What should WOTC do about Golden Wyvern Adept?

[Kesh]

I admit to being a little floored that folks think Mordenkainen's sword is just as bad as Golden Wyvern Adept. I don't equate a spell (one of hundreds) with a name that can be dropped (as per SRD) with a feat (the utility of which extends beyond just a specific kind of wizard) with a name that can't be dropped.

Emphasis mine. Why in the world can't you drop/change GWA?

 

[BryonD]

Tenser's Transformation? Was it in 1st? The only thing you know is it transforms... something. There's no indication in the spell title that it makes the caster into a fighter.

I'd also challenge you to describe how Golden Wyvern Adept doesn't include any words relevant to what it does. If nothing else, the Adept indicates that it's for magic users, which is about as much information as TT gives.

I think the claim the GWA is anywhere remotely as clear as TT is completely absurd.

Again, read TT one time and you will have a trivially easy time recalling what it does. The GWA apologizers keep trying this bait and switch regarding the need to know BEFORE you read the spell/feat/whatever what it does. That has zero to do with the complaint. As I said with Lightning reflexes, I have never known anyone to forget what TT did once they were told. read GWA and 40 other totally randomly named spells and feats and it is down to pure memeory quiz as to what the hell each one does. Sorry but TT is leaps and bounds more clear than GWA. Any other tries?


And all that aside, Adepts can not be clerics? What about warlocks? Druids?

 

[Fifth Element]

Emphasis mine. Why in the world can't you drop/change GWA?

I think he means the feat itself can't be dropped; though I can't be sure.

 

[BryonD]

That's not my point. I'm not talking about the utility of the names. My point is if you use Tenser's Floating Disk, you have to explain who Tenser is/was.

Huh??? Why?
I have never once explained that. And I can't recall anyone every asking.

Some Dude's floating disk. Whatever....

Or Mordenkainen. Or Tisha. Or Baba Yaga. And so on so forth. So to me, the concept of fluff being hardwired into the rules is not something new to the game as of 4e.

/M

Then you are not speaking to a point that has anything at all to do with the complaint.
People who hate GWA have made it clear that Golden Wyvern Spell Shaper or somesuch, while not ideal, would pretty well solve the problem.

 

[BryonD]

Rope trick (yes it involves a rope, but what about the extradimensional space?)
Massmorph (can only turn things into trees)
Magic jar
Tenser's transformation (as discussed above)
Chant

Any more?

Still looking for the first one that remotely compares to GWA by way of having zero mental reminders to someone who has read the details in the past. Your list is zero for five.

I know what all those do right here right now because the name and association is a piece of cake. If I pick one of 50 randomly named spells and walk up to a random gamer six months after 4e comes out and ask them what ti does, they won't have a clue because the name will not provide a clue to them.

 

[Zurai]

I think the claim the GWA is anywhere remotely as clear as TT is completely absurd.

You asked for a single 1st edition spell that did not describe its function with its name. I provided such an example. Then you go on to require me to read the function of the spell to learn what the spell does. Hypocrite much? I'm sorry that I'm not brain damaged, but I can manage to associate a name with a function pretty much no matter what the name is and the function is. Tenser's transformation is no different than Golden Wyvern Adept in that regard. It's a name that describes a function. TT makes the caster into a non-casting fighter; GWA allows the caster to exclude targets from area of effect spells. Neither is more or less clear than the other.

read GWA and 40 other totally randomly named spells and feats and it is down to pure memeory quiz as to what the hell each one does.

Randomly named? Golden Wyvern was already established before we even knew there were feats relating to it. You don't even have to go so far as an assumption to know that there will be quite a few things relating to the Golden Wyvern school in the core rules and that they will follow a theme. It's no more difficult than associating Bigby with giant glowing hands of force.

 

[BryonD]

Emphasis mine. Why in the world can't you drop/change GWA?

By drop he means leave that part out and keep the descriptive part of the name.

Disjunction works just fine for MD. Everyone knows exactly what you mean.
Drop GWA and the name becomes "". Not real useful.
Yes, you can replace it. But that is a different point and it is a real pain in the ass when you have to replace 50.

I replace stuff in my homebrews. Telling someone that "Gar's Death Arc" is such and such's name for Lightning Bolt gets an answer of "OK. Cool." Saying the "Mic's Spell Control" replaces GWA would get an answer of "And that did what again?"

 

[Fifth Element]

Still looking for the first one that remotely compares to GWA by way of having zero mental reminders to someone who has read the details in the past. Your list is zero for five.

Chant = bonus to attacks, damage, and saves? You know the cleric chants, sure. But what does that get you? If you know what this spell does, it's only because you've memorized it.

Just like you can memorize what Golden Wyvern Adept does.

 

[Maggan]

Then you are not speaking to a point that has anything at all to do with the complaint.

I'm speaking to a point made in this thread. For your convenience, I'll quote it for you:

This is the first time fluff has been made this core.

/M

 

[Zurai]

And all that aside, Adepts can not be clerics? What about warlocks? Druids?

Did you even bother to read what I wrote before spewing out your reactionary diarrhea? I said magic users. Adepts, wizards, clerics, druids, warlocks, artificers, wu jens, shugenja, favored souls, spirit shamans, sorcerers, bards, paladins, rangers ... even factotums and spell thieves are magic users. And note that the feat had no pre-requisites other than level tier, so it is, as written, perfectly viable for any magic user.