4e Fan Creations and House RulesWorking on variant powers? Statting up a PC race or your version of a monster? Creating or converting an adventure? Put it here!
Staff Strike - Wizard Attack 1 You strike with your staff and a surge of magical force drives your foe back. At-Will * Arcane, Force, Weapon Standard Action - Melee weapon Requirement: You must be wielding a Staff Target: One creature Attack: Intelligence vs. Reflex Hit: 1[W] + Intelligence modifier force damage, and you push the target a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1).
Increase damage to 2[W] + Intelligence modifier at 21st level. Special: This power counts as a melee basic attack. When a power allows you to make a melee basic attack, you can use this power. This power can also be used as an opportunity attack.
Interesting ... but why would you pick this over Thunderwave, which does almost as much damage, uses your implement and affects several nearby creatures rather than one?
Interesting ... but why would you pick this over Thunderwave, which does almost as much damage, uses your implement and affects several nearby creatures rather than one?
The main advantage to this is it counts as a melee basic attack, so you can use it for opportunity attacks. Also, you can use your implement with it. Staves count as both implements and weapons, and magic staves add their enhancement bonus to both melee attacks and spells.
I like it. I'm not versed enough yet to know if it is balanced, but I like the idea and the imagery it provokes, and that is important, at least to me. Would also make a great attack for NPC mages...
Yep, not good. (Especially as it doesn't target AC)
While I understand the frustration spellcasters feel when they don't get proficiency bonuses, just adding powers that do give them is the wrong way to go.
I don't have to add that sneaking them in (in this case, it took four posters before this bonus was discovered) is even worse.
The main advantage to this is it counts as a melee basic attack, so you can use it for opportunity attacks. Also, you can use your implement with it. Staves count as both implements and weapons, and magic staves add their enhancement bonus to both melee attacks and spells.
That's a good point. I still wouldn't take it if I were playing a wizard, but I can imagine someone would. It doesn't seem unbalanced to me, even with the weapon proficiency bonus added in.
Yep, not good. (Especially as it doesn't target AC)
While I understand the frustration spellcasters feel when they don't get proficiency bonuses, just adding powers that do give them is the wrong way to go.
I don't have to add that sneaking them in (in this case, it took four posters before this bonus was discovered) is even worse.
There was no "sneaking" involved. I didn't even realise that there would be a proficiency bonus until it was pointed out by the previous poster.
That said, I'd be interested to hear people's opinions as to whether or not the proficiency bonus should remain or the spell should be changed to have the implement keyword instead. From the tone of your post, I'd definitely assume you would be against it. I'm curious to know why. There are other powers that give +2 attack bonuses, do you think that this power would be unbalanced with such a bonus, and if so, why?
First off, even WotC have acknowledged the wizard class needs work. But whether this is the direction to go I'm not sure.
Generally, the objection is proficiency bonuses is not for spellcasters. Otherwise put, you generally don't get to use magical power and proficiency bonuses at the same time. Perhaps the staff could be put to better use in a way more in line with the designers' intentions?
That said, my specific reply to your question is "it's an at-will". If you make it Encounter, I wouldn't have anything against it. As an at-will, it would bring in proficiency bonuses into the core of the class, which simply doesn't seem to be what the wizard is supposed to be about.
The power itself is probably okay, as other postrs have remarked. For another class, that is. As a "fighting wizard"'s power it's probably okay. (I know nothing of any 4E spellblade-ish classes under development though)
Edit: I guess if it's in line with pact blades, it's okay too. But still, that you only get if the DM gives it to you. An at-will is a huge step above and beyond this, if you think about it. It redefines the entire class.
Well, if you compare it to other at-will powers with a +2 bonus (like the infamous Sure Strike), how about you drop the extra Int modifier damage? Like this:
Quote:
Hit: 1[W] force damage, and you push the target a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1).
Alternatively, if you change it to the implement keyword, you could drop the [W] all together and just deal Int modifier damage.
Quote:
Hit: Intelligence modifier force damage, and you push the target a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier (minimum 1).
But then wielding a staff stops making sense as a requirement, doesn't it? Why not just call it Force Push at that point? :P
__________________ He attacked everything in life with a mix of extraordinary genius and naive incompetence, and it was often difficult to tell which was which.
Like others have said, the combination of Weapon + non-AC defense is problematic. Particularly Reflex, because Thunderwave targets Fortitude (which is often as high as AC, and would thus be less problematic).
Also, the push thing feels wrong because Thunderwave already does exactly that.
The main justification for a power like this that I could see is You Shall Not Pass, which could imply that you halt movement, or Immobilize, or Slow, (or even Push, but not necessarily). Any status effect would last only until the end of your next turn, of course.
Cheers, -- N
__________________
Brevity is the soul of wit, so trim your sig or look dumb.
I think its cool to give the wizard a token melee attack, but I think this one is too good.
Lets compare it to other attacks, assuming that reflex is typically 2 points behind AC.
A wizard with an 18 intelligence and 14 wisdom would be attacking at +6 v reflex with this power. That's the equivalent of +8 v AC. If he hits, he'd do 1d8+4 damage, and push the target 2.
In comparison, a Fighter with 18 strength, a longsword, a shield, and Tide of Iron would be attacking for +7 v AC. If he hits, he'd do 1d8+4 damage, and push the target 1. He'd have the option of shifting to follow.
That leaves the wizard as more accurate than the Fighter. He can push further, but he can't follow up, but of course as a wizard he's less likely to want to follow. His damage is identical.
I think this is problematic in an at will power that takes the wizard in a different direction from his regular abilities.
I think a better idea might be turning this into an encounter power. Boost it a little, make it per encounter, and instead of breaking the rules in terms of the wizard's shtick and infringing on the fighter's territory, it turns into a neat way to dabble and a nice "escape plan" attack for when the wizard gets engaged in melee.
I think its cool to give the wizard a token melee attack, but I think this one is too good.
Lets compare it to other attacks, assuming that reflex is typically 2 points behind AC.
A wizard with an 18 intelligence and 14 wisdom would be attacking at +6 v reflex with this power. That's the equivalent of +8 v AC. If he hits, he'd do 1d8+4 damage, and push the target 2.
In comparison, a Fighter with 18 strength, a longsword, a shield, and Tide of Iron would be attacking for +7 v AC. If he hits, he'd do 1d8+4 damage, and push the target 1. He'd have the option of shifting to follow.
That leaves the wizard as more accurate than the Fighter. He can push further, but he can't follow up, but of course as a wizard he's less likely to want to follow. His damage is identical.
It's also worth noting that staves are far from the best weapons out there. A staff does d8 damage, has a low +2 proficiency bonus, and requires 2 hands to wield, prohibiting a shield or off-hand weapon. It is an inferior weapon to the weapons a fighter can use. A fighter can use a longsword (which has the same damage, +3 proficiency bonus, and is only 1 handed) and still use a shield. With a feat, a bastard sword can be used, which is even better. Fighters get an additional +1 to hit with their chosen weapon category, putting them at +2 attack bonus over what a staff wielding wizard has.
I don't think anybody's arguing against making it target AC. If it targetted AC instead of Reflex, then would it be balanced? That's a far more interesting question.
If it targeted AC, then... it would be good, but probably within the reasonable bounds of balance. It would be properly compared to druid powers that deal 1d8 damage and shift the target 1, and are usable on an OA. Shift is better than push, but push 2 is really nice. I lean towards thinking that push 2 is better than shift 1, because you can often shift into the optimum position to push in the direction of your choice, but I can see someone else disagreeing.
I'd make it Intelligence vs. AC. Since a wizard's Intelligence should be on par with a fighter's Strength, this would give it a hit chance just slightly less than a typical fighter's at-will (because of the fighter's weapon talent, and the fighter may be using a weapon with a higher proficiency bonus).
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
