My playtest of new Mage (Essentials) spells

[Nork]

range 20

+200 gold = all minions killed

you are not forced to take it... but it is better than you make it...

there are times when the party can just use the surprise round to blast the enemies at range, when they are in a formation or whatever...

it is not the typical balanced encounter, but it happens

.
.
.
.
.

(except when you play put your creatures on the battle map and start rolling kind of game)

edit: a fountain at an open place is wasted...

fireball is an outdoor spell... it has always been...

I just think you are evaluating fireball outside of a reasonable context...

Spend 200 gold when you cast it?

When the context is that for a standard level 5 party, the Wizard's cut of the gold for the entire level is 400 gold... That doesn't seem reasonable.


No, you are not forced to take it, and no it isn't worthless.

However, in the context of choosing between fireball and other level 5 wizard spells, it is bad.

It is bad like a +3 sword is "bad" like if the DM says "you can have a +3 sword or a +5 sword, pick one". Yea, the +3 sword isn't useless, but in the context of choosing one, it really is the bad option.

You can choose the +3 sword, you can get it done with the worse option, but the rest of the party is going to have to pick up your slack. If the whole party picks +3 swords instead of +5 swords, then it generally leads to combat dysfunction and the DM gets a headache.


When my level 5 wizard is sitting there with a spellbook containing Stinking Cloud, Vision of Avarice, Magma Beast and Fireball... Fireball never gets picked. If I'm going to fight some dudes with a lot of minions on a field somewhere, I'll break out the stinking cloud every time.


If you want fireball for roleplaying reasons, there there isn't any reason in the world that your roleplaying would be harmed one bit by WotC making fireball stack up to the level 5 wizard spells on a mechanical level.

 

[Pseudonym]

We started a new game this past Tuesday featuring a Knight and an Evoker Mage (my character). I'd have to say that aside from this being my first controller character, it was pretty fun and I think perhaps overpowered a bit. Granted I lack a bit of perspective on controllers.

I too took Arc Lightning as an at-will. It was fun, and used several times to good effect. On thing though, it is range 20 which targets one or two targets. Fine so far, but it gives no indication as to how far apart the two targets can be. Could you shoot one target 20 squares to your left and one target 20 squares to your right?

I also took Fountain of Flame. Damn that's a fine spell. A daily, but wow, especially coupled with the Staff of the War Mage to make it Blast 2. That's a whole lot of territory.

Ad to that the ability of the evoker to reroll a one on a set of dice and you've got some serious damage potential. I'll have to play more to see how things look, but it seems that the Essentials Mage is a lot of fun.

As a side note, I played a human and had Implement Focus (staff) and Staff Mastery, which I think might be too good of a feat. *shrug*

 

[Tony Vargas]

I too took Arc Lightning as an at-will. It was fun, and used several times to good effect. On thing though, it is range 20 which targets one or two targets. Fine so far, but it gives no indication as to how far apart the two targets can be. Could you shoot one target 20 squares to your left and one target 20 squares to your right?

Yes. 4e powers are usually pretty litteral. I questioned that kind of thing initially, too, since in AD&D there was very often an addtional restriction on how close the targets needed to be together. 4e would handle that by making it a burst power that targeted one or two creatures in the burst.

 

[Aegeri]

I too took Arc Lightning as an at-will. It was fun, and used several times to good effect. On thing though, it is range 20 which targets one or two targets. Fine so far, but it gives no indication as to how far apart the two targets can be. Could you shoot one target 20 squares to your left and one target 20 squares to your right?

Yes you can. As long as the targets are within 20 squares of you it doesn't matter where they are in relation to one another.

 

[Mapache]

Havent seen this mentioned but this isnt true. Suggestion is added to the list of Cantrips and then Mages get to select 3. Minor debuff to the class that explains the Prestidigitation change.

It's not so much a debuff as a change from having a cantrip to having an at-will attack, when you realize that they're getting compensated with Magic Missile. Effectively, Wizards get 4 cantrips and 2 at-will attacks, while Mages get 3 cantrips and 3 at-will attacks. And, indeed, the Prestidigitation change is to remove the aspect that duplicates part of what Mage Hand does, which was never an issue before because nearly everyone with Prestidigitation also had Mage Hand (whether through being a Wizard or Hybrid Wizard, owning Hedge Wizard Gloves, or taking the Fey Trickster feat), with only a Magician's Ring getting you Prestidigitation without its manipulative cousin.

 

[soundslikeiuz]

For the Fireball threadjack: I houseruled fireball to let the wizard keep casting it as a standard action throughout the encounter. That keeps it relevant, but after the first round, when monsters close in, the wizard usually burns party members with monsters (i ok'd this houserule because I knew the player didn't care about collateral damage - he's taken down all his party members at least once

For the OP: I was surprised by your rave review of Arc Lightning. What made it so effective during actual gameplay? Was it the 20 range? The one or two targets seems nice, but just how effective was that during the encounters?

As for Hypnotism, was it that hard to use? I admit that I really liked the preview of this spell, but your experiences in actual gameplay may make me re-consider. Was it that opportunities to use it never turned up - no heavy damage dealing brutes that would make the risk of a double roll worth it?

tia

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Is there some reason the mage cannot take the ritual caster feat? they are trained in Arcana, No?

No, but it is the most expensive way...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

snip

I think you are wrong...

I will only use that 200g in the same places where I use my rituals... when the party shares the costs...

I will only memorize it when I expect using it against an army in the open...

It is not the +3 sword vs a +5 sword, it is a +3 sword (+6) if poisoned vs a +5 sword...

you always use the +5 sword (stored in your spellbook) and only take out the other one if the situation warrants it.

You have the spellbook feature... don´t forget that.

 

[Nightfly]

For the OP: I was surprised by your rave review of Arc Lightning. What made it so effective during actual gameplay? Was it the 20 range? The one or two targets seems nice, but just how effective was that during the encounters?

Arc Lightning was nothing special, but sometimes you don't need anything special. Beguiling Strands was clearly the best at-will: it massacred minions, ruined enemy positioning, and improved ally positioning. But when the minions were all dead and my party had the bad guys set up where they wanted them, Arc Lightning was a really solid smack-the-monster spell to fall back on. Although it was not my best at-will, it was the one I cast the most.

Mind you, I still probably wouldn't take that spell on a real character, because there are too many good controller-y at-wills available. And as good as it was in this RPGA game, Phantasmal Assault would have been better (we had a multiclass rogue that had trouble getting combat advantage). But Arc Lightning is solid enough. When a level 3 non-striker is dishing out 22 total damage with an at-will, that's not trifling. Even a controller sometimes wants to impose the "dead" condition.

As for Hypnotism, was it that hard to use? I admit that I really liked the preview of this spell, but your experiences in actual gameplay may make me re-consider. Was it that opportunities to use it never turned up - no heavy damage dealing brutes that would make the risk of a double roll worth it?

No. I can only recall one monster that seemed to hit hard enough that Hypnotism might have been worth it, and I don't think it was ever adjacent to another. Also, that monster had a grab, so I was busy using Beguiling Strands to keep breaking it.

If the spell didn't have the word "adjacent" in it, I could have found a use for it. I was surprised how rarely two monsters were side-by-side: the ranged enemies never were, and the melee enemies were usually trying to flank or run past the defender. And even when they were adjacent, well, why not just Arc Lightning them both and skip the low-percentage combo stuff?

Honestly, if a power needs TWO successful die rolls to do something, it better be something awfully good. Knocked unconscious, like Sleep does? Sure. Deliver, say, 1d12+6 melee damage? No. I'm not saying Hypnotism could never be useful, even massively useful, but it seems to me to be very, very situational. I will try it out again sometime and see if works better for me with a different party and module.

 

[Stalker0]

Honestly, if a power needs TWO successful die rolls to do something, it better be something awfully good. Knocked unconscious, like Sleep does? Sure. Deliver, say, 1d12+6 melee damage? No. I'm not saying Hypnotism could never be useful, even massively useful, but it seems to me to be very, very situational.

I'll agree with this. The two hit clause of the spell makes it pretty hard to successfully pull off, even with the +4 bonus.

The saving grace is the stronger the bad guys basic attacks are (and for some enemies they are pretty strong), then the strong this becomes.