Dragon article -- Class Acts: Wizards

[WOLead]

Spectral Hound, I can see melee Rogues and possibly Rangers taking up the Wizard MC for that one Utility power alone. Those few Illusion skills shown almost make it tempting to roll up a Rogue with Wizard MC with Dex and Int stats.

Though, a few of the Encounter/Daily Attack powers are missing the Psychic Tag from their descriptions. The ones that need them have Psychic damage, I believe.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

Nice,

but shouldn't phantasmal terrain have some kind of duration to it?

Yeah. I'd say it lasts until the end of the encounter.

But all in all this was a neat little article. The only way it could have been better is if there were some illusion rituals.

 

[WOLead]

Also, the Insight skill is explicitly includes 'seeing through illusions' as part of its schtick now. Some of these illusion things ought to involve insight in one way or another (illusory wall at least, for instance).
...

Insight doesn't "see through illusions." It recognizes effects as illusions. Say an adventuring party is dungeon diving, but a Goblin Wizard put up an Illusionary Wall across a path before the adventurers see it. Insight allows a person to recognize that the wall is an Illusion, rather then the whole party to wander past it. A successful Insight roll doesn't allow that person to see through it though as if it wasn't there.

 

[Mistwell]

Very nice. A new daily vs. will. Human wizards can now hit any of the three non-AC defenses with their at-will powers.

And since it isn't a will based power (which is a bit of a surprise) it helps wand users a bit.

Damn. I'm gonna have to subscribe to the DI, aren't I....

 

[Nifft]

I'm gonna have to subscribe to the DI, aren't I....

Not if it takes them another year to get their acts together.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Mistwell]

Not if it takes them another year to get their acts together.

Cheers, -- N

And I think it won't take a year. I give it 3-4 months tops. They've lowered expectations...

 

[Nifft]

And I think it won't take a year. I give it 3-4 months tops. They've lowered expectations...

Hey, didn't you read that guy's blog? Don't say dates near software! Causes magnetic interference or something.

Anyway, I just hope the sales of the Core books are enough motivation for them to keep up the high quality articles, even if DDI never takes off.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Metus]

It's nice to see new powers for the wizard; I can appreciate that. However, seeing the powers just drives home one of the flaws of 4th ed for me: the heavy focus on doing damage, and the generic quality of it all.

Illusory Ambush. You do some damage ('psychic', in this case), and the opponent gets a -2 to attack.

Kind of like Enfeebling Strike.

Or, maybe it'll do damage and add to AC. Or do some shifting of squares.

Grasping Shadows. Does damage and target is slowed. Steel Serpent Strike. Does damage and target is slowed. Ray of Frost. Does damage and target is slowed.

It's one of the reasons I don't like CRPGs as much as tabletop D&D. I remember playing Neverwinter Nights, and every new spell from every new expansion revolved around doing a damage, except in a slightly different way. I would point that out to other people, and they would explain, yes, it's like that, because you can't use your imagination like you can in tabletop, so spells can't be as versatile.

Well here we are.

Illusory Wall is kind of nice, and I do like that. But most of the other abilities just kind of melt into the bland, generic mush that is combat abilities.

That being said, don't take this as a strike against 4E as a whole, since I think 4E does some things right, and I'm about to start running a 4E campaign which I'm excited about. This is just a problem I have with a part of the system.

 

[Boarstorm]

... combat mush ....

I find myself guardedly agreeing with you here, but to be fair -- these are combat spells.

 

[Mistwell]

It's nice to see new powers for the wizard; I can appreciate that. However, seeing the powers just drives home one of the flaws of 4th ed for me: the heavy focus on doing damage, and the generic quality of it all.

You mean the attack spells do damage?

Both the Hound and Wall spells are utility, and both have solid application outside of combat. I see no problem with attacks doing damage.

As for generic, that sounds a bit redundant. Attack spells do damage and sometimes add a condition. The list of conditions is finite. They become less generic when you look at utility spells, as they should.