Forked Thread: Rate WotC as a company: 4e Complete?

[Haffrung Helleyes]

I will happily admit that I was unhappy with the Fly spell in 3.X. In my own game, I house ruled it to be a Personal range 4th level spell, that granted a fly speed of 30 feet. My PCs still took it.

People who say that Fly was less broken in 1E because the wizard had fewer slots and fewer non-slot ways of casting are correct. If a wizard had Fly memorized in 1E, it was a much bigger part of his 'sctick'.

The Ogre example is interesting. Sure, the Ogre is at -2 to hit the flying wizard. But, what is the Wizard's AC? Probably 14 or 15, if he is like the 5th-6th level wizards I have seen in my campaigns. So the Ogre still has a decent chance of hitting the wizard, even when he's flying.

Nevertheless, I think that nerfing Fly was one of the things 4E got right. That doesn't change my basic point, which is that removing Summoning, Enchantment, Illusion and Necromancy from the game left 4E feeling incomplete.

Ken

How is it that you completely ignored when it was fully explained to you?

Ogre. BAB +3. Throwing is a ranged attack, thus he uses his (8) dex. The attack is a +2. Because he is not proficient with Rocks, he receives a -4. So his attack is at -2.

Compared to his +8 with that great club, I really do not understand how you can argue that an attack at a -2 is a viable option. Would you encourage your PCs to use attacks at -2?

 

[Rechan]

The Ogre example is interesting. Sure, the Ogre is at -2 to hit the flying wizard. But, what is the Wizard's AC? Probably 14 or 15, if he is like the 5th-6th level wizards I have seen in my campaigns. So the Ogre still has a decent chance of hitting the wizard, even when he's flying.

If the Wizard has an AC of 15, the Ogre has to roll 17 or above to hit him. 3 out of 20 is not "Decent chance".

I feel like we're speaking entirely different languages. If we can't even agree with what words mean, I see this discussion as pointless.

 

[billd91]

I'd call it "Idiotic". Or "Wasting your turn".

The same might be said of trying to win an internet argument... yet it's not like people around here don't persist.

 

[Rechan]

The same might be said of trying to win an internet argument... yet it's not like people around here don't persist.

Well, I do have little better to do. As opposed to being attacked by a party of adventurers. With Fly.

 

[Plane Sailing]

This thread is getting pretty close to being closed.

Please attempt to neither give nor take offence.

Thanks

 

[billd91]

Well, I do have little better to do. As opposed to being attacked by a party of adventurers. With Fly.

Which is why the question should be mooted by the ogre getting under cover.

But anyone griping about fly being unbalanced in 3e but not 1e and 2e obviously never saw it used extensively in either of the previous editions. The spell's very similar though spell-casting speed is a little lower in 2e (which I have the spell description for now) being 30 feet rather than 60, the non-combat speed is much higher in 2e, and the duration is 10x as long in 2e as well. The number of 3rd level spells is virtually the same minus maybe 1 bonus spell for most casters and that will get adjusted for once the 2e wizard gets 5 spells to cast at 3rd level compared to the 3e wizard's 4.

 

[Andor]

Could someone explain to me why Fly was broken in 3e, but not in 4e, when in combat there is no bloody difference that I can see?

All that 4e lacks is overland flight, which it hardly needs because now you can just use your handy dandy teleportals to avoid the overland encounters.

Yes flight comes later in 4e, but it's an expanded level scale, and Wizards get levitate at 6th level anyway. So what difference is there, save that 4e makes flying useless outside of combat?

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

If the Wizard has an AC of 15, the Ogre has to roll 17 or above to hit him. 3 out of 20 is not "Decent chance".

I feel like we're speaking entirely different languages. If we can't even agree with what words mean, I see this discussion as pointless.

You're right; I did the math wrong in my head and was thinking the Ogre needed a 13 to hit, not a 17.

That said, the chance of rolling a 17 on a d20 is actually 4 out of 20, or 20%. So we're both a bit math impaired this evening!

Ken

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Which is why the question should be mooted by the ogre getting under cover.

But anyone griping about fly being unbalanced in 3e but not 1e and 2e obviously never saw it used extensively in either of the previous editions. The spell's very similar though spell-casting speed is a little lower in 2e (which I have the spell description for now) being 30 feet rather than 60, the non-combat speed is much higher in 2e, and the duration is 10x as long in 2e as well. The number of 3rd level spells is virtually the same minus maybe 1 bonus spell for most casters and that will get adjusted for once the 2e wizard gets 5 spells to cast at 3rd level compared to the 3e wizard's 4.

There's a major difference in 3E: 3E wizards can put all of their Utility spells on scrolls. In 1E/2E, having access to a utility spell pretty much meant giving up a Fireball. In 3E, a wizard can load up with combat spells and keep his noncombat stuff on scrolls and in wands.

Ken

 

[Fenes]

I still don't get why Fly was considered broken in a game that was going "back to the dungeon".

Did you mostly fight in big halls or out in the open, where you could fly up out of reach? And people out in the open never had any defense against flying foes?