Wizard Build Suggestions (PHB ONLY!)

[Danceofmasks]

Yeah, which is yet another reason it doesn't work ...
'cos a skill challenge = an encounter. You can't take 10.

While a potential combat encounter isn't an encounter yet, so if your bonus is high enough, you can take 10 right by.

Me, I'm of the opinion stealth is only really useful to get a surprise round.
And to that end, you don't bother getting stealth-based feats ('cos feats are expensive) ... but items are cool. So is a stealth-boosting background and/or race.

 

[KarinsDad]

Those are mostly typed bonuses, unless I'm missing something.

Now that I have access to more of my books, I'll answer this one.

When 4E was first announced, there was a claim by WotC that there would be very few bonuses to hit due to the way that got out of hand in 3.5. There is a curve for 4E for most PCs versus most defenses of monsters they will run into at their level and bonuses to hit disrupt that curve. And for the most part, the PHB followed this.

Then, as an example, Martial Power came out and there are about a half dozen bonus to attack roll feats (more in PHB II, more in Arcane Powers, etc.). Granted, many of them are specific to a given class or given race and/or given condition, but they exist. There's about 50 feats that do this and many are untyped bonuses. PHB III is going to come out. How many more will exist?

And this does not include powers, items, or racial/class abilities.

Now granted, some of this might be in response to the "high level to hit" math bug. But, the various Expertise feats seem to handle this, so I'm not sure why there are so many others.

 

[Nifft]

As one example:

PHB Stealth:

+5 Trained
+3 feat Skill Focus
+2 power Elven Boots (once per encounter)
+1 to +6 item Elven Cloak or +2 Ring of Invisibility

Ah, I see what you mean. Okay, here's a better example than the new Item bonuses (which don't stack): the Tribal feat bonuses. +2 to a skill (including Stealth), +1 per ally who has the same feat, up to +5. So PCs in a party of 4 could each gain +5 Stealth over what the PHB had allowed.

Now that I recall that, there's one minor example of power creep regarding items: the new Tattoo slot. It's strictly power creep, since the new slot for the new item type gives goodies without taking anything away. (IMHO the items are pretty sweet, too. Some of them are like Paragon Path AP effects.)

Now that I have access to more of my books, I'll answer this one.

When 4E was first announced, there was a claim by WotC that there would be very few bonuses to hit due to the way that got out of hand in 3.5. There is a curve for 4E for most PCs versus most defenses of monsters they will run into at their level and bonuses to hit disrupt that curve. And for the most part, the PHB followed this.

Then, as an example, Martial Power came out and there are about a half dozen bonus to attack roll feats (more in PHB II, more in Arcane Powers, etc.). Granted, many of them are specific to a given class or given race and/or given condition, but they exist.

I don't see them able to stack with each other, though, so I don't see the big deal. It's not conditional bonuses that are a problem IMHO, it's stacking bonuses.

There's about 50 feats that do this and many are untyped bonuses. PHB III is going to come out. How many more will exist?

FUD is never a good argument.

Cheers, -- N

 

[bganon]

Now that I recall that, there's one minor example of power creep regarding items: the new Tattoo slot. It's strictly power creep, since the new slot for the new item type gives goodies without taking anything away. (IMHO the items are pretty sweet, too. Some of them are like Paragon Path AP effects.)

I agree with most of your post, but I don't think this is quite fair. Tattoos are classified as wondrous items, which were already slotless. In fact, because of the new "slot" they have a drawback that most wondrous items don't - you can have only one Tattoo. And they still cost money, so it's not really giving new goodies if the DM follows normal treasure guidelines. Your argument taken ad absurdum would imply that any new wondrous item is power creep, because every wondrous item can be carried by a character without dropping anything else.

If Tattoos are significantly better than most other wondrous items, then, yeah, that's some power creep. This may in fact be true. But it's not obvious to me that it is (I can't quite tell, wondrous items seem all over the map in power to me, and quite a few in the PH rather sucked).

 

[Nifft]

I agree with most of your post, but I don't think this is quite fair. Tattoos are classified as wondrous items, which were already slotless. In fact, because of the new "slot" they have a drawback that most wondrous items don't - you can have only one Tattoo. And they still cost money, so it's not really giving new goodies if the DM follows normal treasure guidelines. Your argument taken ad absurdum would imply that any new wondrous item is power creep, because every wondrous item can be carried by a character without dropping anything else.

If Tattoos are significantly better than most other wondrous items, then, yeah, that's some power creep. This may in fact be true. But it's not obvious to me that it is (I can't quite tell, wondrous items seem all over the map in power to me, and quite a few in the PH rather sucked).

It seems to me that they act more like slotted items, though.

Do other slotless, wondrous items have properties that kick in for free under combat conditions (e.g. spending an action point)? I don't recall any, but perhaps I've missed some?

If there are such items, then I'll happily retract my accusation of power creep. (IMHO 4e has been better about power creep so far, but it's still a matter for watchful concern.)

Thanks, -- N

 

[Elric]

Your argument taken ad absurdum would imply that any new wondrous item is power creep, because every wondrous item can be carried by a character without dropping anything else.

Gold prices on items increase significantly faster than the benefits received. To the extent that you can replicate bonuses using multiple items rather than a single item, you can get the same bonuses at a lower gold cost. This is often limited by the limited number of slots you have, daily power limitations, and the fact that many bonuses don't stack (e.g., item bonuses or resistance).

To the extent that you can stack benefits on top of each other and use multiple wondrous items to get around slot restrictions, you'll be able to achieve greater power at a lower gold cost.

Tatoos are one example. Dragonshard Augments (EPG) are another. However, the Solitaires (AV) were an early example of this as well. It meaningfully increases character power to keep making items like these, regardless of whether the new ones in EPG and AV2 are better than AV1's slotless items.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't see them able to stack with each other, though, so I don't see the big deal. It's not conditional bonuses that are a problem IMHO, it's stacking bonuses.

Conditional bonuses often stack.

Rites of Spirits' Blood: Your bonus to attack rolls from your Bloodhunt racial trait increases to +2.

Focused Wizardry: When you use an arcane burst or blast attack power and only one creature is within the area of effect, you gain a +2 bonus to the attack roll.

Spellseer Familiar: While your familiar is in its active state, you gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls with arcane powers against targets adjacent to your familiar.


So sure, this only occurs against a bloodied foe, but it's still +5 to hit and fairly easy to arrange.

 

[Nifft]

Conditional bonuses often stack.

Rites of Spirits' Blood: Your bonus to attack rolls from your Bloodhunt racial trait increases to +2.

Focused Wizardry: When you use an arcane burst or blast attack power and only one creature is within the area of effect, you gain a +2 bonus to the attack roll.

Spellseer Familiar: While your familiar is in its active state, you gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls with arcane powers against targets adjacent to your familiar.


So sure, this only occurs against a bloodied foe, but it's still +5 to hit and fairly easy to arrange.

I dunno, it seems like it might be non-trivial to get your Familiar adjacent, and yet catch only that one critter in the blast or burst. (Also, of course, catching only one critter in a blast or burst means you may be using a lower-damage power than you otherwise could have used.)

For example, Scorching Burst at +2 to attack is still worse at damaging a foe than Cloud of Daggers (assuming a +2 Wisdom).

Cheers, -- N

 

[MadLordOfMilk]

Regarding orb wizard: the only real sacrifice to get "unsaveable" effects in epic with just PHB was starting with 18 wis, which meant 16 int instead of an average 18. As an elf, you'd also have Elven Accuracy to slightly make up for this. 18 wis, boosted every opportunity, rises to a +8 by the end of epic. Throw in demigod and up it to a +9. Then throw in spell focus, and you just gave -11 to saves, making it unsaveable even on a 20 (unless nat20 always saves by your rules, in which case you don't even need 18wis).

The items just meant you could do it a lot earlier, and made it easier to get the extra 5 to counter the +5 bonus solos got.

Before you give up on Magic Missile entirely, it's worth checking out the Warlord's potential to grant basic attacks. Warlords in general are excellent at this, but the PHB only Inspiring Warlord might not have much at all. If it does grant a reasonable number of basics, some of which you could benefit from, then it might be worth having (or retraining into) Magic Missile. That's pretty much the only reason I'd recommend it, though.

t~

I keep hearing this, yet despite having actually built several warlords, the only noteworthy use of basic attacks have all been basic melees in my experience. Could you give an example where Magic Missile could be used?

 

[KarinsDad]

I dunno, it seems like it might be non-trivial to get your Familiar adjacent, and yet catch only that one critter in the blast or burst. (Also, of course, catching only one critter in a blast or burst means you may be using a lower-damage power than you otherwise could have used.)

Spell Accuracy. Or the laymans method, attack one guy on one side of the fight. And getting your Familiar adjacent is merely a move action.

For example, Scorching Burst at +2 to attack is still worse at damaging a foe than Cloud of Daggers (assuming a +2 Wisdom).

Maybe so. But, Cloud of Dagger is limited to a single target. Scorching Burst can be used against multiple targets at +0 to +3, and +3 to +5 against a single target. Cloud of Daggers is still limited (in this example) to single target +1 to +3. This allows the Wizard to take a different single target attack that targets Will like Illusory Ambush or Phantom Bolt.

There are also examples with attack bonuses from paragon paths as well. And, the +2 single target area effect feat is not needed to still get +3.

And this is just one example. There are others.