Weapon Classes vs. Implement Classes

[Falling Icicle]

All this talk about the Adventurer's Vault and super powerful new axes, swords and bows has got me thinking. Classes that use weapons benefit far more greatly from their weapon than spell casters do from their implement. Why? Because a weapon determines the die type for the damage of ALL your attacks. Implements offer no similar benefit for spells. Getting a better staff is not going to make my Fireball deal d12s. I think this is partly responsible for Rangers and Rogues so far outperforming Warlocks in the damage department, and why Wizard damage is considered weak by so many.

Discuss.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't know if that's really based on the way implements work vs how weapons work. I think it has more to do with the "shtick" of the Warlock, which is that it has a lot more controller-like features then the other two Strikers, and which probably lead to an intentional reduction of damage values.

I think the "easiest" thing to do for WotC would have been to make Implements just a kind of magical weapon. Games like Diablo already did this, IIRC - Staves, Rods and Wands in Diablo II for example gave you a basic attack you could use while not using any of your powers, just like Swords, Axes and so on did it for non-magical attacks.

I wonder if they didn't do it this way because they wanted to avoid further "video-gamey"-screaming or something like that. But there is an alternative possibility- they didn't do it because balancing powers around damage proscribed by the implement you use gives you less flexibility. You can not only change the number of dice rolled, you can also change the type of dice rolled when using a certain power, and you can also change the range.

But I could see a system where Wands, Staffs, Orbs and Rods gain fixed damage types.
Maybe Wands and Rods are "simple" magical implements. Wands deal 1d6 damage and have a range of 20. Rods deal 1d8 points of damage and have a range of 10.
Holy Symbols, Staffs and Orbs are "advanced" magical implements.
Holy Symbols deal 1d8 damage, have a Range of 5 and do not require you to wield them in your hand.
Staffs deal 1d10 damage and have a Range of 10.
Orbs deal 1d8 damage, have a Range of 20 and add +1 to the area of your blast and burst effects.

Instead of setting fixed ranges, you could also make it range modifiers +0 for Holy Symbols and Rods, +5 for Staffs and Orbs, +10 for Wands
If you'd wanted, you could also add "proficiency" bonuses for each implement. (Wands +3, Staffs +2 and Rods +2, Orbs and Holy Symbols +1)

A spell like Fireball would deal 3 damage. (I standing for Implement damage).

I wouldn't be surprised if some draft for implements used similar ideas.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Actually, video games like Diablo and WoW suffer this same issue. Melee classes in WoW get enormous damage upgrades from their weapons, while casters didn't scale at all until they implemented +spell damage on gear, and even then, a weapon with + spell damage makes a far smaller difference to a caster than an equivalent quality weapon makes for a melee class, even now. Diablo is the same way. It's not the weapon itself that matters to a caster, its the + skills it has on it.

 

[Enforcer]

I don't know, 7d10 plus sending the guy to hell for the Warlock seems more than fair compared to 7[W] for the Level 29 Rogue powers, especially since the Rogue's [W] is likely to be a d4 or d6, d8 for crossbow, tops. And the top level Ranger exploits don't match that kind of damage either.

However, damage isn't always the most important thing. Another Level 29 power for the Warlock does 0 damage but allows total control of a target's actions for one round. That's pretty darn awesome, even with the "no powers or suicide" restrictions.

Anyways, there are plenty of Rods for Warlocks (and implements for the other classes that use them) in Adventurer's Vault too. They may not change the base damage of Warlock powers, but I think everyone is still holding their own quite respectively.

 

[Minigiant]

I think it more has to do with power source and style. Weapon users get their variation of abilities for the chosen weapon. "Spell" users get their variation for the chosen "spell". The Thing that separates a fire magic and a ice mage is the spell.

 

[robotsinmyhead]

I think this is a valid argument, but you missed the part about Weapons imparting a PROFICIENCY bonus and implements not. So not only do basic weapons generally do more damage, they have better hit chances.

This may have been covered before, but I'm kinda new here and I'd love to hear the justification behind this.

 

[Ed Gentry]

Most caster powers (meaning those using implements and not traditional weapons) don't target AC. They target Ref, Fort, etc. which are almost never as high as AC. Traditional weapons DO target AC, so characters using them need a bit of a boost to make up the difference.

That said, as a player of a Warlock at level 9 so far...I'm definitely feeling out-matched by both the fighter and the rogue in my party in terms of damage.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think this is a valid argument, but you missed the part about Weapons imparting a PROFICIENCY bonus and implements not. So not only do basic weapons generally do more damage, they have better hit chances.

This may have been covered before, but I'm kinda new here and I'd love to hear the justification behind this.

As Ed Gentry said - the proficiency bonus is compensated by the lack of armor bonus to AC.

If you look in the DMG, you will notice this reflected in most monster creation guidelines, too. AC is usually higher then the other defenses. (Exceptions are Brutes, I think, which have all the same base defenses, with fortitude in practice being the highest). Likewise, all monster attacks vs AC are higher then attacks vs other defenses.

 

[Plane Sailing]

All this talk about the Adventurer's Vault and super powerful new axes, swords and bows has got me thinking. Classes that use weapons benefit far more greatly from their weapon than spell casters do from their implement. Why? Because a weapon determines the die type for the damage of ALL your attacks. Implements offer no similar benefit for spells. Getting a better staff is not going to make my Fireball deal d12s. I think this is partly responsible for Rangers and Rogues so far outperforming Warlocks in the damage department, and why Wizard damage is considered weak by so many.

Discuss.

Well, I agree with you

Although giving casters +x implements does work in the 'keep hitting things' math department, it does allow/cause them to fall behind in the other departments.

Maybe we'll see a book of arcane goodies whereby a 'fiery staff' allows a wizard to increase the die size of all his fire spells by one step? That kind of thing would work (or indeed they could be 'astral fire' implements, 'burning blizzard' implements and so forth, thus tying them together neatly with the existing feats.)

Cheers

 

[77IM]

Most caster powers (meaning those using implements and not traditional weapons) don't target AC. They target Ref, Fort, etc. which are almost never as high as AC. Traditional weapons DO target AC, so characters using them need a bit of a boost to make up the difference.

And thus full circle to the OP's point: With weapons, the high-[W] ones tend to have the +2 prof bonus instead of the +3. (Unless you get a superior weapon, but then you're paying for it with a feat.) That d12 axe may seem pretty cool but it's a point less accurate than the d10 greatsword, and that makes a lot of difference in the long run.

But with implements, there is no proficiency bonus and no trade-off in damage; hence, Implement powers do constant damage. It would have been an interesting design decision if, say, wands had a +2 prof bonus and did d8 damage, while orbs had a +3 prof bonus and did d6 damage, and staffs had a +2 prof bonus and did d6 damage but gave you +1 AC and Reflex. (I wonder, would such powers use as their variable?) But they decided not to do it that way, probably because spells are much more likely to confer effects beyond just damage, so trading down [W] to get prof bonus would not be balanced the same for all powers.

-- 77IM