N00b question about basic attack

[ExploderWizard]

OR...

Could have regular human fighters wielding greataxes who use cleave and mow down TWO trees at a time! =)

I don't know if the STR bonus alone would be enough to take down the Forest Moon of Endor trees in the DMG. The smallest tree stats provided are for a trunk 5' in diameter (and it takes a Wizard a couple rounds to chew through that at 8 Avg dmg/ round factoring in the 5% miss chance)

 

[ExploderWizard]

You know that a basic attack with an axe is also an at-will. So by the same thought there's no problems with chopping wood with an greataxe all day long.

Anyway, I believe that if someone studies and practices to be a good fighter or mage, he won't be using all that hard work to chop around wood. He would go for higher flights searching for treasures or... taking a kingdom (or two).
That setting just assumes that powerful heroes are as common as kitten.

Edit: anyway, i believe doing magic should be as tiring as fighting, just for the sake of common sense

Oh I agree. Motivational and ethical considerations and capability are separate issues though. If something is At-will that means you can. It doesn't mean you should.

A dog can lick his nether region as an At-Will power and he does it all the time. Why? Because he can.

 

[Staffan]

You're assuming spellcasting isn't tiring. I'd say that it ought to be about as tiring as, say, swinging an axe or a pick. So a wizard with magic missile would be about as effective at chopping down trees or blasting his way through rock as a man with an axe or a pick.

 

[Skyscraper]

You know, there is something called common sense also that might be applicable here.

If that's not enough, what tells you that magic missile is appropriate to cut down trees? A mace does 1d8 damage, pretty close to what a magic missle does. A cleric or fighter wielding his mace will do as much damage as a wizard flinging magic missiles, with his at-will attacks. Why wouldn't they be hired to cut down entire forests with maces?

Oh right, the DMG says that you can damage objects according to this or that rule. Consequently, let's put loggers out of work and let's replace them with wizards and mace-wielding clerics.

*sigh*

Sky

p.s.: did it occur to you that the rules provided in the book might actually be for heroic fantasy play instead of logging simulations?

 

[Danzauker]

I'd apply a variant of the antropic principle here.

Are there forest in your world? Well, that means that magic missile hurling wizards did not destroy them.

Why and how you want to rationalize this is not my problem.

Me, I just make do with some common sense.

 

[ExploderWizard]

You know, there is something called common sense also that might be applicable here.

If that's not enough, what tells you that magic missile is appropriate to cut down trees? A mace does 1d8 damage, pretty close to what a magic missle does. A cleric or fighter wielding his mace will do as much damage as a wizard flinging magic missiles, with his at-will attacks. Why wouldn't they be hired to cut down entire forests with maces?

Oh right, the DMG says that you can damage objects according to this or that rule. Consequently, let's put loggers out of work and let's replace them with wizards and mace-wielding clerics.

*sigh*

Sky

p.s.: did it occur to you that the rules provided in the book might actually be for heroic fantasy play instead of logging simulations?

I agree. Common sense rulings (not rules) should be the order of the day. In that case lets ditch hundreds of pages of rules and save some trees (both in game and out)

 

[-Avalon-]

Well, personally, I would use thunderwave to cut down trees... has a push involved that just cannot be beaten, and you could get more trees... surely a couple rounds of that would suffice to break some decent shrubbery??

 

[ExploderWizard]

Well, personally, I would use thunderwave to cut down trees... has a push involved that just cannot be beaten, and you could get more trees... surely a couple rounds of that would suffice to break some decent shrubbery??

Heh. Don't have rules here with me right now. Is thunderwave an At-Will? Encounter and dailies have thier own limits. The whole point of this silly thing is to demonstrate the wacky highjinks that can happen when a finite resource meets an infinite power.

 

[Skyscraper]

I think it's time for the infinite oregano argument to re-surface

I found an awesome loophole! On page 242 it says "Add oregano to taste!" It doesn't say how much oregano, or what sort of taste! You can add as much oregano as you want! I'm going to make my friends eat infinite oregano and they'll have to do it because the recipe says so!

Full text here Alt Text: Killjoy Cooking With the Dungeons

Whatever the ruleset, if you and your players decide to find a loophole, i'm confident you'll manage to do it. This isn't a simulation so it's especially true for D&D. If you want further examples of how the RAW can be abused, refer to the bag of rats trick where you carry a bag of portable creatures such as rats that you take out and kill with powers when you need to gain bonuses triggered when you kill a creature (bet you're happy that i just told you 'bout that one, aren't ya? ); or to wizards using some spells in 3E to upset entire economic systems.

If you want, as a DM in 4E, to allow a wizard to take down entire forests with his magic missile, more power to you. If a wizard in one of our games were to come up with that, i think everyone around the table would just look at him with raised eyebrows and continue as if they hadn't heard anything

RAW aren't the bible, they're rules to be used as part of a heroic fantasy game. The reason why magic missile is an at-will power (and thunderwave, yes!) is so that wizards can deal as much damage as members of other classes that use weapons every round, during heroic fantasy battles. If that's too far from simulationism for you, then perhaps D&D 4E isn't the game for you.

This being said, technically, if you really wanted to drive your point home, you'd use a stricker as the better example. Indeed, a ranger can deal 2d10 damage per round with the at-will twin strike ability, much better than the meager 2d4+INT from the wizard. Taking down forests with bow and arrows, now that would be a feat! If you still insist on magic, the warlock would be a much better woodcutter than the wizard also.

Sky

 

[ExploderWizard]

This being said, technically, if you really wanted to drive your point home, you'd use a stricker as the better example. Indeed, a ranger can deal 2d10 damage per round with the at-will twin strike ability, much better than the meager 2d4+INT from the wizard. Taking down forests with bow and arrows, now that would be a feat! If you still insist on magic, the warlock would be a much better woodcutter than the wizard also.

Sky

Oh come on!!!! A ranger would run out of arrows!!!!!

I don't take the premise seriously, I hope your sarcasm detectors are working Its not really a loophole like the bag of rats (which 4E explicitly had to say doesn't work-the fact that it had to be said saddens me)