| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Neo2151 |
Posted - 18 Oct 2008 : 21:13:09
Greetings! I hope this is in the right place 
I have a question to anyone who's played around with 4.0 wizards. I understand, from what I hear, that schools of magic, as a collective, are no longer included in gameplay (ie, no specialist wizards because there's nothing to specialize in.) I, myself, haven't actually bought into the 4.0 system yet for a combination of financial and skeptical reasons, and my question is this:
One of my favorite things to play in past years was a Halruaan pacifist Diviner that learned (for knowledge's sake), but did not prepare, offensive spells. Is a caster like this even possible to play anymore? From everything I've heard/been told, almost everything mechanical either deals damage or if not, at least contributes to combat in some fashion.
To the mods: If this is in the wrong forum, feel free to move it to the appropriate place. Just drop me a PM letting me know where it went. Thanks  |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wandering_mage |
Posted - 22 Oct 2008 : 21:22:27
I am DM'ing a 4th edition game and it has been heaven with D&D insider's tools thus far. I can spend one hour on making encounters and dabbling with mechanics while I can focus more on role-play oriented story for the rest of the time. With that said here is something interesting about 4th edition. It is the only version of D&D I have ever felt comfortable about making my own spells/abilities for. There is a relatively basic outline you can follow that makes sure most abilities aren't "broken" and thus game breakers. You can translate almost any attack spell into a defensive spell, or even a divination spell. You could even make nonlethal attack spells. It is sooooo easy. The format for writing it all up is easy to fall into and you can do a lot of coordination your DM to make sure everything is ok. Try it out. Look at the powers of a 5th level wizard and replace every power with a nonviolent divination spell or defensive spell. If you told me what you were looking for based on past D&D edition spells I could make it up in half an hour. I love playing wizards.
On a seperate note Halruaa pretty much bit it in 4th edition. Sooooo, maybe you are of one of the five companies in that region now? Just a thought. :) |
| Ikki |
Posted - 22 Oct 2008 : 10:56:29
Oh yes and simulcra, the best of the best of the best of illusion.
I mean.. kill a dragon today, make a simulcra tomorrow and you wont have to "do diplomacy" to get a dragon steed :D
Or interrogation.. now tell me simulcra, how do you really feel about... and how was it again one got to the treasury? |
| Pandora |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 21:09:17
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
Second: the whole "role" concept is why I think they should have gone completely classless; having roles and classes makes no sense unless you're going to allow some flexibility with assigning the two.
Agreed, except: It would be much easier to kill the "role" thing ... you get freedom to choose and keep the classic classes and ultimately the D&D style. Classless systems ultimately are a bit boring, because you dont have to make tough choices and are able - in theory - to get everything. Playing a specialist Wizard for example is making a choice AND living with a weak spot, but this is a good incentive for roleplaying and developing a characteristic style which is different from the rest of the gang. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 19:06:16
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
So 5/9 Illusion spells do damage... wtf... 
This is such a joke. This 4E might be a fun game to play, but it's no D&D.
well, if your mind believes you fall into a pit, mental damage...
yeah it blows.
The point of illusion isnt really to KILL, but rather to trick and deceive. Sadly it seems someone on the design team seems to have missed this.
I dont think the "pacifist Diviner" is possible, because every class has a "fixed" role to play and for Wizards it is "Controler".
First: deception is too complex a process for the new rules to handle.
Second: the whole "role" concept is why I think they should have gone completely classless; having roles and classes makes no sense unless you're going to allow some flexibility with assigning the two.
That's all. I'm trying very hard not to rant. It's been slow and difficult, but I'm learning.  |
| Ikki |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 18:47:47
conjurer was pretty cool too.. divine the foe a million miles away.. conjure some fiends that could teleport and send them to kill. It gets better still with the conjuration chamber from the cold enviorment book, allowing each summong to grant +1 -> +4 (iirc) creatures to be summoned with each spell, depending on how cold it is.
Which means a 15th leveler could have a daily army to more or less wipe out a fortress.. |
| Pandora |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 13:18:21
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
So 5/9 Illusion spells do damage... wtf...
This is such a joke. This 4E might be a fun game to play, but it's no D&D.
well, if your mind believes you fall into a pit, mental damage...
yeah it blows.
The point of illusion isnt really to KILL, but rather to trick and deceive. Sadly it seems someone on the design team seems to have missed this.
I dont think the "pacifist Diviner" is possible, because every class has a "fixed" role to play and for Wizards it is "Controler". |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 09:23:52
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
So 5/9 Illusion spells do damage... wtf...
This is such a joke. This 4E might be a fun game to play, but it's no D&D.
well, if your mind believes you fall into a pit, mental damage...
yeah it blows. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 02:08:45
Well said! |
| Markustay |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 17:55:20
I'm keeping this as neutral as I can, so please (pro-4e) people, don't read into this and take offense.
4e is designed with encounters in mind, and for the DM to come up with all the roleplay elements on his own. There is nothing wrong with this, and it harkens back to much earlier editions of the game.
The problem that arises from that is that now we have very little in the way of 'hard & fast' rules for anything outside of encounters, so running a character that doesn't get involved in combats doesn't really fit-in with 4e's style. You can still do it (with rituals, as stated above), but the game isn't really geared for that.
In fact, IIRC, at least one designer specifically mentioned Diviners as a 'useless class' that "no-one plays", so we really didn't need rules for it. I'm not sure if that was answer given in something written (blog, post, ect), or in one of the podcasts, but I do remember that exact statement (I remember it, because I thought to myself "gee... they think everone plays the way THEY do").
I hope everyone understands that I am NOT taking sides here - I'm merely stating some facts. Weather you loved or hated the 3e rules for all their convolutedness, they did indeed address far more situations outside of combat. If you want to run a non-combative fighter in 4e, you are going to need to spend some quality time with your DM to work some stuff out.
Cheers --- Mark |
| scererar |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 16:49:26
quote:
Originally posted by Yuen
Aside from spells you can also perform rituals, which are just spells with a casting time of 10 mins or more.
The FRPG has rituals with a lot less time needed to use. 1 minute, 5 minutes. most are indeed longer. |
| scererar |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 16:47:13
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Okay, the un-ranted version of the Answer to your Question.
The only non-offensive magic in the 4th Edition is Rituals.
there are many non-offensive spells for wizards. just a couple examples would be shield, jump, resistance, arcane gate, blur. |
| Tyranthraxus |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 16:37:27
quote:
Originally posted by Neo2151
So 5/9 Illusion spells do damage... wtf...
This is such a joke. This 4E might be a fun game to play, but it's no D&D.
You're right, the new edition has a Diablo feel to it, it doesn't matter what class you are they're all the same. Not that it's a bad thing. I'm still gonna try out the new rules and Realms, and if we (my DnD group and I) don't like it we're simply going back to playing 3.5 |
| Neo2151 |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 10:35:13
So 5/9 Illusion spells do damage... wtf...
This is such a joke. This 4E might be a fun game to play, but it's no D&D. |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 10:18:46
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20080616
the illusionist, more or less, not the diviner, but hey. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 09:34:24
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Okay, the un-ranted version of the Answer to your Question.
The only non-offensive magic in the 4th Edition is Rituals. You do not need to be a mage or cleric to cast rituals, you only need to choose a feat (there are some pre-reqs). Also, rituals, by default do not work during combat since most casting times are in minutes.
As my best friend said about his 4th Edition wizard, "I felt like an archer, not a mage." The default at-will power that wizards get is Magic Missile, which they can use however many times a day they want and it's mechanically the same as firing an arrow.
Wizards has said that in future sourcebooks, they will have more on Illusion, Enchantment and other schools of magic, while the PHB is mostly Evocation/Abjuration schools (in my opinion, anyway).
Thanks Ashe. I should have just shut up and let you answer it to begin with. I can't talk about 4E wizards without getting riled up over "the new Nerf spellcasters!" |
| Neo2151 |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 06:38:16
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
Find a game you like, and play on!
That's pretty much exactly what I've done. I've been out of the D&D scene for quite a while now. Between all the problems with 3.X and the "unreal" feel of the game as a whole, I've just totally moved on to things like L5R and the White Wolf games (ie, when I swing my sword and hit something, I like to know I've actually hurt it, not just chipped away at 1/25th of it's total life... in L5R for example, a rank 1 can kill a rank 8 [max rank]. It's not likely, but I've seen it done). I still love the Realms as much as I ever have, so I still lurk around here and keep reading the novels, but my D&D days are pretty much behind me in favor of better gaming systems.
Thanks everyone for the imput! My friend has started up a Realms game and wants me to join the group, but this was my first character idea and from everything I've heard, I just wouldn't enjoy it, even if it was possible. Double-checking ftw |
| Yuen |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 06:17:36
I haven't actually played 4e yet, aside from playtesting a battle or two with a friend who owns the books. But looking at the wizards "spell selection" I'd say no, it's not possible without severely crippling yourself. In some cases ALL spells of a certain level deal damage of some sorts, so you'll be little to no use at all. I guess it's worse than playing the 3e Adept NPC class. Even a commoner with a bag of wands is more fun to play because (as far as I understand it) you can't prepare the same spell twice for the day.
Aside from spells you can also perform rituals, which are just spells with a casting time of 10 mins or more. You don't memorize them, but you need a scroll or book that tells you what to do and you may only learn a certain number of them during some points of your career. Scrolls are one-shot, books allow you to cast the spells as often as you like if you have the material components and the time to do so.
My conclusion (as an "angry axe-wielding dwarf charging in to the thick of battle" type of player) is that you can't play a pacifist Wizard - or any other pacifist class for that matter - in 4e, and have fun at the same time. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 05:55:35
Okay, the un-ranted version of the Answer to your Question.
The only non-offensive magic in the 4th Edition is Rituals. You do not need to be a mage or cleric to cast rituals, you only need to choose a feat (there are some pre-reqs). Also, rituals, by default do not work during combat since most casting times are in minutes.
As my best friend said about his 4th Edition wizard, "I felt like an archer, not a mage." The default at-will power that wizards get is Magic Missile, which they can use however many times a day they want and it's mechanically the same as firing an arrow.
Wizards has said that in future sourcebooks, they will have more on Illusion, Enchantment and other schools of magic, while the PHB is mostly Evocation/Abjuration schools (in my opinion, anyway). |
| Jakk |
Posted - 19 Oct 2008 : 00:32:10
That's the nice thing about 4.0 wizards; you actually *can* "play around with" them and they can't defend themselves effectively unless there's a dagger handy. I'm exaggerating, but only slightly. If they really wanted to balance the classes that meticulously, they should have made the entire system classless. "But then it wouldn't be D&D anymore, with no wizards, clerics, or fighters." My response is, it isn't D&D anymore now, with healing surges, "powers" and other such things. Mind you, a lot of old-schoolers felt the same way when 3.0 did away with THACO and fixed saving throw target numbers. I know that I wasn't one of them. I had played 1E and 2E for about fifteen years when 3E came out, and I loved the changes then. 4.0, to me, is change for its own sake, and it fixed nothing while breaking a great many things, including the world I love. Anyway, I'm getting off topic.
Seriously: in 4.0, there's no reason to do anything more than roll 1d8 for class selection. Depending on how you choose your powers, you'll be able to do exactly the same things from a game mechanic perspective regardless of your class, so why bother having classes at all? The short answer: To make people think that they're still playing D&D. The same goes for alignment. I've ranted about both of those issues at length in other scrolls, but I encourage you to check out the system for yourself. Some scribes here at the 'Keep, and many others, like the new rules and the new Realms. I like neither, from a D&D standpoint. The new rules are great for a modern-setting or sci-fi game like the Star Wars Saga Edition, but they don't translate to D&D well imho.
[/rant]
Find a game you like, and play on! |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 18 Oct 2008 : 21:23:36
well if it helps there was an illusionist article.
but id have to look at my phb after my homework is done.
on the otherhand you can create your encounter spells and diviner abilities and go with it |
|
|
