Arcanist playtest

[Gortle]

So now the damage is trivial? Why is it then a minor disaster that it's not automatic anymore?

And 100+ hit points? That would be a level 7 Brute or a level 9 Soldier. It's a freaking first level spell! Of course it's not going to scare the pants of monsters in high heroic. But against a group of level 2 Artillery it's going to look pretty intimidating.

No the damage is not trivial. Wizards who take this spell obviously want to do extra damage. You have to compare the value of the control effect of moving to the damage. I said basic attack because it scales at low levels it is likely to be dice+5, at 11th it may well be dice+12. It is still somewhere around 1/8 of the monsters hitpoints.

The monster gets to make the call whether it is worthwhile to stay not the wizard. The control effect is weak. With a simple slow or wall the moster may get no choice.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

This is madness. Why on earth are your monsters moving? There is just no incentive. Not at all. They win nothing by moving. Your argument is faulty to the extreme.


No, the failure is not in the errata. We changed Flaming Sphere to end-of-turn damage over a year ago and it plays so much better for us. In both campaigns I play. Of course it works. I can't think you're really serious anymore. This is way into trolling territory. I'm out of here.

Are you playing 4th edition or some homebrew you made up? What happens when you put your hand on a hot stove? You move your hand because it is burning. It's not complex logic here. The incentive to move is getting their asses fried from the Flaming Sphere.

There is no madness about it. The sphere rolls up, it burns the enemies, they move away because they don't want to be burned again. This is how it works in our games, I don't know what you are doing in your's and it puzzles me.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

hmmh... they move because they were burnt when you hit them on your turn?

You may not forget how turns work: Basically they all happen simultaneously... but they are spread out, because it is very complicated to go through several steps.

So actually end of turn makes more sense, because at the start of their turn, there may not have been a ball of fire at all next to them... complicated? yes! Argumenting with reality fails if you think to hard about the exact timing...

Older systems tried to emulate it better: they spread out turns into several phases:
ranged phase, moveing phase, melee phase etc...

Other systems try to emulate high initiative by forcing the lowest player to decide first what they like to do and resolve those actions in opposite order...

To go bak to the topic:
Both timings of the damage actually have controll effects:

-beginning of turn: spreading out is important

-end of turn: running away helps

I guess however, end of damage is more balanced.

 

[FireLance]

To go bak to the topic:
Both timings of the damage actually have controll effects:

-beginning of turn: spreading out is important

-end of turn: running away helps

I guess however, end of damage is more balanced.

Good summary.

Given that most monsters do not have abilities that allow them to move their allies efficiently (and the bull rush action normally would not be considered an efficient use of a standard action), start of turn damage might as well be dealt at the end of the wizard's turn. After the enemies take damage on the first round, they can minimize the damage they take in future rounds by spreading out, moving faster than the sphere, or (if battlefield conditions happen to be just right) moving so that wherever the wizard places the sphere, it will also damage one of his allies. I personally doubt that the last is likely to happen very often, though. Assuming the enemies move slower than the sphere, start of turn damage effectively works out to once per turn automatic damage with the expenditure of a move action and a minor action. There is simply no way for the enemy to avoid this. He might as well not move, especially if he already has some incentive not to move.

End of turn damage always gives the enemy an incentive to move, but is more difficult to use in a damaging manner. Usually, it involves giving the enemy a Hobson's choice between not moving and taking damage, and moving and running the chance of taking damage.

As an example, consider an enemy marked by a fighter and adjacent to him. Start of turn damage gives him no incentive to move. If he moves, the fighter attacks him, and the wizard will move the sphere next to him anyway. If he does not move, he still takes damage from the sphere, but doesn't get attacked by the fighter. With end of turn damage, the enemy must choose between not moving and getting burned by the sphere, or moving and getting attacked by the fighter.

 

[Gortle]

Good summary.

Given that most monsters do not have abilities that allow them to move their allies efficiently (and the bull rush action normally would not be considered an efficient use of a standard action), start of turn damage might as well be dealt at the end of the wizard's turn. After the enemies take damage on the first round, they can minimize the damage they take in future rounds by spreading out, moving faster than the sphere, or (if battlefield conditions happen to be just right) moving so that wherever the wizard places the sphere, it will also damage one of his allies. I personally doubt that the last is likely to happen very often, though. Assuming the enemies move slower than the sphere, start of turn damage effectively works out to once per turn automatic damage with the expenditure of a move action and a minor action. There is simply no way for the enemy to avoid this. He might as well not move, especially if he already has some incentive not to move.

End of turn damage always gives the enemy an incentive to move, but is more difficult to use in a damaging manner. Usually, it involves giving the enemy a Hobson's choice between not moving and taking damage, and moving and running the chance of taking damage.

As an example, consider an enemy marked by a fighter and adjacent to him. Start of turn damage gives him no incentive to move. If he moves, the fighter attacks him, and the wizard will move the sphere next to him anyway. If he does not move, he still takes damage from the sphere, but doesn't get attacked by the fighter. With end of turn damage, the enemy must choose between not moving and getting burned by the sphere, or moving and getting attacked by the fighter.

Your points are fine but you continue to consider the case where there is only one enemy, and the battle field is static. That is not a typical encounter, and not how a typical wizard plays. The large majority of wizard powers are area or have more than one target. With several monsters on the map they will normally move each turn to minimise the effect of the sphere. But yes the sphere will regularly get one of them. Often the wizard will have to give up his standard action to do it though.

The spell is fine as is.

 

[keterys]

I've never seen a wizard have to give up their standard action to move a flaming sphere... and I've seen a lot of rounds of flaming sphere.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I've never seen a wizard have to give up their standard action to move a flaming sphere... and I've seen a lot of rounds of flaming sphere.

I'm guessing he meant move-action.

 

[FireLance]

Your points are fine but you continue to consider the case where there is only one enemy, and the battle field is static. That is not a typical encounter, and not how a typical wizard plays. The large majority of wizard powers are area or have more than one target. With several monsters on the map they will normally move each turn to minimise the effect of the sphere. But yes the sphere will regularly get one of them. Often the wizard will have to give up his standard action to do it though.

The spell is fine as is.

Frankly, a single enemy and a static battlefield is usually a worst case scenario for start of turn damage. If the wizard or his allies have powers that can push, pull, or slide enemies and make them bunch up together, start of turn can be much more effective. As I mentioned, you might as well be dealing the extra damage at the end of the wizard's turn.

As for the wizard "having" to give up a standard action to move the sphere next to an enemy - the fact that it's considered a good use of a standard action is not helping the case that the original spell is balanced.

 

[Raikun]

I've never seen a wizard have to give up their standard action to move a flaming sphere... and I've seen a lot of rounds of flaming sphere.

This heh. A wizard has a lot better things to do with his standard action than to double move a flaming sphere. I've never seen it happen.

 

[MrBeens]

Are you playing 4th edition or some homebrew you made up? What happens when you put your hand on a hot stove? You move your hand because it is burning. It's not complex logic here. The incentive to move is getting their asses fried from the Flaming Sphere.

There is no madness about it. The sphere rolls up, it burns the enemies, they move away because they don't want to be burned again. This is how it works in our games, I don't know what you are doing in your's and it puzzles me.

Quoting to lend my support to your side of the argument.

I've been looking at Invokers recently (as my wizard has MC into one and is thinking of picking up a power swap feat).
A lot of invoker zones do something on the enemy leaving the zone as well as the effect for staying in - this is how wizard zones should work.
Take the FS for instance - if you end your turn next to it you get ongoing 5 save ends, if you leave it you take D4+int
Cloud of daggers - if you stay in you grant CA, if you leave or enter you take the damage.

Choices regarding zones should be more than just "move to cancel the effect" as in most of the cases the move action doesn't cost the enemy anything (unless they are next to a fighter than can get a free attack on a shift).