Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hawken" data-source="post: 4523717" data-attributes="member: 23619">I'm not seeing where the insult was. The guidelines I thought up for your power didn't change it to a spell, didn't provoke AoOs like a cantrip would, and still did basically all the things you wanted.Everyone does have some small thing they can do at will. That's where weapons come in. Or wands or rings or wondrous items. This sounds definitely very 4E. Are you trying to revise 3.5 rules or are you just wanting to convert 4E material to 3.X edition? Everyone's "at will" is to attack with their weapon unless they want to use a spell or class ability. You're just thinking that because the fighter attacks with a weapon no one else should have to. That's wrong. Everyone has a weapon, the fighter is just much better with the weapon while rogues have more skills and wizards and clerics have spells. A couple of buff spells and the cleric or druid are going to be attacking right alongside the fighter. The thief is going to be stabbing someone in the ass and the wizard is going to be lightning bolting or scorching raying things.My point was, there are no at will anythings, spells or not. You've seemed to decide on adjusting your blast, however, the at will thing does alter game balance. And even if you do limit it to 4-5 shots per round, that's still 4 or 5 d4 + 60-100 damage unable to be blocked, avoided or resisted. Its very possible for fighter types to do that kind of damage, but typically that requires a specific weapon or specific enchantments on a weapon and the selection of specific feats, while the wizard doesn't need to invest in a weapon, enchantments, or feats. As unpalatable as that sounds, that's one of the only mechanics I've seen for being able to use a spell or ability more than the daily limit, and typically a feat is needed to be able to do it.Maybe, but as long as its an attack and not an action, its ripe for abuse. Even going 50/50 in a caster and fighting class, you'll hit the problems I outlined. Why would anyone bother progressing in other classes when they could pick up that power, develop it, and then develop other skills to augment that blast!10' increment, 20' range--as you stated. Which can be increased by the Far Shot feat, and possibly other feats or even spells, with Weapon Focus and Point Blank Shot completely mitigating the range penalty. Low damage at face value, but it encourages players to max out their casting stat and find some other ways (as I outlined) to increase the damage even further. Its a base class, not a core class like I mentioned. Also, it doesn't substitute Int for Str, it adds Int to the damage inflicted and operates just like a Rogue's Sneak Attack, it's very different from what you're inferring here. Yeah, but why do you have to give everyone "something" to do. If you give them a blast, that either stifles or eliminates their ability to creatively come up with something to do. DM: Ok, Joe, it's your Wizard's turn.Joe: I don't know what to do. None of my spells are good for this situation right now. I don't want to use my crossbow and I don't want to get close enough to attack with my staff.DM: Use your blast. Joe: Ok. Fred: Hey, I wanna do that. Why can't my fighter get that. His stuff goes through everything. Joe: Yeah, but it doesn't do a lot of damage. Fred: If I had it, it would!DM: That's why Joe's wizard has it. Fred: He's good at spells, I'm good at fighting. He gets a blast, but what do I get?DM: Nothing. You're a fighter. You don't need anything. All of your attacks are already at will. See where I'm going with this?Why does someone have to have an at will? Just because a wizard may not WANT to use a crossbow doesn't mean he deserves a blast. Just because he doesn't want to throw a dagger or handaxe or shoot a crossbow doesn't mean he doesn't have anything to do. It means he's choosing not to do something. That's not a reason for powers. And if he's not casting a spell or attacking, then he should be doing something else. Moving--get a double move, so he can cover 60' which should be just about anywhere in the combat. Skills--he could be Hiding, actively using Spot or Listen to check for hidden attackers or anyone else coming along. He could be making a Knowledge check to see if he can recall anything relevant about their current challenge that may help. There is a host of things he could be doing instead of just falling back on a blast. You're giving away powers (like 4E does) and turning people into super heroes. If every 1st level person can do something like that, then villages won't need heroes to help them out, they just get together and go blast things away. And if something IS tough enough to scare an entire town of people that can blast (or something equivalent for non-wizards), then the PCs are definitely going to be outgunned. Its a neat idea you've got, but it will totally mess up your game unless you just ignore little things like what I just mentioned. What town is going to be scared of goblin bandits when a dozen of them can get together and blow the bandits to hell? Bigger monster? No problem! Just get more villagers in on the action. A dozen bad guys aren't going to mess with a town of 500, or even 100, potential blasters that would be gunning for them if they pissed 'em off!If your players are stumped and whine about not having anything to do, start giving them suggestions. Remind them of their weapons. If they don't want to use their weapons, fine. That's their choice, but its a choice--meaning they are choosing not to do something; not that they have nothing to do. If they don't like having weapons, tell them to invest in wands. A wand of 1st level magic missiles is going to do what your blast does without changing the power dynamic of your entire campaign world.</blockquote>

Verification