At-Will Magic and Arrows

[haakon1]

My PCs certainly can run out of ammo but very rarely do, mainly because they are wise about when and how they use it and they make sure they're well stocked before leaving town. They also make sure to loot any useful ammo off defeated foes.

The players are expected to keep track of what gets used and if someone does run out, them's the breaks.

Lanefan

Precisely. I've never seen anyone run out of ammo or food, but I've seen them come close and get worried about it.

And I've nearly had PC's die of exposure from getting caught in a mountain storm without good gear . . . makes spells like Leomund's Tiny Hut and Create Food and Water meaningful to the players.

Hmm, I'm not aware of a "create arrows" spell.

 

[Tovec]

I don't consider it right that archers are restricted by ammunition when melee types aren't. My philosophy is until everyone has to pay some kind of per-hit upkeep on their weapons, no one has to.

I don't know which edition you play but..

In any edition with Vancian, and to a lesser extent any edition without, nearly all classes and specialties run out of ammo or have a "per-hit upkeep" for their attacks. In 4e if you had Encounter abilities you had a "per-hit upkeep" to track. If you had dailies then you had them too.

If you were in an edition with vancian magic then you would run out of spells. Running out of spells and not running out of arrows seems like an odd contrast.

In fact the only resource you typically don't run out of pretty much ever is a nice sharp stick. It keeps stabbing. As the butcher said in Wanted, 'you never need to reload and it never runs out of bullets' (paraphrased of course). That is the BENEFIT of using blades over ranged attacks.

The benefit of ranged attacks is that they have to range attack you back, or close the distance to attack you. You can get into cover and avoid attacks much more easily.

Saying that you don't want to have to count arrows is fine.
Saying that you shouldn't have to because swords never run out of swings is silly.


As far as the true topic however, it is less "does it ever happen" and more "should it be possible" to which I certainly answered yes.
It has happened in our games that we have had to track ammo, food, water and all other kinds of resources. Magic and gold made that much easier or more redundant at higher levels (in 3.5) but I dislike that about magic and money. I would like resource management to be something considered at all levels of play. I just don't want to be bogged down by it.

There are a number of solutions to hit the middle ground in that case, some proposed here and some proposed other places. Having well stocked inventories or access to vendors are certainly solutions. Being able to make arrows (food, etc.) is a solution too. The problem arises when magic can override this need entirely or when there IS no need at all. I find it a little ridiculous to think that characters may not need to buy arrows in 5e but then buying marbles/caltrops to trap passageways.

As far as the whole "at-will" part - I don't like at-will and it is something I tried then disallowed for the playtest. I don't have a problem with a wizard using a crossbow if they feel they have nothing left to contribute. Never have. I don't see why they get unlimited access to unerring missiles when no one else does. Especially when they can cast sleep and other area effect spells. It doesn't make them useless it just means that they have to be careful and not waste their resources frivolously. I would expect the same kinds of things from non-casters. I want my martial characters to be more tactical in their thinking instead of just charging in full force as well. I encourage creative and intelligent gameplay, as well as roleplaying in my games. Not having to worry about truly minor things (TP) is fine but I don't appreciate when they are rendered completely moot (unlimited arrows).

 

[thewok]

I don't know which edition you play but..

My preferred edition right now is 4th.

In 4e if you had Encounter abilities you had a "per-hit upkeep" to track. If you had dailies then you had them too.

And everyone has these same restrictions. Essentials martial classes were based around he melee basic attack, but they lacked the "large number" potential of the martial dailies. They still had some powers to keep track of, though, with Power Strike/Backstab and the utilities they picked up.

If you were in an edition with vancian magic then you would run out of spells. Running out of spells and not running out of arrows seems like an odd contrast.

And that's why I'm a huge proponent of at-will magic spells. I believe that magic users should never--ever--be reduced to using mundane weaponry (unless, of course, it's part of the theme, like a swordmage or warpriest). Wizards should be tossing spells out every round and not tossing darts or firing crossbows. In the same way, I think that archers should be firing arrows every round.

That's my philosophy, anyway. When I played 3E, I loved my Sorcerer up until the point that I ran out of spells. Then I felt like I was no longer a sorcerer, but a really, really weak fighter with a horrible BAB. Then, my fun was greatly diminished.

 

[jadrax]

As DM, I am pretty sure my players keep track of all sorts of stuff, as occasionally they ask me questions like how may arrows on are dead NPCs.

As long as I don't have to really worry about and they are enjoying themselves, I see no need to interfere.*


*Although around once a year I tend to have an encumbrance audit where I yell at them for carrying far to much stuff.

 

[Aenghus]

The thing is counting ammo is something some players find easy, some players find hard, and something some players just don't do due to personality etc.

Which means strict resource limits tend to most affect the players who don't or or won't care about such things, and in a mechanical way pushes them either to play PCs with less or no resource management, or play in a bean-counting style they don't like, setting them up to fail.

I've seen games where running out of arrows has been a common feature for archers. Nowadays I see this as code for "Don't play an archer in that game", especially if other character types don't critically depend on a limited resource to function. (It isn't necessary a DM passive-aggressive way of making a class untenable without banning it, but I've seen it happen).

So, some people hate bean-counting, and I don't see it as an essential feature for all styles of D&D (or RPGs in general, for that matter).

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Having played with and without detailed resource tracking, I can generally live without it at this point except in "survival" situations.

So I don't have problems with unlimited arrows or unlimited cantrips ... provided an arrow equals a cantrip. If one's auto-hit and the other has a to-hit roll, they aren't equal.

 

[Tovec]

Having played with and without detailed resource tracking, I can generally live without it at this point except in "survival" situations.

So I don't have problems with unlimited arrows or unlimited cantrips ... provided an arrow equals a cantrip. If one's auto-hit and the other has a to-hit roll, they aren't equal.

Agreed.

And if magic missile did as much as a crossbow in terms of damage (and attack) then what would the difference be? In one situation the wizard doesn't contribute a bigger spell, a "magic" spell if you will, because they are out or they are saving it and instead resorts to firing a crossbow**. On the other hand if they have unlimited crantrips they are in the same situation***. However, the difference is that with the crossbow system the wizard can technically run out of spells and be depleted of magic for the day, the other system has them run out of useful spells but not be depleted because they can cast limitless MM (but only 1 fireball). I find that odd.

It only makes the issue more glaring IMO if the MM are unerring but arrows/bots aren't. But having a finite resource of one and an infinite resource of another is already a problem.


**A resource by the way that could technically run out even if it is unlikely.
***Except, as currently written, MM are a resource that never runs out.. ever.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

The way I see it, a crossbow should rely on Dexterity (which everyone benefits from) for attack and damage, do more base damage than magic missile, and have a greater range than magic missile.

Magic missile should rely on Intelligence for attack (no auto-hit) and damage, do less base damage, and have a shorter range.

Thus, it is justified that the crossbow is more situational.

 

[Gorgoroth]

.

MM == Hellrider?

Now bear with me on this, I heard from friends who played MTG that Hellrider was an insanely broken card, because it *just works*. 1 damage, but it always works. Build a deck around many of those cards, and win. MTG is not my game, never was, but that's sort of how I see MM

In my mind, if you make it magic, iconic, cantrip, at-will, and auto-hit, it should do ONE damage. Each time. No fail. Period. Then with a theme, maybe you can make it more powerful later on, or with other feats. But 1 damage, can win a fight. When an enemy is next to dead, that 1 HP is worth the same as 10, or 100, with better-than-advantage odds and magic holy avenger +5, the enemy will be dead just the same. Or think of it as a versatile Reaper effect, that works at range. If it's to be balanced vs a crossbow or a bow, the fact that it's versatile and never misses is worth OMG huge damage. What about that enemy that can't be hit by anyone because its AC is so high?

If you find ways to boost MM, then it can go from a backup weapon, that on the surface seems incredibly lame, until you realize you can kill almost anything with it (so long as it doesn't have DR or protection from missiles up). You could use it to distract enemy casters who are about to unleach a fireball, making protection from missiles a "must have" buff in any wizard-vs-wizard show-down.

One could also say it can only hit creatures, but they have that limitation in many 4e spells and I hated that. Why can't I aim for that lever over there and nudge it into the right position after a few hits? Maybe it makes a big sound, like a gunshot level noise...which would make a wizard reluctant to use it for petty things in a dungeon, lest he be viewed as a raging bull in a china shoppe, or Pippin in Moria.

Start small, then boost it to get big. A cantrip should do minor damage, but one that cannot miss is UBER powerful, if it's at-will. Even if it's one HP Damage per missile (maybe you get multiple missiles later on, and the dmg goes up by 1 every three levels). I'd say get rid of the 1d4+1, make it 1 / 2 / 3 damage (with possible boost from casting it through a staff as an implement bonus to damage, say +1), that way, by 5th level with a staff, you can do maybe 2 missiles worth 4 damage each. Doesn't seem too crazy, until you think that that's the same damage as Reaper, but on any target, and a perfect "finishing move" for any wizard. Wizards should be able to blast a puny rat in its way, or boost up his ability to be able to cast it in busts like a machine gun. Doing EXACTLY the number of HP damage it takes to kill every monster, not a single shot missed or ounce of magic wasted.

Now THAT's powerful. Magic Machine Gun. No miss. Just dead enemies. Spread the missile love around to finish off enemies who have varying HP still clinging on on the battlefield. Remember the killing blow in D&D is worth a lot. It's one less body on Team Monster on the grid.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

[MENTION=6674889]Gorgoroth[/MENTION] : That does sound familar. I was reading this one manga about what I would call a sorcorer who uses something called magic arrows which are similar to MM. It is a weak spell with only one arrow being fired but as the guy got stronger he was able to cast 1000 of them. It basically turned that simple spell that only did a little bit of damage into something armies would love to use in war. That is why in a few threads I agree with you with making MM weak on it own if it is an auto hit, or same as a crossbow if you roll, but when you get to high lvls you are able to turn the most simple magic into something trully awe-inspiring and terrifiying to behold.....but that is just me. Also if anyone is interested about the manga let me know