Will all spells be attacks?

[DandD]

Actually, as a Cleric, I would never memorize a Cure-irrelevant status effect, simply concentrate on attack spells, or more correctly, self buffs. If somebody really needed to be cured, they'll get fine with my powerful restoration/heal spell that substitutes all other cure spells anyway.
Spontaneous Spellcasting for the Win. A cleric will never suck in the close-confined roll he is always damned to do.

 

[Rechan]

That's why we have different styles entirely. I've ran and played in many sessions where not a single attack roll was rolled.

 

[Mort]

Are you intentionally ignoring the content of my posts?

Let me spell it out for you:

I do not disagree with you at all that wizards are capable of doing everything every day and have access to all the things forever and ever and it makes people feel bad and that's not good.

That is not what I am encouraging or saying should stay.

I have repeatedly acknowledged your points and said that yes, I recognize that is the problem.

Now could you please at least respond to what I am actually saying, and not the point you are trying to make: wizards are unfair because they can do EVERYTHING at the same time?

OK I'll try again.

There is nothing wrong with fun creative combat and non-combat uses for magic. The Beguiler for example is a great class precisely because it "can" do what a rogue can do but in a unique and flavorful way that comes with its own strengths and weaknesses. It is exactly what the standard mage is not in that regard.

The beguiler in fact was built with a 4e philosophy - a fun focused class that has a specific niche (the designers have said as much).

From what little we've seen of the swordmage the swordmage will do what the fighter can do but with a different flavor - again per the 4e niche protection philosophy.

It seems 4e will have the kind of classes you are looking for and with rituals (hopefully) fill in the non-combat stuff. So where's the problem?

 

[Rechan]

It seems 4e will have the kind of classes you are looking for and with rituals (hopefully) fill in the non-combat stuff. So where's the problem?

Well one, I wanted to argue that creative not-directly-combat-related-spells had a purpose and usage.

But that the feel is that magic is just focused on combat (this is something that I've always had an issue with as far as D&D), with the few that aren't are still regulated to rituals; but those rituals are still "adventure-makers" or whathaveyou.

Let me give an example: nation building. Let's say some point when you're paragon, your PCs actually get their own little country. Or at least, get their own big slab of land with towns and villages and such.

So, what can you do with magic to make it better? How can you use magic to build that area up? What can you do with it that doesn't consist of "Blowing it up, turning it invisble, or making it fly for five minutes"?

If PoL is so emphasized in the Core game, then how does one make their own point of light, and how do you make it brighter (so to speak)? One answer to that is magic. Helping with lines of communication, transportation, protection, standards of living (sanitation, food, shelter), recreation, and so on. But I doubt there will be many rituals that answer these questions.

Some of the most fun I had playing Exalted was answering these questions, because we did a lot of nation building. For instance, one of the lowest level spells you can pick up in Exalted instantly makes all the crops in X square miles grow to harvest levels, while all beasts of burden are impregnated and give birth within minutes. With something like this, you can go from famine to cradle of civilization in weeks. On the flip side, there were non-magical responses to magical problems (laying down lines of salt kept the dead at bay, so salt-lines around cities were effective wards). Not to mention convincing magical entities and spirits to do X for you (like say, convincing a water spirit to purify the drinking water in the local river, so that no one is getting typhoid or disentary), or recruiting a spirit over here to come over there, in exchange for some sort of boon.

 

[DandD]

That's why we have different styles entirely. I've ran and played in many sessions where not a single attack roll was rolled.

Yes, I also like the game sessions where we roll SKILL checks, instead of applying magic or fighting rules.

 

[Teemu]

If PoL is so emphasized in the Core game, then how does one make their own point of light, and how do you make it brighter (so to speak)? One answer to that is magic. Helping wtih lines of communication, transportation, protection, standards of living (sanitation, food, shelter), recreation, and so on. But I doubt there will be many rituals that answer these questions.

Probably not in the core books, no, but since these kinds of effects aren't really game breaking, detailing them yourself or just handwaving should work just fine. In any case, they should be available and the basic framework is there in the rules.

 

[Mort]

Eberron is the kind of world that has these kinds of issues in spades. Keith Baker seems to think that 4e does a much better job of modelling this kind of noncombat magic than 3e/3.5e did - the prospect seems quite promising. I think you'll find this post directly addresses your concern by someone who is in the know, likes what you like and is very happy with how 4e handles it.

Well one, I wanted to argue that creative not-directly-combat-related-spells had a purpose and usage.

But that the feel is that magic is just focused on combat (this is something that I've always had an issue with as far as D&D), with the few that aren't are still regulated to rituals; but those rituals are still "adventure-makers" or whathaveyou.

Let me give an example: nation building. Let's say some point when you're paragon, your PCs actually get their own little country. Or at least, get their own big slab of land with towns and villages and such.

So, what can you do with magic to make it better? How can you use magic to build that area up? What can you do with it that doesn't consist of "Blowing it up, turning it invisble, or making it fly for five minutes"?

If PoL is so emphasized in the Core game, then how does one make their own point of light, and how do you make it brighter (so to speak)? One answer to that is magic. Helping wtih lines of communication, transportation, protection, standards of living (sanitation, food, shelter), recreation, and so on. But I doubt there will be many rituals that answer these questions.

Some of the most fun I had playing Exalted was answering these questions, because we did a lot of nation building. For instance, one of the lowest level spells you can pick up in Exalted instantly makes all the crops in X square miles grow to harvest levels, while all beasts of burden are impregnated and give birth within minutes. With something like this, you can go from famine to cradle of civilization in weeks. On the flip side, there were non-magical responses to magical problems (laying down lines of salt kept the dead at bay, so salt-lines around cities were effective wards). Not to mention convincing magical entities and spirits to do X for you (like say, convincing a water spirit to purify the drinking water in the local river, so that no one is getting typhoid disentary).

 

[AuraSeer]

Well one, I wanted to argue that creative not-directly-combat-related-spells had a purpose and usage.

But that the feel is that magic is just focused on combat (this is something that I've always had an issue with as far as D&D), with the few that aren't are still regulated to rituals; but those rituals are still "adventure-makers" or whathaveyou.

Why are you assuming there are only a few rituals? We haven't seen a list yet. There could be very many of them, or they could have a very broad range of effects compared to what a spell can do.

Let me give an example: nation building. Let's say some point when you're paragon, your PCs actually get their own little country. Or at least, get their own big slab of land with towns and villages and such.

So, what can you do with magic to make it better? How can you use magic to build that area up? What can you do with it that doesn't consist of "Blowing it up, turning it invisble, or making it fly for five minutes"?

This seems like exactly what rituals are good for. Again, we haven't seen a list, so why don't you think rituals will cover this?

Some things I'd want to do, off the top of my head: Purify the city's wells. Magically construct a new hospital. Craft magic streetlights. Divine the nature of the next potential threat. Set up wards against invaders. Increase the yield of cropland. Call rain in a drought. That all sounds like great ritual fodder to me.

Can you name one form of noncombat, "civil engineering" magic that would require a six-second casting time?

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

The point of having the abilities of your class is being able to solve solutions with your class's abilities.

A wizard can't push a boulder down a hill on some enemies if he has weak strength. A fighter can. Does that mean that the fighter shouldn't be able to because he can and the wizard Can't?

You seem to be saying "There should be non-magical creative uses; eliminate magical ones".

I'm more saying that the solutions to problems should be equally possible with only a slight advantage for one class over another.

If the fighter has to roll 10+ in order to make his strength check to push a boulder down a hill then the wizard should have either the same chance or slightly better or worse. He shouldn't be able to cast a spell that instantly succeeds. He shouldn't have a chance so low that he'll never succeed, even on a 20.

Right now, the current philosophy says that wizards should be able to succeed on almost anything without rolling because magic can solve all problems. The balance in 3e is supposed to be "You have to sacrifice combat power to get these benefits and you can only use them limited times per day."

Since all classes are balanced in combat in 4e, you can't give wizards any non-combat benefits that simply succeed because they are magic without giving the same benefits to the other classes.

I'm saying that one advantage should be balanced against an equal powered advantage in another class. So, if the fighter can climb the wall really well and the wizard can identify the powers of monsters really well they are about equal powered advantages with 2 different flavors. Balancing the ability to climb well with the ability to create a floating castle is not equal powered.

Except that a fighter could have come up with another plan. Just because the wizard did it with a spell doesn't give him an advantage. A rogue could've used ventriliquism, or tossed a stone, or a dozen other tricks. The magical means is just there as one tool in a kit, not the trump card that you're making it out to be.

I'm saying that having a spell which says "Opens all doors" is an advantage over a skill which says "You might be able to open a door if you roll high enough, a bunch of doors will be too hard for you." It also means that rogues no longer have an advantage from taking that skill.

The way you make it out to be, because a rogue has a good climb skill, and he climbs up above the door to get a good ambush position, that's unfair because the rogue has that option and has created it because he has a good climb skill.

I'm saying that ability is balanced because it has a chance of failing and it can be acquired by all classes. If there is an enemy who is really good at spotting the rogue, he loses the benefit. Just like even a wizard can get the benefit against someone with a very poor spot check.

Compare that directly to rope trick that can only be foiled by: Spellcasters who have the appropriate spells and have cast them at the exact moment the trick has been attempted.

Furthermore, spellcasters sacrifice hit points and other benefits to be able to do things that others can't. Shoudl the wizard PC complain that he doesn't get to fight in melee? And in older editions, spellcasters had to fill those casting slots up with non-combat spells to ACHIEVE those creative uses; that rope trick could've been a much more effective spell. Are you saying that's not a suitable sacrifice?

I'm saying that low hitpoints are canceled out by spells that make you invisible, increase your ac, make you fly, and long ranged artillery spells. The entire fact that you can protect yourself well enough to make the low hitpoints insignificant IS the balance. So adding anything more on top of that is simply advantages with no counterbalance.

Magic is only a crutch for a party when the other players refuse to use their heads. The problem isn't the magic, it's the unmotivated nonmagical players.

Not really. Frankly, if the wizard has a spell that says that it sticks all enemies in a 20 foot radius to the ground I'm disinclined to spend my brainpower coming up with a grand plan where I find the perfect location, get a net and suspend it from the ceiling, rig a trigger mechanism, and plan an ambush. Instead the plan becomes: "When we see the enemies, the wizard sticks them to the ground." It's not that we refuse to think, it's that magic is much easier.

Not only that, but magic isn't the only means. I've heard of a 3rd level party that defeated a hydra. Simply because they could out run it. It chased them while they shot it, it suddenly gave up and tried to run away, they chased it and continued to shoot it, it turned around and chased them - rinse repeat. It wasn't intelligent enough, nor did it have any other options, and so it was plinked to death.

True, but this isn't exactly a case of the rogue's non combat skills being just as powerful as a wizard's spells. This is just a poorly designed monster being beaten easily.

Fantasy literature is filled with stories of weak people pulling off great, big things by just being clever. And that should be rewarded, not discouraged.

To me, a challenge should be a challenge. It shouldn't be easily bypassed with a simple application of one of your powers. Being creative should be rewarded...with advantages. It shouldn't be rewarded with an immediate win.

 

[Stoat]

I can't think of any off the top of my head, Mr. Ermine. But realize I used "Flying castles and creating owlbears" as a general example of the uses of magic, not specific spells that function.

Long ago and far away, my first choice for a login was "weasel." Stoat was a second choice (and the name of an Elf Thief from my 2E days).

On topic, one thing that's got me jazzed about 4E is the hope that Rituals will let it handle the creation of things like flying castles and owlbears better than previous editions did. I'm braced to be disappointed by the final RAW, but it sure seems like the right way to handle flashy non-combat magic effects to me.