Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rykaar" data-source="post: 4107714" data-attributes="member: 56361">It's a very good analogy between the caster losing an implement and the melee class losing a weapon.  I hadn't thought of that.On the other hand, prior to 4e, I never built a weapon swinger that depended on one specific weapon type (specialization isn't complete dependency), and typically they carried several.  It does seem with 4e that many of the class powers are going to be dependent on a particular weapon type.  Perhaps it would be wise to have some powers that could be used with a makeshift weapon.This is assuming that disarming rules are present.  Like I said originally, I haven't seen any yet, but who knows what might appear between now and June?I guess the concept of disarming casters is a tricky one though.  Yes, it makes sense to have disarming rules, but if it is relegated to a minor inconvenience to the target, it won't happen much.  For Potter or Gandalf to lose their implement is a VERY BAD THING.  If you have a pack of wands tucked up your sleeve that you just bought from the blind guy selling them on the corner, it's at best a loss of a move action to whip out a new one, but you made your opponent blow a standard action.  That's actually a net gain for the caster.</blockquote>