Arcanist playtest

[Kinneus]

It's worth noting that just because Flaming Sphere was the Daily 1 of choice at your table doesn't mean that's true at other tables. Other big contenders include Sleep, Arcane Whirlwind, Horrid Whispers, Phantom Chasm and Fountain of Flame. All of those could give Flaming Sphere a run for their money, even before this change. I know of players and groups that consider Flaming Sphere strictly inferior to some of these choices.

The perception that Flaming Sphere was the be all and end all of Wizard level 1 Dailies is honestly something I've only heard repeated in this thread. It's not dogma for the 4e community at large. I'm willing to grant that it was probably big dog for Level 1 Wizard Dailies in the original print of the Player's Handbook if you weren't at all interested in optimizing for Sleep. But that's an awful lot of qualifiers.

That said, I'm willing to accept end-of-turn damage for Flaming Sphere. I'm simply of the opinion that it needs something more (anything more) to keep it a contender. Your solution of making it a close burst 1, Raikun, is actually a pretty decent one.

Edited to add: in the example of the orcs, I was specifically thinking of 3 (statistically) identical orcs, which would roll initiative as one entity and would have the same initiative count.

 

[MrGrenadine]

I see what you mean about this not being the best example of a situation where FS would come into play. However...

Yeah, with EOT in MrGrenadine's situation what you'd want to do is drop the FS in a spot that is in the direct line between the orcs and the wizard. In other words a spot where they would LIKE to end their turn.

This is an interesting idea. But does that mean you'd lose out on the initial damage, and just use the sphere to influence positioning?

The upshot is that you're denying the enemy an area to move into vs denying them the ability to stay in an area they are already leaving. In the SOT example there is zero control, the orcs do exactly what they already wanted to do. In the EOT example there IS control, the wizard is just not understanding how to use it. He CAN stop the enemy from ending its turn in spots he wants them to avoid.

Why isn't it equally an aspect of Control to force a monster to leave a square its already in, as opposed to deterring it from moving into a specific square? Both result in forced movement to avoid damage.

And in both examples, the orcs do exactly what they want to do--they attack the wizard. The only difference I can see is that the wizard has a better chance of living through the attack.

Note that this is the extreme case of FS, BUT it actually is a perfect illustration SOT = all damage, no control. EOT = all control, no damage. Reality will be more grey, but it reveals the nature of the difference perfectly.

So, yes, I see why in the EoT example, the wizard CAN stop the enemy from ending its turn in spots he wants them to avoid.

But I see the benefit in the SoT example, too, because the wizard CAN stop an enemy from staying in a spot he wants them to move away from.

I'm really not trying to be obtuse. I just don't get it.

 

[WalterKovacs]

So, yes, I see why in the EoT example, the wizard CAN stop the enemy from ending its turn in spots he wants them to avoid.

But I see the benefit in the SoT example, too, because the wizard CAN stop an enemy from staying in a spot he wants them to move away from.

I'm really not trying to be obtuse. I just don't get it.

With EoT, the monster knows moving away will avoid the damage for that round.

With SoT, moving away means the wizard has to move the sphere on his turn, but unless the monster moves to a place where the sphere can't follow, he can't be guaranteed to avoid the sphere. You can move away from it, but you or the sphere can be moved before the next SoT, thus negating the attempt to avoid taking damage (and eventually, the inevitability of the damage would cause an enemy to just ignore the sphere and move where they want).

Now, as a group, monsters can spread out to avoid multiple being caught by the FS, or try to prevent the wizard from moving it by limiting his actions, etc ... it is much harder for a monster to avoid SoT damage then EoT. With EoT it's just "don't end your turn next to the sphere". With SoT it's "get away from the sphere AND not have the sphere follow you AND not have the party force move you back to the sphere". The former they can do reliably, the latter is dependent on stuff outside their control.

 

[MrGrenadine]

With EoT, the monster knows moving away will avoid the damage for that round.

With SoT, moving away means the wizard has to move the sphere on his turn, but unless the monster moves to a place where the sphere can't follow, he can't be guaranteed to avoid the sphere. You can move away from it, but you or the sphere can be moved before the next SoT, thus negating the attempt to avoid taking damage (and eventually, the inevitability of the damage would cause an enemy to just ignore the sphere and move where they want).

Now, as a group, monsters can spread out to avoid multiple being caught by the FS, or try to prevent the wizard from moving it by limiting his actions, etc ... it is much harder for a monster to avoid SoT damage then EoT. With EoT it's just "don't end your turn next to the sphere". With SoT it's "get away from the sphere AND not have the sphere follow you AND not have the party force move you back to the sphere". The former they can do reliably, the latter is dependent on stuff outside their control.

I see. The monster has more of a chance to avoid the EoT damage, which doesn't necessarily seem like a better option than SoT to me, especially since FS only takes up one square, and the monster can just shift away every turn.

On the other hand, thats if the target has room to move, or if its movement options are limited by even worse penalties than the small amount of damage from FS.

I guess what I'm (finally) wrapping my head around is that with EoT damage FS is still useful, but its no longer a spell that can really be effective on its own. Rather, it needs to be combined other powers, terrain features, party members, etc.

Good to know.

 

[Kinneus]

I guess what I'm (finally) wrapping my head around is that with EoT damage FS is still useful, but its no longer a spell that can really be effective on its own. Rather, it needs to be combined other powers, terrain features, party members, etc.

Good to know.

Or, you can take one of the many, many level 1 Wizard Daily powers that are fully capable of being awesome on their own, and simply allow your party to capitalize on it by deploying it intelligently.

Seriously, compare Flaming Sphere to Sleep, Fountain of Flame, Phantom Chasm, and the other big contenders. Flaming Sphere, as currently written, simply isn't competitive at all.

 

[MrMyth]

I just started playing a wizard (9th lvl) in my weekly 4e game, so I'm really interested in this conversation, but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the benefits of EoT, especially in terms of whether or not the enemies will move.

To try and clarify: SoT is just better, and that is part of the problem. No one is claiming that End of Turn is more effective (simply more balanced).

The argument regarding control is that End of Turn is more likely to actually result in encouraging/discouraging monster behavior. If the enemy knows that they can avoid being burned by moving, it encourages movement.

With Start of Turn effects, since the Wizard can 'chase' the monster with the flaming sphere even if the monster moves, there is no real encouragement to move. (Outside of rare cases where the monster can arrange for the wizard to be dazed or the like).

But it is true that Flaming Sphere is no longer as powerful as it was before. Some feel it is no longer worth taking - I admit it probably could have used a bit of a buff to compensate for the changes. But it is still quite good in the right situations - crowded environments, or with parties that can take good advantage of it. (Which often takes no more than a single Fighter).

That's why, honestly, I like the change - there are good reasons to take different level 1 dailies. None is an absolute must pick, and none is simply worse than all other choices, either. (I'd still likely rank Flaming Sphere as significantly above Fountain of Flame in any long-term encounter, for example.)

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

To try and clarify: SoT is just better, and that is part of the problem. No one is claiming that End of Turn is more effective (simply more balanced).

This is precisely it, in a nutshell. People are whining because nobody likes having their favourite powers nerfed. Fact remains that it needs to be done for balance reasons.

 

[keterys]

I'd certainly be fine with changing flaming sphere to a burst 1, or making a sustain minor make it attack as it does now (instead of a standard), along with making it end of turn. Just because I'm certain that end of turn is better for the health of the game in auras, zones, powers, etc... doesn't mean I don't also want the powers to be of a valid power level with their peers

 

[mneme]

I'm willing to grant that it was probably big dog for Level 1 Wizard Dailies in the original print of the Player's Handbook if you weren't at all interested in optimizing for Sleep. But that's an awful lot of qualifiers.

You can't really optimize Sleep at level 1.

Horrid Whispers doesn't have an ongoing effect beyond a tiny attack debuf.

Phantom Chasm is competitive, but does need the party to work around it (although just standing in the middle of the chasm is good protection for the wizard).

And people analyzing things seem to keep forgetting that Flaming Sphere grants a very good single-target at will in addition to the EOT ability. That's a huge power-up, especially since there's a point in every encounter where you cannot target more than one monster in a burst or blast.

So Flaming Sphere remained king for a long while (if the least controlling of the top wizard dailies).

 

[Balesir]

But it is true that Flaming Sphere is no longer as powerful as it was before. Some feel it is no longer worth taking - I admit it probably could have used a bit of a buff to compensate for the changes.

Well, it has been published as a playtest, so it could (and in my view should) get a buff - preferably a boost to the EoT effect.

But it is still quite good in the right situations - crowded environments, or with parties that can take good advantage of it. (Which often takes no more than a single Fighter).

Actually I think any defender would work. Place the sphere two squares from a Paladin that is marking an enemy to keep the enemy away. Fighters (including knights) are the optimum, but most defenders should allow some nasty "gotchas". Remember, too, that you can't go through the actual sphere square (it "occupies" its square). Edit: putting the sphere just covering where the enemy could charge to seems to work a treat, too. Charging has to be on an "always closer" basis and ends your turn, so it's quite possible to make FS really inconvenient, there.

On the "you lose the initial attack if you place the sphere to block" issue, just use a standard action to conjure the sphere and damage with it (as usual) and then a move to place it in the blocking position. Nothing says you can't move it on the same turn as you conjure it.