Magic Weapons and Keyword Inheritance

[DemonLord57]

I'm not seeing it. Keyword inheritance is just the keywords being inherited by a power using the weapon or implement. You're not adding new effects. Durations won't change. As long as no item has a stance keyword, then stance will never be inherited. And thus this problem never shows up. Same for reliable.

Yes. He was saying that if a class like the swordmage had encounter powers that had one of those keywords, then it could be made into a wand of that power, which would have those keywords, which could then be applied to all of your powers. He then said that would be broken. I agreed.

Though, now that I'm thinking about it, they've only put reliable and stance keywords on dailies so far. If they keep that up, it'll be fine.

edit: Oh wait, forgot about Stormwarden. It has an encounter utility with the stance keyword.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

Agreed. Hopefully they won't allow stance or reliable keywords on any encounter powers of classes that can use wands... that would be... interesting, to say the least. Legion's Hold, and if I miss someone, I don't expend it. Anyone. In a close burst 20. Yeah, that would be a little overpowered. (though this might actually be a problem with the reliable keyword, if it were fixed, reliable would still be quite good, just not ridiculously overpowered)

Reliable gets expended unless you hit someone, not if you miss someone. It got erattaed (sp?). I'm ok if you use a legions hold that gets the reliable keyword somehow, and if you don't hit anyone, you get to try again. I am glad it will likely never happen though. That's a fighter exclusive keyword. It could be really broken with other combos, but at epic level you should do cool stuff, and by cool I mean not miss every enemy within 20 squares of you

 

[DemonLord57]

...It got erattaed...

Are you sure about that? It's not in the first 'update' on the Wizards site, and I don't see any other 'updates'.

@mourn: no, the text on 226 doesn't support that. It says, "when you use a magic item..." It doesn't say, "when you use a magic item's power...." Also, the example doesn't support that. It says that he uses a Flaming Sword to attack, it doesn't say he activates the Flaming Sword or anything like that. You could say that it was assumed, but our interpretation is the more clear one. (by more clear I mean it is more going by exactly what is said)

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

In order to deal fire damage with a flaming weapon, you have to activate the at-will free action ability to convert it from weapon damage to fire damage. That is a power of the magic item.

"When you use a magic item as part of a racial power or a class power, the keywords of the item’s power and the other power all apply."

So, when using the at-will free action to convert it to fire damage, you add the keyword (it does not supercede the existing ones), so you would be dealing 1/2 fire, 1/2 radiant.

No, it actively has to be used. However, if it is not active, then it's keyword does not apply.

Again, this is not true. In order to deal all fire damage, the weapon's at-will must be used. This is the specific rule that over-rides the general rule that you split the damage between all damage keyword types, and when you use a class or racial power with (not magic item power from) a magic item that has a power with a keyword, then the class or racial power gains all the magic item keywords, and so you split the damage between any damage keywords that now apply.

Okay, let me play this out. The example will be using a paladin with a flaming longsword, as in the PHB.

By your explanation...

- Weapon set to "weapon damage."
Melee basic attack - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (weapon damage).
Holy Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (half fire, half radiant).
Valiant Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (fire damage).

- Weapon set to "fire damage."
Melee basic attack - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (fire damage).
Holy Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (fire damage).
Valiant Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (fire damage).

This is correct. (With the possible exception of the melee basic attack. I am not sure if this should be considered a class or racial power that everyone has. For now I will agree and say no.) Adding the At-Will will change all the damage to fire, just like it says in the Flaming weapon description. Otherwise it inherits the keyword fire, and divides the damage between fire and any others that might apply.

By my explanation...

- Weapon set to "weapon damage."
Melee basic attack - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (weapon damage).
Holy Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (radiant damage).
Valiant Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (weapon damage).

- Weapon set to "fire damage."
Melee basic attack - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (fire damage).
Holy Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (half fire, half radiant).
Valiant Strike - Deals 1[W] plus Str bonus (fire damage).

To me, the weapon damage and fire damage are interchangeable, but it does not negate the existence of other damage types due to powers, and the example in the PHB seems to support this.

This is wrong because there is nowhere that says the damage is interchangeable. There are explicit rules found in the item description about the At-Will changing all damage to fire, the class or racial powers inheriting the keywords of the powers of the magic items that the powers are used with, and the splitting of damage between damage keywords. The fact that the example in the PHB uses a flaming weapon has more to do with the fact the the flaming weapon has a power with the fire keyword than the fact that the flaming weapon has an at will that can make all of the damage fire. The At-Will is not used in the example.

EDIT: Now I got ninja'd!

@mourn: and stuff.

As for the reliable eratta, I looked here http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=229723. I didn't check the WotC site, but EnWorld says that it was erattaed.

 

[DemonLord57]

EDIT: Now I got ninja'd!

Heh, yeah. You're right! It is fun being called a ninja!

As for the reliable eratta, I looked here http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=229723. I didn't check the WotC site, but EnWorld says that it was erattaed.

Oh, I see. That's not official errata. That's a collection of "assumed" errata. Stuff that they think will be errata'd. The stuff in there that's strikethrough and has a <WotC update> tag at the end is officially errata'd. They're probably right, and it probably will be errata'd, but it isn't right now.

 

[Rith the Wanderer]

Does it make any more sense to have a power that deals cold and fire damage without the implement? Since you are channeling the power through the implement to get the enhancement bonus, I don't see why it shouldn't pick up a few characteristics of the implement on the way. Effect keywords still stay effects, even when damage is done, and damage keywords still stay damage even when there is an effect. No Fear damage, because fear is an effect, not damage. The disintigrate now has both a damage keyword and a fear keyword. The warlock is not scary, the wand makes the power have the fear keyword. Not exactly intuitive, but neither is magic, and that is what we are talking about.

Seems to me that all this does is make the max 4 dailies actually really good instead of just a 1.5 round speedbump. I'm OK with that at this point. I may change my tune with some more playtime, but now I'm OK. Your math also didn't include the bonus to saves that solos and elites get. Just from memory I think it is something like +6 and +2 respectively. That changes things. And with a 26 wis, you gotta be 21st level at that point. I'm OK with that level of power at that epic level.

The warlock being scary I was referring to was the doomsayer class ability (this isn't necessarily the case, I was just positing a possible fluff). The thing with disintegrate is, the ongoing damage is a save effect. So the fear keyword + warlock = lower chance of saving versus just a straight damage effect (because the warlock is scary, or whatever that class ability is attempting to model, and the disintegrate is also now doing a save end effect with a fear keyword, that happens to be just damage). I don't really think that makes much sense.

Solo's get +5 to saves and elites get +2 to saves. I took that into account. Without the +5 save bonus the average round time would be over 200 rounds (basically, its dead). With just the elite (+2) bonus the average round time would be something like 30 rounds. The reason I didn't include those numbers is that I think wasting that much resource to keep one guy out when you're fighting a ton of them isn't as awesome a tactical maneuver. When its a solo it is.

Equation I used: +5-2-8=-5 total mod on a solo save. This means he needs a 15 or higher (30% chance). Both saves need to succeed in order to get out. 9% chance per turn. .09^8=.47%. So it's 7 or 8 rounds (I was using a wisdom mod of 9 not 8 earlier for some reason, I fixed it now).

Being stunned for 8 rounds is not just "making those abilities a little better." I play wizard pretty much exclusively, and stun, even for one round on a solo is AMAZING. Thats one round where your entire team gets to wail on it for free, with combat advantage. Stun means no actions, no opportunity attacks, nothing. I understand that this (the 8 round stun) is a high level effect, but it will completely destroy any level appropriate (or even much higher level, as long a stun save end effect hits once) monster will be completely dead.

8 rounds of stun means the solo is dead. Obviously if someone hit with an unconscious effect it would be even worse. Unless there is some kind of unusual circumstance, 8 rounds of focus fire from a level equivalent party, with combat advantage, is going to kill even the huge hp solos.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

That's not official errata. That's a collection of "assumed" errata. Stuff that they think will be errata'd. The stuff in there that's strikethrough and has a <WotC update> tag at the end is officially errata'd. They're probably right, and it probably will be errata'd, but it isn't right now.

I stand corrected. I didn't read it that carefully, I just happened to notice that it was there when I was looking up keywords for errata. Makes sense to me though. I will use that version in my games.

The warlock being scary I was referring to was the doomsayer class ability (this isn't necessarily the case, I was just positing a possible fluff). The thing with disintegrate is, the ongoing damage is a save effect. So the fear keyword + warlock = lower chance of saving versus just a straight damage effect (because the warlock is scary, or whatever that class ability is attempting to model, and the disintegrate is also now doing a save end effect with a fear keyword, that happens to be just damage). I don't really think that makes much sense.

See, I have no problem with magic working in weird ways, especially if it makes the game more fun. I understand your issue with it though. Each person has that line that makes them go "What?" I feel like I can divorce my understanding of physics enough to be OK with cold and fire being mixed, so I don't mind fire and fear. As a former professional firefighter, I can easily understand a consuming fire that is both enthralling and horrifying to a degree that obsession over it will make the pain of it last forever. Especially since HP are not literal damage points anymore.

Solo's get +5 to saves and elites get +2 to saves. I took that into account. Without the +5 save bonus the average round time would be over 200 rounds (basically, its dead). With just the elite (+2) bonus the average round time would be something like 30 rounds. The reason I didn't include those numbers is that I think wasting that much resource to keep one guy out when you're fighting a ton of them isn't as awesome a tactical maneuver. When its a solo it is.

Equation I used: +5-2-8=-5 total mod on a solo save. This means he needs a 15 or higher (30% chance). Both saves need to succeed in order to get out. 9% chance per turn. .09^8=.47%. So it's 7 or 8 rounds (I was using a wisdom mod of 9 not 8 earlier for some reason, I fixed it now).

Sorry, you didn't explain you math, and I jumped to conclusions. Oops.

Being stunned for 8 rounds is not just "making those abilities a little better." I play wizard pretty much exclusively, and stun, even for one round on a solo is AMAZING. Thats one round where your entire team gets to wail on it for free, with combat advantage. Stun means no actions, no opportunity attacks, nothing. I understand that this (the 8 round stun) is a high level effect, but it will completely destroy any level appropriate (or even much higher level, as long a stun save end effect hits once) monster will be completely dead.

8 rounds of stun means the solo is dead. Obviously if someone hit with an unconscious effect it would be even worse. Unless there is some kind of unusual circumstance, 8 rounds of focus fire from a level equivalent party, with combat advantage, is going to kill even the huge hp solos.

It is entirely possible that you are right. I haven't had the ability to playtest this stuff, but I think that we are pointing to the wrong thing and saying "Broken!" The problem with the Doomsayer/Fear keyword item is not the fear keyword. It is the Doomsayer mechanic that breaks the game's fundamental math. The game was designed with a 50% probabilty for level appropriate test/roll, and a linear distribution with few modifiers to this value. Then it added things like double rolls. This takes a 50% probability and makes it 75%, with a skewed normal curve distribution. A few modifiers on a skewed normal distribution can make a huge difference. This happens with elven accuracy, a couple of divine oracle abilities, and the doomsayer ability. The doomsayer ability is the worst offender because saves do not scale with level, except for the elite/solo thing. But the problem remains that WotC chose to break their own math with double rolls. The keyword thing is elegant. Double rolls are teh uber.

 

[Rith the Wanderer]

Sorry, you didn't explain you math, and I jumped to conclusions. Oops.

Thats fine, I should've explained it the first post.

It is entirely possible that you are right. I haven't had the ability to playtest this stuff, but I think that we are pointing to the wrong thing and saying "Broken!" The problem with the Doomsayer/Fear keyword item is not the fear keyword. It is the Doomsayer mechanic that breaks the game's fundamental math. The game was designed with a 50% probabilty for level appropriate test/roll, and a linear distribution with few modifiers to this value. Then it added things like double rolls. This takes a 50% probability and makes it 75%, with a skewed normal curve distribution. A few modifiers on a skewed normal distribution can make a huge difference. This happens with elven accuracy, a couple of divine oracle abilities, and the doomsayer ability. The doomsayer ability is the worst offender because saves do not scale with level, except for the elite/solo thing. But the problem remains that WotC chose to break their own math with double rolls. The keyword thing is elegant. Double rolls are teh uber.

I have to agree with you there. Its just that for me, I have two problems one is the suspension of disbelief with the keywords, and the other is the brokenness of that combo. Removing both by removing the keyword mixing is the easiest for me, I understand others may differ in their own games.

 

[DemonLord57]

I have to agree with you there. Its just that for me, I have two problems one is the suspension of disbelief with the keywords, and the other is the brokenness of that combo. Removing both by removing the keyword mixing is the easiest for me, I understand others may differ in their own games.

Well, the major thing for me is that I don't see that as broken-ness. I see Blade Cascade, Seal of Binding, and Divine Miracle in general as broken. That requires focus to be good. When it gets good, it's awesome, but you still actually need to have a Doomsayer, use a wand with the fear keyword and use dailies that have saves. I think that there should be a reward for focusing and working together like this. Admittedly, it may be a little too powerful once it gets to the higher levels, but I think this is more a problem with the orb mastery of the wizard. It's pretty ridiculous, actually. Even without this, you can actually push a normal monster to the point where they can't save. Solos will have a 25% chance or so (depends on Wis), and Elites will have around 10%. This is the root of the broken-ness, IMO.

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

This is likely a problem of non-scaling saves and either double rolls or scaling penalties. This doesn't releive the problem of double rolls in other places, where scaling actually happens. Either way, double rolls don't fit the math well, and non-scaling saves don't fit the math of scaling penalties well. Stacking could be a problem as well, but that is mostly taken care of outside of the double rolls. The non-linearity of double rolls makes any bonus/penalty broken, especially the further out from the mean you get. The non-scaling nature of saves just means that it is easier to get away from that mean as you progress.