And so I thought... what if mages attacked.... magically?

[Veritas]

Hmm... that's pretty good... however, I'm not sure something of this nature would vary in damage based on size. I realize a small-sized crossbow does less damage than a medium sized, but this attack is still using magic, as opposed to actual physical ammunition. I don't think that a small wizard or sorcerer would be limited to a small attack size/damage. Giving it 1d6 damage for all sizes would be fine, I think. Or maybe... make it start out as 1d4 and then you get +1 damage per level, or maybe just per two levels... so even at higher levels it's still a worthwhile attack form.

 

[JimAde]

Actually I wrote it up like that at first (following RangerWickett's post) but then I thought: If this is designed to replace the crossbow (without making casters more powerful) it shouldn't scale. Casters above a certain level probably don't dust off the old crossbow very often. They have enough spell slots to attack in better ways.

If you want it to scale, I suggest this:

Level Damage
1-3 1d6
4-7 1d8
8-11 2d6
12-15 2d8
16+ 3d6

I have to agree with you on the size thing, though. It felt odd even as I wrote it. But without it small casters get a definite boost. If we make it 1d6 for everybody I think it's fine.

 

[Veritas]

Yeah, I see your point about the higher level casters. I kinda thought that myself. Still, I like your progression. My way gave too high of a minimum damage.

However, maybe without the progression is best. This could be something that the wizard can just fall back onto in higher levels, but is more useful at lower levels, just as the crossbow would be.

 

[JimAde]

Cool. Well Veritas and I are happy, I don't know about everybody else.

 

[Terwox]

This is going into my campaign immediately.
Version I'm using:
Comes from a magic staff that's attuned to the caster, functions exactly like a longbow (except for it being fire damage, because it's a powergame anyway. If I wasn't worried about balance [there's only one character, a gestalt bard/fire sorceror] it would be different.) so d8, 20/x3, multiple attacks happily allowed at will. balanced? no, but I'm not concerned. The problem in the game will be fire resistance, not DR.
The character is an elf, so already has a longbow, so, I don't want to penalize them for using a weapon with a lot more style. Will probably come out of your traditional mage's staff with a ruby on the end of it.
But yeah... I'm thinking about making this a permanent inclusion in my games. Not sure why I haven't already!
So mine is:

		Cost	Dmg (S)	Dmg (M)	Critical Range	Increment	Weight	Type
Flamestaff	–	1d6	1d8	20/x3	80 ft.		     5lbs	      Fire

Eh, I don't know how to do that, oh well. (lazy.)

 

[Veritas]

Cool. Well Veritas and I are happy, I don't know about everybody else.

hehehe.

I've been thinking of something like this for my campaign, but my first thought was to have the wizard's staff or wand be like the cleric's holy symbol, so it's necessary for all spellcasting, and would take the place of many material components. Adding this little ability is quite appropriate, I think.

 

[Naathez]

Then it seems the magestrike idea with the staff focus is a winner!!! Thank you ALL people for the feedback. And for your time and attention.

Stay tuned for more ideas....

 

[Grayhawk]

I've been thinking of something like this for my campaign, but my first thought was to have the wizard's staff or wand be like the cleric's holy symbol, so it's necessary for all spellcasting, and would take the place of many material components.

Regardless of whether you want a Magestrike ability or not, this thread gave me the same idea - that a Wizard's (no cost) components could be replaced by a staff focus.

Whether or not this should be the same for all Wizard's could depend on the campign's flavor.

E.g. an Arthurian/Tolkinesque game could require all Wizards to have a staff focus, a Harry Potter themed world would require a wand and a 'standard' D&D campaign could offer the choice between staff, wand or normal components at character creation.

 

[ARandomGod]

Magestrike is pretty cool... it's not the way I would go.

Actually, the way I *went* when I thought this was to simply give mages increased access to cantrips, I think that I gave them bonus cantrips for intelligence, and then multiplied the number they could cast per day by 1/2 their mage level. Which worked pretty well. You never saw a mage using a non magical attack again. This can be really important as those ranged touch attacks make a real difference in higher levels. And I don't think it's too powerful to give it to 'em.

On the other hand, to go this route, and just give them a magestrike type ability. Personally I would stat it differently.

Have it do d3 damage, and be a ranged touch attack, just like the relevant cantrips. Give it all the stats of a ranged touch attack cantrip... but have it be physical only, and for that matter, give them INT mod bonus to damage...

Hrmmm...

OK, or how about this.
Magestrike... you can manifest magical energy as physical force. Damage d3, bludgeoning (physical), DOES count as magical for DR (hey, the mage should get a bonus for that! It's clearly magic. Sure low level mages *should* be good for hitting the ghost... once. Then dying a horrible death as the mage remembers that pitiful hit die) If manifested as a melee weapon it also gets int mod bonus to hit and to damage, if manifested as a ranged attack, it has the range increments of a crossbow, provokes AoO's, recieves + int mod to damage, and it can be manifested as a ranged attack a number of times per round equal to the number of ranged attackes you would normally be able to make as determined by your BAB.

This makes it useful both as a melee and a ranged attack, does not give it touch attack bonuses, but does give it bonus to hit similiar to a composite short bow... and gives is a longer range than perhaps it should have... OK, make the range appropriate for a cantrip: Close.

 

[ARandomGod]

Further thoughts...
Actually, allowing the strike to be fired off more than once might be too much. Although only *might*, after all, a mage only gets two attackes all the way through twentieth level.

But making it one attack per round makes it more spell like. I'd say give it verbal but not somatic components. One attack if ranged, you do not threaten that round, and you provoke AoO's, just as if ranged. As many as you'd normally get if melee, and with a melee range, 5ft only, but it doesn't have to manifest as a dagger or club or whatever, it can still shoot as if "ranged" for flavor, but not provoke AoO's and you DO threaten, to show that it's a melee attack.

Oh, and for the melee version +int mod to hit and damage, only + int mod to damage for the ranged version.