Force Orb Question

[DracoSuave]

The beauty of Thunderwave is that getting close enough to thunderwave successfully is that you are afterwards not close enough to thunderwave.

And who said you have to be adjacent to thunderwave anyways? Last I heard, sucker's got a range of 3 away from you. So you can use it, then your fighter can step in as a meat shield against those who miss.

But -who- bothers to coordinate their attacks anyways. That's too much work!

 

[LittleFuzzy]

I'm not sure what gave you that idea. If the large object in question is definitively a single object, they would most certainly be able to target the whole thing. It's a per-case ruling though. No "I target the building and kill everyone inside," but "I target the wagon and splatter the minions driving it" is fine.



What are you talking about? Force Orb cannot damage the same target twice. It doesn't matter what the original target was, it won't be targeted by the secondary effect, nor will any of the secondary targets be hit more than once.

So what is "definitively" a single object? I think the floor is definitively a single object, but you apparently disagree. At what size does a statue cease to definitively be a single object? The giant faces on Mount Rushmore are definitively single objects, while I could easily see individual components of a wagon which could make it not a single object. If my players chose to target a wheel of the wagon with their force orb, I should rule they do no damage to the rest of the wagon, because it's all a single target? I think there is less need for per-case ruling than you do. I think the rules regarding targets and objects right now adequately cover most/all of these situations, if they're read a bit more restrictively than you apparently desire.

 

[James McMurray]

The beauty of Thunderwave is that getting close enough to thunderwave successfully is that you are afterwards not close enough to thunderwave.

Unless you miss. Then the crocodile swallows you, the ghoul immobilizes you, the phantom stuns you, etc. Thunderwave is great, but wizards who see it as their primary strategy are often going to find themselves in severe pain.

Also, Thunderwave targets everyone. Force Orb won't kill the beleaguered cleric surrounded by goblins but will hurt all of the goblins.

And who said you have to be adjacent to thunderwave anyways? Last I heard, sucker's got a range of 3 away from you. So you can use it, then your fighter can step in as a meat shield against those who miss.

If you want to hit the same 3x3 chunk of enemies that a force orb could hit, you have to be adjacent to at least one of the targets. More depending on terrain and target layout.

But -who- bothers to coordinate their attacks anyways. That's too much work!

Cute straw man. Try again.

So what is "definitively" a single object? I think the floor is definitively a single object, but you apparently disagree. At what size does a statue cease to definitively be a single object? The giant faces on Mount Rushmore are definitively single objects, while I could easily see individual components of a wagon which could make it not a single object. If my players chose to target a wheel of the wagon with their force orb, I should rule they do no damage to the rest of the wagon, because it's all a single target? I think there is less need for per-case ruling than you do. I think the rules regarding targets and objects right now adequately cover most/all of these situations, if they're read a bit more restrictively than you apparently desire.

I'll take it on a case by case basis. You want to know what size the statue has to be to not be a single object, I ask what is it made of and how, and what will be the effects of saying yes.

If you want to have a single general rule for everything, and it's fun for your group, that's great. I'd rather not paint myself into a corner when there's no need, and don't see a need to restrict the players' tactics of desperation because someone who isn't in our group thinks they can destroy the planet if I allow targeting the ground.

 

[DracoSuave]

Unless you miss. Then the crocodile swallows you, the ghoul immobilizes you, the phantom stuns you, etc. Thunderwave is great, but wizards who see it as their primary strategy are often going to find themselves in severe pain.

But -who- bothers to coordinate their attacks anyways. That's too much work!

Cute straw man. Try again.

When a point made directly rebuts one of your own rebuttals, then it is -you- making the strawman, by removing the objection to your own statement before you make it.

Never advocated it as a primary strategy. Merely as a suitable replacement for Force Orbing nothing at all.

Also, if your cleric is surrounded by Goblins, thunderwave does a very effective job of trading a bit of damage on him (if you hit him) for him no longer being surrounded by goblins. If he is in such peril that these goblins are a viable threat, he'd much rather take the 1d6+4 from you than the xdx+x from the multiple attacks of the goblins. Especially if said 1d6+4 has the rider of knocking the goblins away from him.

Again, math wins again.

 

[Danceofmasks]

And that's why my Tiefling Wizard happily sets fire to party members.
Oh, and he's evil, but that's beside the point ... he doesn't play to lose, so he wouldn't set allies on fire if it isn't for their own good.

 

[James McMurray]

When a point made directly rebuts one of your own rebuttals, then it is -you- making the strawman, by removing the objection to your own statement before you make it.

Either you're assumiong that Force Orb prevents coordination, or your claim snark about people not coordinating is meaningless. I take that back, either way it's meaningless.

Never advocated it as a primary strategy. Merely as a suitable replacement for Force Orbing nothing at all.

Yep. There are definitely times when it will be a better idea. There are also times when it won't.

Also, if your cleric is surrounded by Goblins, thunderwave does a very effective job of trading a bit of damage on him (if you hit him) for him no longer being surrounded by goblins. If he is in such peril that these goblins are a viable threat, he'd much rather take the 1d6+4 from you than the xdx+x from the multiple attacks of the goblins. Especially if said 1d6+4 has the rider of knocking the goblins away from him.

Excellent job ignoring the part where I said it could kill him (or at the least knock him out). Please try to keep up.

Again, math wins again.

The math that says knocking your cleric unconscious is better than killing the guys that are attacking him. You may want to try a calculator next time. Last I checked, an unconscious leader could easily escalate to a TPK.

Question: Are you saying that force orbing an object to deal collateral damage is never going to be the best option a wizard has available? If so, please explain. If not, then why are you continuing to argue that it's a bad idea, given that nobody has said it will always be the best option?

 

[Danceofmasks]

Well, for me, force orbing an object for collateral damage is never the best option available.
Because the best option available is to prep a better spell.

But ... it's a viable tactic (for *cough* suboptimal wizards), just don't target the ground in an LFR game, 'cos it could end with a head judge having to settle a dispute.

 

[James McMurray]

Anything useful to add besides "look at how great I am"? It's likely having the opposite effect you think it is (assuming you think it'll make people respect your knowledge and manhood).

Force Orb is a) not something you prep since it's an encounter power, b) a good option for a low level wizard that wants to do area damage at range without hitting his friends, and c) the spell whose mechanics are under discussion in this thread.

Who cares if it makes a head judge give a ruling? Isn't that their job?

 

[DracoSuave]

Either you're assumiong that Force Orb prevents coordination, or your claim snark about people not coordinating is meaningless. I take that back, either way it's meaningless.

No I understand basic things like

Step 1) Thunderwave
Step 2) Interpose the fighter between you and targets.

That's what coordination is, and it deftly handles the problem of what happens when you miss.

I figured that would be obvious, but the fact that it is not might imply why such coordination isn't an assumption to you.

Yep. There are definitely times when it will be a better idea. There are also times when it won't.

Those times are rare and far between.

Excellent job ignoring the part where I said it could kill him (or at the least knock him out). Please try to keep up.

I apologize. I am not a mind reader and I don't automaticly telepathicly pluck this information from your brain. See, in my country, you actually have to -say- things for people to register that you said them.

For the record, you didn't.

Wait. That'd not be my fault then. That would be your own.

The math that says knocking your cleric unconscious is better than killing the guys that are attacking him. You may want to try a calculator next time. Last I checked, an unconscious leader could easily escalate to a TPK.

If your cleric is in that much trouble, your party is in a lot more trouble than a single force orb is going to help you with. If the goblins aren't minions, then yes, thunderwaving the cleric then having the next player Heal check him to get the second wind might actually be optimal as well. This way the cleric ends up above bloodied when he healing words himself (which he should do.)

But they aren't minions than that force orb -might- be put to better use by using its primary so that you can concentrate damage, because your necessity is to lower their numbers as fast as possible.

Question: Are you saying that force orbing an object to deal collateral damage is never going to be the best option a wizard has available? If so, please explain. If not, then why are you continuing to argue that it's a bad idea, given that nobody has said it will always be the best option?

I'm not saying it's never an option. But you have to weigh the loss of that primary damage vs the situation, and it gets -very rare- that that loss of opportunity is less than the value you get from using force orb over other, less expendable, options.

 

[DracoSuave]

No, cause LFR games are run at the DM's whim. 'The DM said so' is ruling enough in LFR.