4th Edition Quirks

[Maxus]

What's sad is that the 3.5 power model would have made more sense in 4E and vice versa.

Hellz Yes.

-Username17

Frank, you never stop surprising me.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

Well I feel like it's proably better to try to differentiate the spells within their levels, because that way, you don't ever run into the problem of crazy at will combos (at will charm person ftw!).

I think that is more a problem with individual spells like Charm Person than the mechanic. I mean, at level 6, you can blow all your first level spells on charms and that can get pretty bad. As an example, looking at the first level Sorc/Wiz list, not many look like they would be too bad as at wills for a 5th level wizard.

My example mechanic is super easy to implement. Your example mechanic is probably more balanced, but it would be a supreme bitch to makes daily/encounter/at will lists for the hundreds of spells in Dnd.

[RandomCasualty2]

I think that is more a problem with individual spells like Charm Person than the mechanic. I mean, at level 6, you can blow all your first level spells on charms and that can get pretty bad. As an example, looking at the first level Sorc/Wiz list, not many look like they would be too bad as at wills for a 5th level wizard.

My example mechanic is super easy to implement. Your example mechanic is probably more balanced, but it would be a supreme bitch to makes daily/encounter/at will lists for the hundreds of spells in Dnd.

Yeah, I mean it is a problem with individual spells, or should I say, spell balance in general. 3.5 was notoriously bad for having some spells being the suck, other spells being medium and some spells being crazy awesome.

And while true, my system is going to take significantly more work, I think it's worth it, mostly simply because you can actually balance out more spells that way. Like wraithstrike isn't really that broken if you can only use it once per adventure. Same with scry and die. At the very least you've got to be damned careful when you use it. Similarly, shit spells that nobody ever casts, like melf's acid arrow can be at will.

Actually I think it'd go a long way towards fixing 3.5 casting some.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

And while true, my system is going to take significantly more work, I think it's worth it, mostly simply because you can actually balance out more spells that way. Like wraithstrike isn't really that broken if you can only use it once per adventure. Same with scry and die. At the very least you've got to be damned careful when you use it. Similarly, shit spells that nobody ever casts, like melf's acid arrow can be at will.

I'd be interested in seeing such a list, and hearing a playtest report.

[RandomCasualty2]

I'm thinking right now everyone gets 1 At will and 1 encounter spell at the first level they acquire a given spell level. Then at the second level, they get an additional at will, an encounter and one limited use spell. Then you just move onto the next spell level.

Each class also has a special ability for their casting method.

Wizard: A wizard can keep a spellbook where he can hold a potentially infinite number of spells. By spending 1 hour studying, a wizard can swap out any of his spells for another of the same level and type (so a level 2 at will could be swapped for another level 2 at will and so forth). Note that whle he can swap limited use spells, he does not actually recover an expended slot this way. Once a limited use spell has been used, it is gone until the slot is refreshed.

Sorcerer: A sorcerer who casts an at will spell can instantly recover all his expended encounter spells. In addition if the sorcerer wishes, he can sacrifice a slot of the same type and of equal or higher level to recast a spell he already used. (So you can sacrifice a level 3 encounter spell to cast a level 2 encounter spell you already used if you want).

Cleric: Some kind of spontaneous healing bullshit. I'm thinking of adopting healing surges or a similar mechanic to 3.5 to allow some kind of resource management mechanism on healing. Seriously thouh clerics don't need much.

Druid: No casting benefit.

[baduin]

Funny thing, but this system is really Vancian. In Vance's stories, the spellbooks were enormous, and each could hold one or two spell. You prepared your spells in your study, and went on adventure with what you had - no travelling spellbooks! And one limited spell per level is also Vancian - experienced wizards could hold 4 or 6 limited spells.

[Ravengm]

Don't know if anyone's said this yet...

Turns out clerics have auto-kills. If you have a party of five clerics, anything smaller than Gargantuan that can't fly or teleport can be blocked by four clerics using Knights of Unyielding Valor. Then the fifth cleric just tosses a Blade Barrier on the hapless monster and sustains it every round, while everyone kicks back and has some tea.

If the monster has a ranged attack, oh well. There's no specification that you have to be in range to sustain any of those powers, so you can just go off to the rest of the dungeon and loot all the treasure while the monster sits there helpless.

Yeesh.

[Koumei]

So, Intimidation to halve the time of combat down to only one and a half days per battle...

3E had Diplomancy*. That had a nice ring to it - it's almost the same as the name of the skill, but lets people know it's practically a school of magic, it's that good. But now it's Intimidation, used after assault. Do we have a clever name for this tactic?

*Not to be confused with Dipsomancy, the alcohol-fuelled magic in Unknown Armies.

[Username17]

So, Intimidation to halve the time of combat down to only one and a half days per battle...

3E had Diplomancy*. That had a nice ring to it - it's almost the same as the name of the skill, but lets people know it's practically a school of magic, it's that good. But now it's Intimidation, used after assault. Do we have a clever name for this tactic?

"Cowboy" is too clever of a pun and would never fly.

"Intimictator" functions at about th level of Diplomancer.

For reasons I can't fully explain, I'm fond of "Bullysaurus." Especially because almost all such characters are going to be Draconians.

-Username17

[Koumei]

If it was "Beat them up -> Diplomacy" then I'd call it "Spousal Abuse" and wait for angry remarks, so it's a good thing it isn't.

Bullysaurus works. That made me laugh.

[mlangsdorf]

If the monster has a ranged attack, oh well. There's no specification that you have to be in range to sustain any of those powers, so you can just go off to the rest of the dungeon and loot all the treasure while the monster sits there helpless.

The definitions of Knights and Blade Barrier on p 67 as Conjurations, and the rule that conjurations end immediately if you are out of range of them on p59 says that you're wrong. Monsters with a ranged attack of at least 10 can continue to fight while being beaten up by the blade barrier.

[Ravengm]

My mistake. Even so, you're a party of clerics, so dying won't be any time soon.

[josephbt]

Arcane Gate Wizard Utility 10
You open a dimensional rift connecting two nearby locations.
Daily ✦ Arcane, Teleportation
Minor Action Ranged 20
Target: Two unoccupied squares
Effect: You create a dimensional rift between the two target
squares that lasts until the end of your next turn. Any creature
that enters one of the target squares can move to the
other target square as if it were adjacent to that square.
A creature cannot pass through the rift if either square is
occupied by another creature.
Sustain Minor: The rift persists.

Can you play with Portal physics with this spell? One portal on the ground, the other 20 in the air, push enemy in, stop sustaining after they reach terminal velocity.

edit - okay, wtf? why doesn't the link work now?
edit - k, thanks

[Leress]

you have an extra bracket in the first url tag

[mlangsdorf]

Arcane Gate says that anyone who enters a portal square can move to the other square. Can implies voluntary.

You make choices on forced movement, so you can push a foe into an Arcane Gate and force to teleport to the other gate, 20 squares above something unpleasant, but when they fall into the first gate, they can choose to continue falling or just hit the ground.

I think that's a defensible argument, anyway.[/i]

[Koumei]

Can you play with Portal physics with this spell?

The cake is a lie.

[Orion]

Eladrin are kind of on the weak side no matter what you do your bonuses don't fully synergize with any currently published class. But if you do play an Eladrin, you want to be in one of the decent presented archetypes for which there is currently no optimized race: like Control Wizard or Brute Rogue.

Eladrin actually are Kick-Ass Brute Rogues. Compared to Human, you lose a feat and 1 from fort and ref and an unnecessary third power to pick up broader skill access, tele-flanking, and low-light, and longsword proficiency, for you many-W powers.

Edit: not a light blade. Damn! What is that sword supposed to be for? fighters, paladins, warlords, rangers already have it, rogues and warlocks only want light blades. A Cleric would use it, though this isn't enough to make eladrin cleric good. I guess it's just there to be used by a Wizard/Spiral Tower -- and I'd *still* rather have an Orb with a real power.

There are three kinds of Warlocks, of which only one of them is Charisma based (Fey type), and they are optimized for Halflings, Tieflings, Dragonborn, Humans, or (especially) Half-Elves. The other two are Constitution centric, and thus are optimized for Dwarves, Humans, or Half Elves.

Ironically, Tieflings are the best Feylocks, since their INT boosts secondary effects of the powers. Half-Elves are the best Starlocks.

ETA:

Potentially viable builds which don't boost primary ability:

Dwarf CHA Paladin: This is a tank's tank. You get an extra lay on hands, a swift second wind to heal self, and can't get shoved out of the way. Worth the reduction in DPS if you're serious about being a Defender.

Dwarf Halberd Fighter: CON boost pumps your axe powers, WIS helps you qualify for polearm gamble, plus see paladin.

Dwarf Wizard: Has the WIS for lockdowns and a serious boost to survivability. Good if your team is too small to protect you.

Eladrin Tactical Warlord: Okay, perception isn't on the warlord skill list, so grab that. No strength bonus makes your atacks sad. But it *does* make your buffs better. Commander's Strike is based on INT, not STR. Arcane Initiate gets us an INT attack, preferably Thunderwave which we set up with our fey hop. Take the whole wizard multiclass for more INT goodness. Once you go Spiral Tower, you can mix it up with INT-based melee attacks and your magic sword pumps your spells.

(By the way, how does commander's strike work? Do you both need to be adjacent to the enemy, or can you order people from a distance?)

Elf Fighter/Rogue/Blademaster: Cheese DEX powers, have a re-roll in your pocket for the big attack. Move fast and see well.

(BTW, is there *any* benefit to being a *light* blade fighter?)

Elf Control Wizard: boss-killer; re-roll your sleep, then orb it. Probably worse than a Human though.

Half-Elf Cleric Hospitaler: CHA helps some cleric powers; use CON for your Fort stat, gets better health. You can still melee briefly thanks to Half-Elf and Multiclass Paladin CHA smites. Hospitaler powers make you the best Healer *ever*, with all your paladin heals being wisdom boosted. Use a Holy Avenger.

(What does a power that makes an enemy marked do if you aren't a fighter or paladin?... the same as a marking form that class? the -2 to hit alone?)

[Username17]

If you don't have a special class feature to hose marked opponents, it's just a -2 to their attacks. This means that picking up a cross classed marking ability is of primary use to be deployed on your own team mates. As soon as one of your friends has a mark on them that does something shitty, you can drop your own mark on them and then all they get is a -2 to-hit (which considering that you're almost always better off attacking enemies that don't mark you, is something you'd be suffering anyway).

In any case, Light Blades suck. But all Rogue attacks require Light Blades. So getting onus proficiency with Longswords (a Heavy Blade) is worthless for a Rogue, and using a Light Blade as a Fighter is completely worthless. As a Fighter you take Heavy Blades or Spears, anyone who wants to use a Light Blade has to GTFO and become a Rogue instead.

-Username17

[SunTzuWarmaster]

Heh, Bullysaurus. That term is just useful enough that if you tell someone "I'm playing a bullysaurus in a 4e game" that they will know what you are talking about if they have played 4e.

[RandomCasualty2]

If you don't have a special class feature to hose marked opponents, it's just a -2 to their attacks. This means that picking up a cross classed marking ability is of primary use to be deployed on your own team mates. As soon as one of your friends has a mark on them that does something shitty, you can drop your own mark on them and then all they get is a -2 to-hit (which considering that you're almost always better off attacking enemies that don't mark you, is something you'd be suffering anyway).

That's an interesting use of marking, though I wonder if it's even worth wasting your action in this way to remove a mark from someone (and still give them a -2 penalty). Especially because the creature can usually just go ahead and mark them the next round.

Just doesn't seem worth it to me. You're better off using your standard action to attack an enemy rather than attack a friend just to mark him.

[Jacob_Orlove]

Isn't it usually a minor action to Mark someone?

[RandomCasualty2]

Isn't it usually a minor action to Mark someone?

Only for the paladin, and I honestly can't imagine why you'd want to divine mark an ally (since they take damage everytime they attack someone else).

most creatures and the fighter work by marking someone they attack (hit or miss). Attacks are generally standard actions.

[JonSetanta]

Isn't it usually a minor action to Mark someone?

Sure, but always wash your hands after.

[Jacob_Orlove]

Well, you could mark an ally to kill a monster's mark as a minor, then burn a move action to mark a nearby monster (removing your mark from your ally), and you still have your standard action left to make an attack.

It seems plausible, at least. Although the flavor is beyond inane.

[Username17]

The Paladin's Mark is ideal for getting rid of enemy marks, because it goes away at the end of your turn if you don't live up to your challenge.

Just mark your friend 5 squares away and then don't attack him or end your turn next to him. You can't challenge on your next turn (but you can use your minor actions for other things), and the mark you put on your friend falls off altogether. Since you displaced whatever mark was on your ally to put it there in the first place, this leaves your ally unmarked at the cost of a single minor action.

Paladins can and should mark their allies pretty much every single time an enemy marks them.

-Username17