Dispel Magic

Oh this is sweet. Finally smaller, easier to deal with spells. No more need to read 3 paragraphs of text just to figure out what happens when you make your save :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

This is the best decision I've seen yet.

I always dread 3.5 dispel when the wizard pulls it out. I signal the rest of the party to go get a drink or use the restroom.

*roll* 15
nope
*roll* 22
He becomes less... err floaty.
*roll* 17
nope
*roll* 28 woot!
Umm... his boots aren't umm... sparkely anymore
Keep rolling?
Yes
*roll* 19
ugh.....

Awesome. We can quibble about the power balance after we see the rest of the design. I like the design direction on this one.
 

Hmm.
Hmm.
I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. On the one hand, getting rid of text bloat is good (more text often means more exploits, especially with WotC rules). On the other hand, is this even useful if its this situational? What spells does it compete with?

Nice to see some indication that you aren't yanking summoned creatures from somewhere and then just putting them back when you're done exploiting them. Conjuration seems morally neutral again, even if its... not exactly conjuration anymore. Evocation is everything!
 

mhensley said:
Yay, no more dispelling magic traps. (assuming that there will still be magic traps)


I don't understand how this is a bad thing. Isn't 4th edition supposed to let groups share the spotlight a little? Even in 3.x dispelling a magic trap wasn't an ideal situation; you have to make a caster level check and then the trap is only nonoperational for a measly 1d4 rounds. Using a rogue would almost always be superior, unless you were pressed for time.
 

CoarseDragon said:
Does anyone know what "Ranged 10" might mean in the description? And might that encompass the "zone" size as part of the range?
Range 10 squares. I'm not sure what you mean by the second question, but my interpretation is if the edge of a zone is within 10 squares of you, you can target it for dispelling, regardless of the zone's size.
 



I like it. Whenever a new bit of 4e crunch is released, I often think to myself "Why did we make it so hard on ourselves in the past?" Hopefully, it will play as well as I think it will.
 

Sir Brennen said:
Range 10 squares. I'm not sure what you mean by the second question, but my interpretation is if the edge of a zone is within 10 squares of you, you can target it for dispelling, regardless of the zone's size.

Basically that was my question - how big is the "zone"? Seems to me that an unlimited "zone" size is not quite right. Of course we may get better information when 4th Ed. is actually released.
 

I don't think I've said it yet, so I'll say it now:

I love the new power formats. So much smaller, no more "here are the 10 corner cases for this spell that you're going to use every other day of your career". You skim it over in 10 seconds and you know what it's supposed to do, and how you do it.

I love it. And I see no problem with having a utility daily "dispel magic" to deal with conjurations and zones and something else to deal with buffs (say, something to dispel fly or greater invis, those types). If dispel is going to be daily (and I think it should be, if it's mainly canceling dailies), I'd prefer it this way - that way you don't have all your eggs in one basket.
 

Remove ads

Top