New Design: Wizards...

[Driddle]

Experience tells me that I'm not going to be satisfied with the way the game designers justify which spells are linked to which implements. Zapping with a wand makes sense, but then where are they going to draw the line at how powerful you can zap with a staff?

 

[Someone]

This is the one feature of 4E I don't understand honestly. How can one make it so that a character is less dependent on magic items and yet at the same time, have it so that actually getting a magic item is an actual REWARD?

Anyone want to help me out here?

As I see it (as I hope it is in 4e), suppose three Fighters, exactly equal except in equipment.

Number one has only non-magic weapons and armor.

Number two has a Belt of giant strenght +6, amulet of health +6, a +5 flaming shocking sword, +5 armor and shield, ring of protection, and cloak of resistance +5.

Number 3 has a cloak of the mountebank, a folding boat, dust of illusion, and winged boots.

Number 3 is "more powerful" than number 1: he has more options and capabilities. However, the two of them have more or less the same combat power, since none of #3's items give him direct advantage in a straight combat (he can use his items inteligently to gain some advantage, like luring enemies to go after hin and teleporting back with the cloak, but he doesn't have a direct, numerical advantage); thus, #3 is more interesting and has cool items, but he isn't more powerful in combat. None of his magic is "required" to be more powerful.

#2, however, has a great advantage over #1 and #3: he hits harder and his AC is 15 points higer. If the other two fighters want to compete with him they too need stat bosting items and magic weapons and armor. #2 is more powerful. #3 is more interesting

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

I suspect there will be a magical enchantment similar to flaming or ghosttouch (or whatever the new equivalent is) that makes the weapon function as one of the four components. For example a wandstrike longsword +1 or a set of runic full plate +2 that functions like a tome.

I really dig this new change, if for no other reason than I never liked the way wands and staffs worked before.

 

[Tharen the Damned]

But encouraging bonuses will almost guarantee that every wizard player will want the best of each of these items. And that sounds to me like a new translation of the Christmas Tree Effect.

I want to see the mechanics WoC implements to solve this problem. Even if Wizards don't need Spell-Buffs they will want them if they are available.
If Wizards have Spell-Buffs there need to be Save Buffs and we are back were we started in 3x.
I have no idea how they will make this work mechanically without dumb limiting (only one implement can be magical) like in the 3x "body slots".
But I am always open for surprises.

Anyway, I am waiting for the first Rule question if a wizard can create an orb topped scrollwrapped wandstaff

 

[Cadfan]

I like this a lot.

1) Wizards have always had a mechanical approach to magic. It makes sense to have them use tools.

2) It makes wizards mechanically different on the battlefield if they're holding a book in one hand and a gem in the other. They won't be threatening surrounding spaces, for one. I don't know exactly how that will be an issue, but I bet it will. Staff wizards will maybe still threaten.

3) This is much cooler than material components everyone ignores.

4) If wizards are expected to have one primary focus, and one secondary focus, as I expect they will, this will finally make wizards of different types genuinely different from one another. In the olden days of 3.5, specializations were something you took for the extra spell per day, then basically forgot about. Now it may actually matter.

5) The staff granting "big boom" effects as well as teleportation and telekinesis type powers is the unholy matrimony of stereotypical D&D wizardry with Gandalf's duel with the White Wizard. I... think I like it?

6) Prediction- items like The Evil Book of Evilness: +3 Tome, +5 for Necromancy spells.

7) Finally, enemy wizards don't automatically grant the party's wizard a bunch of free spells from the looted spellbook. Figuring out ways to stop that from happening was annoying. I could do it, sure, but I didn't like having to all the time.

8) You will be able to look at an enemy wizard, and know a little about what to expect. I like that.

9) I've got no idea whatsoever about what will be happening to the Sorceror and the Psion. These guys entire reason for existing seemed to be that they were alternate mechanical versions if the wizard. The Psion at least had a short nod towards having his own flavor. So he can be reincarnated, perhaps with a new mechanical system? The Sorceror though existed purely as a way of avoiding having to memorize spells in advance. What will his niche be now? If they give him the "customizable, innate magic" type abilities and flavor that the Warlock used to have, what will the Psion get? I'm taking it as a given that the psion won't be getting spell points.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Funny, this article made me think of Harry Dresden for some reason...

But yeah, as somebody else mentioned already...this really pulls 4E away from the typical D&D flavour for me. Ah well...as long as it keeps the brand alive. :\

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Anyway, I am waiting for the first Rule question if a wizard can create an orb topped scrollwrapped wandstaff

Right! That was my first thought: well, orbs go on top of staves!

After reading the thread a little more thoroughly, I think the idea has potential, but I agree it rests in the mechanical implementation of this concept. From the sounds of it, the basic enhancement effect these items offer will be bonuses to spell "attack rolls." Which in itself is fine, but if there's nothing limiting one or two of these items per wizard then there's no reason not to carry all four of these items, on top of any other arcane gadgetry the intrepid wizard might pick up along the way.

 

[Cadfan]

I don't think this is going to create a christmas tree effect. Its two items. They go in the hands of a character who can't use a shield and who doesn't need weapons. While I bet that a lot of magic items are going away, I suspect we haven't seen the end of magical weapons and armor. This just means that wizards won't be left out.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I think this is an interesting idea. As a frequent player of wizards, I'm willing to give this a chance.

Now, what does it say about the type of player I am when I read this,

The staff is best suited to powers that forcefully project powers from the wizard, such as lines of lightning and cones of fire; however, a staff also has resonances with effects related to flight and telekinesis (pushing, pulling, or sliding creatures or objects).

and, rather than Lord of the Rings, immediately thought of that great wizard called Tim shooting fire from the end of his staff.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

The wand is a perennial favorite, as it is an ideal conduit for powers that create effects well away from the wizard’s physical position, effects which include explosions of fire, bursts of cold, and other long-range effects that can affect several enemies at once. In addition, personal protections and countermagic effects may lie in wands.

That's so anime video gamey Harry Potter.