did, and no i didn't nerf the wizard, I simply added a few feats to the Fighter's list that they don't have any problems taking all the time

The Wizard is pretty much as written

As for me saying the ToB is broken, I think anything at will IS broken, no matter how you justify it. and any charitor who can take on my Gauntlet 5 times without fatigue is broken

FYI my gauntlet is I take the DMG and roll 10 Level equivalent encounters for the party...int he case of the ToB the party was A Swordsage who used the Shadow...w/e..a Swordsage that used Dessard Wind, a Warblade useing Stone Dragon, and a Crusader. I rolled the Encounters and ran them brutally. the party was able to take down 30 encounters before even one of them started to Fatigue...so yes i playtested the classes..

The only other four person party to do that was the Complete Divine party. And that was expected.

Mewtarthio
2007-12-16, 05:12 PM
Yes Wizards can give Negitive Levels with no save, but they can't do it 1,000 times a day. A Stone Dragon can do Con Damage a million if they want

And anyone in the world can just pick up a Wounding Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#wounding) and do the same thing. Also, they can do it with every hit. A Warblade using Bone-Splitting Strike can do 2 Con damage every other round. Anyone with a Wounding Weapon deals 1 Con damage every hit.


As for Desert Wind being Magical, that isn't quite exactly what they are if you read them. it's Chi, the same stuff that the monk has. are you saying the Monk is a magical class too?

The Monk can teleport and is immune to aging. That's supernatural.

Reel On, Love
2007-12-16, 05:15 PM
ofcorse that is exactly what I did, and no i didn't nerf the wizard, I simply added a few feats to the Fighter's list that they don't have any problems taking all the time

The Wizard is pretty much as written

As for me saying the ToB is broken, I think anything at will IS broken, no matter how you justify it. and any charitor who can take on my Gauntlet 5 times without fatigue is broken
Eyeroll.
The Warlock has things "at will". And yet, Warlock is a weak class.

Hey, you know what else is "at will"? The Fighter's feats! Fighters are broken now?



FYI my gauntlet is I take the DMG and roll 10 Level equivalent encounters for the party...int he case of the ToB the party was A Swordsage who used the Shadow...w/e..a Swordsage that used Dessard Wind, a Warblade useing Stone Dragon, and a Crusader. I rolled the Encounters and ran them brutally. the party was able to take down 30 encounters before even one of them started to Fatigue...so yes i playtested the classes..

The only other four person party to do that was the Complete Divine party. And that was expected.
Why is being able to take on *many* encounters of your CR a sign of brokenness, rather than being to take on *more powerful* encounters? Throw in a CR Level+4 monster and you'd've had a TPK, whereas a wizard would disable that monster.

Real games don't have 10 encounters a day. Real games have around, oh, *four*.
Did you include any, oh, flying monsters? A CR 10 dragon would've made fairly short work of these guys, what with Flyby Attack and the breath weapon and Snatch and everything.

Morty
2007-12-16, 05:20 PM
I'm not saying it's "okay".

I'm saying it's stupid to complain that Tome of Battle has miraculously given us characters out of Shounen Fighting Anime (I specify this, because anime is a form of media, not a genre), when we already have classes that do all those things.

Give a default D&D wizard spiky hair and a poor voice actor, and you have exactly the fluff that everyone is complaining about already.

"Ancient Egyptian Laser Beam Attack!" *casts disintegrate*

Druids were already conjuring swords of fire.
Paladins were already channeling holy energy to heal/smite.
Shadowdancers were already becoming one with the shadows.

Well, it's not quite the same. Wizards, druids and paladins are doing supernatural stuff because that's what they're supposed to do. Fighters aren't supposed to do all this, yet some people fear that 4ed by using ToB as an inspiration will force all characters, even fighters, to break the laws of physics. Those complains have no real basis in facts of course, but that's what some people claim.

Xefas
2007-12-16, 05:22 PM
As for me saying the ToB is broken, I think anything at will IS broken, no matter how you justify it. and any charitor who can take on my Gauntlet 5 times without fatigue is broken

FYI my gauntlet is I take the DMG and roll 10 Level equivalent encounters for the party...int he case of the ToB the party was A Swordsage who used the Shadow...w/e..a Swordsage that used Dessard Wind, a Warblade useing Stone Dragon, and a Crusader. I rolled the Encounters and ran them brutally. the party was able to take down 30 encounters before even one of them started to Fatigue...so yes i playtested the classes..

You're missing the point. Parties don't HAVE 50 level equivalent encounters in a day.

If you and I are running a 4 mile race, and we both run at the same speed, it doesn't matter if you had the stamina to run 46 more miles after that, because the race is over already. You gain absolutely nothing for that extra stamina. We both tied; end of story.



Well, it's not quite the same. Wizards, druids and paladins are doing supernatural stuff because that's what they're supposed to do. Fighters aren't supposed to do all this, yet some people fear that 4ed by using ToB as an inspiration will force all characters, even fighters, to break the laws of physics. Those complains have no real basis in facts of course, but that's what some people claim.

I agree entirely. Fighters should remain mundane.

I was speaking specifically about 3.5 edition, and the complaints about Tome of Battle being "anime". It's comical, because the classes we already have in the core books are more like what they're talking about. What they're talking about, of course, isn't anime itself, but Shounen Fighting, like Dragonball Z.

I should hope they don't think Iron Heart stances give them Evangelions, adorable animals that beat the tar out of one another, or harems of women.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 05:24 PM
Alright, here i'll give you a good amount of proof I just got the ToB here,


Irriestable Mountain Strike

Stone Dragon 9

Does 2D6 Con damage IN ADDION TO regular Damage Minimum of 2 con max of 12 con

someone said that con damage isn't as scary as Negitive levels sooo a wizard can do Energy Drain for 2D4 negitive levels. no damage. Minimum 2 maximum 8

Wizard can fly and do his Stone Dragon can't. I always seen combat in cramped spaces where the Wizard can't fly and in addion he has to etiehr take damage to cast spectral hand (good choice) or touch the enimy.

the Stone Dragon has to hit a attack....weapon focus full BAB...most likly happening. if I deal 12 points of con damage to you you loose 6 hp per level..in addion to whatever damage my super powerful build allows. I mean i'm useing the Shock Trooper build in addion...this is do able cause it's a standar action to do this..so in addion to nice damage I am makeing it where you can't afford to stay in melee with me...if you do I stand there for a round and next round I do it again.

Yes this is 9th level strike but I compared it to Ninth level spell. in the same area. The Wizard can cast the spell, now you go upto him and ready verses him casting another spell...your 8 levels lower but oh well. Smack him and he looses that spell, he'll cast defensivly and get the frick out.

yes this examle is narrow, but it does show you what I have seen.

I had to have the book with me to make this example, I hope you guys are happy.

Morty
2007-12-16, 05:37 PM
I was speaking specifically about 3.5 edition, and the complaints about Tome of Battle being "anime". It's comical, because the classes we already have in the core books are more like what they're talking about. What they're talking about, of course, isn't anime itself, but Shounen Fighting, like Dragonball Z.

I should hope they don't think Iron Heart stances give them Evangelions, adorable animals that beat the tar out of one another, or harems of women.

I actually don't know why people claim ToB is "anime" either. But then, when I say "anime", I think "graphics style I don't like". Which I don't see in ToB.
But while I don't agree with those complains, I kinda see where they're coming from. Some ToBers can do supernatural or at least very extraordinary stuff while not being spellcasters. People for some reason consort it with anime -while at the same time not noticing that only swordsages are doing really physics-breaking things- and they fear that in 4ed all fighter will be like that.

Reel On, Love
2007-12-16, 05:38 PM
Alright, here i'll give you a good amount of proof I just got the ToB here,


Irriestable Mountain Strike

Stone Dragon 9

Does 2D6 Con damage IN ADDION TO regular Damage Minimum of 2 con max of 12 con

someone said that con damage isn't as scary as Negitive levels sooo a wizard can do Energy Drain for 2D4 negitive levels. no damage. Minimum 2 maximum 8
Yeah, except ENERGY DRAIN SUCKS. If you want negative levels, try Split Ray Empowered Enervation for 3d4, so minimum 3 maximum *12*. Or how about a high level spell like Irresistible Dance (NO save, Arcane Reach lets you cast it from range), Imprisonment (can force a save at -4)...


Wizard can fly and do his Stone Dragon can't. I always seen combat in cramped spaces where the Wizard can't fly and in addion he has to etiehr take damage to cast spectral hand (good choice) or touch the enimy.
All of your combats take place in cramped spaces?
Well, you play some WEIRD games, then.

But, no, the wizard has Arcane Reach from Archmage (the quintessential core PrC; I don't recall ever making a high-level wizard without it). He doesn't need to enter melee...
...and if he's casting Enervation he wouldn't need to ANYWAY, because it's a RANGED TOUCH.


the Stone Dragon has to hit a attack....weapon focus full BAB...most likly happening. if I deal 12 points of con damage to you you loose 6 hp per level..in addion to whatever damage my super powerful build allows. I mean i'm useing the Shock Trooper build in addion...this is do able cause it's a standar action to do this..so in addion to nice damage I am makeing it where you can't afford to stay in melee with me...if you do I stand there for a round and next round I do it again.
No, you CAN'T use Shock Trooper with maneuvers. Manevuers are standard actions. Shock Trooper involves CHARGING, which gives you an ATTACK action, which is not the same as a STANDARD action.

"If I deal 12 points of CON damage"... sorry, but the average of 2d6 is 7. So they're losing, on average, *3* HP per level.
Which isn't exactly BAD or anything... but a full attack or a Shock Trooping, Leap Attacking charger would have done as much or more.


Yes this is 9th level strike but I compared it to Ninth level spell. in the same area. The Wizard can cast the spell, now you go upto him and ready verses him casting another spell...your 8 levels lower but oh well. Smack him and he looses that spell, he'll cast defensivly and get the frick out.
You compared it to a crappy 9th level spell no one uses.

yes this examle is narrow, but it does show you what I have seen.

I had to have the book with me to make this example, I hope you guys are happy.[/QUOTE]

If that's how your wizards play, no wonder your martial adepts are better. The wizard cast the spell, from 30' away. You're 8 levels lower. All of your saves are at -8. Next round he hits you with a save-or-die and you die.
You don't go up to him and hit him, because he's invisible, greater mirror imaged, or possibly inside the ceiling (Xorn Movement, Greater Blink, etc), or has one of any number of other defenses up.

Or maybe he cast Irresistible Dance. In which case you do *nothing*, because you're dancing for 1d4+1 rounds, no save. The party beats you up.

tyckspoon
2007-12-16, 05:43 PM
Alright, here i'll give you a good amount of proof I just got the ToB here,


I had to have the book with me to make this example, I hope you guys are happy.

We might be if you weren't really, really wrong..

Enervation and Energy Drain are Close range, not touch; at 20th level, you can cast them from up to 75 feet away (assuming no increases to caster level.) Your Stone Dragon adept has to be in melee range to deliver his strike.

Energy Drain is a fairly crappy spell, incidentally; you can get better results by metamagicing an Enervation up to 9th (Split Ray Maximize, for example, guarantees you get 8 drained levels. The Stone Dragon strike has no means of ensuring he gets a good roll.)

Negative Levels causes, per level drained:
-1 to skill and ability checks
- 1 to attack rolls and saves
-5 HP
-1 effective level for anything where level is a factor (like caster level for spells and spell-likes)
-loss of highest level spell slot

In comparison, Con damage causes:
Lost HP
Reduced Fort Save
Reduced save DC for abilities based on Con.

Now, assuming you failed to kill the monster, it's going to counterattack. Your negative levels probably didn't kill it, but now it sucks. If the warblade rolled high on his damage and Con damage, he might have killed it; he can't guarantee it with Shocktroopery deathcharges, because charging is a full-round action and cannot be combined with a Standard action strike (There are some maneuvers that count as a charge and could be combined with Shocktrooper/Leap Attack. Irresistable Mountain is not one of them.)

The wizard is as much as 75 feet away. The monster almost certainly has to move to get to him, which means it won't be Full Attacking unless it's a pouncer. When it does get in reach of the wizard, it has a -8 to hit him thanks to the negative levels. The Warblade is right next to the monster; he's going to be eating a full attack at full effectiveness, since his Con damage didn't hurt the monster's Strength or otherwise alter its attack bonus or damage at all. Warblade's going to be hurting or possibly dead- hopefully he has some counters ready.

Azerian Kelimon
2007-12-16, 05:44 PM
I was going to disprove the Irresistible mountain strike thing, but ROL did it for me.

To clarify, ToB is essentially a solid, nice system similiar in effectiveness (not in execution) to psionics that got a lot of complaints for ONE line in the introduction and a lot of skimming: "We have based this system on Films such as the Matrix trilogy or Wuxia movies.."

There are really, really few suppahPOWAH! cheese on ToB, besides poorly worded maneuvers (Iron heart Surge), and most of it is actually Per Day, such as the bazillion attacks swordsage build.

Renegade Paladin
2007-12-16, 05:45 PM
Alright, here i'll give you a good amount of proof I just got the ToB here,


Irriestable Mountain Strike

Stone Dragon 9

Does 2D6 Con damage IN ADDION TO regular Damage Minimum of 2 con max of 12 con

someone said that con damage isn't as scary as Negitive levels sooo a wizard can do Energy Drain for 2D4 negitive levels. no damage. Minimum 2 maximum 8

Wizard can fly and do his Stone Dragon can't. I always seen combat in cramped spaces where the Wizard can't fly and in addion he has to etiehr take damage to cast spectral hand (good choice) or touch the enimy.

the Stone Dragon has to hit a attack....weapon focus full BAB...most likly happening. if I deal 12 points of con damage to you you loose 6 hp per level..in addion to whatever damage my super powerful build allows. I mean i'm useing the Shock Trooper build in addion...this is do able cause it's a standar action to do this..so in addion to nice damage I am makeing it where you can't afford to stay in melee with me...if you do I stand there for a round and next round I do it again.

Yes this is 9th level strike but I compared it to Ninth level spell. in the same area. The Wizard can cast the spell, now you go upto him and ready verses him casting another spell...your 8 levels lower but oh well. Smack him and he looses that spell, he'll cast defensivly and get the frick out.

yes this examle is narrow, but it does show you what I have seen.

I had to have the book with me to make this example, I hope you guys are happy.
Crippling strike. A rogue can do 2 Strength damage, flat out, per sneak attack, automatically. If he sneak attacks a target, that target takes 2 Str damage with no extra effort or sacrifice of sneak attack dice required. This is a core rogue special ability; you can have it at level 10. Go TWF, speed properties for the weapons, belt of battle, or any other number of ways to get many attacks per round and the rogue can immobilize a lot of foes before they even get the chance to blink. Keen rapier and the Telling Blow feat make it worse; it'll happen on every crit (along with sneak attack damage) too.

There we go. At-will ability damage from a non-magical core class using core only material (except for Telling Blow, which is entirely optional). This isn't even particularly cheesed; it's right there plain as day on the rogue special ability list. It isn't Constitution, but it doesn't need to be; when you get down to zero strength you're helpless. One coup de grace later and it's the exact same effect as Con damage. Frankly, if you think the Tome of Battle classes are really all that much superior to all the core stuff, you haven't been paying core all that much attention.

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 05:52 PM
"If I deal 12 points of CON damage"... sorry, but the average of 2d6 is 7. So they're losing, on average, *3* HP per level.

Yes but I also said 2D4 giveing 8 Negitive levels


If you want negative levels, try Split Ray Empowered Enervation for 3d4, so minimum 3 maximum *12*.

aaaand use two feats



All of your combats take place in cramped spaces?
Well, you play some WEIRD games, then.

But, no, the wizard has Arcane Reach from Archmage (the quintessential core PrC; I don't recall ever making a high-level wizard without it). He doesn't need to enter melee...

soooo to make a good wizard you have to take a Prc....funny that is what peaple say about the Fighter....as for weird games..most of the games I play put us in lost tombs and stuff..as such we have a max of 8 foot tall ceilings

yeah...weird...




You compared it to a crappy 9th level spell no one uses.

yes this examle is narrow, but it does show you what I have seen.

and you aquitted my example with compareing it to a metamagic'd spell..requiring useing my feats...and not two core feats that..but one core feat and a complete feat.



No, you CAN'T use Shock Trooper with maneuvers. Manevuers are standard actions. Shock Trooper involves CHARGING, which gives you an ATTACK action, which is not the same as a STANDARD action.

you may have a point there. but take awy the shock trooper and just walk upto him with some other things and power attack with your two handed weapon..that is still alot of damage...



My point was narrow, but to give you the kind of thing that owuld apease you I would have to take every thing in that whole book and compare it to everything in the PHB...oh wait..you want to use every book, so I will only have a 'good' point if I use every slatbook and make sure I break both classes hard and still have the same results.

Renegade Paladin
2007-12-16, 05:57 PM
...

Yes, it takes two feats. Guess what? Any self-respecting wizard will have metamagic feats anyway. It's not even an opportunity cost; it's something you've had around to use with all your other spells for most of your career.

tyckspoon
2007-12-16, 05:57 PM
aaaand use two feats

Shock Trooper. Power Attack. 2 feats.



and you aquitted my example with compareing it to a metamagic'd spell..requiring useing my feats...and not two core feats that..but one core feat and a complete feat.

Shock Trooper is from Complete Warrior. Martial adepts are from Tome of Battle, a book that is decidedly not core. What the hell is your point here?

Lady Tialait
2007-12-16, 06:01 PM
the shock trooper is nulled...


So ToB is all I am usein against a Core Wizard....the ToB wins...every time


Edit: in addion take the Wizard after 8 combats, and the ToB guy after 8 combats...the Wizard is now really in a tight spot, low on spells. the ToB guy on the other hand still has his big guns..that is one thing that really upsets me even worse...don't say the fighter does too...what the fighter has doesn't compare to the wizard's spells, the ToB guy can compare. throw a Epic zombie against thease guys the ToB guy is gunna beat it..the Wizard will either have trubble or Die...the before mentioned Rouge sucks out...and the Cleric proves why it rules the school.

Azerian Kelimon
2007-12-16, 06:03 PM
Not really. With Fly and Solid Fog, a Swordsage level 15 is required to even have a chance at reaching you, the other two classes can't even touch you. This is before I even start citing save or X spells, mind you, or no saves.

Renegade Paladin
2007-12-16, 06:04 PM
the shock trooper is nulled...


So ToB is all I am usein against a Core Wizard....the ToB wins...every time
Then your wizards are doing something wrong. Now, I don't think that the classes should be balanced according to PvP combat (though it should be a consideration, certainly, considering that one class level is supposed to be one CR increase), but even just in core the wizard has all kinds of cheese to ensure that he doesn't lose. Now, unlike the Crippling Strike example I listed above, they aren't all obvious in the class description. But they're there. Look around this board a little and you'll see all the usual suspects.

mostlyharmful
2007-12-16, 06:05 PM
the shock trooper is nulled...


So ToB is all I am usein against a Core Wizard....the ToB wins...every time

Um... No.

Contingency, Gate, Polymorph, Timestop, Glitterdust, Fly, Teleport, Mirror Image, Wish, Shapechange, Ray spells in General, Cloud spells controling battlefields, Illusions for the creative, etc....

ToB in all but a few cases just gives versatility of attack options without adding anything supernatural at all. the ones that are supernatural are By-and-Large subpar to the other choices.

tyckspoon
2007-12-16, 06:23 PM
Edit: in addion take the Wizard after 8 combats, and the ToB guy after 8 combats...the Wizard is now really in a tight spot, low on spells. the ToB guy on the other hand still has his big guns..that is one thing that really upsets me even worse...don't say the fighter does too...what the fighter has doesn't compare to the wizard's spells, the ToB guy can compare. throw a Epic zombie against thease guys the ToB guy is gunna beat it..the Wizard will either have trubble or Die...the before mentioned Rouge sucks out...and the Cleric proves why it rules the school.

This thread has already been over over-extended scenarios like that.. yes, if you deliberately create a situation that favors reusable skills, the people with reusable skills will look stronger. A Warlock will also look superior to a Wizard when the 8th fight of the day comes around (however, unless you have some very cheap and preferably free, infinite means of healing, even a ToB Adept is going to be wanting to stop fighting so they can get some HP back.)

As for the zombie.. do you mean a real zombie? The mindless type? To make an Epic one, it's going to have.. probably in the area of 100 HD, which is a challenge for any character that has to try and take enemies down through only HP damage, even the Warblade. Lucky Wizard- Command Undead. 2nd level spell, mindless undead get no save against it. That Epic Zombie is now the wizard's pet. We can keep doing this for any situation you want to suggest..

Renegade Paladin
2007-12-16, 07:07 PM
tEdit: in addion take the Wizard after 8 combats, and the ToB guy after 8 combats...the Wizard is now really in a tight spot, low on spells. the ToB guy on the other hand still has his big guns..that is one thing that really upsets me even worse...don't say the fighter does too...what the fighter has doesn't compare to the wizard's spells, the ToB guy can compare. throw a Epic zombie against thease guys the ToB guy is gunna beat it..the Wizard will either have trubble or Die...the before mentioned Rouge sucks out...and the Cleric proves why it rules the school.
As mentioned, command undead. Also, yes, the rogue sucks against the undead (though if he has Penetrating Strike from Dungeonscape it's not so bad), but then again that maneuver you were whining about won't work on it either since it doesn't have a Con score to begin with and is immune to ability damage even if it did. :smallannoyed:

VeisuItaTyhjyys
2007-12-16, 09:06 PM
and such but I see that as very Z fighter like. It annoys me so.
Just for the record, the only Z fighter who swings a sword never once lights it on fire. Also, for most of his existance, really sucks at it. Another character, who is the personifcation of all evil, swings a sword, and is better at it, but still no fire.
Aside from that, ToB characters end up less powerful than non-gimped wizards (unless the wizards are poorly made and the ToB class optimizeD), while the Z fighters end up better than all the gods put together. Seriously.
Also, every Z fighter is pretty much some PrC that makes monks not suck, and be better than all the other classes.


Mountain W/E it is has a few problems, Con damage without save. Even a Wizard can't do that.
Actually, I'm pretty sure they can, and better, too.
Observe: Wizard takes Lich. Lich takes the template that lets undead be swarms from Libris Mortis. Leech swarm. Now, the wizard does 1 Con damage per round, and cannot be harmed by weapons.
That ToB guy? He can still do his 12 Con damage every other round. Except, wait, that wizard not only doesn't have Con, but can't even be damaged by weapons.
By the way, when that wizard hits epic, he'll be able to make himself immune to virtually all magic, too.


Yes Wizards can give Negitive Levels with no save, but they can't do it 1,000 times a day. A Stone Dragon can do Con Damage a million if they want
But, uh, you never need to do "con damage a million." Wizards can give enough negative levels to destroy just about anything pre-epic and then some, then go out to a hidy-hole where not ever gods can find them rest, preapre their spells, have a cup of tea, and go back to the dungeon to continue the next day.


As for Desert Wind being Magical, that isn't quite exactly what they are if you read them. it's Chi, the same stuff that the monk has. are you saying the Monk is a magical class too?
No, but it is supernatural.


Edit: in addion take the Wizard after 8 combats, and the ToB guy after 8 combats...the Wizard is now really in a tight spot,

Hardly. Rope trick, sir?

Citizen Joe
2007-12-16, 11:11 PM
Off topic OFF TOPIC OFF TOPIC!!!

Gahh!! Interpretation of 4ed wizard... not How 3.5 screwed up this class or that...

Continue...

Mewtarthio
2007-12-17, 03:19 AM
The OP interpretation seems almost like a Binder. Anyone else agree?

Dhavaer
2007-12-17, 04:37 AM
The OP interpretation seems almost like a Binder. Anyone else agree?

I did say it was a combination of Binder, Wizard and Warlock.

Swooper
2007-12-17, 08:43 AM
I feel it's needed that I repeat my question, which got drowned in a ToB debate a couple of pages back: What is your source for this information, Dhavaer?

Telonius
2007-12-17, 12:02 PM
It's not what I mean. What I mean is, it looks like wizard's spells will be gained just like fighter's new ways to hit stuff- which means that wizards lose thieir variety and versatility that was the point of this class.
And I really, really, don't understand what's so dreadful about wizards running out of spells.

The dreadful thing about running out of spells isn't running out of spells, per se. The wizard is the shaper of reality, the one who tells physics to sit down and shut up, and can completely, unquestionably outshine any other class whose name isn't Cleric, Druid, or Archivist. The biggest limit on their power is ... spells per day.

So, what does this mean in a fight? That the wizard is either completely in control, or is a commoner with a better will save. He either outshines the rest of the party, or is less useful than a Samurai. I suppose you could say that the weaknesses and the strengths balance out. But this situation gets at the heart of the caster/noncaster class divide.

There are quite a few ways to fix this. Nerfing the offending spells is one. Screwing with the caster (stealing spellbooks, disrupting sleep, etc) is another. But getting rid of vancian magic entirely is another way to avoid the problem. By all indications 4ed is going this route. The variance of what a caster will be able to do will probably be much smaller (Big stuff vs. Average stuff, instead of Warp Reality vs. run away screaming). Depending on how they do it (and "how they do it" could screw up in any number of ways), I think this could lead to a better gaming experience.

Morty
2007-12-17, 12:18 PM
The dreadful thing about running out of spells isn't running out of spells, per se. The wizard is the shaper of reality, the one who tells physics to sit down and shut up, and can completely, unquestionably outshine any other class whose name isn't Cleric, Druid, or Archivist. The biggest limit on their power is ... spells per day.

So, what does this mean in a fight? That the wizard is either completely in control, or is a commoner with a better will save. He either outshines the rest of the party, or is less useful than a Samurai. I suppose you could say that the weaknesses and the strengths balance out. But this situation gets at the heart of the caster/noncaster class divide.

And here I thought it's because wizard has got acces to broken offensive and defensive spells thus becoming untouchable while offing enemies with ease. How wrong I was.
And what's so bad about wizard having to pay attention to his/her spells? If someone wants to just kill stuff without thinking about it much, they should play barbarian. Seriously, smart players don't let their wizards turn into commoners with good will save. And even then, some kind of free reserve feat can fix this.
But even if they just can't live without wizard being non-complicated fireball tosser, I hope they'll at least let me choose from big variety of spells.

Telonius
2007-12-17, 12:42 PM
And here I thought it's because wizard has got acces to broken offensive and defensive spells thus becoming untouchable while offing enemies with ease. How wrong I was.

Yes, you were. The variance of untouchable and laughable is the heart of the wizard's problem. The brokenness of some combinations, while also a big problem, distracts attention from this issue.


And what's so bad about wizard having to pay attention to his/her spells? If someone wants to just kill stuff without thinking about it much, they should play barbarian. Seriously, smart players don't let their wizards turn into commoners with good will save. And even then, some kind of free reserve feat can fix this.

There's nothing bad about the wizard having to pay attention to the spells - except that there is really nothing else useful that a wizard can do in combat. If the wizard isn't casting a spell, what's he doing? Full defense? In order to contribute at all, the wizard has to expend one of his spells, regardless of how smart or stupid the player is. This puts him one spell closer to uselessness.

Reserve feats would also go quite a way to resolving the issue. They change the power variance on the low end, bumping it up to average and giving the wizard something that he could always use, no matter what the combat situation, as long as one spell is kept in reserve. I like that idea, for the same reason that I like the idea of the Warlock's Eldritch Blast ability. (In practice, EB is horribly weak).

A question, though - if you take the Reserve Feat, how often do you use that last spell? Ever? With what we know of 4th edition, it looks like they're effectively giving a built-in reserve feat (of sorts), giving an always-on option without bothering with the last spell.

Morty
2007-12-17, 12:50 PM
Yes, you were. The variance of untouchable and laughable is the heart of the wizard's problem. The brokenness of some combinations, while also a big problem, distracts attention from this issue.

I don't consider it a problem, or big problem in any case. Wizard offing non-casters with one spell is a problem, wizard running out of spells- not so much. And the real problem with wizards is that while they're supposed to be laughable if they aren't careful, it's not the matter, as they're can easily Teleport away and do other stuff before they prepare their spells again.


There's nothing bad about the wizard having to pay attention to the spells - except that there is really nothing else useful that a wizard can do in combat. If the wizard isn't casting a spell, what's he doing? Full defense? In order to contribute at all, the wizard has to expend one of his spells, regardless of how smart or stupid the player is. This puts him one spell closer to uselessness.

There are scrolls and wands. But I agree that some kind of minor cantrip to use all the time would be nice.


A question, though - if you take the Reserve Feat, how often do you use that last spell? Ever? With what we know of 4th edition, it looks like they're effectively giving a built-in reserve feat (of sorts), giving an always-on option without bothering with the last spell.

I cannot help but notice that it isn't mutually exclusive with Vancian casting.
Yeah, I'm one of those weird people who actually like Vancian casting.

kamikasei
2007-12-17, 01:15 PM
Off topic OFF TOPIC OFF TOPIC!!!

Gahh!! Interpretation of 4ed wizard... not How 3.5 screwed up this class or that...

Continue...

Attempting to drag the core of that argument as it related to the thread proper back on topic:

Giving wizards per-round or per-encounter abilities instead of / on top of their spellcasting isn't necessarily going to break them any more than it broke warlocks or ToBers. In the first place, if everyone has something they can do all day long, then no one person's being able to do so is going to be unbalancing. In the second place, if it's an ability usable all the live long day then it'll probably be a lot more toned down than most wizards' spells.

Basically, you can't predict how unlimited X will affect balance until you know the weight of X on its own. While Tialait dragged in and mixed together a lot of different arguments and opinions on whether the flavor of ToB was icky, whether individual maneuvers were too powerful, and so on, I don't think anyone else in the thread would agree that it is inherently broken for a magic user to have a magical effect that he can produce every round or every other round - in principle, depending on what the effect is.

I personally like the idea of being able to go the whole day roughly as effective as when you started, with a small set of resources such as HP, potions/scrolls/other consumables, and particular powerful spells/effects (of which you needn't have any offensive) acting as your limiting factor.

Citizen Joe
2007-12-17, 02:44 PM
I did say it was a combination of Binder, Wizard and Warlock.

Having seen all the multidip builds here and elsewhere and the hundreds of classes available, I think it would be nice to bring things back to four core 'roles' which you could then work within. So, for the "arcanist" role, i.e. wizards, I wouldn't mind seeing any of those 'styles' opened up to the character. I think I read that the level cap was moving to 30. I wouldn't mind seeing 4 roles with 3 styles in each and 10 levels in each style. So by level 30 you would be maxed out in all three 'styles' of your 'role'. So you would likely start with a minor 'eldritch blast', minor prepared spell ability and a minor binding skill.

For "diviners" there would be the spell casting style, a powers (healing touch and turning, etc) and then a fighting style (the rationale for armor and weapons training and a method for replicating paladins).

All the roles could be laid out so they get unlimited use of some minor ability (eldritch blast, healing, striking), limited per day use of some better abilities (spells), and then some nice 'permanent' abilities (day long bindings, immunities, etc.)

Wizzardman
2007-12-17, 02:50 PM
Actually, I'm pretty sure they can, and better, too.
Observe: Wizard takes Lich. Lich takes the template that lets undead be swarms from Libris Mortis. Leech swarm. Now, the wizard does 1 Con damage per round, and cannot be harmed by weapons.


Sorry, but the wizard can't take that template. It has no level adjustment, and thereby (unless I'm entirely misunderstanding the rules on templates) cannot be used by a PC. So the ToB guy is still pulling his 12 con dmg per round, with no wizardly equivalent.

Draz74
2007-12-17, 02:52 PM
From what I've read of 4E, "workings" will be called "rituals." Also, there will be a fourth level of spell, between "spells" and "workings," which is a fast spell meant to be used in-combat, but which is still only available a limited number of times per day.

Mewtarthio
2007-12-17, 02:59 PM
Hence the comment about Mordenkainen's Sword.

Dhavaer
2007-12-17, 03:23 PM
I feel it's needed that I repeat my question, which got drowned in a ToB debate a couple of pages back: What is your source for this information, Dhavaer?

What source? I made it up.

Lord Tataraus
2007-12-17, 03:29 PM
What source? I made it up.

..........

kamikasei
2007-12-17, 03:32 PM
I have evidence to present to the court:


"I’ll take magic missile and fireblast for my at-will powers. Oh! Burning hands for an encounter power, and, let’s see, sleep for my daily."

- here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drcw/20071214).

So, hmmm. Who knows what fireblast is, but chances are it's something eldritch blast-y. So that's two targeted damage spells at-will, one area damage per-encounter, and one encounter-ender n/day (possibly even once a day). That seems like a sensible way to break them down... of course, there are other kinds of spells, and this is first level, so who knows how it scales up; presumably you know more of each type, but do you get extra uses per time block? Can you use sleep 2/day at level 2? Will you be able to use burning hands more than once in an encounter (what would the recovery mechanic be like? Will it just be 1/5 rounds, or similar?), or just have multiple per-encounter abilities to use one after another? Will you have to wait a while after using any per-encounter spell until you can use another, even if it's a different one?

Grey Paladin
2007-12-17, 04:11 PM
Illusionary Pit: Lose or Lose, who needs to deal damage when you can pull off an instant win?

Citizen Joe
2007-12-17, 04:15 PM
So, hmmm. Who knows what fireblast is, but chances are it's something eldritch blast-y. So that's two targeted damage spells at-will, one area damage per-encounter, and one encounter-ender n/day (possibly even once a day). That seems like a sensible way to break them down... of course, there are other kinds of spells, and this is first level, so who knows how it scales up; presumably you know more of each type, but do you get extra uses per time block? Can you use sleep 2/day at level 2? Will you be able to use burning hands more than once in an encounter (what would the recovery mechanic be like? Will it just be 1/5 rounds, or similar?), or just have multiple per-encounter abilities to use one after another? Will you have to wait a while after using any per-encounter spell until you can use another, even if it's a different one?


Oh man... I hope not. Or maybe I hope it does do that so everyone sees how munchkin that is for 1st level and avoids 4dE.

Personally, I'd yank the damage spells out of the spell lists and just have sort of generic damaging energy blast sort of thing as the 'at will' but require a focus, like a wand or staff or orb or something like that. You're just channeling raw arcane magic into a damaging effect. Prepared spells would do something different, so mostly utility spells. These would typically have the material components and also take the place of scrolls. Assuming you had enough time between encounters, you could prepare them again, thus these would be your per encounter effects. The daily effects I would see as long term buffs or possibly the enchanting abilities.

kamikasei
2007-12-17, 04:19 PM
Oh man... I hope not. Or maybe I hope it does do that so everyone sees how munchkin that is for 1st level and avoids 4dE.

What are you responding to?