D&D 4E Revised 4E Wizard Class with Freeform Spellcasting System

[Garthanos]

OK, but this is getting dangerously close to the stick approach again. It may be closing A particular loophole (if one exists, I'm not sure) but it probably doesn't come close to closing them ALL. This is of course a danger with a system like 4e when you introduce an entirely new element. Slayers, for example, kind of 'break' the MBA, making it too good. It isn't enough to really 'break 4e' but it definitely creates some weird and not really thematically justified synergies like between Slayers and Warlords.

MM didnt think of those in advance it was short sighted narrow visioned and demonstrated lack of empathy for the over all system.

If MM can brokes it I can fixes it... zing

No but seriously I am not looking at this as a design idea to take exactly the classes as stand and tack it on to them but rather to construct and present them in terms of this which may well mean Slayer is built entirely different.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, I understand that none of this is a 'tack on' solution.

Anyway, I'm not saying it won't work. I'm saying I think that the game you will get will be quite a bit different from how 4e works now.

Characters will do a lot more spamming of basically the same 'power'. They will select an optimum set of options and stick with it for a wide variety of their 'bread and butter' attacks. It will be hard, at best, to produce really interesting sorts of results like a CaGI or an RoS because it would require some very different options which would be even harder to insure the balance and synergy of compared with the fairly tame options that U_K proposes in his designs. At least for the fighter I have a very distinct feeling that the end result would be quite Slayer-like, which isn't IMHO where I want to go with 4e.

No doubt there are ways to introduce other new mechanics to compensate for those issues, but they will tend to move you back in the direction of more complexity. There were e-Classes like the Warpriest which are simpler than full up 4e PHB style classes, but avoid many of the pitfalls of them. My impression is it is harder to do this well, though. A number of the e-classes of this general type were fairly meh. The scout for instance, and the thief, as well as the sentinel are all tactically inferior to their PHB counterparts, though not by as much as the Slayer and Knight. I think this is a function of the limited options as well as an ill-adised attempt to subvert the source/role concepts. So we might say that there is A way to cut back on power sprawl and still do a decent class, which seems to be by converting encounter powers into static boosters, but oddly Essentials never quite tried THAT.

 

[Garthanos]

Y
No doubt there are ways to introduce other new mechanics to compensate for those issues, but they will tend to move you back in the direction of more complexity.

It occurred to me that the idea of repertoire / set of signature moves is exactly moving back towards the you have these powers approach to a certain degree. I think its fine to solve some things differently, without abandoning paradigm elements of course.

 

[Garthanos]

Weirdly enough, the Revised Rogue and Cleric classes were basically finished, However I can't find the appropriate notebook. I'll have another hunt and see what I can see but its not looking good.

...that said I DID find the beginnings of the 4E Immortal Tier system I was working on which would have been awesome, albeit totally hamstrung by what would have been my need to completely design all the monsters* for such a tier as well.

*One of the problems with 4E was the lack of scalability. I was planning to flesh out the monster roster through a bunch of epic and immortal tier adventures with pretty much all new monsters including super-solo's and horde's...damn the Iron Tower of Dispater adventure would have made you wet your panties. C'est la vie.

Heck we didnt even get an Epic DMG III smh...

I have recently been concluding we have practical board size issue for epic feeling well epic...with huge amounts of Knock Back for your hay maker and everything.

Immortal Tiers seems like it would high light the problem even more

 

[Tony Vargas]

Is it weird that I find Come And Get It --> "Very 4e" and necessary for any true descendant.

Not at all, it's such a broader-heroic genre staple, and 4e is the only version of D&D to even attempt it, mechanically, plus it drew so much h4te...

...it's iconic.

 

[Upper_Krust]

You realize a single Epic Wizard can one round your Orcus by your rules, right? With the use of 2 encounter powers…

Doesn't even require any optimization other than initiative and be good at hitting.

I'm curious as to how.

Little pressed for time, I'll reply to other comments tomorrow.

 

[MwaO]

I'm curious as to how.

Little pressed for time, I'll reply to other comments tomorrow.

Ok, just noticed the Wing interrupt, so it'll take just a touch of optimization - Quickened Spellcaster feat. However, also just noted what Ray does, so instead of needing Encounter powers to take Orcus down, we just need at-wills.

At 29+, at-will powers are 3d6. Ray adds a die, so 4d6. Annihilation does damage = bloodied value+damage roll and takes # of dice, divides by 4. So any level 29+ Epic Wizard can do a 1d6+bonuses+annihilation as an at-will power. Your Orcus has 1500 hp, so he takes 750+1d6+bonuses on a hit. You didn't give him immunity to annihilation, so that's that. He can block one attack as an interrupt with his wing, but then has to wait until next turn to do it again.

So Minor: Annihilate. Standard: Annihilate, AP: Annihilate again and down he goes if you hit him three times. And assuming you optimize around hitting, it isn't hard to nearly guarantee that happening. And again, this is just the use of at-wills.

 

[Garthanos]

Is it weird that I find Come And Get It --> "Very 4e" and necessary for any true descendant.

Not at all, it's such a broader-heroic genre staple, and 4e is the only version of D&D to even attempt it, mechanically, plus it drew so much h4te...

...it's iconic.

For some reason my mind read that "it's ironic" several times.

 

[Garthanos]

So Minor: Annihilate. Standard: Annihilate, AP: Annihilate again and down he goes if you hit him three times.

Predictability is Bad
I have noticed that boring is as bad as over powered... and the cure for boring might be reducing the chance to hit for repeating ie the predictability is bad in battle idea is perhaps even realistically why we do not pull the same tricks again and again.

Still looks like the numbers need some crunching.

By the way I want to thank people for looking at this again.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Ok, just noticed the Wing interrupt, so it'll take just a touch of optimization - Quickened Spellcaster feat. However, also just noted what Ray does, so instead of needing Encounter powers to take Orcus down, we just need at-wills.

At 29+, at-will powers are 3d6. Ray adds a die, so 4d6. Annihilation does damage = bloodied value+damage roll and takes # of dice, divides by 4. So any level 29+ Epic Wizard can do a 1d6+bonuses+annihilation as an at-will power. Your Orcus has 1500 hp, so he takes 750+1d6+bonuses on a hit. You didn't give him immunity to annihilation, so that's that. He can block one attack as an interrupt with his wing, but then has to wait until next turn to do it again.

So Minor: Annihilate. Standard: Annihilate, AP: Annihilate again and down he goes if you hit him three times. And assuming you optimize around hitting, it isn't hard to nearly guarantee that happening. And again, this is just the use of at-wills.

Well if Orcus wins initiative he Last Words your character, uses Curse of Brittle Bones, Death from Above, Action Points and uses Wrath of Orcus. He autoblocks your first Annihilation attempt, uses another Action Point on round 2 and assuming you hit with an eventual Annihilation attack and bloody him it just triggers into gaining another attack AND another Action Point.

That said, I do see the sort of problems you are talking about.

It 'might' be better to have:

Disintigration = +1/2 Bloodied Value Damage on a Crit

Annihilation = +Bloodied Value Damage on a Crit