Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Wizard Implement Expertise
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4975400" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Wizards certainly have secondary stats just as much as many other classes do. Basically ALL single primary stat classes use the primary for all attack rolls. Secondary stats on these classes are always riders and wizards have all kinds of different riders on their powers. Thunderwave has a WIS rider just as a simple example. Given the power of the wizard's implement mastery features their use of secondary stats is also fairly non-trivial. No orbizard would be worth squat without putting points in WIS for example. The very fact that you mention the CON dependency of summoning wizards also says something doesn't it? Wizards are a BIT of a unique class design in that they seem to be designed not to rely too heavily on one single secondary stat or at least you have more of an option to spread your points around or pile them up in one place depending on how much you want to specialize. </p><p></p><p>I can see the point with the expertise feat. It could have been broken up into a series of feats for each implement with different requirements, etc. As a house rule that seems like a decent way to go. Just generally though I like the concept of ability score requirements on feats. It really makes optimization a lot more of a process of trading off one thing for another. "Do I just keep boosting my INT sky high or do I toss a point or two into this secondary stat so I can take a feat that puts me at about the same power level?" You end up with 2 equally good but different sets of choices. Personally I think they've tended to drop the ball with later books where they seem to be mostly abandoning the whole idea. Same thing with using typed bonuses. I think more things should have been typed bonuses so that super specializing in one area is possible but it requires taking some kind of top tier feat at some point that has difficult prereqs instead of being able to pile on a near infinite series of smaller and easier to get bonuses. Plus it would let high level PCs free up a feat slot or two for better customization or filling in a weak spot or two.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 4975400, member: 82106"] Wizards certainly have secondary stats just as much as many other classes do. Basically ALL single primary stat classes use the primary for all attack rolls. Secondary stats on these classes are always riders and wizards have all kinds of different riders on their powers. Thunderwave has a WIS rider just as a simple example. Given the power of the wizard's implement mastery features their use of secondary stats is also fairly non-trivial. No orbizard would be worth squat without putting points in WIS for example. The very fact that you mention the CON dependency of summoning wizards also says something doesn't it? Wizards are a BIT of a unique class design in that they seem to be designed not to rely too heavily on one single secondary stat or at least you have more of an option to spread your points around or pile them up in one place depending on how much you want to specialize. I can see the point with the expertise feat. It could have been broken up into a series of feats for each implement with different requirements, etc. As a house rule that seems like a decent way to go. Just generally though I like the concept of ability score requirements on feats. It really makes optimization a lot more of a process of trading off one thing for another. "Do I just keep boosting my INT sky high or do I toss a point or two into this secondary stat so I can take a feat that puts me at about the same power level?" You end up with 2 equally good but different sets of choices. Personally I think they've tended to drop the ball with later books where they seem to be mostly abandoning the whole idea. Same thing with using typed bonuses. I think more things should have been typed bonuses so that super specializing in one area is possible but it requires taking some kind of top tier feat at some point that has difficult prereqs instead of being able to pile on a near infinite series of smaller and easier to get bonuses. Plus it would let high level PCs free up a feat slot or two for better customization or filling in a weak spot or two. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Wizard Implement Expertise
Top