4E: what can we expect from SAGA and Bo9S?

[Bigode]

So you can actually get to most of it following internal article links, it's just really hard to actually find any particular segment because the archives won't tell you where that shit is.

AFAIK, until it's actually deleted, it's easy to find anything with Google - just tested some - as long as memory provides a good enough quote to try. Whether anyone here cares (since I didn't like them either): that's another issue, but I did have "anti-revisionist" thoughts as soon as the links were gone.

[Lago PARANOIA]

The sad thing about this thread is that all of the optimistic predictions were wrong and all of the skeptical ones were right.

This thread made me weep stoic, manly Indian tears and I'm bumping it because misery loves company.

[Caedrus]

The sad thing about this thread is that all of the optimistic predictions were wrong and all of the skeptical ones were right.

This thread made me weep stoic, manly Indian tears and I'm bumping it because misery loves company.

I remember making worried 4e predictions from the moment they came out with the first development previews. I also remember saying "I really hope I'm wrong." And then... not being wrong, except in that my predictions of failure at that point weren't extreme enough.

[ggroy]

[erik]

Sounds good in theory. If I'm a fire mage I want to throw fire, not cast sleep then plink with a crossbow.

Say, did they ever actually make a fire mage who can, you know, throw fire and burninate the countryside?

It would be so damned easy to have written up a playable power list for a wizard to be a fire blaster, but I don't recall it actually having been done. There's some fire powers you can load up on from level 1 onwards, but damn if they don't look awful.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

But if you want a firemage, all you have to do is reflavor existing powers and say they do fire damage (even if the game mechanics say they do cold damage--wait, new power source: cold fire! Brilliant!) Besides, the fire mage is on its way in Arcane Power 3. What's your problem?

[MartinHarper]

Homebrew Feat: Fire Mage.
Everything's better with Fire
Your acid, cold, lightning, and radiant powers now also do fire damage and have the fire keyword.

I wouldn't make an entire character build just for someone who wants to cast Fire Spray instead of Color Spray.

[erik]

Homebrew Feat: Fire Mage.
Everything's better with Fire
Your acid, cold, lightning, and radiant powers now also do fire damage and have the fire keyword.

I wouldn't make an entire character build just for someone who wants to cast Fire Spray instead of Color Spray.

Yeah!

Don't forget thunder and force powers! Probably best to do it whole cloth without mentioning old types specifically. It should probably be something like "All typed damage powers now do fire damage instead of their previous damage type and have the fire keyword replacing any former damage type keywords."

Now that makes for a pretty fun selection (except that 99% powers are pretty lame by my 3e standards)! Grab a couple more feats to augment fire powers somehow, and that would be lovely.

[MartinHarper]

It should probably be something like "All typed damage powers now do fire damage instead of their previous damage type and have the fire keyword replacing any former damage type keywords."

That would work. I kinda like the idea of ice bolt + fire mage feat = cold fire, and this also provides a rationale for the slowing effect. Also, by adding fire damage, rather than replacing, you still get to choose radiant powers for extra damage to undead (aka holy fire).

There's also psychic and necrotic damage, depending on whether psychic fire breaks your suspension of disbelief.

[erik]

Alrighty, I can dig that.

Heh, there's poison damage too. God knows how many more there are. I made the mistake of assuming you had missed damage types rather than just targeted a few for substitution since I got very excited at the prospect of eeeeeeverything becoming fire damage. I have no problem with suspension of disbelief or rules-ethics for changing anything to fire damage. Stinking Cloud, Color Spray, Ice Bolt, you name it and I'll whip up a fire analog. I am fire-crazy enough that psychic fire is totally cool to me. Give em burning fevers with your psychic schtick! Kill em with a crit using psychic fire damage and have their head explode in a burst of flames. Ooooh yeah.

I was thinking total substitution, but tacking it on could do well. I dunno how that calculates out on things with a resistance, weakness or immunity though. Hell, I don't even know how those properties work in 4e due to my lack of scholarship on the edition's rule set. Splitting the damage to be 50% one type and 50% another like 3rd edition Flame Strike never really appealed to me. Too clunky. That's one reason my mind immediately assumed total replacement.

I'd be 1000% more excited with this notion if it wasn't 4e. Honestly the fire feat thingy could work for any class' powers, not just wizard. Just many classes don't have a fun damage type to be altered. Perhaps if someone had a weapon that was actually made out of fire (or spent a feat to be able to generate one as an encounter power using a move action). Instead of a light saber, you get a fire saber. Then convert all weapon damage for attacks into fire damage. Hoo-ah!

I suppose a feat that allowed your weapon to take on fire damage type to its weapon damage would be fairly balanced (if a bit weak, actually). A cold variant would be even better for those stupid wintertouched feats that some rogues like or whatever it is that gives them combat advantage for hitting someone with something cold.

[edit: typoes]

[Username17]

Why are people talking about Energy Substitution as if it were exciting or revolutionary?

-Username17

[erik]

Why are people talking about Energy Substitution as if it were exciting or revolutionary?

-Username17

Hey now. Soooooome people have yellow musk creeper fetish, I have my fire sub fetish.

=-p

[add-edit]
I really did like the Fire Mage notion from the Tomes. I'd be totally willing to play a Fire Mage so long as I had some sort of option to not be totally useless against Fire Immune guys. Like melting terrain to slow em down, or summon a fire/lava type critter who could at least do some other physical attacks.

I've always longed for a fire themed character who didn't suck or just have like 3 options.

Yeah, it's a bit lame to be psyched about energy substitution, but it's even more lame that it still isn't a viable option in 4e yet.

[/edit: added a bit about the Fire Mage and cleverly disguised my barb, tho I'm sure Frank already read it and didn't take my troll bait anywho]

[Absentminded_Wizard]

Why are people talking about Energy Substitution as if it were exciting or revolutionary?

-Username17

I think it says more about the blandness and rigidity of 4e than it does about people.

[MartinHarper]

I was thinking total substitution, but tacking it on could do well. I dunno how that calculates out on things with a resistance, weakness or immunity though.

You use whichever property allows the most damage. For example, if you do Fire/Cold damage to a creature with Fire immunity and Cold vulnerability, you use the vulnerability.

[CatharzGodfoot]

Kind of funny how that encourages you to not use fire powers.