Two Handed Implement wielding

[Salamandyr]

One disparity I've seen that has really bothered me with 4th edition is that it seems magic users (wizards, warlocks, to a lesser extent clerics) seem to have had their damage balanced against a character wielding a longsword (d8 damage). Of course, a fighter could use a greatsword, or great axe, or spend a feat and use a superior weapon, doing even more damage, and then stack weapon focus on top of it, and maybe even power attack. Magic types can't do any of that, their abilities are locked in. In some cases, the status effects make up for it, but not always.

So I've come up with a rule for essentially giving wizards and warlocks 2 handed weapons. Any feedback would be appreciated.

“Two-Handed” Implement Wielding

Damage listed for spells and prayers in the Players Handbook is only base damage. Implements allow a magic user to focus his energy, doing greater damage. If he focuses all his energy through a single item, undistracted by secondary considerations, his magical fury is even greater.


If a character is wielding a single implement and no weapon or shield in its hands, the damage for the primary effect increases by a die step from the table on page 220 for oversized weapons (single handed). In cases of powers that do multiple dies, each die steps up by one, except for 2d4, which becomes 1d10.

Example: A Fireball (5th level daily) cast by a Wizard wielding a staff in two hands (or wand, or orb with no weapon, implement or shield in the other hand), does 3d8+Int damage, rather than 3d6.

Special consideration: Holy symbols must be held in the hand to increase the damage. This is an exception to the rule where you may wield a worn holy symbol.

 

[-Avalon-]

Small issue with this idea, just my opinion of course...

You say that this is unfair to a wizard/warlock/cleric because they have no 2-Handed Implements, and this is due to the fact that they compare the abilities to a typical fighter wielding a longsword (d8)...

What about Rogues then... If what you are proposing goes through, and is widely accepted... I think it would be completely unfair to rogues that all they can use is light blade, sling, crossbow... and that the best way for them to go is dagger (for the extra +1 to hit)...

They are compared to the same person, but end up doing d4's for damage...

Imagine a rogue using a Fullblade instead! =)

Happy Days!!!!

 

[Salamandyr]

At my table at least, the rogue, using daggers, has been the consistently highest damaging person in the party. The warlock by comparison, has been one of the least.

Any class that uses weapons, including the rogue, has multiple ways to increase their damage, from using a two handed weapon, superior weapon proficiency, weapon focus, two weapon combat, etc. The rogue misses out on the ability to use a two handed weapon, but makes up for that with a number of other options, and the most powerful striker ability in the game. So when you say, a rogue using a dagger is balanced against a fighter using a longsword, well, I say a rogue using a rapier is balanced against a fighter using a bastard sword.

Implement based powers have none of these, except for a range of feats that apply about half the time, unless you severely limit your power choices based on elemental type.

 

[-Avalon-]

At my table at least, the rogue, using daggers, has been the consistently highest damaging person in the party. The warlock by comparison, has been one of the least.

I think you mistake the differences in roles... sure there are major differences between striker and defender, but there are also subtle differences between the strikers themselves. If there wasn't, we would have a generic archetypal striker, with options of flavor text, they would all basically do the same thing. Instead, they are very different from each other.

Any class that uses weapons, including the rogue, has multiple ways to increase their damage, from using a two handed weapon, superior weapon proficiency, weapon focus, two weapon combat, etc. The rogue misses out on the ability to use a two handed weapon, but makes up for that with a number of other options, and the most powerful striker ability in the game. So when you say, a rogue using a dagger is balanced against a fighter using a longsword, well, I say a rogue using a rapier is balanced against a fighter using a bastard sword.

Actually, balance wise, yeah rogues may pour out damage, that is their job. A Fighter's job is to soak up damage... a wizard's job is not pure damage, it is control. And they do that through numerous methods, damage is the least of those. So why should the wizard's damage be a main concern again? Warlocks do more damage and have less control than wizards, thus striker, but they still do not do as much damage as a rogue. And, both of those classes (wiz/lock) do their damage from ranged, AND affect multiple creatures from around 10-20 squares away.

Implement based powers have none of these, except for a range of feats that apply about half the time, unless you severely limit your power choices based on elemental type.

There are enough feats to boost your abilities, shape your spells, lengthen your range, expand your burst, etc...

I am sure there are some mathematicians that can assist in showing the differences in damage between using 3d6 and 3d8 vs a number of mobs (15-25 of them) and what a fighter swinging a sword can do...

As for specializing in an element... isn't that sort of like what a fighter does? starts out a bit generic, and eventually is focused on a singular weapon (a la Kensai?)