PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Multiple Implements



Mark Hall
2008-10-03, 08:15 AM
Something I was thinking about last night... it hasn't come up, but I wanted some opinions on it.

Let us suppose for a moment that a wizard has Orb mastery, but a magic wand. Would you allow him to cast the spell through the wand (getting the wand's bonus to attack and damage), but use the Orb to sustain the spell?

Incidentally, last night we had one of the coolest images ever in our game. Our Dragonborn fighter picked up a huge (6-square) table, breathed fire all over one group of enemies, then threw the table at another, knocking them down and back.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-03, 08:23 AM
Let us suppose for a moment that a wizard has Orb mastery, but a magic wand. Would you allow him to cast the spell through the wand (getting the wand's bonus to attack and damage), but use the Orb to sustain the spell?

Assuming he's wielding both implements, then yes.

Incidentally, I believe it would be cool to put an orb on the top of a staff (because, you know, a wizard's staff has a knob on the end). As long as the wiz wields this double implement using both hands (yes, he's handling his staff with... never mind) it's not even a mechanical change.

Charity
2008-10-03, 08:24 AM
^ sounds cool I'd allow it.

I can't really see a big issue with it, the daily powers of items are restricted as to number/ day so i doubt anything gamebreaking will emerge from allowing it.
later on the wizard is allowed to take a second impliment so I imagine they must have considered this event.

JBento
2008-10-03, 09:16 AM
Don't staff implements already require two hands to grant their bonus? I thought they had to be wielded as a weapon to do so. :smallconfused:

Also, it doesn't matter what if the wizard's staff has a kob on the end or not if he's facing a hedgehog, because everyone knows that hedgehogs can't... well, y'know - which, incidentally, is why they're the happiest of animals.

Burley
2008-10-03, 09:40 AM
Yeah. It doesn't matter what your mastery is, your implements will all work. You gain the mastery benefit as long as you're wielding the implement.
As far as I know, staff is a one handed implement, a two handed weapon. You'd get the AC bonus if that's your mastery and the implement bonus, but not OAs or melees.

JBento
2008-10-03, 09:46 AM
Oooh, OK. I've only DM'd so far, and none of my players are playing Wizards so I didn't look that much into the class.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-03, 09:49 AM
As far as I know, staff is a one handed implement, a two handed weapon. You'd get the AC bonus if that's your mastery and the implement bonus, but not OAs or melees.

Yup. That's because walking around with, or pointing and waving a staff requires only one hand (think LOOM), whereas whacking somebody with it in combat requires two (think Prince of Thieves), otherwise it'd be a club.

Burley
2008-10-03, 10:05 AM
Yup. That's because walking around with, or pointing and waving a staff requires only one hand (think LOOM), whereas whacking somebody with it in combat requires two (think Prince of Thieves), otherwise it'd be a club.

But, I'd probably allow the PC to use it one handed as a club, for melee or OA attacks, if I were running a 4e game. Is club an actual weapon, or is it Iprov?

Hzurr
2008-10-03, 10:51 AM
The real problem I can see with using a wand or staff to cast a power, then using an orb to sustain it, is that it doesn't really work the other way round. I mean, I can't see how, if you were a wand wizard, you could cast a spell through an orb and use "wand of accuracy," so should you be able to cast a spell through a wand or staff and use your orb power?

TricksyAndFalse
2008-10-03, 12:13 PM
If you allow this, why require a wizard to carry their specialized implement at all? Why not just simply let them gain their specialized benefit regardless of the type of implement used?

Kurald Galain
2008-10-03, 12:56 PM
If you allow this, why require a wizard to carry their specialized implement at all? Why not just simply let them gain their specialized benefit regardless of the type of implement used?

I don't see a problem with that. The division of powers between magical orbs, staffs and wands is completely arbitrary, so if a Staff of Foo exists, there's no reason why a wand specialist couldn't have a Wand of Foo instead.

Burley
2008-10-03, 01:48 PM
For the same reason that rogues get a +1 to hit with daggers, and d6 dice with shuriken. (Or is it the other way around?)
Same reason why a ranger picks ranged or two-weapon fighting.
Or why Warlocks make a choice between pacts.
Because you get a bonus for making a choice on what implement. You can use any implement, but you get a special bonus when you use a specific one.

Besides, sustaining an at-will power is...underwhelming by the time you're able to get a +1 from the wand and sustain for an extra round with the at-will. Why not just use the at-will power again?
I'm a Orbizard, and I only use with my Acid Arrow for the ongoing Acid damage.

Mando Knight
2008-10-03, 02:12 PM
I don't see a problem with that. The division of powers between magical orbs, staffs and wands is completely arbitrary, so if a Staff of Foo exists, there's no reason why a wand specialist couldn't have a Wand of Foo instead.

Because Wand, Orb, and Staff enchantments have different focuses. Orbs enhance a power's natural hindrance to the opponent's ability to act (generally by whacking away at the enemy's saves), Wands give you more powers to blast stuff with, and Staffs tend to increase the power or add an effect to your powers.

Staffs and Orbs enhance your control abilities, while Wands increase your striking ability (since both Warlocks and Wizards can use them).

bosssmiley
2008-10-03, 04:27 PM
Assuming he's wielding both implements, then yes.

Incidentally, I believe it would be cool to put an orb on the top of a staff (because, you know, a wizard's staff has a knob on the end). As long as the wiz wields this double implement using both hands (yes, he's handling his staff with... never mind) it's not even a mechanical change.

♪♫ A wizard when young has a staff that is small
It's puny and weak, ineffective withal
It grows with his power until it stands tall
As his fame and his glory expand
As his fame and his glory expand ♫♪

:smallbiggrin:

I didn't think 4E permitted implement stacking cheese? It seems about as reasonable as allowing a fighter to gain the benefits of two (mutually unwieldable) weapons at the same time. :smallconfused:

erikun
2008-10-03, 04:49 PM
I think it depends on what you mean by "using the orb".

If you're talking about using the abilities from an orb, such as the Orb of Sanguinary Repercussions (PHB, p.239) granting +1d10/plus to criticals against bloodied opponents, then you need to cast the spell out of the orb. If you cast it out of the wand instead, then you get the bonuses from the wand (generally just +1d6/plus), not the orb.

Much like a fighter: they can hold one weapon in each hand, but they can only use one for each attack. The wizard (or Warlock, or Cleric, or Paladin) can only choose to cast a spell out of one implement at a time.

Now, if you're talking about casting a spell out of a wand, then using the Wizard's Orb of Imposition ability with the orb in his other hand, that's fine. The Orb of Imposition is a free action that is seperate from the attack, so the Wizard shouldn't need to be casting the spell through the orb. All he needs to do is have the orb on-hand to use the ability.

Kurald Galain
2008-10-03, 04:50 PM
Orbs enhance a power's natural hindrance to the opponent's ability to act (generally by whacking away at the enemy's saves), Wands give you more powers to blast stuff with, and Staffs tend to increase the power or add an effect to your powers.
Yes, I'm aware of that, and it's completely arbitrary. Note also how there are very large overlaps in these categories.



I didn't think 4E permitted implement stacking cheese?
I don't think it does. But you speak of "mutually unwieldable", whereas obviously two one-hand items are "mutually co-wieldable", if that's a word. From a game balance point of view, it's as reasonable to allow a mage the "... of awesome doom" item with whatever implement he focuses on, as it is to allow the fighter the "... of mighty sla****ude" item on whatever weapon he likes.