Magical attacks - do they all require to-hit rolls?

[Kinak]

But they are a cantrip now and I don't know how to fell about it. I worry a little that a wizard could potentially own an encounter without even making a single attack roll or allowing a single save. I'm not too sure if that spell really belongs in the free-all-day category, but that remains to be seen.

I actually like the cantrip aspect, but am not a big fan of the "scaling by level" aspect. Personally, I think people will be perfectly happy to have a single 1d4+1 no roll magic missile as a cantrip.

Or, actually, have it be a first level spell that scales based on what level you're using to cast it. It's possible that's already how it already works. The playtest seems to be a bit behind the articles (not that I can blame them).

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[drothgery]

I'm really, really not a fan of the idea of 'some spells make an attack roll, some you have to save against' concept, particularly if one or the other isn't a thing for unusual, niche spells. That means that weapon users have one thing to improve if they want to increase accuracy, and casters have two.

 

[Kinak]

I'm really, really not a fan of the idea of 'some spells make an attack roll, some you have to save against' concept, particularly if one or the other isn't a thing for unusual, niche spells. That means that weapon users have one thing to improve if they want to increase accuracy, and casters have two.

To be fair, both their attack rolls with spells and their save DCs are tied to the same attribute.

Feats or class features might end up causing a division, but we haven't seen anything like that yet.

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[KesselZero]

I'm not sure about Magic Missile being a cantrip. At its current damage value it can auto-kill the lowest-level monsters. That means that against a pack of kobolds or rats, for example, the wizard is essentially doing the same damage as the fighter (defined as "enough to kill the enemy in one hit"), at the same rate (at-will), but from range and with no chance of missing. (Note that the Slayer theme gives the fighter auto-damage on a miss, which would basically negate this objection, but that's only a specific theme power and not natural to any melee combatant.)

 

[mlund]

I'm really, really not a fan of the idea of 'some spells make an attack roll, some you have to save against' concept, particularly if one or the other isn't a thing for unusual, niche spells. That means that weapon users have one thing to improve if they want to increase accuracy, and casters have two.

Magical Attack rolls use the same Magic Attribute as Magical Save DCs. It is mono-stat. The only poor soul that gets stuck with MAD in combat is potentially the Cleric of Moradin.

I'm not sure about Magic Missile being a cantrip. At its current damage value it can auto-kill the lowest-level monsters. That means that against a pack of kobolds or rats, for example, the wizard is essentially doing the same damage as the fighter (defined as "enough to kill the enemy in one hit"), at the same rate (at-will), but from range and with no chance of missing. (Note that the Slayer theme gives the fighter auto-damage on a miss, which would basically negate this objection, but that's only a specific theme power and not natural to any melee combatant.)

Yes, the Slayer does indeed do the same average damage even when he misses, so it is a moot point with "trash" monsters. Anyone who isn't a slayer is going to get some sort of compensation in exchange for it, ideally an equivalent exchange, so there's still no disparity. Heck, the Wizard seems to specialize in controlling larger mobs of "trash" monsters with his Major spells too. Burning hands kills all the basic kobolds and rats in the blast even if they all make their saving throws and he rolls minimum damage.

Meanwhile when you attack anything with > half a hit die the Fighter is doing an average of 14 damage at-will with an attack roll while the Wizard is doing 3 without a roll or 8 with a roll. On the up side, the Wizard is at range. It all seems to come out in the wash.

- Marty Lund

 

[OnlineDM]

I'm not sure about Magic Missile being a cantrip. At its current damage value it can auto-kill the lowest-level monsters. That means that against a pack of kobolds or rats, for example, the wizard is essentially doing the same damage as the fighter (defined as "enough to kill the enemy in one hit"), at the same rate (at-will), but from range and with no chance of missing. (Note that the Slayer theme gives the fighter auto-damage on a miss, which would basically negate this objection, but that's only a specific theme power and not natural to any melee combatant.)

I don't see a problem here. Against very low-level monsters, Magic Missile is very useful. Why is that a problem? It does d4+1 damage; if you're fighting something with more than 2 hit points, it's not an auto-kill.

Certain tools SHOULD be very effective in certain situations. If the wizard is up against something tougher, the plinking damage from Magic Missile isn't going to keep up with the fighter's axe. Different characters shine in different situations; that's a good thing in my opinion!

 

[KesselZero]

Right, but what if the fighter isn't a slayer?

 

[drothgery]

To be fair, both their attack rolls with spells and their save DCs are tied to the same attribute.

Feats or class features might end up causing a division, but we haven't seen anything like that yet.

I guess I may be jumping the gun there, but I'm very much expecting this unless the D&playtest feedback is essentially the revolt of the mathematicians (there's so much math that looks broken right now...).

 

[mlund]

Right, but what if the fighter isn't a slayer?

Then he traded that Theme for another Theme that he believed had equal or greater value for his desired play style. He's certainly not going to trade into something worse that he wants less now is he?

- Marty Lund

 

[erf_beto]

Something is bugging me about Ray of Frost. Two things, actually.

It asks for a successful ranged attack to hit - not a magic attack. (edit: ok, I just reread the "attack spells" section, my mistake). And it doesn't say anything about damage. Isn't it strange that a spell freezes you into place but doesn't cause any damage?