Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WalterKovacs" data-source="post: 5506957" data-attributes="member: 63763">There is one way to do it at 10. There is no information that says it is the ONLY possible way to do so. Also, before the pyromancer, most fire specialists had to take paragon options (feats, paragon paths) to deal with it. Until you start facing paragon tier enemies, you are looking at about resist 10 necrotic. You can either completely ignore or half most resistances, and with your at-will, the vulnerable 5 makes up for it the next time anyone hits it.   Well, for ALL the wizards, they have access to a power that can get rid of 5. They may very well have feats that do more. [Ignore X amount of resist, modify the cantrip, maybe ignore completely at paragon tier via a feat or paragon path]. Basically something similar to the many ways that non-pyromancers [or sorcerors or evokers] have to deal with fire resistance.  That depends on what they are doing. For example, conjuration's require sustaining via minor action. Permanent summons, like say ... what the necromancer gets ... doesn't require minor sustaining (it does get to move as a minor, true, but then again we don't know if the summoned undead deal necrotic damage, which would not require simultaneously needing to use both the cantrip and the minor action to command the summoned creatures). Controller's CAN take powers that require using up minor actions to sustain, but unless those powers are tied to necrotic damage, it's going to be an issue of either having something worth sustaining or something that deals necrotic damage, and less often do you need both.   And there is no reason to believe a book dedicated entirely to shadow, in which EVERY new class is going to probably have necrotic damage would get generic feats to make it viable. In fact they spoiled some today. For ghosts with both necrotic resistance AND insubstantial, the ability to ignore the latter makes necrotic damage, even without any way to reduce that resistance, more damaging. And again, damage isn't the most important thing that wizards do [although pyromancers, by virtue of the kinds of powers that has fire attached to it, damage IS the only thing they do for the most part].  They have options. They don't have a "oh, you are a specialist, so you don't have to deal with it at all" class feature at level one like the pyromancer but they have a cantrip, feat support, a level 10 mastery, powers that try to offset the resistance with rider effects, etc ... Those are not options for dealing with it?  Or, this book is introducing those options. But a blanket "ignore all resistance at level 1" isn't really an option. It's an "ignore all other solutions" option. Why make other options irrelevant with a single option?  What is the function of the wizard, the necromancer wizard? Is it deal as much damage as possible at all times? Or are they controllers. Does resistance to damage prevent the controller from imposing effects on monsters. Does reducing a monster to having no resistance or resist 5 make it so they can't deal any damage.  We don't know what the necromancer gets at level 1. We don't know what the feat support looks like. We don't know what most of the powers do. We do know an at-will will cause vulnerable 5 to all damage which for ANY heroic tier monster will quickly outstrip any necrotic resistance they might have had. And yet, the necromancer is going to be USELESS because he may have to spend a minor action to deal full damage (or 5 less instead of 10 less) against certain monsters, while still getting full benefit (if not EXTRA benefit) against the monsters it hits. Why would it be good design to make the necromancer JUST like the pyromancer? Pyromancers and evokers are focused on damage, especially to large areas, where resistance can quickly make it useless. Hopefully, Necromancer powers aren't like that, damage spread over a large area with nothing in the way of rider effects apart from ongoing or conditional damage.  (a) not all nethermancer powers are necrotic(b) Gaining the vulenerable on a hit at the 'cost' of doing less damage on the initial hit is not much to pay, especially when feats, class features, or powers [like the cantrip] can reduce or completely ignore the resistance in the first place.(c) mages have spellbooks. They don't have to prepare powers all the time, and if only ONE of their powers is 'weak' because of vulnerability it's not as bad as if ALL your powers are that way. And, depending on the rider effects, they may be good enough against undead that it doesn't matter if they don't deal as much damage as it would against a non-undead enemy. A mage that can use something like refocus to bring it out at the right moment might decide to use it then. There are wizard powers that deal no damage at all. Not dealing damage is not the worst possible thing for a wizard to do.</blockquote>

Verification