At-will class powers ruining my archetypes

[Sadrik]

(1) Are you only worried about this insofar as spellcasters are concerned? You haven't mentioned anyone other than wizards and clerics.

It doesn't matter if you are martial, arcane, divine, primal, elemental, shadow, ki or whatever other power sources they are going to come up with. Characters are limited by the at-wills that they are tied to at character creation. This makes having characters that do not fit the mold of those at-wills outside of RAW and a limitation of the game system. So no I don't really care if they are martial, martial characters should do their heavy hits less often too, it doesn't matter what power source you are. Why have a special attack at will is not very special. Not to mention when it straight jackets your character creation. When I look at a class that I want to play in 4e I look first to its at-wills and class features and determine how I can maximize the effects of those. If one of them says you have to use a certain weapon or cannot use a certain weapon those are undue character creation rules that I don't prefer. You may prefer those limitation, I like options.

(2) What options do at-wills prevent? What archetypes are blocked by 4e that are also enabled by the system you're proposing? You mentioned the elf archer cleric, but it's pretty clear that this build works fine, at least IMHO. Give me some more examples.

Well the cleric with a bow is just an example. But essentially any character whose at-will powers are better than simply making a character with a sword or whatever weapon the player wants. Not to mention the flash bang of certain at-wills make the game feel a lot more magical as Cadfan illustrated.

(3) Why is it preferable to eliminate at-wills entirely, as opposed to increasing the number of encounter powers and leaving at-wills as-is?

This is another solution. A pretty good one to boot. It would give some more variety to players out of the starting gates. It does nothing for the endless magical effects (or ninja effects for martial) stuff though.

 

[ryryguy]

I'm going to try and reiterate this.
If at-wills are removed several things happen.
--> I think we touched on all of the effects. Some are very beneficial and there are a couple of stumbles. In my opinion there are more benefits than stumbles.
So here is a list:
1. Basic attacks become the vanilla attack as opposed to at-wills.
2. Different weapons can be used without becoming sub-par options to a classes at-will powers.
3. STR and DEX become more important in character creation.
4. Basic attacks are less tactical but speed up real time grind.

I think that is it.

1. Hard to see how this is a "beneficial effect" in and of itself. I think your point is that you've made the current at-wills feel more "special" by changing them to encounter powers, but how is that really any different than just adding new encounter powers?

2. Seems a slightly roundabout way of stating that you'd prefer to see all or most characters using weapons more often. This is only a "beneficial effect" if that's your personal taste. (see below)

3. Really hard to see how this is a "beneficial effect" in and of itself. What, you just like Str and Dex?

4. I don't find the current at-wills significantly slow down combat or increase "grind". Indeed compared to endless basic attacks they may reduce grind since their extra little bonuses can help end combat sooner (and at least promise to keep it more interesting).

This reminds me of the old arguments about the ranger and the paladin being too magical. It was such a controversy that they published alternate versions in complete warrior that were not magically bent. I suppose that the game now is more keyed in the direction of lazer beam clerics and reaping strike fighters. These are cool effects but they seem like they should not be happening at-will. Instead, every once in an while in an encounter seems more appropriate.

At-wills simply gives the game a completely different feel than D&D once had. If there is anything that gives 4e its feel it is the application of at-wills.

This seems to me to be the heart of the issue and most of the stuff about basic attacks and stats and weapons and archetypes is pretty peripheral. You prefer a style where some characters' "output" is less uniform, in particular it seems where spellcasting classes have much bigger but infrequent "booms" and are forced to fall back to much less effective weapons use fairly often.

That's fine. It is true that the 4e system does not support that style very well, because 4e consciously tries to give every player character something interesting to do almost all of the time and a way to contribute to party effectiveness roughly equal to everyone else in the party. The "boom and bust" wizard does not fit well into that scheme.

The one thing that I fundamentally disagree with is that this design direction leads to less space for different character archetypes. Partially this is a matter of terminology, since I think what you're expressing is a desire for a different style of play mechanics which has nothing to do with what I think of as character archetypes. "Wizard who has to shoot a crossbow after running out of spells" is not, to me, a character archetype so much as an artifact of a particular system of mechanics. One that we've all gotten used to over time so it may seem familiar and comfortable, but not really a character archetype if you look at it more closely.

Even if you want to insist that the crossbow-wizard is indeed an archetype, I don't see how removing at-wills leads to space for more archetypes. Even if it reopens the crossbow-wizard "archetype", it closes down the "magic missile all day" wizard archetype... that may be one that you personally dislike, but I think you have to regard it as an archetype that is lost if the crossbow-wizard is an archetype that is gained.

 

[nightwyrm]

I think there might be a paradigm problem here. In 4e, at-wills are that character's basic attacks. They're the bread and butter of that particular class. They're not suppose to be flashy or very awesome, you have encounters and dailies for that, those are the special powers, not at-wills. "Basic Attack" is just stuff that you do when you make an OA or a charge or when doing something that your class is not good at.

Magic missile? It's just a wizard's normal attack comparable to a fighter's sword swing.

 

[ryryguy]

It doesn't matter if you are martial, arcane, divine, primal, elemental, shadow, ki or whatever other power sources they are going to come up with. Characters are limited by the at-wills that they are tied to at character creation. This makes having characters that do not fit the mold of those at-wills outside of RAW and a limitation of the game system.
<snip>
This is another solution. A pretty good one to boot. It would give some more variety to players out of the starting gates. It does nothing for the endless magical effects (or ninja effects for martial) stuff though.

So maybe to get closer to the style of play you want you could just restrict all classes to using the weapon-based, non-ninja martial at-wills that you like the best. The wizard will still fall back to his crossbow instead of to magic missile, but at least his damage output and "specials" won't drop off so much compared to making him just shoot it using ranged basic attack.

You'd probably still need to allow the character to use their primary/secondary stats for attack and damage with these at-wills, otherwise they will just be at too much of a disadvantage vs. the martial classes that already have Strength and Dexterity as primary stats. (I'm sensing that you want to emphasize Strength and Dexterity for basically the same reason you want to increase the use of weapons, basically for thematic reasons; it offends you if a wizard can use his Intelligence to swing a sword. But I think this is the easiest compromise to make to get close to where you want to go without having to rewrite fundamental parts of the system.)

 

[Rechan]

I'm sensing that you want to emphasize Strength and Dexterity for basically the same reason you want to increase the use of weapons, basically for thematic reasons; it offends you if a wizard can use his Intelligence to swing a sword. But I think this is the easiest compromise to make to get close to where you want to go without having to rewrite fundamental parts of the system.

Not to mention classes that use a different stat, even in melee with weapons:

Swordmages, Bards, Charisma paladins, Avengers.

 

[Oni]

Characters are limited by the at-wills that they are tied to at character creation. This makes having characters that do not fit the mold of those at-wills outside of RAW and a limitation of the game system. So no I don't really care if they are martial, martial characters should do their heavy hits less often too, it doesn't matter what power source you are. Why have a special attack at will is not very special. Not to mention when it straight jackets your character creation. When I look at a class that I want to play in 4e I look first to its at-wills and class features and determine how I can maximize the effects of those. If one of them says you have to use a certain weapon or cannot use a certain weapon those are undue character creation rules that I don't prefer. You may prefer those limitation, I like options.

Hold up a sec, are you trying to say that only having basic attacks as at wills some how gives you more options for character creation than having basic attacks plus the choice of other things you can do? That somehow by limiting everyone to whacking things with sticks you've somehow created a environment that frees you up to make any character you want?

Wizard A can cast scorching burst and magic missle, Wizard B can cast cloud of daggers and thunderwave.

or....

Wizard X can ineffectually whack things with a stick and ineffectually fling rocks, Wizard Y can ineffectually whack things with a stick and ineffectually fling rocks.

Which group has been more straightjacketed at character creation?

 

[Minigiant]

I understand what is being said.
The thing is the typical 4E fight has a lot more rounds than one in previous editions. Wizards killed or were killed back then. If the only ones who did the same thing all day were people using weapons. Fight reached the danger zone quick or draaaaaagged on. Everything was random.

4E is a different monster. Instead of the caster casting two spells then making mostly useless actions while the weapon users attack, attack and attack, every action matters. All classes have been made equal in style and the damage model is fixed. Each character is intended to use all his encounter powers and use at-will as its other actions. Basic attacks were not intended for the formula for most characters. It unbalances things.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It doesn't matter if you are martial, arcane, divine, primal, elemental, shadow, ki or whatever other power sources they are going to come up with. Characters are limited by the at-wills that they are tied to at character creation.

Really...short of rangers twin strikeing all the time I can't think of a single class built around 1 at will...wizards (one of the two classes you complained about) right now has the most options in there at wills...

Why have a special attack at will is not very special.

they are not ment to be special...they are ment to be your bread and butter...
example: Fireing off a small bolt of arcane energy (magic missle) is easy, but focusing that energy into a bolt of real force (force orb) is slightly more taxing...trying to conjur and maintian a ball of fire (Flaming sphear) takes even more...

Not to mention when it straight jackets your character creation. When I look at a class that I want to play in 4e I look first to its at-wills and class features and determine how I can maximize the effects of those. If one of them says you have to use a certain weapon or cannot use a certain weapon those are undue character creation rules that I don't prefer. You may prefer those limitation, I like options.

let me pull out the problme here...

You may prefer those limitation, I like options

by RAW as a wizard right now I have 2 at wills chosen from 6 options...how many do I have your way??

Well the cleric with a bow is just an example. But essentially any character whose at-will powers are better than simply making a character with a sword or whatever weapon the player wants.

what if the OPTION the player is going for has nothing to do with weapons? You want your weapon to matter...but what if someone else at the same table does not??

It does nothing for the endless magical effects (or ninja effects for martial) stuff though.

why would my magic weilder want to run out of magic???

 

[Cadfan]

Very well stated Cadfan.

This reminds me of the old arguments about the ranger and the paladin being too magical. It was such a controversy that they published alternate versions in complete warrior that were not magically bent.

Thanks. I'm basically sympathetic to the desire to create what I'm going to call dual power source characters, specifically, characters who are martial with a splash of magic. I don't think that messing with the at will system is the way to go about it though.

I think that, if you want to create the feel of a character that you seem to be looking for, your best bet is probably this: take at wills from a martial class, but everything else from an arcane class.

Then just declare that you get to use your primary stat as your attack stat no matter what. From where I sit, your primary stat is just a number. If its balanced to have a +4 at a given level, then just assign a +4 to the relevant tasks and don't worry about where it came from.

This sort of character should give you basically what you are looking for. A character who is mostly mundane but who pulls out powerful magic when he's in a tight spot.

It won't help you if you're even offended by the power level of Reaping Strike being used at will, but I don't think that should bother you. The martial at wills are mostly things you could accomplish in 3e with a basic melee attack and a feat.

The only damage it will do to the game is that it will make it so that your character might not fill his combat role very effectively, particularly at low levels, and particularly if you've chosen at wills from a martial class very different from your true class.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

So what would the effect of removing the at-wills be? It would change character creation for sure. It may make characters invest in strength or dexterity more, when they normally would not have. This will lower the primary stat to do so (unless of course you have a class that needs one of those stats). Doing this may alter the 50% to hit rate assumption and make it more difficult to be competent.

The problem is that it won't change things for the classes that already invest heavily in Strength or Dex. The PHB(*) Fighter will barely notice the difference: none of his at-will attacks do more damage than his basic attack. And the Fighter in particular is not considered by many to be a weak class.

(*) Martiial Power changes this quite a bit.

The Warlock on the other hand will notice it an awful lot. If she doesn't invest in Str or Dex, she is limited to her encounter and daily powers; if she does so invest, she loses points to spend in her primary stat, so her encounters and daily powers are now less likely to hit and do less damage.

4e is currently balanced assuming that characters can use their primary attack stat almost all the time. In 4e battles, especially at low level or against elites and solos, PCs spend a lot of time using their at-wills to wear down enemies HP. They don't have enough encounters or dailies to end the fight without it.

The effect of your proposed rule change is that you have will make the non-Strength based classes much weaker than those based on other Strength. How do you intend to rebalance the classes? If you don't, I expect your players to mainly play Fighters, Warlords, Strength-Clerics and -Paladins, Brutal Scoundrel Rogues and Elven Bow Clerics.

A positive effect is that it will open up design for character types that are sub-par in the current rule set.

And a negative effect will be to close off design for most of the character types currently in the rules.