Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4978820" data-attributes="member: 82106">The issue I have with the whole concept is that there is a pretty potent argument against every option:Ported weapon properties like brutal and high crit - not really generally applicable to spells. It would work for many but would basically devalue all non-damaging spells. To hit bonus - this makes no sense, get a higher plus implement. How is this actually different from the expertise feats anyway? Its just a basically mandatory extra feat that gives some static stackable to-hit bonus. ANY kind of universal damage bonus - again, its just a "do more damage" feat. Still devalues non-damaging spells.ANY sort of situational damage boosts or pretty much anything else of this ilk - Uh, isn't this why you get a magical implement? Only positive comment would be it creates a huge number of new permutations of basically magic implements without the need to actually put out a book full of them. OTOH is it likely worth the cost of a feat to gain access to these items? Just save yourself the feat slot for some basically equivalent feat that works with ANY implement.There are a very few pretty weak counterarguments but I don't see them as justifying a whole complicated new subsystem being added to the game. OK, it makes it possible to get something out of using a non-magical implement, but so what? Every level 2 PC has a magic implement and they STILL have to burn a feat slot to get access to these better implements? Just take Implement Expertise etc...I also have to wonder how this feat is going to work at all. Are these things just considered entirely new types of implement? If not then why can't my wand wizard just pick up a superior wand right now? If it was a weapon then there's a loss of the proficiency bonus, but implements don't have proficiency bonuses... Overall I'm mystified. Still haven't seen any good argument for where there is space in the 4e design for these things. I'm suspicious too. They've been delayed once already (and maybe were left out of the core rules to start with) possibly because they haven't actually found an implementation that is very satisfying. Now we're getting SOMETHING, but its all hush hush. Like are they nervous that the implementation isn't that great and don't want to stir up a whole bunch of criticism before they spring this on us or what?</blockquote>

Verification