Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rangda" data-source="post: 4986252" data-attributes="member: 86125">Some of the epic wizard powers are indeed good, but making a class gimp for 20 levels to give it cool stuff for 10 is not good game design.This I totally disagree with.  You cut resource allocation by reducing monster actions.  Wizards reduce monster actions a bit, but not nearly as much as a minimaxed party just killing them.  In my prior example the party took out ~600 hp spread across 2 boss monsters in ~2.25 rounds.  Daze/immobilize/prone/slow (pretty much what a L14 wizard would have access to at that point) doesn't mean much when the monsters have been reduced to two actions each by pure damage output.Pretty similar to the published modules, which is to say they suck. (I've been VERY, VERY disappointed with SoW.)  I totally agree with you that better combats can be designed.  It's been my experience that encounters don't put pressure on a party until the number of nonminion monsters outnumbers the party by at least 40%, i.e. 7+ nonminions for a 5 person party.  WotC instead prefers to have "scary" solos that get eaten up.  However, to get these numbers with useful monsters you're looking at a fight that is at least +2 levels over the party, possibly +3.  Hard to do every fight. (As an aside, War of the Burning Sky appears to get it as far as encounter design, their combats look much more challenging.  But my party wants to finish SoW before I can run that.)Easy enough to do, toss several controllers at them in every fight.  Monster controllers are far superior to PC controllers.  Daze+prone, daze+immobilize, stun, use greens only, all make players lives miserable.  The problem is that isn't FUN for the players (and having fun is the whole point); doing it once in a while is OK, doing it every fight is not.  Dazing a player means far more than dazing a monster; dazing a monster means essentially nothing as they all get a good basic attack which they can still make, and few have minor action powers.  Many PC classes, however, make extensive use of minors and some lack a good basic attack.I totally agree with you, my point is I think it's too late.  The powers have already been devalued to the point of near worthlessness IMO.  That train has already left the station.I've played pretty much nothing but wizards in D&D for 30 years, but I just haven't seen enough usefulness from the controller role to justify it in a tuned party (since the PHB2 has come out anyway).IMO they need to give controllers some teeth; controllers should get restrained effects at high heroic instead of immobilized, there should be a paragon power that prevents monsters from using recharge powers, daze should be more common, area stun until EoNT should creep in at high paragon, area domination should be doable at low-mid epic, etc.In terms of implements they should IMO work just like weapons.  In 4.5/5.0 I'd like to see them reduce monster AC's by 2 across the board and make proficiency bonuses +0/+1, then you do the same thing with implements.  And for damage they've got to either shrink the die range for [w] powers or make implement powers do and vary it for implements.Our discussion on the usefulness of wizards aside, what everyone is complaining about in this thread (and I agree with them) is that caster powers are designed around the concept that [w] powers are doing d6/d8, maybe the odd d10 here or there.  But the reality is that you're hard pressed to find a melee type that isn't on d10/d12 and high crit (and those extra dice really add up if you can get the crits).  Even if the wizard is the most uber class in the game, that's not going to help out the warlocks and single target sorcerers of the world who should be on par damage wise with the melee strikers (rogues excepted) but aren't.</blockquote>

Verification