Mearls on Controller design and At-Will balance

[MwaO]

I don't see how having the ability to toss a burst 1 once/encounter can be /better/ than being able to toss a burst 1 every round. That's just absurd on the face of it.

Once per encounter at the cost of a feat(with possible free skill) vs. every round at the cost of an at-will. Given non-human wizards only get one additional at-will, that's a high cost if there's no moment where Scorching Burst represents the best possible action.

This is also in the context that Wizards, if anything, should find it difficult to pick Encounter/Daily powers that don't target areas. Non-Wizards getting it once a day often have problems picking up area damage.

 

[Lizard]

He picked the two weakest at-wills. It's not surprising he isn't doing well.

I was wrong; he took MM and Thunderwave, which is where his 10 Wis really shines. I think his Encounter must be the icy one.

 

[Jack99]

The wizard in our 4e game is stunningly ineffectual. I think the "Nerf wizards!" meme went way too far. We have a melee-heavy party (rogue, ranger, paladin, wizard, bard) and we are in an urban campaign, which means a lot of tight alleys, small rooms, and interior spaces. Slowing enemies doesn't work because the melee is rushing into range with them. Hindering terrain screws us up at well. Area spells catch us in the bargain. So, pretty much, he's limited to magic missile, or "Magic Missing", as it has become known.

Definitely needs a buff.

Which is most of them.

I admit, we do need to work on tacticals. In our last game, in a mansion, we spread out to look for a room and so triggered several encounters, and we had people running around from room to room instead of focus firing. In most cases, though, if the wizard had a clear shot at the target, someone else was also nearby. There was a lot of opening, closing, and locking doors, and while there was a nice open area for a fight, it was being covered by a (regenerating) archer on a balcony we couldn't reach. The two ranged characters were both "squishy" and didn't want to expose themselves to artillery fire, and the rest of us were fighting in narrow hallways and small rooms. The large, open, rooms had no monsters in them.

Other fights have been in crowded bars, narrow alleys, and sewers. In most cases, it takes a round to close the distance and then it's melee-on-melee, with magic missile being the only spell the wizard can bring to bear with any effectiveness. We should be "dinging" next game, and we'll see if additional feats/utility help.

My campaign has been going on for a while now, and players are approaching level 10 (will ding next time, if they survive their first dragon-encounter). One thing I have noticed is how the wizard has become much better over time. Not due to getting more encounters and dailies, and thus using his at-wills more, but instead because the party has embraced the whole cooperative spirit of 4e instead of playing me, myself and I, which they had a tendency to do in the previous editions. That cooperation has helped our wizard immensely, because he can use his area attacks a lot more often, when other players help position the monsters so that the party can benefit from having a wizard. Also, he has himself become better using the push effect of thunderwave coupled with action points and area of effects to achieve a great synergy.

Sure, he does not feel so hot against solo monsters, but on the other hand, no one can touch him when the battlefield is flooded with minions. But that's okay, as he says, he doesn't expect the wizard to be the best in every circumstance, as he was in the previous editions (especially 2e, which is what we have played the most).

Anyway, to sum up, I do not feel there is anything underpowered about the wizard. I would wish however, that all of his spells did less damage, but impaired the monsters more instead. But that's for another thread.

Cheers

 

[Budalic]

Magic Missile is about half striker damage (6.75dpr vs 12-15dpr for strikers).
You need to constantly hit 2 targets with something like scorching burst to do "near" what a ranger would do with a twin strike + quarry attack or what a rogue would do with a sneak attack.

Assume that monster's ref defense is 2 points below AC. At first level, ranger with twin strike will do, assuming 50% chance of hitting, quarry, 18 dex and longbow, 0.5 * 5.5 + 0.5 * 5.5 + 0.75 * 3.5 = 8.125 damage. Wizard with 18 int and scorching burst will do 0.5 * 7.5 + 0.5 * 7.5 = 7.5 damage against 2 targets. That's 0.625 damage difference - enough to account sometimes catching 3 targets. I didn't count feats, because effect of astral fire and weapon focus / ex. weapon prof. is equal for this comparision.
And if party cooperates with you (delay/ready), it's easier to set up 2 or 3 tragets for attack.

 

[James McMurray]

I was wrong; he took MM and Thunderwave, which is where his 10 Wis really shines. I think his Encounter must be the icy one.

This isn't a case of the wizard being too weak, it's a case of one person making a very sub par build for RP reasons. There's nothing wrong with it if he enjoys himself, but it doesn't work as evidence of the wizard's usefulness in a normal game.

 

[Lizard]

This isn't a case of the wizard being too weak, it's a case of one person making a very sub par build for RP reasons. There's nothing wrong with it if he enjoys himself, but it doesn't work as evidence of the wizard's usefulness in a normal game.

Wasn't 4e supposed to free us from the terrors of the character optimization board and the need for "system mastery"?

Seriously, I hope he takes advantage of the ability to respec at every level. His Wisdom won't be at +1 until, what, 8th level?

My own character is also "sub par" according to the number crunchers on RPG.net, but he's still very effective. (I have a 2WF ranger with a 14 Cha, 12 con, 12 dex, 12 wis, 18 Str, 10 int.) I plan on spending a lot of his feats on skill training and skill focus to round out the character concept I couldn't build at 1st level -- he needs Streetwise, bad. Indeed, none of the characters in our group are "optimized" -- we all start with a concept and then make the numbers fit as closely as possible to the character we want to play.

 

[James McMurray]

You don't need a char op board to know that minimizing your wisdom and then picking a power that relies on wisdom is going to make you less effective in combat. Like I said, if it's fun, that's good. I'm not disparaging people who don't go for the bang at every point on their sheet, I rarely do that these days myself. I'm just saying that it isn't a good starting point for making the case that a certain class is underpowered just because someone can make a build that's underpowered.

 

[jorwland]

Re: Wizard At-Wills

Playtest these changes:

1) Ray of Frost. Targets one or TWO creatures in range. (choose targets near the rogue if you got one it since a slowed creature grants combat advantage and therefore sneak attack from rogue)

2) Cloud of Daggers. Sustain Minor. (Allowing wizards to keep this single square as an obstacle without re-casting is a good thing. It wold be possible to have 3 up at the same time at the expense of other actions)

3) Magic Missile. Add push 1, Push 2 at paragon, push 3 at epic.

 

[Mengu]

Wasn't 4e supposed to free us from the terrors of the character optimization board and the need for "system mastery"?

I don't know if it's supposed eliminate mastery requirement or not, but it doesn't remove stupidity from the equation. There is nothing stopping someone from building a fighter with 8 strength and 20 intelligence. But the book does have suggestions and guidelines for each class, which will help you toward a playable character, as opposed to a gimped character.

However it can't be denied that mastery of the system does open more doors and leads to more educated decissions (optimized or not).

 

[deleteme123456]

firesnakearies[/b]]
NEW SCORCHING BURST
Damage: 1d6 fire damage (plus see effect)

Effect: Target takes additional fire damage equal to the caster's Intelligence modifier at the end of its next turn, unless it spends a move action to extinguish the flames, which is automatically successful with no saving throw needed. This damage persists indefinitely until the target spends the required move action to end it. Additional applications of this effect from multiple castings of Scorching Burst do not stack.

How about:

Scorching Burst
Arcane, Fire, Implement, Zone
Standard Action Area Burst 1 within 10
Int vs Reflex
Target: All creatures in burst
Hit: 1d6 fire damage
Effect: The burst creates a zone of flames. Any creature that ends its turn in the zone or that enters the zone takes additional damage equal to your CON, DEX, or WIS modifier. Overlapping applications of this zone do not stack. The zone persists until the end of your next turn.
Special: When you gain this power, choose CON, DEX, or WIS for the secondary damage. Once you make this choice, it cannot be changed, even by retraining.

[I really don't know why you need that clause about 'cannot be changed' but all the other powers like this have it.]

The zone effect is nice -- you get a little battlefield control, and the end of turn instead of start of turn makes it non auto-kill vs minions, and still gives monsters the chance to get out... and if they're up against defenders near the front line they may be taking OAs to move.