How good is the new MM? (Thread split)

[MrMyth]

In another thread, the discussion came up that the new version of Magic Missile was simply better than any other single-target wizard At-Wills, and the Mage getting it for free was a substantial boost to their power level. Ironically, when we originally saw the new form of the MM, I had found myself defending it as 'not useless', yet now find myself on the other side of the argument - that while a decent power, it is on par with most other At-Wills.

I'm splitting this off from the other thread, since it was a pretty significant tangent from the main point. Those who find the math meaningless or the debate pointless can feel free to ignore this thread.

Now then, on the actual discussion...

Just to be clear, here are the claims which I am disputing:

Getting MM for free is more potent than some people are willing to admit... There are multiple times to use it in nearly every encounter.

If the Wizard player in your game has MM and doesn't use it frequently at low level when it is appropriate (typically at least 1 round in 3), that's his mistake.

Just to be clear, I do think MM is useful, and certainly versatile. It comes in handy in some very specific situations - when a character is at penalties to hit, or weakened, or the enemy is out of range of other options. In those cases, the mage does have an edge.

Most of the time, Magic Missile will provide around the same average damage as most other At-Will powers, and thus be of around equal use for the simple goal of 'eliminating enemies'. Unless you can know for sure that an enemy's hp are in low-mid single digits (which is pretty hard to do), then MM is just as good a choice - but no better - than most other At-Wills.

In other situations - such as when you have bonuses to hit or damage - Magic Missile begins to fall behind. The more optimized - or even just higher level - a character gets, the less effective MM will be in terms of raw damage, compared to other options.

Single digit hit points are not the only issue. You are missing the big picture here and focusing on that. You are not focusing on foes that have other number of hit points. Even a fresh first level foe with 25 hit points can often (nearly 40% of the time) be taken out quicker by Magic Missile (assume no striker attacks for this example), attack #1 hitting, and attack #2 hitting; then with Phantom Bolt missing, attack #1 hitting, attack #2 hitting, and attack #3 hitting. The odds of Phantom Bolt hitting and attack #1 taking the foe out are extremely tiny when the foe has 25 hit points, so attack #2 hitting is almost always required. The difference is that if attack #1 and #2 hits along with Magic Missile, attack #3 is typically not required. That saves a Standard Action to be used on a different foe at least one attack in three for this scenario. Sure, the DPR is similar, but there are initial hit point ranges where MM works better, just like there are hit points ranges where the extra few points of Phantom Bolt works better.

Well, yes, that was generally my point. With the same average damage, they are usually of the same benefit in terms of simply dealing damage. In some specific scenarios one or the other will be more useful, but there is rarely any guarantee you'll know which before the dice are rolled.

Sometimes you will miss with Phantom Bolt several times in a roll, and would have been better off chipping away with MM. Other times, you'll hit twice in a row, and save two actions you would have instead spent on MM. Neither of these examples proves one At-Will better than the other.

Let's take your example. Let's take a first level Wizard with Magic Missile (7 points at level one) vs. a first level Wizard with a D8+5 single target At Will power, and both have a first level Cleric with a D8+4 single target At Will power as backup.

...

This is a hit point scenario that favors your POV (because the Wizard with a D8+5 power can kill the foe with a single attack) and there is still only a 1 in 4 chance that he will do that.

The foe is dead in a single round 43.5% of the time (with 2 PCs attacking it) vs. the 55% of the time with Magic Missile.

The foe isn't even additionally wounded by the two attacks almost one round in five. The foe is always seriously wounded in the MM case.

And what if the foe has 14 hit points instead of 11? The D8+5 attack is a lot less useful then because it cannot kill the foe with a single attack. In that scenario, MM wins more because the Cleric attack will almost always kill if it hits.

The thing is, again, some numbers are better for MM, some are worse. It's easy to say "MM wins when the foe has 14 hp" while ignoring that it is less useful if the opponent has 15 hp, and it takes 3 MM to kill the foe. What about at 8 hp, where the At-Will's edge in potential damage is more significant?

But let's look at your numbers again. I'm not sure why you assume the cleric has a 0% chance of kill an enemy in one shot, but otherwise the math is right. The MM team had a 55% chance to kill the enemy in 2 actions, or a 45% chance to kill the enemy in 3. Correcting for the cleric's chance to kill, the other team has: a 25.6% chance to kill in 1 action, a 25.9% chance to kill in 2 actions, a 22.8% chance to kill in 3 actions, an 11.4% chance to kill in 4 actions, a 7.6% chance to kill in 5 actions and a 3.4% chance to kill in 6 actions (and a few more diminishing returns in later rounds). Now, the question becomes, is that 1/4 chance of it taking 4+ rounds worth the 1/4 chance of it only taking one attack?

Well, maybe yes, maybe no. But the fact those odds are so close is my point - the advantages and disadvantages are about the same. MM isn't automatically the better choice. By those numbers, on average, MM will kill in 2.45 rounds, and another At-Will will kill in ~2.75 rounds. MM has the slight advantage - for 11 hitpoints. If we run the numbers for an enemy with 10 hp, the numbers draw close to even. If the enemy has only 8 hp, other At-Wills pull ahead...

...but, worth noting, the difference between all these choices is relatively small. And that's my main point - they all come out pretty close to even. Using Phantom Bolt instead of MM isn't a mistake, and the Wizard without MM isn't any worse off than the Mage who gets it for free.

The reason it works this way is that the ratio of damage vs. the ratio of to hit. As an example, the D8+5 damage does 9.8 average damage (including criticals) vs. 7 for MM, whereas the ratio to hit is 6 to 10. 7/9.8 > 6/10. Until the 9.8 increases above 12 (2+ more damage per hit), MM wins the DPR race and hence, wins the "how often does it help more than a D8+5 power" race.

I got the sense, for the most part, that your argument wasn't "MM has the most DPR", and more "enemies regularly end up in the range where MM's reliability is more important than the extra damage of At-Wills". If you are trying to claim that MM is the best because it wins the DPR race... then I think I have to disagree even more.

Yes, at level 1, with no bonuses at all, MM has a higher average damage. But it takes so little to shift that difference. Combat Advantage alone brings the DPR basically even. You mentioned earlier Gauntlets of Blood and Arcane Reserves - just one of those basically brings the damage even, and both of them lets other options pull ahead.

MM typically has a better DPR at low level and hence, there are a lot of scenarios (most of the non-area effect ones) where it is better. Even when the player boosts other At Will powers above the DPR of Magic Missile with feats and items, there are still a lot of scenarios where the Wizard either automatically takes out a foe, or sets the foe up for another PC to kill.

...

Except that it is NOT a wasted action. Here is where you are missing the point and mistaken. It actually does a LOT of good.

The Cleric with his D8+4 attack will automatically kill the 4 hp remaining foe if he hits.

Again, the point isn't that using MM is useless - just that it isn't any better than other options.

In this scenario, you set up successfully another foe to kill. But as we showed earlier, that comes out about even to attacking it normally instead, and having a chance to kill it outright.

Sometimes the enemy will be at the hp where MM is the better choice. Sometimes the enemy will be at the hp where a different At-will is the better choice. You don't generally know, beforehand, if the enemy is at 8 hp or 11 hp. Honestly, it's hard to tell if it is at 6 hp or 19 hp.

And, Mages get it automatically. It really is the best choice for when it appears that it will kill a foe or when it leads to the death of a foe by a fellow PC when a different single target At Will Wizard power would not have killed the NPC. The rest of the time, it may or may not be the best choice.

"Best choice", again, is the problem here. We've shown that for enemies who aren't in 'instant-kill' range, it is essentially the same as using any other At-Will. (At least for characters without combat advantage or any extra bonuses to hit or damage, who are better off with other At-Wills).

For enemies that it will kill instantly, yes, it is the best choice. But you just don't know that accurately if enemies are in that range, and enemies staggering around in isolation at single digit hp, in my experience, is not something so common as to happen one in every three rounds.

Is having it, for free, a benefit? Sure. But not a huge one, and a low-level Mage who never casts Magic Missile at all will be almost exactly as effective as one who casts it multiple times every encounter.

 

[Aegeri]

The other key point that KarinsDad fails to address is that magic missile has no viable control on it either. It's just a flat poor amount of damage, while many other at-wills while they can miss will exert important control functions or hit multiple creatures (like Chilling Cloud). So using magic missile 4 times in an encounter is just a ridiculous concept, because it's not got the damage or any control effect whatsoever. The point of the wizard/mage is they are controllers and so not actually controlling enemies is a poor use of actions.

 

[KarinsDad]

The other key point that KarinsDad fails to address is that magic missile has no viable control on it either. It's just a flat poor amount of damage, while many other at-wills while they can miss will exert important control functions or hit multiple creatures (like Chilling Cloud). So using magic missile 4 times in an encounter is just a ridiculous concept, because it's not got the damage or any control effect whatsoever. The point of the wizard/mage is they are controllers and so not actually controlling enemies is a poor use of actions.

Neither do the other Single Target At Will Attack powers. I'll repost what I posted before. The control from these types of powers is so limited as to be almost non-existent.



What is the most important type of control? The answer is death. If a foe is dead, then he cannot attack back (as a general rule shy of some monsters bringing NPC allies back from the grave). So, damage is the ultimate form of control.

You'll note that I said multiple times that area powers are flat out better when the Wizard can manage them. And I also said that at low level, the Wizard runs out of Encounter powers quickly and is quickly limited to At Will Attack powers.


With regard to single target At Will Attack powers, let's look at the control that you are talking about:

Cloud of Daggers, Erupting Flare, Nightmare Eruption. 95% damage, 5% control. These are almost never used as a control spells. They are all about damage.


Illusory Ambush. Almost all damage. A -2 penalty to attack rolls is ok, but unless it forces the DM to use a single target attack instead of a multiple target attack, or to use a weaker attack, it has little to do with control. It has to do with protection. And for single target NPC attacks, the -2 penalty only works 6% of the time (60% chance to hit * 10% chance to have the NPC miss when he normally would have hit).


Ray of Frost. The first of the hard control powers. It is good for preventing a foe from escaping, but in the scenario that you were discussing (i.e. the first attack on a foe), it rarely helps as control. An NPC that is slowed can still shift and attack, or charge up to 4 squares and attack, or use a ranged attack. The control aspect of Ray of Frost (and the chance to hit) is fairly limited.

Storm Pillar. Also a control power that uses damage to control, but it's use too is extremely limited. When the situation calls for it, it's nice. No doubt. But, the situation rarely calls for it. It's easy to just walk out of it shy of a narrow area (with the exception of the center square if it is placed 5 feet about the ground directly above a foe). As a general rule, it's tough to set up a situation where the NPCs will give up their attacks in order to not move through it and they can often just sidestep it. And if they have ranged attacks or some types of burst or blast attack, the spell does virtually nothing unless the PCs can also create forced movement.

There is no doubt about it. Area effect powers are typically better when the Wizard can use them, and as a general rule, he should when he can. If not though, the other single target attack spells typically result in less average damage than Magic Missile at low level and with very little extra control.

At higher level, Magic Missile loses its luster due to the plethora of extra Encounter and Daily Attack powers and the damage boosts to the other Single Target At Will powers. But at low level when a PC typically only has one or two Encounter Attack powers and has a greater need to save his only Daily attack power, Magic Missile is a solid choice over most of the other single target At Will Attack powers (build depending).

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

In my campaign, I would let PCs pick whichever version of Magic Missile they want. But that hasn't come up, as I don't have a wizard this type around.

 

[Aegeri]

What is the most important type of control? The answer is death.

Magic missile is very poor at this you realize. Very poor. It gets poorer and poorer the higher level you are as well. This is a really unconvincing argument. Especially because a minor amount of damage is not "control" by any definition. Neither will anyone in the party agree when the "controlled" monster freely moves and punches the rogue unconscious - instead of being slid into difficult terrain or adjacent to the fighter.

Cloud of Daggers, Erupting Flare, Nightmare Eruption. 95% damage, 5% control. These are almost never used as a control spells. They are all about damage.

Nightmare Eruption has the psychic keyword, so qualifies for psychic lock. This boosts it to a control power easily and is a fantastic choice for an illusionist. Not to mention wipes out clustered minions and deals solid damage to other adjacent creatures.

Erupting Flare isn't so good.

Cloud of Daggers is not bad and inflicts extra wisdom damage at the start of the creatures turn. This can finish off enemies just as effectively as MM can at low levels. Without costing an additional action. Plus it can present a barrier in narrow areas for monsters to cross.

Illusionary Ambush + Psychic lock = -4 penalty to attacks. So that's damn good. Especially combined with a mark. Also you severely underestimate the importance of a -2 penalty if you think it isn't important, especially when you've thrown that -2 penalty onto a marked creature. There is a reason getting combat advantage for the +2 bonus makes a huge difference in 4E. With a mark and illusionary ambush and psychic lock, that's a whopping -6 penalty for that creature attacking anyone other than your defender. That is pure control, no questions asked.

Ray of Frost has frost cheese associated with it, so can get constant CA and deal more damage as well. It also slows an enemy for a delightful side benefit, that allows another PC to easily keep distance from that creature. Or prevents artillery from running and similar.

Storm Pillar is not great post-errata, but it works brilliantly in its niche.

Charm of Misplaced Wrath is an encounter power, that gives an attack against an enemies ally as an effect, plus on a hit slides and dazes. Magic missile is not better than this power and I am stunned you could claim it is. Are you claiming that Magic Missile is seriously better than this encounter power? I have to assume this is a mistake and you meant hypnotism.

Hypnotism (which may have been what you meant) is a great control power. It lets you use monsters very strong MBAs against their own allies, with a +4 (+6 with right school) to the attack roll. That's incredible. It's secondary effect isn't bad either, sliding the creature for setting it up for allies, marks or similar. It also targets will and has a solid range. Overall this can be really niche or absolutely terrific. Given how many monsters do great things with their MBAs, this is more than worth having.

Let's continue though to other spells.

Arc Lightning is two attacks that deal pure damage, but targets two creatures. This is a very good deal and lightning damage has good synergy with Mark of Storm from Eberron (slide 1 when you hit with a lightning/thunder keyword power).

Phantom Bolt has a slide and again, psychic lock.

Winged Horde (that you ignored) is an ally friendly burst 2, has the psychic keyword and the enemy cannot make OAs. That's a very strong control power.

Beguiling Stands is a close burst 5 entirely ally friendly power that can push a ridiculous amount of squares with the right set up. Even so, int damage and push 3 ally friendly is terrific.

Your arguments here just don't make any sense whatsoever, because all of these have control effects while MM does a very small and often insignificant amount of damage. PCs with good tactics can easily make use of powers that slide, for example, by keeping a creature adjacent to the defender of the party. Forcing a creature to waste actions and not move as it wants is by definition control.

 

[the Jester]

Ehh, the new MM is about right for a wizard at-will.

It certainly hasn't proven overpowered like KD suggests in my campaign. KarinsDad- have you seen it in actual play or are you judging on theory?

If "death" was considered "control," wouldn't strikers be better controllers than controllers?

 

[Aegeri]

Ehh, the new MM is about right for a wizard at-will.

It certainly hasn't proven overpowered like KD suggests in my campaign. KarinsDad- have you seen it in actual play or are you judging on theory?

If "death" was considered "control," wouldn't strikers be better controllers than controllers?

It's funny, because I was just about to edit my post to throw in a remark that the slayer was a better controller than the wizard or mage. Especially because I can get a near 80% chance to hit your average monster with a level 1 human slayer. No I'm seriously not kidding and if I do miss, haha, heroic effort takes care of that. If MM makes the wizard a controller then a charging human slayer is an amazing controller.

I will say though that Wizards Fury + MM is a really powerful low level combination.

 

[KarinsDad]

But let's look at your numbers again. I'm not sure why you assume the cleric has a 0% chance of kill an enemy in one shot, but otherwise the math is right.

Sorry. Foobar on my part. I was thinking of a Cleric that did D6+4, not one that did D8+4. My error. He actually had a outright 17.5% chance of killing the foe if the Wizard missed.

The MM team had a 55% chance to kill the enemy in 2 actions, or a 45% chance to kill the enemy in 3. Correcting for the cleric's chance to kill, the other team has: a 25.6% chance to kill in 1 action, a 25.9% chance to kill in 2 actions, a 22.8% chance to kill in 3 actions, an 11.4% chance to kill in 4 actions, a 7.6% chance to kill in 5 actions and a 3.4% chance to kill in 6 actions (and a few more diminishing returns in later rounds). Now, the question becomes, is that 1/4 chance of it taking 4+ rounds worth the 1/4 chance of it only taking one attack?

One has to put a disclaimer on this.

This is an 11 hit point example where the Wizard does not know that it is an unfavorable situation for him and the Cleric.

Even in this unfavorable (to MM and more favorable to Phantom Bolt) situation and using your numbers, the average number of actions that it takes to kill the foe is:

.55 * 2 + .45 * 3 = 2.45 actions

.256 * 1 + .259 * 2 + .228 * 3 + .114 * 4 + .076 * 5 + .034 * 6 = 2.498 actions

It's basically a tie.

Both spells average the same number of rounds to kill the foe.


In the 7 NPC hit point scenario, MM averages 1 round 100% of the time.

Phantom Bolt averages 1 round 60% * 7/8 (rolling a 1 still doesn't kill the foe) of the time or 52.5% of the time. Phantom Bolt averages 1.9 rounds, MM averages 1 round.

When it is advantageous for Phantom Bolt, it's pretty close to a tie because the DPR is pretty close to even. When it is advantageous for MM, MM wins by almost an entire round and saves 0.9 of a standard action.


So in answer to your question (for this example), it's a tie. Although Phantom Bolt can succeed in one round, it will not succeed just as often.

In the scenario favorable to MM, then MM wins hands down.


And note: I've been saying all along that the player of the Wizard has to pick and choose when to use MM. You think 1 in 3 rounds is too high. I don't. I see a lot of scenarios where the Fighter is surrounded by foes and an area effect doesn't help (unless it is an enemy only area effect). Giving a foe -2 to hit helps very little. Slowing the foes does practically nothing. But wounding the already bloodied foe does quite a bit.

There are also times when the dice are cold and the dice are hot. We've all seen this. When the dice are hot, sure, use Phantom Bolt. You're in the zone.

When the dice are cold, doing even a small amount of damage automatically is better than doing nothing.

Course, for those of us who aren't supersitious and realize that cold dice and hot dice are just probability results, it's still best to pick the spell that appears to be best. For example, if one NPC dropped after taking 35 points of damage and another of the same type of NPC has taken 25 points of damage, there's a good chance that MM will kill that foe with 32 points. Phantom Bolt might hit for 10, but then again, it might hit for 6 or for 0.

 

[Aegeri]

I see a lot of scenarios where the Fighter is surrounded by foes and an area effect doesn't help (unless it is an enemy only area effect).

Magic missile helps more in this situation... how? Considering we're talking about a class that has two of the best ally friendly at-wills available, this is a rather silly argument. As it almost entirely ignores that Wizards have two fantastic area of effect powers that are ally friendly. Winged Horde will mean the fighter can leave provoking less OAs, plus with psychic lock those OA's will be at a -2 penalty to attacks. Beguiling Strands can simply blow the whole lot away and give more than enough breathing room for the fighter, while simultaneously keeping certain creatures adjacent so the monsters aren't entirely free to act. Even other powers here like hypnotism can be of great use: Monster MBAs are frequently strong in effects themselves, so a monster whacking his ally in that group with a +4 bonus can punt away his ally or similar. While MM is going to um, deal a whole 7 damage and then the fighter gets beat down into death. Very useful action that.

 

[mneme]

Illusory Ambush. Almost all damage. A -2 penalty to attack rolls is ok, but unless it forces the DM to use a single target attack instead of a multiple target attack, or to use a weaker attack, it has little to do with control. It has to do with protection. And for single target NPC attacks, the -2 penalty only works 6% of the time (60% chance to hit * 10% chance to have the NPC miss when he normally would have hit).

Your math is off here.

The chance of a -2 (assuming you're looking at to-hits of 3+ to 18+) turning a hit into a miss isn't "60% of 10%". It's 10% -- period.

This is trivial -- just look at the d20, and count how many success numbers are turned into miss numbers over the number of possiblities on the d20.

Alternatively, if you have to do things the hard way...
60% chance to hit (9-20).
Of those, 2 numbers (9 and 10) are turned into misses by a -2.
So that's 60% * 1/6 (chance of one of the twelve "hit" numbers actually being now a miss number) = (drumroll, please) 10%.

Ray of Frost. The first of the hard control powers. It is good for preventing a foe from escaping, but in the scenario that you were discussing (i.e. the first attack on a foe), it rarely helps as control. An NPC that is slowed can still shift and attack, or charge up to 4 squares and attack, or use a ranged attack. The control aspect of Ray of Frost (and the chance to hit) is fairly limited.

I don't like Ray of Frost much for the PH wizard, but there are plenty of situations where it's hard control. Drop it on a melee brute at the beginning of a fight, and it's not -that- hard to either gimp their damage for a round or two or even kill it entirely. The problem with RoF is really that it's situational, and the wizard -needs- to have a good area power and a good power that works when an area power won't -- which usually means Thunderwave and an area burst (as Thunderwave is very effective as the "get out of being pinned against the wall" power). Human wizards may take Ray of Frost (or Storm Pillar), but others won't, typically. If anything, mages are much more likely to
take the hard control powers, as Magic Missile gives them some breathing room and covers the long range aspect (thus builds like MM/Thunderwave/RoF are reasonable).

FWIW, I agree with you specifically that the ability of the Mage to have Magic Missile for free is exceedingly powerful (also, it means that parties with ranged leaders -- Eagle Shaman, ranged warlords gain a significant bump, even if primarly in the damage output of the "everyone attack this guy right here" powers); it's not the mage should MM all the time (1/3 is a little much, given that I can set up bursts with 2+ enemies in them about half the time at minimum; Enlarge Spell helps a lot here), but that the presence of MM in their repetoire changes what other at wills they can and will take. That said, it's somewhat balanced by the lack of ritual casting (although that can be partially bought back with a feat).