Dispel Magic

[small pumpkin man]

Being whacked repeatedly by a weapon should shut down most conjurations.

Actually, yeah, even things like telekentic sphere have hp now, so I guess we already have that ability, and it's called "a basic attack".

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

Actually, yeah, even things like telekentic sphere have hp now, so I guess we already have that ability, and it's called "a basic attack".

Ye gods, they've already gotten rid of Magic Missile as the unstoppable force; have Telekinetic Sphere and Wall of Force finally ceased to be the immovable object? I'd love it if D&D stopped making the universe implode.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Ye gods, they've already gotten rid of Magic Missile as the unstoppable force; have Telekinetic Sphere and Wall of Force finally ceased to be the immovable object? I'd love it if D&D stopped making the universe implode.

I don't think you can actually move the sphere, so don't worry, D&D physics isn't going to be making sense anytime soon.

 

[Kishin]

Magic should be unreliable, fickle, mysterious -- or at least be a resource which can be removed or shut down more easily than the training/skill which are the basis of a Martial heroes powers.

Maybe in your campaign world Magic is unreliable, fickle and mysterious, but I've seen quite a few where that isn't a case. I don't think this is the sort of thing that should be imposed on someone. Furthermore, why should it be easier to counter? How is that in any way fair to people playing magic using classes? What do you tell them? 'Sorry, your class is just easier to counter because magic is unreliable and fickle.' That doesn't sound very fun.

Good game design (and universal mechanics are good game design) should be a paramount concern of the people who are mechanically designing games.

I wonder if they will remake Iron Heart Surge?

IMO there's not the need for Iron Heart Surge there was in 3.5E, thanks to the whole 'save ends' mechanic.

 

[Lizard]

Maybe in your campaign world Magic is unreliable, fickle and mysterious, but I've seen quite a few where that isn't a case. I don't think this is the sort of thing that should be imposed on someone. Furthermore, why should it be easier to counter? How is that in any way fair to people playing magic using classes?

Because magic can do anything, and so, they will always have an edge in flexibility...unless, of course, all power sets are basically identical with different flavor text. The idea that abilities derived from practice and training *differ* from abilities derived from controlling the flow of an external power source is part of not only D&D, but much fantasy literature, and removing the distinctions in mechanics is a poor choice.

Good game design (and universal mechanics are good game design) should be a paramount concern of the people who are mechanically designing games.

Making people feel choices matter is good game design. Creating multiple sets of identical powers and hoping no one peels back the label to see they're all the same is not.

 

[Cadfan]

4e Iron Heart Surge
Fighter Utility Level 2
Per Encounter, Personal, Minor Action
For each ongoing effect on your character that permits a save, you may choose to roll one saving throw.

 

[Sojorn]

Making people feel choices matter is good game design. Creating multiple sets of identical powers and hoping no one peels back the label to see they're all the same is not.

I agree completely with this point.

But the moment that I see a completely non-magical martial ability with the zone or conjuration keyword is when I will see what connection this point has to 4th edition. If zones and conjurations are only ever attached to magic, then one can hardly say that what a sword can do and what a spell can do are the same thing.

Mechanically, yes, you can understand the effects of a fireball in terms of a sword strike. But that is simply consistent mechanical design at work, the designers are under no obligation to actually give a sword strike the properties of a fireball. Much like they are under no obligation to give both a dagger and a longsword the same damage die.

 

[Thyrwyn]

@Lizard - Magic can not do anything. Magic can only do what the rules let it. The rules should only "let it" do that which is consistent with the setting/genre.

Making people feel choices matter is good game design. Creating multiple sets of identical powers and hoping no one peels back the label to see they're all the same is not.

Show me examples of this being the case from the abilities we have seen - I haven't seen it.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I suspect that if and when martial characters get some kind of magic-disrupting ability, it will be something of the sort that allows them to interrupt a caster's ability to sustain his powers. For example:

Disrupting Strike
Attack: Strength vs Will
Hit: [w] + strength damage, and any powers the target is sustaining end as if he had failed to spend the required action to sustain it.

 

[The Little Raven]

Give it time.

Guilty of a crime they have yet to commit, eh? Brilliant.