Arcanist playtest

[Balesir]

Sometimes you have to get burned in order to learn your lesson. With the old Flaming Sphere you can have damage and control.

Well, nope. Damage, yes, definitely; control, not much.

I have played a Wizard since day one and my character is a control machine. I can have two zones going at the same time and my team mates move the enemies into them.

That's not control, it's an attack boost. More of a leader schtick than a controller one.

Ever moved a Flaming Sphere into a group of enemies and watch as they run because they got flamed?

Nope. As DM I hardly ever bother moving monsters away from a FS because either it will be moved to get better advantage (in which case the monster needn't move) or the monster is considered an important target (in which case it will get hit whether it moves or not). With the new version, I might very well move monsters away - they will definitely avoid damage, that way. Of course, if the move away means ignoring a mark, the damage will likely not be enough to bother moving, but that just means the EoT effect should be stiffer, not that it should be SoT.

About intercepting enemies, well it's just what I said. I have had minions and enemies on their last leg attempt to gang up on me because I got moved all alone. Well I knew it was their turn after mine and I needed to do something quick. I already had my Flaming Sphere up so what I did was move the sphere to intercept them and when their turn came up they immediately took the damage which killed the minions in range and bloodied another non-minion. Well instead of 4 guys coming at me, it was only one.

So, just to be clear, you had screwed up your tactics so badly that the wizard was caught facing four enemies alone, and you were glad you had a blaster spell to sic on 'em? Hm, yeah, I can see the utility, but not the justice of a free 'defender substitute' for the wizard.

I understand that everyone's mileage will vary, but my group is the one that I have to look out for and these changes have proven to be a negative influence on our game.

The changes have been in playtest, what, a week? And already their "negative influence" is proven? That must have been one intense session.

 

[Gortle]

Nope. As DM I hardly ever bother moving monsters away from a FS because either it will be moved to get better advantage (in which case the monster needn't move) or the monster is considered an important target (in which case it will get hit whether it moves or not). With the new version, I might very well move monsters away - they will definitely avoid damage, that way. Of course, if the move away means ignoring a mark, the damage will likely not be enough to bother moving, but that just means the EoT effect should be stiffer, not that it should be SoT.

Moving monsters away from a FS is almost always the best tactic. Moving 1 monster away from a FS is often pointless.

A group of monsters can't pack in and hold a corridor anyway against a party with 2 or more at will area or blast attacks. Most parties should be able to do that.

 

[Gortle]

Mmmmm, I have to conclude that you misunderstand the nature of tactics. Tactics isn't about a +1 or a +2. Tactics is much more than that.

Please there is no reason to get condescending just because I am disagreeing with you. There are multiple levels to tactics.

I didn't actually claim it did, I was mentioning Stinking Cloud there IIRC. The point is none of this gets at the point, which is that the new FS motivates monsters to move, the old one doesn't in as many cases. New one is more about control, old one is more about damage. The point holds.

I have already agreed there is more motivation for monsters to move away from the moveable zones if they do their damage at the end of turn. But were we disagree is that there is significant motivation for monsters to move anyway away from the original beginning of turn zones.

It is perfectly OK to give wizards a few daily powers that do moderate damage in an area. Players should be choosing the style of wizard they want to play not completely limited by having their damage options nullified. They shouldn't be forced to be pure controllers.

The changes to Flaming Sphere seriously downgrade its damage output for a minor increase in control. Also the fun tactic of punting monsters next to the sphere is gone.

The changes to Stinking Cloud seriously downgrade its damage output for a minor increase in control and a big loss in tactical flexibility.
My group used to use it as a moveable shield against ranged attacks as it blocked line of sight. Now it is only heavily obscured, sure this is 50% protection against ranged attacker but the cost of using the moveable zone is move actions on the wizard so you lose half your speed and may have to spend twice the time as a target. Suffering twice the attacks with 50% protection is roughly equal and another tactic has little value and gets flushed down the errata hole. Lets not forget that it now of no value at shielding from area of effect attacks as they aren't affected by concealment.

If WotC feel the need to rebalance these powers fine. But they are also killing some of the fun tactics players used with these powers and that is bad for the game.



While we are rebalancing things can we please improve some of the marginal options.

Web would be really fun if it affected creatures that moved into it. No dashing through the web anymore but PCs and monster could be punted into it.

Wall of Fog would be much better if it was movable or larger in size. It is far too easy to move around.

 

[Raikun]

Sometimes you have to get burned in order to learn your lesson. With the old Flaming Sphere you can have damage and control. .

You have damage, but very little control with old Flaming Sphere.

And there's no "learning your lesson" with it either seeing as many times there simply is no way to avoid it.

Until now, that they've fixed it.

Old flaming sphere - Monster standing there, watching this ball of flame coming at him unable to move until it's hit him.

New flaming sphere - Monsters finally have the option to jump out of the way.

 

[Oldtimer]

there is significant motivation for monsters to move anyway away from the original beginning of turn zones.

Incorrect. There is no motivation to move away.

The changes to Flaming Sphere seriously downgrade its damage output for a minor increase in control.

Incorrect. The increase in control is major.

Also the fun tactic of punting monsters next to the sphere is gone.

Correct. There are other zones better used for that now.

 

[Gortle]

Incorrect. There is no motivation to move away.

I disagree it is only worth not moving if there is one monster and the wizard can afford to forgo his move action. For monsterS it is often worthwhile moving.

If the wizard has to use 2 move action - giving up his other attack - to get the zone back on target then team monster should be OK with that.

Incorrect. The increase in control is major.

No I disagree it is minor. If the position is that important the monster will soak up the damage regardless. The damage is only equivalent to a hit from a typical basic attack. Many monster have 100+ hit points. The control effect is way weaker than a well placed slow.

If you are arguing that the spell is so strong to drive a group of monsters away from a fixed point then you aren't playing the rest of the wizard spells well enough. A group of monsters in a fixed point that won't maneuver is easy prey to any number of wizard spells.

 

[Raikun]

I disagree it is only worth not moving if there is one monster and the wizard can afford to forgo his move action. For monsterS it is often worthwhile moving.

And often it's only one or two monsters that the wizard wants/needs to move.

The old flaming sphere, more often than not, was cast, did damage to multiple targets at first, with the wizard then just using it as a steady source of single target damage for the rest of the encounter.

The change makes it much more of a tactically interesting spell in my experience. With the old flaming sphere, once the wizard chooses his victim after the first cast, really the best option as the DM was to just either write off the sphere as something that can't be avoided, or try and use the sphere against the players if the rare opportunity occured to do so.

Usually that led to the sphere being a rather static, uninteresting zone that slowly damaged one target.

After we'd changed it, it became a much more fun giant ball of flame rolling around the room with monsters jumping out of the way, which was much closer to how I envisioned the spell being intended.

 

[brehobit]

My 2 cents (I'll send on to Wizards after I get others feedback):

• I'm I missing something, or can a level 5 wizard prepare two level 5 dailies as the spellbook power now reads? I'm assuming this is an error.
• Wand of Accuracy needs to be made clear when you add the bonus. Before you roll? After you know if you hit?
• Force orb really needs a miss effect. Half damage maybe?
• Flaming sphere was too powerful, now it is too weak. Perhaps have it cause damage to anyone that enters a square next to the sphere or ends their turn next to it? That leads to push/pull abuse though (which could be fixed per Stinking cloud). But right now it will very (very) rarely cause damage. Too much of a nuke. Perhaps remove the sustain minor? Perhaps keep the sustain but allow it to move the sphere 3 spaces?
• Fireball needs something more. Big areas can be helpful, but for an "each creature" attack they are a mixed blessing. I'd prefer 5d6 and 5 on-going fire damage (save ends).
• Scorching burst needs some love. At it sits it's really weak compared to the mage's option (freezing burst). Maybe dex mod damage on a miss?

Another problem is that this class is almost entirely weaker than the mage. The mage class abilities are generally much better, they get a free at-will, and their spellbook applies to encounter powers (a non-trivial benefit). A Wizard gets ritual caster, which varies quite a bit in usefulness from table to table (and a mage can take it with a single feat in any case).

So what makes sense to "pump up" the wizard without making it too much? I'd suggest two things:

1. My sense is that an arcanist is to be a generalist. I'd just give them additional at-will selections. Say at level 1, 5, 15, 25 an arcanist may select an additional at-will power. You'd have to add a few more at-will choices to the "base" class, but that's trivial.
2. Also, they should just be better at general magic stuff. Give them a +2 bonus to arcana at level 1, increasing to +3 at 11 and +4 at 21.

Neither bonus should have too much of an impact on the power of an arcanist, but it does make them look like a better option compared to a mage.

 

[brehobit]

It has been nerf way harder than the updated Rain of Steel.

Humm, what update to rain of steel?

 

[brehobit]

One more whine:

Arcane Riposte sucks. It really does. A level 11 wizard with a 22 int, 10 str and a +3 staff can expect to make an attack at +10 (5 for level, 2 for staff, 3 for magic) that does d8+3. With this power I get an attack at +11 for d8+6. Both attacks suck and the difference is minor at best. If the wizard has combat training the staff is much better at +16/d8+6.

By level 21 (int 26, str 12, +5 staff) the staff is at +18 for d8+6 and the arcane riposte is at +18 for d8+8.

I'd suggest just making arcane riposte an at-will power (green text and everything), usable only as an opportunity attack and make it an implement power. Or even better, just make it an at-will melee attack that counts as a basic attack that is an implement power.

Arcane riposte -- Battle mage attack 11
At-will * implement
Standard Action melee 1
target: One creature
Attack: Intelligence +4 vs. AC
Hit d8+Intelligence; Level 21: 2d8+Intelligence. When you hit, pick one of the following: cold, fire, force, or lightning. This power deals that damage type and gains that keyword.

Special: This power may be used as a basic melee attack.