Giving wizards more control...through cantrips?

[ravenheart]

So, I've been thinking about the Wizard. Especially how I could add more "control" to it. I also happen to like cantrips, and applaud clever use of them.

Therefore, I devised a way to boost the wizard as a controller by creating feats that improve their cantrips!

I think they are pretty ok, albeit clumsy, but I'd like a second opinion.

Thoughts?

EDIT: See this post for the revised version 2.3!

 

[Khuxan]

I was underwhelmed by the prestidigitation options in the feats. They didn't seem to offer anything of particular value - certainly they weren't as useful as the other cantrip options. Prestidigitation is also the only cantrip option that grows weaker the more times you take the feats (because it's less likely you'll need to use it).

That said, I liked the other options! They seem fairly specific for a feat - maybe an epic tier feat could be "Complete Cantrip Expertise" - allowing you to use all the cantrip options with a single feat.

 

[yeturs]

i love it. quite ssimply yeturs approved.

i think preseditation (not even going to try spelling that right) is a tad under done, but hey, why take it if you dont like presto anyway?

i am seriously thinking about adding these to my game, thanks Ravenheart!

 

[ravenheart]

I was underwhelmed by the prestidigitation options in the feats. They didn't seem to offer anything of particular value - certainly they weren't as useful as the other cantrip options. Prestidigitation is also the only cantrip option that grows weaker the more times you take the feats (because it's less likely you'll need to use it).

That said, I liked the other options! They seem fairly specific for a feat - maybe an epic tier feat could be "Complete Cantrip Expertise" - allowing you to use all the cantrip options with a single feat.

Thanks, but I have to disagree on having a single epic feat give the benefits of several lower level feats. That would just make those lower level feats redundant, and act as useless baggage for several levels as they slowly are retrained.

i love it. quite ssimply yeturs approved.

i think preseditation (not even going to try spelling that right) is a tad under done, but hey, why take it if you dont like presto anyway?

i am seriously thinking about adding these to my game, thanks Ravenheart!

Thanks! Go right ahead and use them, but check out my revised version first!

I've revised the feats: I boosted Prestidigitation (wasn't really happy with it in the first place), reformatted the layout (I used the Channel Divinity feats as a model) tried to clarify the feats for ease of reading and comprehension, and I added a few other feats for flavour!

What do you think? Still balanced, still fun?

EDIT: Some further formatting issues and one major change - I added ability score prerequisites to the feats on behalf of a friend's suggestion. Further improves Prestidigitation and emphazises specialization.

 

[Khuxan]

Does Cantrip-Up allow you to use a Cantrip Expertise or Cantrip Mastery, or just the at-will iteration of a cantrip?

For Cantrip Focus, are Expertises and Masteries included for the sake of the defence bonus?

I don't think many people will use resonance at the cost of a feat and a standard action - one square of difficult terrain is rarely going to be a huge disadvantage. What if it was a minor action instead?

Light Expertise's powers grant a sizeable benefit - perhaps too much of a benefit.

I think Cantrip Mastery has been improved sufficiently.

Light Mastery allows you to use light as a free action if surprised - what if you're not surprised? Nova is a very powerful ability - at the very least it needs an attack roll. It should also have its area reduced to burst 1 or even just 1 square, in my opinion. Remember these are extra powers, not replacing any.

I would like the text to be a little clearer on when cantrip means "just the at-wills" and when it means at-will, encounter and daily powers.

Thanks, but I have to disagree on having a single epic feat give the benefits of several lower level feats. That would just make those lower level feats redundant, and act as useless baggage for several levels as they slowly are retrained.

One of my favourite aspects of the retraining rules is that lower-powered feats can be replaced by higher-powered replacements as a character gains levels. That said, I think you've improved the feats to the point where this is no longer necessary.

The formatting is a definite improvement.

 

[ravenheart]

Does Cantrip-Up allow you to use a Cantrip Expertise or Cantrip Mastery, or just the at-will iteration of a cantrip?

Just the cantrip, see below.

For Cantrip Focus, are Expertises and Masteries included for the sake of the defence bonus?

No, see below.

I don't think many people will use resonance at the cost of a feat and a standard action - one square of difficult terrain is rarely going to be a huge disadvantage. What if it was a minor action instead?

I agree with you that it is situational, but so are all of the powers. Resonance is very much a control effect; it is great when you are battling a throng of monsters coming down a narrow corridor or when faced with a quick skirmisher. Resonance could also be used to tremendous effect on a fragile large, or even huge, object. And note that the slowed condition is not dependant on the object shattering, but rather an ambient effect due to the strong vibrations emanating from the object! That said, I changed it to a move action, ok?

Light Expertise's powers grant a sizeable benefit - perhaps too much of a benefit.

Ok? Please explain.

I think Cantrip Mastery has been improved sufficiently.

Good, but could it be taken further? I'm asking because I just tweaked it again, and I gave Prestidigitation Mastery an even greater bump.

Light Mastery allows you to use light as a free action if surprised - what if you're not surprised?

My mistake, fixed it now.

Nova is a very powerful ability - at the very least it needs an attack roll. It should also have its area reduced to burst 1 or even just 1 square, in my opinion. Remember these are extra powers, not replacing any.

I'm not so sure I agree with you, my reasons being:
1) It is a daily power,
2) It targets an unoccupied square
3) It affects all creatures (not just enemies)
4) It requires a paragon feat
5) It requires 2 feats and Cha 13 (not an ability score wizards tend to favour)
None the less, I cleared up the range and effect lines and reduced the affected area as well.

I would like the text to be a little clearer on when cantrip means "just the at-wills" and when it means at-will, encounter and daily powers.

A cantrip is not the same as a Cantrip Expertise or Mastery power. I think it is very clear that the Cantrip Expertise and Mastery feats grant feat powers, which is an entirely different thing than cantrips per se. How would you phrase it if you think it still needs clarification?

One of my favourite aspects of the retraining rules is that lower-powered feats can be replaced by higher-powered replacements as a character gains levels. That said, I think you've improved the feats to the point where this is no longer necessary.

I agree, but what I got hung up on was that you seemed to encourage the idea of a single high-level feat that would replace a bunch of low-level ones in terms of function. Thus the low-level feats would have to be retrained level-by-level, as they would be useless now that there was one feat that did it all! But I digress, I just wanted to make myself clear.

The formatting is a definite improvement.

Good, glad you like it!

Anyway, here is the new tweaked version 2.2!

 

[ravenheart]

Ok, I realized I had forgotten what I actually wanted to do with some of the powers, so I made a couple of major changes:

1. Changed Scream/Thunderclap and Flash/Nova to close burst 1

2. Major Rework of the wording, targeting and effect of Resonance/Shockwave

3. Changed Luminary/Pulsar to melee touch

4. Changed Metacreation/Permanency to close burst 5/10

5. Buffed Cantrip Mimicry/Cantrip Duplication to minor action

Now, I hope I haven't taken them to far in the other direction and destroyed the balance. But they fit better thematically this way, I think.

1 XP to the one that finds "certain similarities" with a couple of famous games in the naming conventions...

Without further ado, the newly revised version 2.3!

 

[evilbob]

I haven't read any of the rest of your thread but I looked at the 2.3 version and I just had two quick thoughts: I'd give all of those attacks actual attack rolls. As written they look like auto-hits and that's incredibly powerful. For example, Resonance and Scream would be Int vs. Fort and Flash is Int. vs. Ref.

You may also want to make those feats only give one of those attacks to bring them back in line with other feat-granting powers. For instance, Luminary is really pretty good considering how many things are vulnerable to radiant damage, so giving someone that encounter power by itself for a feat is probably about right, power-wise.

 

[ravenheart]

I haven't read any of the rest of your thread but I looked at the 2.3 version and I just had two quick thoughts: I'd give all of those attacks actual attack rolls. As written they look like auto-hits and that's incredibly powerful. For example, Resonance and Scream would be Int vs. Fort and Flash is Int. vs. Ref.

Are they really that powerful? Think about it:
1) They require atleast ONE feat (and quite possibly more than that).
2) The feats in question have (generally) non-favourable ability scores as prerequisites (Str, Con and Cha; Dex on the other hand can be useful for wizards, but then again Prestidigitation Expretise/Mastery is "weaker" than the rest).
3) They are situational, short-duration effects - NO DAMAGE (not counting mage's strike, it's a bit different).
4) In the heroic tier, you only have a single per encounter use of the powers (this increases in the paragon and epic tier, and can potentially be increased further with a feat; same goes for the daily powers).
5) Adding attack rolls would probably require, to ensure their efficiency, adding the implement keyword or a scaling bonus to attack per tier. This would potentially make the powers to powerful, as various implement properties could be used to augment the cantrip powers.

But if you still think they are to powerful I guess i could add attack rolls. Then the trouble remains to decide which defense it attacks.

You may also want to make those feats only give one of those attacks to bring them back in line with other feat-granting powers. For instance, Luminary is really pretty good considering how many things are vulnerable to radiant damage, so giving someone that encounter power by itself for a feat is probably about right, power-wise.

The idea behind giving two powers per feat was to add an aspect of versatility to the feat. Besides, only one of the powers can be used per encounter (at least until the paragon tier). In comparison to Channel Divinity, the divine classes already have channel divinity options built into them (but I guess wizards already have cantrips built in as well).

 

[evilbob]

Are they really that powerful?

Yeah. I think so anyway. Doing no damage does not make something weak. Granting CA to all allies? That's like a 5th level rogue daily power. Yeah, they at least need attack rolls, and even with attack rolls some are still fairly strong. I don't think it would be hard to decide on a defense.

The idea behind giving two powers per feat was to add an aspect of versatility to the feat. Besides, only one of the powers can be used per encounter (at least until the paragon tier).

I didn't realize you could only pick one; like a drow, right? Yes, that is certainly better. Giving the best ones high action costs is a good balance, too, along with making them encounter powers.

Just be careful about making it so good that no wizard in his right mind would ever -not- pick up the feat: that means it's probably broken.