# July Errata is up



## Nightfly (Jul 6, 2010)

Magic Missile is autohit! What's old is new again.

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Official D&D Updates)

More interesting changes:

As suspected, the new damage/hit values from MM3 are here, in table form.

Several cleric abilities (Bless, Shield of Faith, and Purify) have been changed from standard to minor actions. 

Tumble lets you shift your entire speed, not just half.

Dispel Magic has been changed from a daily to an encounter power, but Wizard's Escape got nerfed the other way around.

Good bit of errata to PH3 and the Tiefling book.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Jul 6, 2010)

Lead the Attack and Windrise Ports get the nerf bat
Battleminds get the obvious fix
Brutes no longer get -2 to attack rolls
Magic Missile being autohit is interesting
You can only use a Free Action to make an attack once per turn


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 6, 2010)

Actually, the huge one is for barbarians (indirectly):

You're restricted to one attack as a free action per turn now.


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

thecasualoblivion said:


> Lead the Attack and Windrise Ports get the nerf bat
> Battleminds get the obvious fix
> Brutes no longer get -2 to attack rolls
> Magic Missile being autohit is interesting
> You can only use a Free Action to make an attack once per turn



These are ALL good things.  Particularly the second.

-O


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jul 6, 2010)

I was recently joking with a friend saying that Magic Missile should be an autohit. What happened? Did Bill Slavicsek say to everyone "I know! Lets put out a bunch of numbered book for a couple of years like PHB2, MM3, DMG2, etc... and then screw with their heads by changing a bunch of rules and put out a whole new line of alternate class builds aimed at new players!" I mean, I like the changes, but this is weird, even for them.


----------



## Beckett (Jul 6, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Actually, the huge one is for barbarians (indirectly):
> 
> You're restricted to one attack as a free action per turn now.




Yeah, I think my barbarian player is not going to be pleased. On the other hand, critical hit leading to rampage/swift charge/free attacks from epic have been a bit much.


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

At work = Can't download yet 

Any nerfs to Disheartening Strike and ... what was it for Psions, Mind Thrust?

-O


----------



## Joshua Randall (Jul 6, 2010)

Since they keep adding [-]errata[/-] rules updates to magic items that make their damage bonuses into item bonuses, why don't they just do the smart thing and make every item grant item bonuses to damage?

Sheesh. That's whay they should've done to begin with.

Items grant item bonuses.
Powers grant power bonuses.
Feats grant feat bonuses.

It would be a lot easier to remember that way, and you wouldn't have to worry about unintended stacking of untyped bonuses....

[/rant off]


----------



## Joshua Randall (Jul 6, 2010)

Obryn said:


> Any nerfs to Disheartening Strike and ... what was it for Psions, Mind Thrust?



Nope.


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

Joshua Randall said:


> Nope.



[keanu]whoa[/keanu]

-O


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 6, 2010)

Joshua Randall said:


> Since they keep adding [-]errata[/-] rules updates to magic items that make their damage bonuses into item bonuses, why don't they just do the smart thing and make every item grant item bonuses to damage?




Because then the bonus would do nothing.


----------



## Joshua Randall (Jul 6, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Because then the bonus would do nothing.



???

You have an item, it grants an item bonus to damage. You pick up a different item that also has an item bonus to damage, they don't stack. You have to choose which one you want to use.

How would this be bad?


----------



## Shroomy (Jul 6, 2010)

Beckett said:
			
		

> Yeah, I think my barbarian player is not going to be pleased. On the other hand, critical hit leading to rampage/swift charge/free attacks from epic have been a bit much.




The free action change is 1/turn not 1/round; rampage only triggers off barbarian attack powers, so unless your player was crit'ing often on off-turn barbarian powers as a free action granted by another PC, it shouldn't make much difference.


----------



## Verision (Jul 6, 2010)

thecasualoblivion said:


> Magic Missile being autohit is interesting




I'll say. 
I don't really understand why they did this one. They say "This update reflects an effort to restore the power to its classical form", but is that a good thing? It's the idea with a new edition to move forward? 
I know the guy playing the Wizard in my group will be happy, but I think everyone else will be a little annoyed (since they don't get auto-hit abilities). 

Are there any other At-Will powers, for any class, that are auto-hit?


----------



## Mengu (Jul 6, 2010)

Joshua Randall said:


> ???
> 
> You have an item, it grants an item bonus to damage. You pick up a different item that also has an item bonus to damage, they don't stack. You have to choose which one you want to use.
> 
> How would this be bad?




Because everybody would pick the best "give me the biggest item bonus most frequently" item (ala Iron Armbands), and forget about the existence of every other damage bonus granting item.


----------



## webrunner (Jul 6, 2010)

So what does this mean for Arcane Bolt?


----------



## Beckett (Jul 6, 2010)

Shroomy said:


> The free action change is 1/turn not 1/round; rampage only triggers off barbarian attack powers, so unless your player was crit'ing often on off-turn barbarian powers as a free action granted by another PC, it shouldn't make much difference.




The sequence would be he'd attack and roll a 20, so critical hit. If that didn't kill the target, he'd get a free swing from rampage, and that was usually the killer. Then he's play swift charge, for a free charge and attack. And he has the Fang of the World Serpent epic destiny, which when you bloody or crit an enemy, you get two basic attacks as a free action. Even after swift charge is expanded, this change invalidates one of his class features.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 6, 2010)

Beckett said:


> The sequence would be he'd attack and roll a 20, so critical hit. If that didn't kill the target, he'd get a free swing from rampage, and that was usually the killer. Then he's play swift charge, for a free charge and attack. And he has the Fang of the World Serpent epic destiny, which when you bloody or crit an enemy, you get two basic attacks as a free action. Even after swift charge is expanded, this change invalidates one of his class features.




No it means he can't use all his class features in one single round.  His encounter abilities are still quite usable.


----------



## joebobodo (Jul 6, 2010)

Verision said:


> I'll say.
> I don't really understand why they did this one. They say "This update reflects an effort to restore the power to its classical form", but is that a good thing? It's the idea with a new edition to move forward?
> I know the guy playing the Wizard in my group will be happy, but I think everyone else will be a little annoyed (since they don't get auto-hit abilities).
> 
> Are there any other At-Will powers, for any class, that are auto-hit?




While I don't particularly mind the change, I don't think the needed to change it.  However, if they were going to make a change, I'd have preferred something more along the lines of Hand of Radiance.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 6, 2010)

I'm at work. Did we get a monster builder update?


Please. Hope Hope. Hope


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

I can't say I am unhappy to see the number of recursive free action attacks get nerfed. This actually fixes some monsters as well, where their free action attacks were often triggering quite a lot and making things quite a pain every turn.

It's a good update actually and pretty solid. Disappointed to see that psions still aren't fixed, but I guess we'll have to wait a bit longer to sort out psionics.


----------



## Bold or Stupid (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> I'm at work. Did we get a monster builder update?
> 
> Please. Hope Hope. Hope




Well last i checked the servers were down so it's looking good.


----------



## Greg K (Jul 6, 2010)

I thought changing magic missile to a non-auto hit was a good thing. I am sorry to see this change.


----------



## Echohawk (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> I'm at work. Did we get a monster builder update? Please. Hope Hope. Hope



My Character Builder just updated, but the Adventure Tools is still saying "No Update Available"


----------



## mneme (Jul 6, 2010)

Stuff I haven't seen mentioned:

Improved Armor of Faith: no longer a scaling bonus.

Wizard's Escape: Now a daily power.

Slasher: killed, as expected.  All slashing powers are now 1/turn, and granted vulnerability has been reigned in.  Radiant One wasn't touched, though.

White Lotus Master Riposte: As expected, doesn't work with a mark and only affects the enemy.

So...what does Windrise Ports look like now?


----------



## keterys (Jul 6, 2010)

Outside of a few optimized builds, magic missile wasn't seeing a ton of use as is... so jazzing it up into something different is at least interesting. And it does mean that if you want your wizard to be the most consistent at killing minions, there's a new option available.

I suspect that folks could safely use a 'Hand of Radiance' style magic missile as a house rule and no one would object to that, either


----------



## Piratecat (Jul 6, 2010)

I'm thrilled about the magic missile auto-hit; having to roll to hit annoyed me every time our wizard used it. Hurrah!


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

Adventure Tools update is rescheduled for 7/20.  They must be having a bear of a time with the new format.

-O


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 6, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> I'm thrilled about the magic missile auto-hit; having to roll to hit annoyed me every time our wizard used it. Hurrah!




Very annoying. With the damage change I'm going to have recalculate all my carefully crafted magic missile timetables. I will need to rework how long it takes to:

Chop down a tree
Destroy a section of castle wall
Tunnel through to the other side of the planet....etc.


----------



## Echohawk (Jul 6, 2010)

Obryn said:


> Adventure Tools update is rescheduled for 7/20.  They must be having a bear of a time with the new format.



How do you know? I haven't seen an announcement yet. An update today would have been nice, but the 20th isn't too far away.


----------



## Festivus (Jul 6, 2010)

No adventure tools update that I have seen today.


----------



## Shin Okada (Jul 6, 2010)

Magic Missile is now auto-hit and inflict damage as an effect.

While the special rule allows a wizard to add the enhancement bonus of his implement, other bonuses which specifically applied to damage ROLL cannot be used.

So, neither Dual Implement Wielder nor Stuff of Ruin bump up damage of MM.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

Obryn said:


> Adventure Tools update is rescheduled for 7/20.  They must be having a bear of a time with the new format.
> 
> -O




Where did you read this?


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

Echohawk said:


> How do you know? I haven't seen an announcement yet. An update today would have been nice, but the 20th isn't too far away.



Well, a correction - I'm seeing elsewhere that the _Compendium_ update is scheduled for 7/20.  No word on the Adventure Tools update, but I'd hope it's on the same date.

I'll let you know if I hear more...

-O


----------



## Joshua Randall (Jul 6, 2010)

Technically _magic missile _is not auto-hit.

It doesn't "hit" at all. It has an effect, that deals damage.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 6, 2010)

ZOMG THE WIZARD IS BROKEN!

The wizard just went from being the underdog to being the most powerful class EVAR!!

Get the low level wizard in a position so that a vastly more powerful creature (with unhittable defenses) can't get to him and count off the rounds until victory. 

Autohit defenses of 50 at 1st level FTW!!


----------



## Herschel (Jul 6, 2010)

Joshua Randall said:


> ???
> 
> You have an item, it grants an item bonus to damage. You pick up a different item that also has an item bonus to damage, they don't stack. You have to choose which one you want to use.
> 
> How would this be bad?




Because, for example, things like arm slot items would never be used or taken when you already have a magic weapon. The weapon is an item.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Jul 6, 2010)

Shin Okada said:


> Magic Missile is now auto-hit and inflict damage as an effect.
> 
> While the special rule allows a wizard to add the enhancement bonus of his implement, other bonuses which specifically applied to damage ROLL cannot be used.
> 
> So, neither Dual Implement Wielder nor Stuff of Ruin bump up damage of MM.




Assuming 50-65% accuracy, its still a pretty even trade. You lose out on the extra damage, but getting Intelligence+Enhancement 100% of the time adds up to the same in the long run.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> I'm thrilled about the magic missile auto-hit; having to roll to hit annoyed me every time our wizard used it. Hurrah!



 I don't like it, and I don't like the changes that it's going to require to get it working as intended.

How to break this... just off the top of my head: *Inescapable Force* doesn't require a hit, and it adds a damage roll, so now Magic Missile kills insubstantial critters at about 4x the expected rate rather than 1.5x.

Oh, and *Reaper's Touch* (Shadar-Kai) + one of the staff implements that grants +1d6 to melee attacks. Bang, auto-hit for MM damage (+Int +Enh) + a damage roll (+Enh again, + all the usual suspects). Oh boy. This one is going to get VERY nasty with granted MBAs.

This power change is a not a great idea -- and I say that as a guy who plays a Wizard who likes Magic Missile, and whose team-mates have named that power "Magic Killsteal".

Oh well, at least smart Half-Elves have something that doesn't screw them over with MID.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> ZOMG THE WIZARD IS BROKEN!
> 
> The wizard just went from being the underdog to being the most powerful class EVAR!!
> 
> ...




Some epic level creatures are outright immune to attacks of creatures lower than 20th or non-epic creatures.

It could take a while with anything else and they can have the same range.


----------



## webrunner (Jul 6, 2010)

new magic missile + wizard's fury + room full of minions...


----------



## Shin Okada (Jul 6, 2010)

Hmm, the new update to the Free Action says "A creature can take a free action to use an attack power only once per turn."

Now, Swift Charge itself is NOT an attack power.
And Charge granted by this power is not an attack power itself, too.
But the Melee Basic Attack, which is done at the end of charge, is an Attack Power.

Now, will the use of Swift Charge still counted as "taking a free action to use an attack power"? I guess so. But some may disagree with this interpretation, I guess.


----------



## TerraDave (Jul 6, 2010)

20 more pages. Can we call it 4.5 yet?

I actually talked with Mearls and Heinso about the MM, at that time they said that the resulting damage was so low it just wasn't worth the autohit, but they did consider it.

Clearly minds were changed and it was deemed _essential_.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

> Oh, and *Reaper's Touch* (Shadar-Kai) + one of the staff implements  that grants +1d6 to melee attacks




I would need to see the wording on this, but you don't add bonus damage unless you actually rolled damage in the first place. Can you find the staff implement in question, because this doesn't sound right.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 6, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> Some epic level creatures are outright immune to attacks of creatures lower than 20th or non-epic creatures.




Level based immunity.......

MMO?

~ Lets not throw around the old MMO jibes please: Plane Sailing ~


----------



## Joshua Randall (Jul 6, 2010)

Herschel said:


> Because, for example, things like arm slot items would never be used or taken when you already have a magic weapon. The weapon is an item.



Yep. And that would open things up for people to take fun, random magic items instead of boring ones that simply add boring numbers to other numbers.

But drifting off topic so I'll shut up now.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> Level based immunity.......
> 
> MMO?




No, just being divine or similar. 

All of these creatures almost without exception are level 30+, so it makes sense you can't piddle them down with mm as a level 1 mage. Not that it mattered, because I'm not sure why you think this is significant because automatic damage powers have been available for ages. Zones, conjurations, certain at-wills that leave zones or similar as well. I mean there are lots of ways of dealing automatic damage in 4E, so I'm not sure why magic missile being auto-damage is special or significant in this regard.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jul 6, 2010)

All the "Slashing Wake" builds are now gone, forever.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> ZOMG THE WIZARD IS BROKEN!
> 
> The wizard just went from being the underdog to being the most powerful class EVAR!!
> 
> ...



When you do that, please take into account that there is a Wizard Daily Attack Power that makes casting magic missile a minor action for the rest of the encounter.



Nifft said:


> I don't like it, and I don't like the changes that it's going to require to get it working as intended.
> 
> How to break this... just off the top of my head: *Inescapable Force* doesn't require a hit, and it adds a damage roll, so now Magic Missile kills insubstantial critters at about 4x the expected rate rather than 1.5x.



Wait, is someone actualy complaining that this might _speed up_ combat? You are my new favorite poster.

FWIW, I love this change. But I suspect a guy who calls himself "Fanboy" on an internet forum is destined to.

Edit: thanks Aegeri.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

fanboy2000 said:


> When you do that, please take into account that there is a Wizard Utility that makes casting magic missile a minor action for the rest of the encounter.




It's not a utility power, it's a daily attack power.


----------



## Shin Okada (Jul 6, 2010)

Oh wait! How will the new revision to free action interact with Bravura Presence?

Using action point is a free action. Now a PC use a free action to use an attack action and choose to take advantage of this feature. He hits. But he cannot make an additional basic attack (an attack power) as a free action, because of the new rule?

He can still take a move action but ....


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 6, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> No, just being divine or similar.




What does divinity have to do with a metagame concept of "you must be this tall to ride"? 

Sorry little one I'm immune to that ability..........until you gain XP, come back, _and use that exact same ability. _

Whatever.


----------



## abyssaldeath (Jul 6, 2010)

Shin Okada said:


> Oh wait! How will the new revision to free action interact with Bravura Presence?
> 
> Using action point is a free action. Now a PC use a free action to use an attack action and choose to take advantage of this feature. He hits. But he cannot make an additional basic attack (an attack power) as a free action, because of the new rule?
> 
> He can still take a move action but ....




The free action rule only applies to free attacks. Action Points grant an extra Standard action. So if you make an attack with the standard action granted by the action point you are making an attack with a standard action not a free action.


----------



## Mengu (Jul 6, 2010)

Damage from Inescapable Force is extra damage, and as such, is not a damage roll from my understanding.



Aegeri said:


> I would need to see the wording on this, but you don't add bonus damage unless you actually rolled damage in the first place. Can you find the staff implement in question, because this doesn't sound right.




Staff of the Serpent
Property: Any melee attack made with this staff deals +1d6 poison damage.

This one I think works with Shadar-Kai Reaper's Touch, though I doubt it's intended.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> What does divinity have to do with a  metagame concept of "you must be this tall to ride"?
> 
> Sorry little one I'm immune to that ability..........until you gain XP,  come back, _and use that exact same ability. _
> 
> Whatever.




No idea. But when you try to point out something utterly absurd like taking out a god or another epic creature with MM _somehow_, I feel the need to point out it's not going to work anyway as the rules kinda account for it. There is very little way you'll get a range 20 MM fest for long enough to kill anything in epic anyway - you'll be dead so fast it won't matter.

In any event, you can already do this and better with many other damage bonuses and automatic damage effects. So again, what point are you trying to make?


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

Can I mention how thrilled I am that Windrise Ports finally got nerfed?

When it's an ingredient of 90% of broken builds, you know it's a problem. 

Today, the Arcane Slasher died.

-O


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jul 6, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> It's not a utility power, it's a daily attack power.



Even better because it's level 1!


----------



## Mentat55 (Jul 6, 2010)

Shin Okada said:


> Oh wait! How will the new revision to free action interact with Bravura Presence?
> 
> Using action point is a free action. Now a PC use a free action to use an attack action and choose to take advantage of this feature. He hits. But he cannot make an additional basic attack (an attack power) as a free action, because of the new rule?
> 
> He can still take a move action but ....




Using an action point is a free action, but the effect of using an action point is to grant you an additional action.  It is that action that you use to make the attack.  Thus, you haven't made an attack as a free action yet...so you can still take advantage of Bravura Presence.

EDIT: Or what abyssaldeath said.  Ninja'ed.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

fanboy2000 said:


> Wait, is someone actualy complaining that this might _speed up_ combat? You are my new favorite poster.



 Broken builds of many types "speed up combat". Do you really like all broken builds?

What I don't like is that they took something that worked reasonably well and changed it so it can be made to work unreasonably well.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> What I don't like is that they took something that worked reasonably well and changed it so it can be made to work unreasonably well.




Magic Missile is not broken. Insubstantial creatures having a weakness is not a bad thing at all either, but the point here is that MM won't win encounters, has poor control other than auto-hitting and is very hard to actually buff (adding extra damage doesn't count as a damage roll either).


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> Broken builds of many types "speed up combat". Do you really like all broken builds?



Hey, I'm just glad for the change of pace. I wasn't trying to saying anything about broken builds, you were, but I wasn't. No sarcasm, I really do like the fact that someone is complaining about a power speeding up combat.


----------



## Shin Okada (Jul 6, 2010)

abyssaldeath said:


> The free action rule only applies to free attacks. Action Points grant an extra Standard action. So if you make an attack with the standard action granted by the action point you are making an attack with a standard action not a free action.




Ah! I see. So Bravura Presence still works.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

fanboy2000 said:


> Hey, I'm just glad for the change of pace. I wasn't trying to saying anything about broken builds, you were, but I wasn't. No sarcasm, I really do like the fact that someone is complaining about a power speeding up combat.




I'd like to point out too that in the recent "What's the most boring creature" thread I think it was heavily dominated by insubstantial creatures.


----------



## Nightfly (Jul 6, 2010)

Well, Magic Missile needed a buff very badly. It was by far the worst of the Wizard at-wills, not worth considering at all unless you planned to do cute things with it through feats and items, and really not even then. 

Compare Magic Missile to Biting Swarm, one of the "counts as a ranged basic attack" spells that seekers have. Biting Swarm does more damage (assuming at least a longbow) AND imposes a great status effect AND also puts that debuff on every adjacent monster AND that splash effect is enemies only. Until this change, Wizards were screwed so badly in comparison on their "counts as a ranged basic" that I actively avoided playing a Wizard when there was a Warlord in the party.

So MM badly needed a spit-polish. Whether autohit was the solution is a different question, but it's nice that one of the iconic wizard spells is no longer for clueless beginners only, and that Wizard's Fury is now a viable daily. And truly, MM is still not *that *good. It's certainly not the best wizard at-will, and maybe isn't even the best single-target wizard at-will. Nor is the anything new for wizards to have an at-will that deals automatic damage; remember Cloud of Daggers? 

Coming right after the announcement that Burning Hands will be changed to deal partial damage on a miss, it seems that WotC is intent on fixing some of the classic wizard powers that were underpowered in PH1, which I think is terrific. I'm crossing my fingers that Fireball will be de-suckified once Essentials comes out.


----------



## Mentat55 (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> I don't like it, and I don't like the changes that it's going to require to get it working as intended.
> 
> How to break this... just off the top of my head: *Inescapable Force* doesn't require a hit, and it adds a damage roll, so now Magic Missile kills insubstantial critters at about 4x the expected rate rather than 1.5x.




I'm not sure making Inescapable Force barely worth taking counts as broken.  Actually, if a player wants to spend a paragon feat to be awesome against insubstantial creatures, then they should be justly rewarded.

I'm kinda torn, overall, about making MM automatic damage.  On one hand, it is THE classic wizard spell, and has always worked this way.  OTOH, the auto-damage of MM made it the one 1st level spell that always saw use well into the highest levels, which suggested that maybe it shouldn't be this way.  However, right now I don't see any way to really abuse the new MM.  It goes from "meh, I might take it to have a decent RBA and for legacy reasons" to "this could be really useful in some situations, and the rest of the time it is guaranteed damage."


----------



## Mirtek (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> Level based immunity.......
> 
> MMO?



 No, deities and primordials


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

Mirtek said:


> No, deities and primordials




It's also something they are dropping in all fairness. I don't believe allabah, Lolth, Imix or the other dood actually have this. I never understood the point because such creatures will squish PCs trivially below level 20 (even with optimized cheese).


----------



## Gort (Jul 6, 2010)

I don't really get the point of resurrecting the Magic Missile sacred cow.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jul 6, 2010)

Some nice changes in there, for sure. 

Not much PHBIII, though, as I had expected more, even though I am do not know much about that book. 

Also, 3 months till the next update, not two.


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> It's also something they are dropping in all fairness. I don't believe allabah, Lolth, Imix or the other dood actually have this. I never understood the point because such creatures will squish PCs trivially below level 20 (even with optimized cheese).



Lolth does, though it only triggers when she loses 1/2 of her spidery form's HPs.  I don't believe the others do.

It seems to be reserved for gods; primordials and far realm abominations need not apply.

-O


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

Gort said:


> I don't really get the point of resurrecting the Magic Missile sacred cow.




Why not? Magic missile has fallen pretty far behind in terms of how good it is these days and it doesn't really compare to other wizard at-wills. It's now a different choice that has a role, albeit a niche role I will give you, within the general wizard at-wills.

I still wouldn't take it over chilling cloud, phantom bolt and such forth though. But I might have it as a third at-will or if I needed auto-damage for something.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

fanboy2000 said:


> Hey, I'm just glad for the change of pace. I wasn't trying to saying anything about broken builds, you were, but I wasn't. No sarcasm, I really do like the fact that someone is complaining about a power speeding up combat.



 If you like fast fights, you should *hate* the new MM. The damage is nerfed to the point that it's going to *slow down* combats against anything except Heroic-tier minions, unless you go out of your way to optimize for it.

It's not just a "change of pace", it's a rather major nerf to the power.

(If they made this version of Magic Missile a Minor action, it would be interesting.)

Cheers, -- N


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Jul 6, 2010)

Gort said:


> I don't really get the point of resurrecting the Magic Missile sacred cow.




I can name one. As it stood previously, Magic Missile was boring. It really didn't do anything, and when you crunch the numbers it was the worst At-Will Wizard had outside of a few corner cases. Magic Missile is a D&D icon. Whatever it is, it shouldn't suck and it shouldn't be boring. In an attempt to make it interesting, they went back to Magic Missile's roots.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 6, 2010)

Mirtek said:


> No, deities and primordials




Heck I don't mind the concept of deities being immune to mortal attacks regardless of level. 

But I am a firm believer in the concept of:

If it has stats we can kill it.  

So if it's in the MM, has a hp total, etc. it doesn't count as a deity.


----------



## Nightfly (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> If you like fast fights, you should *hate* the new MM. The damage is nerfed to the point that it's going to *slow down* combats against anything except Heroic-tier minions, unless you go out of your way to optimize for it.
> 
> It's not just a "change of pace", it's a rather major nerf to the power.




You lost me there. The old MM did 2d4 base which averages to 5; the new MM does a flat 2. That's a loss of only 3 damage, in exchange for never missing, which is a great tradeoff.

And what's faster: rolling attack and damage, or just saying "I move here and deal 7 damage. Done." In fact, one of the things that concerns me about the new MM is that it will shorten your turns so drastically that it will take all the enjoyment out of the game. Rolling dice is fun. Waiting 15 minutes for your turn, only to have your turn last 5 seconds, is not fun.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jul 6, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> So if it's in the MM, has a hp total, etc. it doesn't count as a deity.



This brings-up some interesting philosophical questions about D&D deities. Maybe their just _really_ powerful mortals. The _real_ deities, "lurk" about, keeping their presence hidden from everyone, and laugh every time one of the fake deities like Lolth get the beat down from a mortal.

Real deity: Ha ha! Orcus just owned by quartet of mortals. Who won the betting pool?


----------



## Shin Okada (Jul 6, 2010)

Final Confrontation, Frenzied Berserker's 20th-level daily, seems to have some trouble with the new free action update.



> Effect: After the attack, you can allow the target to make a melee basic attack against you as a free action. If the target makes that attack, you can make a melee basic attack against it as a free action. You can repeat this effect until the target chooses not to make the attack.


----------



## abyssaldeath (Jul 6, 2010)

Shin Okada said:


> Final Confrontation, Frenzied Berserker's 20th-level daily, seems to have some trouble with the new free action update.




Specific beats general?


----------



## Obryn (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> If you like fast fights, you should *hate* the new MM. The damage is nerfed to the point that it's going to *slow down* combats against anything except Heroic-tier minions, unless you go out of your way to optimize for it.



Is it, though?  I'm trying to think on it, and I'm not sure it's a damage nerf at all over a whole combat.  Each individual attack, sure.  But over the whole combat?

Level 17 Wizard.  Assume 50% to-hit, 22 Intelligence, and a +4 implement.  Heck; make it a Staff of Ruin +4.  Heck again - let's give him Weapon Focus.

Magic Missile (Old): 2d4+16, 50% hit rate.  Or, .5*21 = 10.5 expected dpr.  Crits, of course, throw this off a bit, but Wizards have few ways of increasing their crit range at this level.

Magic Missile (New): 3 base +6 Int +4 Implement.  Reliable 13 damage every round, no misses, no crits.

-O


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> If you like fast fights, you should *hate* the new MM. The damage is nerfed to the point that it's going to *slow down* combats against anything except Heroic-tier minions, unless you go out of your way to optimize for it.
> 
> It's not just a "change of pace", it's a rather major nerf to the power.



Sorry, I still love it.

And your still my favorite poster.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

Nightfly said:


> You lost me there. The old MM did 2d4 base which averages to 5; the new MM does a flat 2. That's a loss of only 3 damage, in exchange for never missing, which is a great tradeoff.



 It's a lot more than that once you remember how many different things add to damage when you get past 1st level. My Wizard at 12th level gets:
- Enhancement
- Enhancement again (Dual Implement Spellcaster)
- Weapon Focus (Staff)
- Power bonuses (from our leader)

It's a loss of a LOT more than 3.



Nightfly said:


> And what's faster: rolling attack and damage, or just saying "I move here and deal 7 damage. Done." In fact, one of the things that concerns me about the new MM is that it will shorten your turns so drastically that it will take all the enjoyment out of the game. Rolling dice is fun. Waiting 15 minutes for your turn, only to have your turn last 5 seconds, is not fun.



 At-wills are fast in my group. Dunno why yours is slower, but mine has no trouble rolling attack & damage for our simplest powers.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Mentat55 (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> If you like fast fights, you should *hate* the new MM. The damage is nerfed to the point that it's going to *slow down* combats against anything except Heroic-tier minions, unless you go out of your way to optimize for it.
> 
> It's not just a "change of pace", it's a rather major nerf to the power.
> 
> ...




At level 30, for a wizard with Int 28, a Staff of Ruin +6, Weapon Focus (staff), Dual Implement Spellcaster (with a +6 implement in the off-hand) and Wizard Implement Expertise, vs. a level 30 monster with Reflex 42 (wizard has a +33 vs. Reflex):

Original Magic Missile: 0.5*(10+9+6+3+6+6)+0.1*(16+9+6+3+6+6+33) = 27.9 damage.
Updated Magic Missile: 5+9+6 = 20 damage.

So the new magic missile suffers, mainly due to non-enhancement bonuses to damage (like feat and item bonuses, not to mention situational power bonuses) and the lack of critical damage.  It also suffers against monsters with low Reflex, since the wizard will likely hit them anyways.  If you use a Staff of Missile Mastery, you can push the updated MM damage to 26, still inferior, and that relies on using a weak implement.

It is specifically good at killing minions (since damage doesn't matter) and if you tack on additional effects, i.e., push 1 square with Wand of Magic Missile, it could be situationally better.  But Nifft is right, it is weaker.


----------



## Maximilia (Jul 6, 2010)

If they really wanted it like the "old" Magic Missile, they could have just added another missile at every tier, ie 2 at 11 and 3 at 21, that would be able to hit different targets.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

Maximilia said:


> If they really wanted it like the "old" Magic Missile, they could have just added another missile at every tier, ie 2 at 11 and 3 at 21, that would be able to hit different targets.



 Hand of Radiance (an Invoker power) is the new "real" Magic Missile.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## MrMyth (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> If you like fast fights, you should *hate* the new MM. The damage is nerfed to the point that it's going to *slow down* combats against anything except Heroic-tier minions, unless you go out of your way to optimize for it.
> 
> It's not just a "change of pace", it's a rather major nerf to the power.
> 
> (If they made this version of Magic Missile a Minor action, it would be interesting.)




If they made this a minor action it would be super broken. 

Let's actually look at some numbers: 

Level 1 Wizard, pre-Errata MM, 18 Int: 2d4+4 damage = ~9 damage. Assuming he hits half the time, that is ~4.5 average damage. 

Level 1 Wizard, new MM, 18 Int: 6 damage.  

Level 11 Wizard, pre-Errata MM, 20 Int, +3 Implement, random +3 damage bonus from feats/items: 2d4+11 damage = ~16 damage. Assuming 50% hit rate, ~8 damage. 

Level 11 Wizard, new MM, 20 Int, +3 Implement: 9 damage. 

Thus far, assuming a pretty average character and a 50% chance to hit, they seem rather equal.

Let's check a more optimized character, though, which is where the big difference will be felt. 

Level 30 Wizard, pre-Errata MM. 30 Intelligence, +6 Deadly Staff of Ruin, +6 off-hand Implement and Dual Implement Spellcaster, Weapon Focus (Staff): 4d4+34 damage = ~44 damage = ~22 average damage. 

Level 30 Wizard, new MM. 30 Intelligence, +6 Staff of Missile Mastery: 26 damage. 

So overall, assuming you hit half the time, the power hasn't taken a huge nerf. There are downsides - if you hit more often, then the previous version obviously is better. Much more relevant - you can't crit with the new one. That's pretty big. 

On the other hand, absolute guaranteed damage is very nice. Enemies have enough crazy tricks at higher levels that automatic damage can be more than worthwhile. Especially since the wizard probably has a second at-will that _does _add all the normal bonuses, and they can use whenever it is more beneficial to do so. 

I don't really think they needed to make the change. But it doesn't ruin the power and it doesn't break the math of the game. Overall, I think it's fine.


----------



## babinro (Jul 6, 2010)

Great post MrMyth, I don't believe the power breaks the game either.  It is well balanced while still feeling overpowered for an at-will.  I suspect it'll become like twin strike in that every wizard should take it as one of their at-wills. 

This change was by no means needed, as being a ranged basic attack has its advantages especially from up to 20 squares away...but I must admit the autohit nostalgia of magic missile should make lots of people happy.  Good errata for the haters of 4e, one less thing to hate.


----------



## Nightfly (Jul 6, 2010)

Mentat55 said:


> But Nifft is right, it is weaker.




I like your number crunching, but saying it does less damage at level 30 is not the same thing as saying that it's flatly "weaker". The new MM clearly does more damage at level 1, and that's just as valid a case as level 30. (Probably more so, since I'm guessing there are many, many more players in heroic tier than epic). But even saying that it's stronger in epic is an oversimplification, because you have to factor in things like superior cover that would make the auto-hit property of the new MM much more valuable in a given situation. Not to mention that there are minions in epic, too.

But I'm not sure why the average damage matters that much anyway to a controller. I don't think anyone would say Scorching Burst is an objectively "stronger" power than Winged Horde, just because it does more damage. And even if single-target at-will damage is that important, there are still three wizard at-wills that do 1d8/2d8 damage, a negligible downgrade from the old Magic Missile's 2d4/4d4, especially since those other powers add solid controller effects. So how do we conclude that combats will take longer? With respect, I'm still not seeing that.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 6, 2010)

I don't think MM is that great to be honest and won't be an essential part of every wizard. Psychic lock is better for keywords and effects, without the range and yeah you need to hit. Other than psychic lock I would be taking chilling cloud or scorching burst (if I'm a blaster wizard) over MM. MM now has a place though and isn't going to be the most poorly regarded at-will.

Edit: In terms of control the new MM is pretty poor at it, except maybe for finishing off chronic HP enemies without the usual comedy of errors. Winged Horde is superior in terms of control to Scorching Burst clearly, but sometimes different people build for different things. Ultimately it's important to remember that the best condition you can impose in 4E is dead.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

MrMyth said:


> Level 30 Wizard, pre-Errata MM. 30 Intelligence, +6 Deadly Staff of Ruin, +6 off-hand Implement and Dual Implement Spellcaster, Weapon Focus (Staff): 4d4+34 damage = ~44 damage = ~22 average damage.



 Plus crits. Crits are actually rather important, given how many things key off of them at Epic level.

Crits are not just nice for the extra damage, they can grant things like recovering your Encounter powers and spending Surges.

With a Staff of Ruin, that's a 10% chance for max damage (50) + 6d10 + any other nastiness that you add to a crit (+1d10 for a feat, +1d10 for a war ring).

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Prestidigitalis (Jul 6, 2010)

Nifft said:


> It's a lot more than that once you remember how many different things add to damage when you get past 1st level. My Wizard at 12th level gets:
> - Enhancement
> - Enhancement again (Dual Implement Spellcaster)
> - Weapon Focus (Staff)
> - Power bonuses (from our leader)




The new version still gets the enhancement bonus -- but you probably knew that, being a mighty penguin and all.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

Prestidigitalis said:


> The new version still gets the enhancement bonus -- but you probably knew that, being a mighty penguin and all.



 Yep yep. My point is that it's more than the +1 Enhancement that the other poster had used as the basis of his argument.

But the big one is probably still a Leader's power bonus to damage. That's harder to account for on one's build, but it's very much a factor in our real combats.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Brandis (Jul 6, 2010)

Was so overpowered that the Swordmage could use Master Lotus Riposte against an enemy that he marked with his aegis?

I understand the other change about being able to repeat the attack against one enemy, but i do not understand why is so bad that the enemy is under your aegis. (I was hoping to try it with my Shielding Swordmage as it was a neat option to stay next to the striker and the aegised enemy )


----------



## Nifft (Jul 6, 2010)

Brandis said:


> Was so overpowered that the Swordmage could use Master Lotus Riposte against an enemy that he marked with his aegis?



 No, it was generally a bad idea -- his class features use his Immediate action!

White Lotus Riposte works great for a Swordmage, but not the Master version.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Brandis (Jul 6, 2010)

I know that ... but I was thinking something like this, against the aegised enemy (my SM is Shielding):

Hit my friend and you do that with a -2 and I will reduce the damage you do.

Hit me and you will not only get my Int damage but also will get another attack.

It was nice as we have a melee striker in our party ... But now, I can´t use that idea ... That was why i asked if it was so overpowered.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 7, 2010)

Nifft said:


> No, it was generally a bad idea -- his class features use his Immediate action!




No, absolutely wrong. The point you miss here is the swordmage forces the monster into a permanent catch 22. It either attacks him and is attacked, or it attacks an ally and is attacked (or has its damage reduced and takes a -2 or -3 penalty to the attack roll). It gives a guaranteed attack or effect regardless of if the creature actually attacks using the mark or not.

This is probably not the original intention of the power and how it should interact with a defender, hence the qualifier on marks.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 7, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> No, absolutely wrong.



 No, you are absolutely wrong!

(Remember that the same tier that grants you WLRiposte v2 access also grants access to Double Aegis. Allowing a Swordmage to blow his Interrupt on an attack that targets himself removes his ability to control his second Mark.)

... but really the reason it stinks for a Swordmage is that they should be spending their Interrupts either enforcing their Mark, or using Encounter powers like Dimensional Vortex. If they're spending both their standard action AND their interrupt action on at-will powers, they're screwing themselves over.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 7, 2010)

> ... but really the reason it stinks for a Swordmage is that they should be spending their Interrupts either enforcing their Mark, or using Encounter powers like Dimensional Vortex. If they're spending both their standard action AND their interrupt action on at-will powers, they're screwing themselves over.




No they aren't, this isn't screwing them at all.

At what point is guaranteeing an extra attack every round "screwing" yourself? That just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. It either attacks you and is attacked, or attacks an ally and is attacked. It's a classic catch 22 situation for the defender, guaranteeing he will get an immediate action extra attack. Making 2 attacks > making 1 attack. You can mark an enemy, use swordburst to attack multiple enemies and then guarantee another attack (either swordburst on the target you've marked, or you will get the swordmage interrupt attack).

You _could_ do this every round guaranteeing an extra attack every round and not compromising your ability to defend at all.

If this is "Screwing yourself" then I would hate to see what you would consider actually *good*.


----------



## Abraxas (Jul 7, 2010)

Hmm - not happy with the change to free actions. While not terribly common, the free attack had its uses for my Rogue with the Two-Weapon Opening feat plus powers that let him get in more than one attack in a round.

A lot  of the updates make my group feel like collateral damage, they are made to fix specific problems with specific Char-Op builds (IMHO) and our non-optimized characters get whacked.

These changes plus the increased monster damages mean we spend more time patching up and have to take extended rests more often - the woes of having a group of casual gamers.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 7, 2010)

Regarding Inescapable Force and New Magic Missle, I'd refer to the sidebar that ran in Dragon 381 for Arcane Bolt (also big thanks to webrunner for guiding me to this):



			
				Dragon 381 said:
			
		

> This article introduces some powers that automatically deal damage to one or more enemies.  Keep in mind that because the damage is in the “Effect” line, the powers don’t hit, and therefore can’t benefit from effects that trigger off of a hit. Also, since the damage is a flat number, it isn’t considered a damage roll, and therefore it doesn’t benefit from effects that increase the result of a damage roll (but can still benefit from extra damage that doesn’t require a roll).




I'd say that applies here as well.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jul 7, 2010)

Abraxas said:


> Hmm - not happy with the change to free actions. While not terribly common, the free attack had its uses for my Rogue with the Two-Weapon Opening feat plus powers that let him get in more than one attack in a round.
> 
> A lot of the updates make my group feel like collateral damage, they are made to fix specific problems with specific Char-Op builds (IMHO) and our non-optimized characters get whacked.
> 
> These changes plus the increased monster damages mean we spend more time patching up and have to take extended rests more often - the woes of having a group of casual gamers.




The disadvantage of constant rules patching. The "fixes" must cater to the l33t optimizers. For anyone not playing on the edge....well you should be or don't bother logging in.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 7, 2010)

ExploderWizard said:


> What does divinity have to do with a metagame concept of "you must be this tall to ride"?
> 
> Sorry little one I'm immune to that ability..........until you gain XP, come back, _and use that exact same ability. _
> 
> Whatever.




If the situation -ever- comes up that a wizard of level <21 is going up against a creature with the immunity to attacks of creatures <21, say, tiamat, or, say, orcus, or, say, grazzt, then you have the situation where your DM is a utter dick, seriously, if you have the problem 'THE WIZARD IS AUTOHITTING GRAZZT FOR 10 DAMAGE' then you have the solution 'THE GRAZZT IS AUTOKILLING THE WIZARD FOR THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE OF DAMAGE'

Serious.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 7, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> If this is "Screwing yourself" then I would hate to see what you would consider actually *good*.



 Like I said above, getting to use your Encounter abilities (which are *better than* your At-Wills) is what I consider *good*.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 7, 2010)

Nifft said:


> Like I said above, getting to use your Encounter abilities (which are *better than* your At-Wills) is what I consider *good*.




Except that in this situation you deal more damage and are attacking twice so therefore a greater chance to critically hit as well.

What's better 2[W] + mods

Or

1[W] + mods + 1[W] + mods?

Which do you think does more damage and is more effective (not to mention the guaranteed catch 22 scenario I described). Encounter powers can be better, but using an at-will twice is better than many encounter powers. Why do you think so many avengers try to get twin strike? Especially given that many swordmage encounter powers are lackluster anyway and the catch 22 is far better (suffer an attack without a penalty to hit, or suffer an attack and a penalty to hit).

Also considering how much static damage begins to override the base dice for _many_ powers, it doesn't take a lot of effort to see the guy attacking twice pulls ahead of everyone else compared to using an individual encounter power. Once again, you were _guaranteed_ that other attack. It either attacked you, was attacked or attacked someone else and was attacked. Alternatively it did nothing and that's the greatest victory you could possibly have.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 7, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> Except that in this situation you deal more damage and are attacking twice so therefore a greater chance to critically hit as well.



 Go look at the power I mentioned. It's an Interrupt, it's better than another At-Will, and it's not alone.

You are basing your argument on a false dichotomy.

 -- N


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 7, 2010)

Nifft said:


> Go look at the power I mentioned. It's an Interrupt, it's better than another At-Will, and it's not alone.




It's not as good as well.

First: It's ranged. So it will provoke from creatures next to you when you use it. Better hope you aren't on the front lines like a defender and often surr- WHOOPS. Guess you better hope no enemies are nearby to thump you into the dirt when you use it. WLMR I'd like to point out has no such disadvantage given you're using a melee or burst attack to begin with.

Second it only applies to melee attacks. The attack from WLMR will be against _any attack_ that targets you. No getting around your attack using bursts and blasts (or just attacks that won't trigger it). You get that attack no matter what he does!

Third, it can be easily and trivially avoided simply by attacking the swordmage. It's not a catch 22 and no way guarantees you an attack. WLMR and a mark is a catch 22, you WILL get your immediate action attack one way or the other - or the creature does nothing.

It is also a level 3 power, while WLMR is going to be in paragon tier. But if you think that is as good as WLMR then you've got to be kidding.



> You are basing your argument on a false dichotomy.




It's not a false dichotomy.

The way it worked is exactly as I described: Either they attacked you and were attacked. Or they attacked an ally, took a -2 penalty and were attacked. That is the inherent power.

The encounter you bought up isn't a catch 22. It can be circumvented immensely easily by any monster that is vaguely intelligent. It works once per encounter, while WLMR will work _the entire encounter all of the encounter_ while you have an immediate action. In addition, nothing stops you from taking powers like that and putting a marked target under a catch 22, plus using something else if it dies or similar. 

I can have my cake and eat it as well. While you just get the left-over icing. This is why it was nerfed.


----------



## Piratecat (Jul 7, 2010)

Tone down the snarkiness, por favor -- it's not a problem yet but it's heading that way fast. Problem is, it's hot and I'm going to be a jerk if I have to actually moderate. Who wants that?


----------



## Gort (Jul 7, 2010)

I still fail to see how a guaranteed tiny amount of damage is more interesting than a higher (on average) yet more variable amount. We've got criticals to take into account also.

As written the new magic missile seems to be a minion-killer, nothing more. Plus it sparks all the usual "ohoho! Now to kill God all I need is an academy of 98 bazillion wizards who all know magic missile!" crap.


----------



## Stalker0 (Jul 7, 2010)

First of, let me say I'm thrilled to see some actual buffs in this errata, several powers get toning up instead of the constant nerf bat that's thrown around.

As for MM, I'm fine with it either way, but I don't care about level 20+ analysis of its damage vs the old one. The wizard in my group isn't using a lot of at wills by that point.


----------



## Squire James (Jul 7, 2010)

Now I wonder why they left the Magic Missile crit text in the Staff of Missile Mastery, since you can no longer crit with one...


----------



## hvg3akaek (Jul 7, 2010)

Nifft said:


> Hand of Radiance (an Invoker power) is the new "real" Magic Missile.
> 
> Cheers, -- N




Hand of Radiance was better than Magic Missile when it first came out.  It is even better than most striker at-will powers!


----------



## Nifft (Jul 7, 2010)

Squire James said:


> Now I wonder why they left the Magic Missile crit text in the Staff of Missile Mastery, since you can no longer crit with one...



 They forgot to delete that line, according to a tweet.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## keterys (Jul 7, 2010)

Squire James said:


> Now I wonder why they left the Magic Missile crit text in the Staff of Missile Mastery, since you can no longer crit with one...




There are a lot of moving parts in these things, and not a lot of time involved between review and posting. I do have to say... does it matter? If you never crit with magic missile, it never comes up, and it's one less line to edit. I blame me for distracting Greg, though, so I encourage you to blame me too. My blame quotient for the month is low, and it's less fun if WotC gets blamed.


----------



## Dan'L (Jul 7, 2010)

I'm confused by the errata to _Eruption of Steel_.  

It seems that now it is not two separate attack rolls during the primary attack, but only attack roll that uses both weapons.  How do you calculate the attack roll?  

Do you get to add weapon proficiency and enhancement bonuses from both weapons to the single attack roll, or only from one of them, or only the best of both?  

I'm leaning toward the last, as I think this would count as "typed" bonuses not stacking.  So, if you were attacking with a +5 hammer and a +4 longsword, you'd get to add +8 to the attack roll:  +5 enhancement from the hammer, +3 proficiency from the longsword?

-Dan'L


----------



## kerbarian (Jul 7, 2010)

Nightfly said:


> I like your number crunching, but saying it does less damage at level 30 is not the same thing as saying that it's flatly "weaker". The new MM clearly does more damage at level 1, and that's just as valid a case as level 30. (Probably more so, since I'm guessing there are many, many more players in heroic tier than epic).



For another data point, my LFR Wizard at 8th level had (until this update) a Magic Missile at +16 vs. Reflex for 2d4 + 16 damage [1].  Against a typical Reflex of 20 for a level 8 monster, that's an average (with crits) of 18.5 damage.  The new MM hits for 11, or 41% less.

Magic Missile wasn't a great at-will, but it was useful when you needed the extra range, and it could be boosted as an MBA in ways other powers couldn't.  Now my wizard will be looking for something else as his 3rd at-will.  In another class it might have been worth keeping as an anti-minion power, but enlarged Winged Horde is vastly superior at that job.

[1] Hit is +4 half level, +6 Int, +3 implement, +1 expertise, +1 superior implement, +1 eagle eye goggles.  Damage is +6 Int, +3 implement, +3 dual implement spellcaster, +2 bracers of the perfect shot, +1 siberys shard of the mage, +1 weapon focus.


----------



## cdrcjsn (Jul 7, 2010)

MrMyth said:


> Level 30 Wizard, pre-Errata MM. 30 Intelligence, +6 Deadly Staff of Ruin, +6 off-hand Implement and Dual Implement Spellcaster, Weapon Focus (Staff): 4d4+34 damage = ~44 damage = ~22 average damage.
> 
> Level 30 Wizard, new MM. 30 Intelligence, +6 Staff of Missile Mastery: 26 damage.
> 
> So overall, assuming you hit half the time, the power hasn't taken a huge nerf. There are downsides - if you hit more often, then the previous version obviously is better. Much more relevant - you can't crit with the new one. That's pretty big.




You forgot that bonuses to hit (expertise, combat advantage, leader bonuses, etc) also add to average damage per round for the old version.  Also leader bonus to damage (as well as a Syberis Shard of the Mage) is also pretty common at higher levels and don't apply to the new MM.  And if you're using a +6 staff of MM, that means that you likely don't have a +6 Staff of Ruin that actually helps all of your other powers.


----------



## deadsmurf (Jul 7, 2010)

I like the idea of the new magic missile - but I kinda wish it was 1d4 + 1 damage, for the full classic spell model.

In fact If someone is playing a wizard in my game they can have that instead of just 2 flat damage.  Only increases average damage by 1.5, so not too bad.  Will have to keep the "no bonuses to damage rolls" part though, to keep it fair.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 7, 2010)

Mentat55 said:


> I'm kinda torn, overall, about making MM  automatic damage. On one hand, it is THE classic wizard spell, and has always worked this way.




Not always... only from AD&D (and possibly BD&D?) onwards.

In OD&D magic missile fired a +1 magic arrow that did 1d6+1 damage or something similar. It wasn't very popular...


----------



## Plane Sailing (Jul 7, 2010)

Nifft said:


> Plus crits. Crits are actually rather important, given how many things key off of them at Epic level.
> 
> Crits are not just nice for the extra damage, they can grant things like recovering your Encounter powers and spending Surges.
> 
> ...




If I was still playing my 12th level staff wizard, I'd be pretty put out by this errata on magic missile - it was a great mainstay spell, his basic damage was (from memory) something like +6 level, +6 Int, +3 staff of ruin, armbands than improve basic ranged damage +4, for a total of 2d4+22 damage normally, and on a crit he did 3d10+30 damage. Those were mighty times, and I'd hate to swap it for a relatively paltry effect damage.

Then again, we only ever played with PHB1 and there may have been lots of whizzy things that appeared later on for wizards...


----------



## Verision (Jul 7, 2010)

*Can I say ****s and giggles?*

My problem with the new magic missile is the following:

I can see exactly what my group will do with this. The first time my group comes up against a group of mostly melee monsters, the wizard will cast Evard's Black Tentacles and the rest of the PCs will kill off any ranged enemies. Next, the PCs will sit down and have a cup of tea while the wizard spends the next X number of rounds sustaining the Tentacles and whittling down, and eventually killing, the monsters with magic missile. 

Is this optimal? Not by a long shot. Is it going to happen in my game? Yes, it definitely will, even if it only for ****s and giggles.


----------



## eamon (Jul 7, 2010)

Verision said:


> My problem with the new magic missile is the following:
> 
> I can see exactly what my group will do with this. The first time my group comes up against a group of mostly melee monsters, the wizard will cast Evard's Black Tentacles and the rest of the PCs will kill off any ranged enemies. Next, the PCs will sit down and have a cup of tea while the wizard spends the next X number of rounds sustaining the Tentacles and whittling down, and eventually killing, the monsters with magic missile.
> 
> Is this optimal? Not by a long shot. Is it going to happen in my game? Yes, it definitely will, even if it only for ****s and giggles.




Evard's tentacles were errata'd in may; the immobilizing effect is merely save-ends now - and anyhow, how is this impossible with any other ranged attack?  As long as you deal damage on average, you can do this; no need for effect damage.

I also think the new MM is too weak, particularly as levels rise.  It shouldn't be a discussion about whether the old one or the new one is better, it should be competitive with an optimized ranged basic weapon attack - i.e. much better than it was - and it shouldn't require heavy feat or item investment that competes with all your other powers to be reasonable (i.e. the staff or wand specifically for MM are neat, but they shouldn't be a basic assumption since they have a high opportunity cost.)

Much better: 2+Int modifier +enh modifier; 2 missiles in paragon; 3 missiles in epic (or something like that - the epic version at least sounds too strong, but that kind of approach is more traditional anyhow).

One neat thing about the new MM is that it doesn't require an attack roll - so situationally that's great (trying to hit an invisible foe, usage when you're blinded, that kind of thing.)  I'm not picking it for my wizard, but it _might_ be neat for some human wizards, I guess.  Also nice for hybrids, by the way.


----------



## jimmifett (Jul 7, 2010)

Having not finished reading this thread yet, i'm not sure if I like the change to magic missile...

2d4+int mod, vs 2+int mod.

assuming int mod of 4

new: guarenteed hit for 6 damage with no ciritcals.
old: Chance to miss, 6 - 12 damage, chance to crit.

Using Wizard's fury...
new: gaurenteed 12 damage, no crits.
old: 12 - 24, chances to crit.

Even stranger now is Master's Wand of Magic Missle. You don't get the chance to crit, even when casting magic missile via this wand. A third Magic missile during a single turn in an encounter is nice, as is the pushing.

18 damage vs 18-36 + crit chances.

Player: "I hurl bolts of force at BBEG, blasting him off the cliff into the lava below! Pew Pew Pew!"

DM: He fails his save and is pushed into the yawning expanse behind him. Gravity, slightly late to work that day and being the friendly sort, taps him on the shoulder and reminds him he does not have the hover keyword. Now confused at having being tapped on the shoulder by a supposedly universal law of attraction, who was quite disheveled and not very attractive, realizes he has left the stove on just as he crests below the floor he was previously standing on. "Aaaaaaaaagh!" sploosh, sizzle. The load bearing boss is now a memory.

Player: "Load bearing...  Expiditous Retreat!"


----------



## Zaran (Jul 7, 2010)

Piratecat said:


> I'm thrilled about the magic missile auto-hit; having to roll to hit annoyed me every time our wizard used it. Hurrah!




Don't know if anyone else has noticed but the Staff of Missile Mastery still does 1d8 for each +1 of enchancement bonus on a crit with Magic Missle. How are we supposed to crit with that? I suppose we can use it on Coup de Grace...

Edit: Oops. Someone did notice!


----------



## jimmifett (Jul 7, 2010)

As a DM, I certainly enjoy the fixes to items that were being abused for surgeless healing (especcially in combo with the Battle standard of healing by lfr players that insist it works a certain way and I don't have the time to explain basic engrish to them)


----------



## keterys (Jul 7, 2010)

It makes low level master's wands of magic missile pretty darn useful treasure now.


----------



## Mengu (Jul 7, 2010)

keterys said:


> It makes low level master's wands of magic missile pretty darn useful treasure now.




That's actually a good point. Auto push 1 can sometimes be rather useful, so keep one in your deep pocket cloak.


----------



## MrMyth (Jul 7, 2010)

cdrcjsn said:


> You forgot that bonuses to hit (expertise, combat advantage, leader bonuses, etc) also add to average damage per round for the old version. Also leader bonus to damage (as well as a Syberis Shard of the Mage) is also pretty common at higher levels and don't apply to the new MM. And if you're using a +6 staff of MM, that means that you likely don't have a +6 Staff of Ruin that actually helps all of your other powers.




As I mentioned, damage skews in favor of the old version once you get to start adding bonuses in - but the counter is that damage skews in favor of the new one when up against enemies that are debuffing you, and there are plenty of high level enemies that blind, weaken, or can otherwise hinder your attacks - none of which apply to the new Magic Missile. And remember, you get two At Will Powers - being able to break out Magic Missile when hindered, and your other power when buffed, and you get the best of both worlds. 

The +6 Staff of Missile Mastery is a good point - it isn't likely to be a primary weapon. On the other hand, it makes a decent off-hand implement for all the dual-implement casters out of there. They use their Staff of Ruin most of the time, and then cast out of the Staff when they want to Magic Missile - or several, as the case may be.


----------



## Zaran (Jul 7, 2010)

I really wish they would encompass all the updates into new printings of the books.


----------



## Xeterog (Jul 7, 2010)

ignore.


----------



## sigfile (Jul 7, 2010)

Xeterog said:


> but it's an implement that you can use other powers with..and those could crit.



There is special crit damage for Magic Missiles.  *shrug*


----------



## mneme (Jul 7, 2010)

Nightfly said:


> You lost me there. The old MM did 2d4 base which averages to 5; the new MM does a flat 2. That's a loss of only 3 damage, in exchange for never missing, which is a great tradeoff.




That's not a great argument (as 2.5 is better than 2), but if you actually expand it out to the real world, the new MM does a lot more damage than the old one did (yes, even with Bracers of the Perfect Shot factored in).  The old MM had a DPR of (13 * 50% + 6.5*.05) 6.825 at 2nd level (with bracers); the new one has a dpr of 8 at 2nd level, and you don't need to acquire a 3rd level item to do it.  And yes, I'm quite certain you can optimize the old MM to do more damage than the new one at 30th level due to the optimization limits that "static damage" imply -- but even that's a sucker move; against really tough foes, the comparably unoptimized MM (doing 2+10+6+5 (dual implement spellcaster) = 23 damage)  is going to start outdamaging an optimized single-target will just through hitrate.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 7, 2010)

Zaran said:


> I really wish they would encompass all the updates into new printings of the books.




They'd have to stop making them so often for this to be viable.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 7, 2010)

mneme said:


> That's not a great argument (as 2.5 is better than 2), but if you actually expand it out to the real world, the new MM does a lot more damage than the old one did (yes, even with Bracers of the Perfect Shot factored in).  The old MM had a DPR of (13 * 50% + 6.5*.05) 6.825 at 2nd level (with bracers); the new one has a dpr of 8 at 2nd level, and you don't need to acquire a 3rd level item to do it.  And yes, I'm quite certain you can optimize the old MM to do more damage than the new one at 30th level due to the optimization limits that "static damage" imply -- but even that's a sucker move; against really tough foes, the comparably unoptimized MM (doing 2+10+6+5 (dual implement spellcaster) = 23 damage)  is going to start outdamaging an optimized single-target will just through hitrate.




I agree, the new MM has a nice niche. When you really cannot hit stuff for crud you can still do perfectly acceptable damage with a MM. It may not be attractive enough to take up an at-will slot on most wizards, but it is worth considering. Especially for those players that aren't super excited about T-Wave. Also consider that its nice to have an at-will for as many defenses as you can, but now really with the new MM you effectively have a spell that will work well on that super high FORT guy or super high WILL guy that you can't seem to do much to. It does have its uses for sure. 

I'm still not fond of the concept of using errata to create new powers out of old ones, and I don't think MM needed a change to make it useful, but whatever, its changed now. The new version probably isn't WORSE than the old one overall anyway.


----------



## Salamandyr (Jul 7, 2010)

One side effect of the change to magic missile is that it's a huge nerf to invisibility.  Since it's an auto-hit, and the attack is visible (silvery darts streaking towards their victim), it's like tracer fire to identify what square the invisible opponent is hiding in.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 7, 2010)

mneme said:


> That's not a great argument (as 2.5 is better than 2), but if you actually expand it out to the real world, the new MM does a lot more damage than the old one did (yes, even with Bracers of the Perfect Shot factored in).  The old MM had a DPR of (13 * 50% + 6.5*.05) 6.825 at 2nd level (with bracers); the new one has a dpr of 8 at 2nd level, and you don't need to acquire a 3rd level item to do it.




Dpr of 8?  Show the math.  I have:

2+4+1= 7...

....or do we have two magic implements at level 2 I don't know about and that the treasure tables and money you get don't actually support?

....assuming Dual Implement Spellcaster works on the new magic missile, which it actually might not, as you are not actually attacking with the off-hand implement and therefore Magic Missile's Special line probably does not apply to it.

....and that the average hit rate of a wizard with a +4 int, +1 implement, +1 level bonus (6) against an average reflex on an equal level monster of 14 is somehow 50% (Protip:  14-6 = 8, 21-8 = 13, 13/20 = 65%)

....unless you have 20 int, in which case it's 70%, which changes your 6.825 to... 8.775.

8.775 > the 8 you're giving.

If you're gonna do a DPR calculation, please use numbers that exist in the game, not assumptions that were proven two years ago to NOT exist in the game.



> And yes, I'm quite certain you can optimize the old MM to do more damage than the new one at 30th level due to the optimization limits that "static damage" imply -- but even that's a sucker move; against really tough foes, the comparably unoptimized MM (doing 2+10+6+5 (dual implement spellcaster) = 23 damage)  is going to start outdamaging an optimized single-target will just through hitrate.




2+10+6+5?  Seriously.  Show your math.  You can have, at most (without contraversy) 5+6+6 = 17, and that's using a Staff of Magic Missiles.


----------



## Verision (Jul 7, 2010)

eamon said:


> Evard's tentacles were errata'd in may; the immobilizing effect is merely save-ends now - and anyhow, how is this impossible with any other ranged attack?  As long as you deal damage on average, you can do this; no need for effect damage.





Lol. I guess I don't keep up to date on errata 

It's not that it's impossible with other ranged attacks, it's simply that I know how my PCs think, and something that is auto-hit would be treated differently then something that "deals damage on average", even if the average damage is equivalent. 


(Side question: Do they sell PDFs that include all the errata? Or am I looking at an Insider account?)


----------



## Mirtek (Jul 7, 2010)

Nightfly said:


> Well, Magic Missile needed a buff very badly. It was by far the worst of the Wizard at-wills,



 Given that it was one of the very few powers with range 20 on a class that's otherwise surprisingly helpless against anything greater than range 10, I don't agree.



Aegeri said:


> It's also something they are dropping in all fairness. I don't believe allabah, Lolth, Imix or the other dood actually have this. I never understood the point because such creatures will squish PCs trivially below level 20 (even with optimized cheese).



With the "low damage, high hp" formula used for 4e monsters (even with the MM3 damage increase) "squish" is exaggerated. Yes, they would defeat one such creature eventually, but it would take some time. So swarm them with enough level 19 dragons and they will eventually take the deity/primordial/... down.


Obryn said:


> Lolth does, though it only triggers when she loses 1/2 of her spidery form's HPs.  I don't believe the others do.
> 
> It seems to be reserved for gods; primordials and far realm abominations need not apply.



I don't see it in either of her stat blocks, seems the have dropped it. And the god-like primordials also used to have that ability. I also always thought it should have been below 21st level and not below 20th level


Nightfly said:


> You lost me there. The old MM did 2d4 base which averages to 5; the new MM does a flat 2. That's a loss of only 3 damage, in exchange for never missing, which is a great tradeoff.



 Rule #1 in 4e: The "x" in x[W]x+static-damage-mods doesn't matter

The only thing that matters is getting the static damage after the the + into the atmosphere. As such MM lost much damage potential


----------



## Mengu (Jul 7, 2010)

Verision said:


> (Side question: Do they sell PDFs that include all the errata? Or am I looking at an Insider account?)




No, they don't "sell" them. The updates are freely available, here is the latest, and the archive. The compilation in the archive should have everything.


----------



## kerbarian (Jul 7, 2010)

eamon said:


> One neat thing about the new MM is that it doesn't require an attack roll - so situationally that's great (trying to hit an invisible foe, usage when you're blinded, that kind of thing.)  I'm not picking it for my wizard, but it _might_ be neat for some human wizards, I guess.  Also nice for hybrids, by the way.



With plenty of at-will bursts and blasts, wizards are probably the least affected by blindness, invisibility, etc. already.  The new spell fills an interesting niche, but not one that's useful to wizards, IMO.

I think the new version is comparable to the old MM for unoptimized characters and quickly falls behind as you add gear and feats for attack and damage modifiers.  That's a perfectly fine thing to have somewhere in the wizard's list of powers -- I just wish they hadn't taken away the only range 20 at-will to offer it.


----------



## Verision (Jul 7, 2010)

Mengu said:


> No, they don't "sell" them. The updates are freely available, here is the latest, and the archive. The compilation in the archive should have everything.





Sorry, I meant the full books with the errata included. You know, so I don't have to look through the errata whenever I browse through one of the books I bought. (Or go back through and put *stars* next to everything that has been errata'd)


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 7, 2010)

kerbarian said:


> I just wish they hadn't taken away the only range 20 at-will to offer it.




This is my opinion on it.

The old magic missile was -fine-.  It did what it was supposed to, and with certain options was a perfectly serviceable control or damage power depending on what items you used to support it.

Is the new power fine?  Yes.  It is a perfectly good power.  It does something unique, and interesting, and if they feel the wizard needs that niche, well that's okay.  I don't mind it.

Where the problem lies is that they've removed an old, perfectly fine power, so they can include a new, perfectly fine power, instead of simply printing a new, perfectly fine power.  The old power wasn't broken, why get rid of it? 

Errata to fix problem powers?  Sure.  Errata to bring things to intended functionality?  Absolutely.  Errata to make things that don't work well so that they work well?  Okay.

Errata to remove something perfectly fine for something completely different?  That's where it gets a bit messy, and I don't think I like this trend.

They should have just printed a new power.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jul 7, 2010)

Never Miss!!!

Minion = Dead!

What misses however is the ability to deal full damage to insubstantial creatures.

Also i had liked following Spell:
hit: 1d4 damage
effect: what it is now!

edit: about removing a perfectly fine power...
they reacted to critics which are 2 years old by now...  Maybe add a different spell to fill the old niche...
They just tried to make magic missile "magic missile"... i guess it has something to do with essential line, where they try to make it better than with the normal line, where they had to endure a lot of nerdrage because of a magic missile which had to hit.

Since they are trying to get in those peaople who skipped 4e until now, they want to avoid those mistakes, and in this case there was no other option than errata...

They also don´t want to hear again that all classes are the same and wizards are no wizards...
I also bet that rituals included in essential line will have casting times of about a min and wizards may cast some of them for free


----------



## Markn (Jul 7, 2010)

No not usually.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 7, 2010)

UngeheuerLich said:


> What misses however is the ability to deal full damage to insubstantial creatures.




Actually, the new power is better against insubstantial creatures.

This is because the only thing that made insubstantial creatures fear the magic missile was: 

Inescapable Force
Benefit: When you use a power that has the force keyword, you deal full damage (instead of half damage) against insubstantial creatures, and that power deals an extra 1d10 damage to such creatures.

So, against insubstantial creatures, Magic Missile now gains a damage roll, which means all them bonuses you have with the rest of your powers are now applicable.  1d10+3+static bonuses on an autohit is nothing to sneeze at.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 7, 2010)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Never Miss!!!
> 
> Minion = Dead!
> 
> ...




You still have the ability to do full damage to insubstantial creatures, what would change that?


----------



## Solvarn (Jul 7, 2010)

*Magic Missile*

Yeah they should have created a new power called:

Grognard's Magic Missile

or

Archaic Magic Missile.

I think that they are hoping to scoop up a good portion of old school gamers with the Essentials line and one of the biggest zomg comments you get from old school gamers is "I have to roll to hit on magic missile?!"


----------



## MrMyth (Jul 7, 2010)

Salamandyr said:


> One side effect of the change to magic missile is that it's a huge nerf to invisibility. Since it's an auto-hit, and the attack is visible (silvery darts streaking towards their victim), it's like tracer fire to identify what square the invisible opponent is hiding in.




I'm pretty sure you have to know the enemy's square to target them to begin with. You can't just declare you are firing at an invisible assassin, and have it magically seek them out (any more than you could do so with any other attack, and have it fire at their location regardless of where they are.) Of course, it is still great against invisible enemies, since once you do figure out where they are, you can ping away at them without any worries about missing.


----------



## MrMyth (Jul 7, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Inescapable Force
> Benefit: When you use a power that has the force keyword, you deal full damage (instead of half damage) against insubstantial creatures, and that power deals an extra 1d10 damage to such creatures.
> 
> So, against insubstantial creatures, Magic Missile now gains a damage roll, which means all them bonuses you have with the rest of your powers are now applicable. 1d10+3+static bonuses on an autohit is nothing to sneeze at.




It remains very much a topic of debate whether adding bonus damage dice to static damage rolls allows you to add damage modifiers. I think using that as an argument in it's favor is a pretty poor one. 

Here is a more interesting one: Weakened. This was mentioned briefly earlier, but let's put a bit of a spotlight on the fact that when you are weakened, "Your attacks deal half damage. However, two kinds of damage that you deal are not affected: ongoing damage and *damage that isn’t generated by an attack roll.*"

So if you also have Inescapable Force, all those weakening insubstantial creatures get to be extra afraid of your ability to blow past all their damage reducing abilities.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 7, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Inescapable Force
> Benefit: When you use a power that has the force keyword, you deal full damage (instead of half damage) against insubstantial creatures, and that power deals an extra 1d10 damage to such creatures.



 There's an active debate over on the CharOp board about what constitutes "extra damage" vs. what constitutes the "damage roll".

There are very few ways to add rolled damage to a power that can't be interpreted as "extra damage".

Shadowfell Gloves are one surefire way, but that uses a Daily power.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 7, 2010)

MrMyth said:


> It remains very much a topic of debate whether adding bonus damage dice to static damage rolls allows you to add damage modifiers. I think using that as an argument in it's favor is a pretty poor one.
> 
> Here is a more interesting one: Weakened. This was mentioned briefly earlier, but let's put a bit of a spotlight on the fact that when you are weakened, "Your attacks deal half damage. However, two kinds of damage that you deal are not affected: ongoing damage and *damage that isn’t generated by an attack roll.*"
> 
> So if you also have Inescapable Force, all those weakening insubstantial creatures get to be extra afraid of your ability to blow past all their damage reducing abilities.




Still.  I don't know if the new power is all it's cracked up to be... I mean, yeah it autokills minions (so does Cloud of Daggers) and it does automatic damage (so does Cloud of Daggers) but... does it do more than say... Cloud of Daggers?

Range concerns aside, Magic Missile and Cloud of Daggers have much in common.  For all practical purposes:

Magic Missile's damage is 2/3/5 + Enhancement Bonus + Int bonus

and Cloud of Daggers' damage is Probability (1d6 + Enhancement Bonus + Int bonus + other stuff) + Wisdom bonus...

A direct comparison between the two is possible for any given character.  Generally tho, because of 'other stuff' and the Wisdom bonus kicking in there for auto damage, you're really asking if the DPR of the attack portion of cloud of daggers is greater than, well, usually 3 for heroic characters.

Is 3 dpr a hard hurdle for a 1d6+stuff power to climb over?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 7, 2010)

UngeheuerLich said:


> they reacted to critics which are 2 years old by now...  Maybe add a different spell to fill the old niche...
> They just tried to make magic missile "magic missile"... i guess it has something to do with essential line, where they try to make it better than with the normal line, where they had to endure a lot of nerdrage because of a magic missile which had to hit.



This is a really bad reason to change the MM since it wasn't auto-hit from the start. AD&D had it as auto-hit but not OD&D or BECMI. 3.x being more of AD&D than BECMI went for auto-hit, but I was glad they went back to the original MM in 4e.

But most of all, you don't change a spell that's been in play for 25 months in such a fundamental way when there is no problem with it!


----------



## The Little Raven (Jul 7, 2010)

Zaran said:


> I really wish they would encompass all the updates into new printings of the books.




Easier said than done. A change can have a cascading effect on the layout. For example, the addition of the Hop Down action in Acrobatics could push the entire chapter to be one page larger than it was previous, which would require quite a bit more work for layout people.


----------



## Zaran (Jul 7, 2010)

The Little Raven said:


> Easier said than done. A change can have a cascading effect on the layout. For example, the addition of the Hop Down action in Acrobatics could push the entire chapter to be one page larger than it was previous, which would require quite a bit more work for layout people.




Aw gee.  Nevermind then!  Don't want to give them any work.   Actually, I do.  They can sell the updated book for the same price as it first was with their new layout work and still make quite alot of profit since the info is already there.  The art is already there.  The customer base is there as well.


----------



## MacMathan (Jul 7, 2010)

Hmm interesting. 

I have to say I have not seen a Wizard in our group take the original MM since 4e has been out, even the Human ones so maybe this will rectify this. 

On the other hand I also agree that it could have been a additive change. Oh well maybe we will get a Dragon article renaming the original into something else "sometimes-magical missile" or something


----------



## Markn (Jul 7, 2010)

Changing gears here...

Does anyone think Maze requires errata?  You make an Int check against the Wizards defence.  We are level 28 and most monsters have no chance of succeeding on the first 3 round and its not uncommon from some monsters to finally escape on round 5, meaning they have burned their standard action that round so in effect it hoses a creature for up to 6 rounds.  

Plus an Int check doesn't seem very 4e to me.  

I'm surprised this one has not seen a change yet.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 7, 2010)

MacMathan said:


> I have to say I have not seen a Wizard in our group take the original MM since 4e has been out, even the Human ones so maybe this will rectify this.




There's one in my group now. Out of 2 wizards that have played any substantial time in the group the first was eladrin and had T-Wave and CoD. The second is human and has T-Wave, MM, and I think Ray of Frost (no, they don't bother to look in AP or anything like that for better powers, lol). She uses MM a lot, really I think unless some other option leaps out at her. Really it wasn't a bad spell. At level 10 she's doing 2d4+5+3+3 = 16 avg on a hit. With the new MM she'd do 1 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 12 damage per hit, so it will actually be a slight damage boost with Staff of Ruin +3 and INT 20. I think this is pretty typical for casual players. With a bit more optimization like say DIS and a master's wand no doubt the old version would be up there around the same DPR.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 7, 2010)

Monsters have stats as well and should be adding their int mod + 1/2 level like anything else. Plus every time they fail they get a +5 bonus to it as well. Maze is useful, but it doesn't really lead to "Nova" rounds and similar, so it's really not as bad as many other things.


----------



## Markn (Jul 7, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> Monsters have stats as well and should be adding their int mod + 1/2 level like anything else. Plus every time they fail they get a +5 bonus to it as well. Maze is useful, but it doesn't really lead to "Nova" rounds and similar, so it's really not as bad as many other things.




Yep, but the numbers are still too low.  They simply can't make it on the first couple of rounds and need a REALLY high number on the 3rd.  4 rounds is about average. 

Our group has discovered that target removal is an effective tactic.  Removing one monster is like lowering the Encounter level of the fight.  Particularly if he is removed for a LONG time with Maze.  In several instances, the monster returned when everyone else was dead.  Don't underestimate target removal, I kid you not.  It is a VERY effective tactic - particularly when there is a lot of monster synergy.

Edit:  To give some numbers, our level 28 wizard has a 43 will (boostable by his ED).  Most creatures will be around 20-24 on their Int roll.  1st round is a fail, 2nd round high chance of fail, 3rd round is about 50/50, 4th round is a decent chance, 5th round about guaranteed.  Also remember it burns your Standard Action so some monsters can't do anything until the following round.


----------



## Markn (Jul 7, 2010)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> There's one in my group now. Out of 2 wizards that have played any substantial time in the group the first was eladrin and had T-Wave and CoD. The second is human and has T-Wave, MM, and I think Ray of Frost (no, they don't bother to look in AP or anything like that for better powers, lol). She uses MM a lot, really I think unless some other option leaps out at her. Really it wasn't a bad spell. At level 10 she's doing 2d4+5+3+3 = 16 avg on a hit. With the new MM she'd do 1 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 12 damage per hit, so it will actually be a slight damage boost with Staff of Ruin +3 and INT 20. I think this is pretty typical for casual players. With a bit more optimization like say DIS and a master's wand no doubt the old version would be up there around the same DPR.




The human wizard in our group has MM too.  We are level 28 and he still has Wizards Fury (I think thats the name - it lets you cast MM as a minor action for the encounter).  He uses MM quite a bit and it packs a wallop.


----------



## The Little Raven (Jul 8, 2010)

Zaran said:


> Aw gee.  Nevermind then!  Don't want to give them any work.   Actually, I do.  They can sell the updated book for the same price as it first was with their new layout work and still make quite alot of profit since the info is already there.  The art is already there.  The customer base is there as well.




It's more than that.

If the book grows by one page, that changes the page count. If I remember correctly, that means they'd need to add 3 more pages since it's done in multiples of 4. That means more changes to the book, which starts to add up. What began as the addition of errata has turned into more.

That is not going to happen.


----------



## BobTheNob (Jul 8, 2010)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> There's one in my group now. Out of 2 wizards that have played any substantial time in the group the first was eladrin and had T-Wave and CoD. The second is human and has T-Wave, MM, and I think Ray of Frost (no, they don't bother to look in AP or anything like that for better powers, lol). She uses MM a lot, really I think unless some other option leaps out at her. Really it wasn't a bad spell. At level 10 she's doing 2d4+5+3+3 = 16 avg on a hit. With the new MM she'd do 1 + 5 + 3 + 3 = 12 damage per hit, so it will actually be a slight damage boost with Staff of Ruin +3 and INT 20. I think this is pretty typical for casual players. With a bit more optimization like say DIS and a master's wand no doubt the old version would be up there around the same DPR.




Hang on a minute. The description in the errata sais "If the implement used with this power that has an enhancement bonus add that bonus to the damage". That means add the enhancement damage. The extra damage from a staff of ruin(above a different staff of the same enhancement level)  in "Item" bonus...doesnt that mean that a staff of ruin is actually not a very good staff to use with MM.


----------



## Zaran (Jul 8, 2010)

Oldtimer said:


> This is a really bad reason to change the MM since it wasn't auto-hit from the start. AD&D had it as auto-hit but not OD&D or BECMI. 3.x being more of AD&D than BECMI went for auto-hit, but I was glad they went back to the original MM in 4e.
> 
> But most of all, you don't change a spell that's been in play for 25 months in such a fundamental way when there is no problem with it!




I think Magic Missile will be in the Essentials rules and they decided to make it auto hit there.  So for new players it will always be auto-hit.


----------



## webrunner (Jul 8, 2010)

They should, at least, make a "pastable" version of the errata: each one with cut-lines around it, made to fit exactly in the slot the old one fit, even if that means the font size has to be lowered.


----------



## cmbarona (Jul 8, 2010)

The Little Raven said:


> It's more than that.
> 
> If the book grows by one page, that changes the page count. If I remember correctly, that means they'd need to add 3 more pages since it's done in multiples of 4. That means more changes to the book, which starts to add up. What began as the addition of errata has turned into more.
> 
> That is not going to happen.




Furthermore, paper publishing is a lot more complicated than it seems at first glance. Aside from formatting changes, which are much more daunting than they seem, there are a lot more factors that go into it. Just working as a bookstore clerk for a couple years and not knowing the full details, I can see that publishing a new printing every month would be disastrous for WotC's sales. If you want to keep bookstores sane, you'd need a new ISBN with every printing. That would complicate things considerably. If you don't get a new ISBN, sellers would be screaming at you to get one. There's some cost-benefit trade-off to consider, too. Once you publish a new printing, your entire last month's stock becomes obsolete. All of the investment you just put into that printing is essentially gone, and you not only have to replace the cost of that, but try to encourage people to actually buy the new book. And I'll go ahead and say that I still have a first printing PHB and don't see myself buying a new one any time soon. Maybe not the entire time 4e is around. Printing a new version every month could actually decrease sales as people wait for the "big" update months to buy a book and skip out on the "small" months. It's a very complicated process, so please cut WotC some slack. They are a business, after all, and one we like to see making wise business decisions.

Granted, digital publishing is another beast entirely. I'm not sure what sort of complications arise there, especially considering its interaction with paper publishing. However, no .pdfs are currently being published (unless they began again and I missed that bit of news).

Edit:







			
				webrunner said:
			
		

> They should, at least, make a "pastable" version of the errata: each one  with cut-lines around it, made to fit exactly in the slot the old one  fit, even if that means the font size has to be lowered.




Yeah, this would be nice. They started printing updates in the standard book formats a little while ago. Cut and paste could work for a few things, like power blocks, but I'd love to see them do it for all updates. Maybe even make a separate "pasteable" version.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 8, 2010)

BobTheNob said:


> Hang on a minute. The description in the errata sais "If the implement used with this power that has an enhancement bonus add that bonus to the damage". That means add the enhancement damage. The extra damage from a staff of ruin(above a different staff of the same enhancement level)  in "Item" bonus...doesnt that mean that a staff of ruin is actually not a very good staff to use with MM.




The only staff that adds to Magic Missile damage with an item bonus is the staff of magic missile.  Staff of Ruin adds to damage rolls with its item bonus, which Magic Missile doesn't then except.  The same is with DIS (my mind was changed on this) because DIS doesn't allow you to be attacking with the off-hand implement with the MM power, so the MM power won't take -that- enhancement bonus.


----------



## Steelwill (Jul 9, 2010)

I know, its like 4E has an identity crisis and is now trying desperately to figure itself out.


----------



## Aegeri (Jul 9, 2010)

I don't think we're going to see the full logic of how things are going to work out until after essentials is released.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jul 9, 2010)

Steelwill said:


> I know, its like 4E has an identity crisis and is now trying desperately to figure itself out.




Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players. 

Which is not a surprise.


----------



## Mithreinmaethor (Jul 9, 2010)

Dice4Hire said:


> Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.
> 
> Which is not a surprise.




I am an older player, been playing since fall of 1977, and I dont think that I agree with your statement.


----------



## Festivus (Jul 9, 2010)

Dice4Hire said:


> Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.
> 
> Which is not a surprise.




I run a meetup (so this is just my experience, but it's sizable): 90% of my meetup is in the age bracket of 21-40.  So of the 45 people who show up at my meetup monthly, only 2 or 3 fall outside that range.

The other 10% are comprised of older or younger than that... weighted on the older side.

D&D needs younger players to come in and start playing the game for it's long term survival.


----------



## doctorhook (Jul 10, 2010)

Dice4Hire said:


> Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.
> 
> Which is not a surprise.



That's not really the issue. What WotC realises is that it needs to try to keep growing. It can't do that if it isn't catering to the largest reasonable target market that it can, older or younger. This is the factor behind most of the changes to D&D since WotC bought TSR in, what, 1997? Like it or leave it, WotC knows better than to pander to nerdrage.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jul 10, 2010)

Have inherent bonuses always been at level 4 and 9? I somehow remember they were given out at level 2 and 7....

level 4 is even worse than level 2... attack can go up at this single level by 4 (or even 5)

I still beleieve the first inherent bonus should be handed out at level 3!


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 10, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> The only staff that adds to Magic Missile damage with an item bonus is the staff of magic missile.  Staff of Ruin adds to damage rolls with its item bonus, which Magic Missile doesn't then except.  The same is with DIS (my mind was changed on this) because DIS doesn't allow you to be attacking with the off-hand implement with the MM power, so the MM power won't take -that- enhancement bonus.




Huh? I agree with the Staff of Ruin thing, it distinctly gives an item bonus to damage rolls, so won't apply. I don't understand your DIS logic. The case is again simple with DIS after rechecking it, it applies an item bonus to damage rolls. 

The basic observation is good though. My 'old' number is fine, I just wouldn't be adding the 3 points for SoR with the new version. She could however use a Master's Wand and get the same numbers. DIS I only factored on the OLD anyway, so it didn't really matter.

Eh, in any case, enough about MM. How about them there Free Action attack limitations? Eh. Any enraged chargebarian fans here?


----------



## Aulirophile (Jul 10, 2010)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Have inherent bonuses always been at level 4 and 9? I somehow remember they were given out at level 2 and 7....
> 
> level 4 is even worse than level 2... attack can go up at this single level by 4 (or even 5)
> 
> I still beleieve the first inherent bonus should be handed out at level 3!



Attack and Damage: All characters gain a +1 bonus
to attack rolls and damage rolls at 2nd, 7th, 11th, 17th,
and, and 27th level.

Defenses: All PCs gain a +1 bonus to AC, Fortitude, Reflex,
and Will at 4th, 9th, 14th, 19th, 24th, and 29th level.

? Has always been that way, and it matches up perfectly with how the original DMG said to constantly upgrade weapon/neck/armor for players at appropriate levels.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jul 10, 2010)

Oh, didn´t realize that the attack and armor upgrades level up at different rates... still... an automatic bonus at 2 and 4 is meh...


----------



## Legildur (Jul 10, 2010)

Nightfly said:


> Tumble lets you shift your entire speed, not just half.



So now what do I do with _Ignoble Escape_?

As a level 6 rogue utility, the only difference compared with _Tumble_ (level 2 rogue utility) is that it can remove the marked condition.


----------



## Aulirophile (Jul 10, 2010)

UngeheuerLich said:


> Oh, didn´t realize that the attack and armor upgrades level up at different rates... still... an automatic bonus at 2 and 4 is meh...



You do realize that 4e has a _very _specific power curve in regards to Enhancement bonuses? Even level monsters and PCs hit on a 10+, and Strikers kill a standard even level Skirmisher in 4 rounds of At-Will DPR if they make the minimum striker benchmark. PCs are hit on a 10+ by an even level skirmisher, assuming they have standard defenses (i.e., defenders take more +hit, some ranged PCs will actually be even easier to hit). All those averages form very nice curves.

All inherent bonuses do is replace the magic items you _should _be getting with a number. If your DM isn't giving those magic items to you at appropriate intervals, he is a bad 4e DM (barring using inherent bonuses and/or tailoring the encounters to be even to -4 levels below your group, instead of even to +4)

The only break in the above formula is that you lose 1 hit per tier and become 1 hit easier to hit in the NADs per tier past heroic. Expertise and Paragon/Robust defenses fix this. Which is why many games, including the developer's home games, give those feats free to all PCs.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jul 10, 2010)

Tell me how the assumption of hitting at a 10+ can hold if monster attack bonus increase by 1 per level and the PC defense score, using inherent bonus, jumps by 2 points at level 4. (it can actually jump by 3 points if a stat increase also increases the defense and by even more points if you spend your feat at better armor.

So how can increasing the inherent bonus at an odd numbered level, where you have no increase due to half level bonus can screw up the finely tuned balance...

there are actually three kinds of balance:
a stable balance (a pendulum at the lowest point)
and an instable balance (pendulum at its highest point)
and metastable balances (a ball in crate of a volcano)

My assumption is that 4e has a metastable balance: as long as you don´t go too far away from the default assumptions it won´t break... (see new monster damage progression)

IMHO i wouldn´t want to play a game where you are entitled to get the +1 sword as soon as you level up, just because you took an extended rest to level up... this sounds more than boring. In a real game you will find the sword usually at the middle of 2nd level. Then there is no 2 point jump and so the curve stays more or less smooth...

edit: so the solution should be two increases at levels 3 or 5 and 7 or 9.


----------



## Runestar (Jul 10, 2010)

Mithreinmaethor said:


> I am an older player, been playing since fall of 1977, and I dont think that I agree with your statement.



In all fairness, he said "not enough of a market", not "no market". 

I don't deny there are bound to be able of your age bracket playing dnd, but that doesn't necessarily mean there are all that many of you, and I doubt they can break even just by appealing to the few of you. Wotc needs to cater to as wide an audience as possible to make dnd financially viable.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jul 10, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> I don't think we're going to see the full logic of how things are going to work out until after essentials is released.




Absolutely.  We got a very nice cleric preview, but there is a lot more to the game. 

Monsters, especially, for me. 

I am quite interested in what they are doing, and I think WOTC will get a lot of my money this fall. And I am glad to give it to them.


----------



## abyssaldeath (Jul 10, 2010)

Legildur said:


> So now what do I do with _Ignoble Escape_?
> 
> As a level 6 rogue utility, the only difference compared with _Tumble_ (level 2 rogue utility) is that it can remove the marked condition.



So it's like Tumble, but better. I'm not seeing the problem.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 10, 2010)

abyssaldeath said:


> So it's like Tumble, but better. I'm not seeing the problem.




Obviously they probably wouldn't have designed 2 such similar utility powers from the start like this, but its not a big issue. If you don't take Tumble at level 2 (and with Fleeting Ghost at that level who would) then you can just take Ignoble Escape at level 6 (whereas if it didn't exist you could take Tumble at level 6, but since IE exists you might as well get the minuscule extra benefit).


----------



## keterys (Jul 10, 2010)

Fleeting Ghost is pretty bad or unnecessary for an awful lot of rogues. Sadly, I can no longer point from Tumble to Ethereal Stride and go 'Okay, how the hell are these the same level?'

The real competition is probably Sneak in the Attack at that level.


----------



## MrMyth (Jul 10, 2010)

Legildur said:


> So now what do I do with _Ignoble Escape_?
> 
> As a level 6 rogue utility, the only difference compared with _Tumble_ (level 2 rogue utility) is that it can remove the marked condition.




Yeah, a very small upgrade in power. 

But the real strength is that with both of them, you can now shift a good distance _twice_ per encounter. That's strong.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 10, 2010)

MrMyth said:


> But the real strength is that with both of them, you can now shift a good distance _twice_ per encounter. That's strong.



 Yep yep.

If you're a Rogue who benefits from mobility, having lots of mobility sounds good to me.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 10, 2010)

Aulirophile said:


> You do realize that 4e has a _very _specific power curve in regards to Enhancement bonuses? Even level monsters and PCs hit on a 10+,




The curve is not like that.

Originally, PCs started just ahead of the curve.  With a +3 attribute bonus, at level 2 with the +1 something, if you're an implement user, your hit will be +5, and the defenses you are hitting will be 14, giving you 60%.

The collecting wisdom, however, makes characters with +4 attribute bonuses, and starts with some form of accuracy booster, for another +1, giving 70%.

At level 30, using the original progression, 15(lvl)+7(att)+6(enh) = +28, 42, meaning you need an 8 to hit, putting you at 45%.  But by that point you have such easy access to bonuses to hit and combat advantage that you're not far behind.

Of course, now, with an extra attribute bonus, and +4 from accuracy boosting feats, this implement user would be at 70% again.

The game's '50% to hit' rate only existed at level 29.  Every other level, the hit rate was some higher number.


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Jul 10, 2010)

abyssaldeath said:


> So it's like Tumble, but better. I'm not seeing the problem.




I'd retrain Tumble.  Or use both in the same encounter.

Brad


----------



## Victim (Jul 10, 2010)

Yeah, our rogue has been built for mad mobility with Tumble, Ignoble Escape, Guerrilla Blitz and Speed 8.  If anything, he's too fast; with his extra mobility he's sometimes tempted to go after more isolated monsters and work on them with all his CA granting stuff instead of focusing fire.


----------



## Legildur (Jul 11, 2010)

MrMyth said:


> But the real strength is that with both of them, you can now shift a good distance _twice_ per encounter. That's strong.



Not as strong for a halfling artful dodger as you might think, as they already get +6 (assuming 18 Cha at 8th level) to AC versus movement based opportunity attacks and have the halfing racial ability _Second Chance_ to possibly ignore any damage they might sustain.

I guess it seems a little odd to see such a miniscule improvement in a power for something 4 levels higher.... In fact, I usually forget about the ability to remove the marked condition. If something has me marked, I tend to attack it irrespective of the condition.

Might look at retraining either _Tumble_ or _Ignoble Escape_, but not both.


----------



## Lord Ernie (Jul 11, 2010)

Legildur said:


> Not as strong for a halfling artful dodger as you might think, as they already get +6 (assuming 18 Cha at 8th level) to AC versus movement based opportunity attacks and have the halfing racial ability _Second Chance_ to possibly ignore any damage they might sustain.
> 
> I guess it seems a little odd to see such a miniscule improvement in a power for something 4 levels higher.... In fact, I usually forget about the ability to remove the marked condition. If something has me marked, I tend to attack it irrespective of the condition.
> 
> Might look at retraining either _Tumble_ or _Ignoble Escape_, but not both.



If Dragon options are allowed, have a look at "Swift Parry" at level 6. It's an encounter power which adds your charisma modifier to defenses vs. one attack as an interrupt, and gives you combat advantage against the attacker for one turn. It's basically the Rogue's version of Shield, with extras .


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 11, 2010)

keterys said:


> Fleeting Ghost is pretty bad or unnecessary for an awful lot of rogues. Sadly, I can no longer point from Tumble to Ethereal Stride and go 'Okay, how the hell are these the same level?'
> 
> The real competition is probably Sneak in the Attack at that level.




FG is still awesome for the majority of rogues. Sure you can be a Cunning Sneak and its totally redundant. You could be a build that pretty much eschews stealth and you might not care about it, but even then its highly useful. Its still probably the hands down best choice for 75% of rogues that are out there. In my experience it is far and away the single most used utility power in the game.


----------



## keterys (Jul 11, 2010)

It's unnecessary for any rogue who doesn't stealth that often. Most rogues manage to get CA just fine without stealth. It's redundant for any Cunning Sneak rogue. It's not terribly exciting for rogues who are in melee most of the time.

As far as I can tell, that's a majority of rogues.

It is a better utility if you have a DM who helps the battle terrain a bit so that you can stealth more easily. In a campaign like LFR, that's less exciting, and some DMs are just aggressively unhelpful due to disliking the tactic or being actively lazy about terrain (which is sad, in general, for 4e, but there you go).

It's very good. It's very solid. Of the six or so rogues I've played alongside or DMed, I'd only consider it awesome for one, and a solid pick for another.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 11, 2010)

keterys said:


> It's unnecessary for any rogue who doesn't stealth that often. Most rogues manage to get CA just fine without stealth. It's redundant for any Cunning Sneak rogue. It's not terribly exciting for rogues who are in melee most of the time.
> 
> As far as I can tell, that's a majority of rogues.
> 
> ...




Well, it will vary a lot depending on the DM. At least in the games I run the players have certainly learned that having the rogue (usually with the warlock as a backup since he's pretty darn sneaky as well) scouting things out is a pretty key tactic. Having FG really makes that a lot easier to do reliably. I tend to have a lot of situations where a rogue can move around to an advantageous flanking position early in an encounter and get some significant advantage for instance. 

It certainly isn't CRITICAL even in my game, but pretty nice to have. Sneak in the Attack, and Tumble are certainly good utilities as well. I think FG has certainly lost a decent amount of its luster over time with various rulings on Stealth, new builds, other powers at other levels that can produce similar results etc. I'd still call it a pretty good utility power to have in your back pocket. One reason being it has a fair amount of utility even outside of combat (quickly escaping or trailing a moving enemy for instance).


----------



## Legildur (Jul 11, 2010)

Lord Ernie said:


> If Dragon options are allowed, have a look at "Swift Parry" at level 6. It's an encounter power which adds your charisma modifier to defenses vs. one attack as an interrupt, and gives you combat advantage against the attacker for one turn. It's basically the Rogue's version of Shield, with extras .



I like that power! But no Dragon Magazine options for us.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jul 12, 2010)

Legildur said:


> So now what do I do with _Ignoble Escape_?
> 
> As a level 6 rogue utility, the only difference compared with _Tumble_ (level 2 rogue utility) is that it can remove the marked condition.



And it means you can do the shift your speed trick twice per encounter. Provided you keep Tumble, too. Might be useful, depending on your build and your group.


----------



## Maximilia (Jul 12, 2010)

Ok, we had our first game session after the errata and... the new Magic Missile sucks. Although I was always auto-hitting, it felt like I wasn't doing anything. I think it was semi-frustrating for the GM too because even though we were making fun about taking a nap inbetween rounds, I was always hitting and since the beastie I was attacking hovered at range 20, after Force Orb, that was... well, that was it for my attack powers at that range. 

Completely unfun.


----------



## eamon (Jul 12, 2010)

Maximilia said:


> Ok, we had our first game session after the errata and... the new Magic Missile sucks. Although I was always auto-hitting, it felt like I wasn't doing anything. I think it was semi-frustrating for the GM too because even though we were making fun about taking a nap inbetween rounds, I was always hitting and since the beastie I was attacking hovered at range 20, after Force Orb, that was... well, that was it for my attack powers at that range.



Anything that's consistently beyond range 10 is problematic anyhow...


----------



## keterys (Jul 12, 2010)

That wasn't necessarily the spell sucking (though it might also have been), but it was definitely the monster and/or DM sucking.


----------



## Piratecat (Jul 12, 2010)

Maximilia said:


> Ok, we had our first game session after the errata and... the new Magic Missile sucks. Although I was always auto-hitting, it felt like I wasn't doing anything. I think it was semi-frustrating for the GM too because even though we were making fun about taking a nap inbetween rounds, I was always hitting and since the beastie I was attacking hovered at range 20, after Force Orb, that was... well, that was it for my attack powers at that range.
> 
> Completely unfun.



We had a different experience; with the elite ghoul bride dropped all the way down to 1 hp (_almost_ dead!) and fleeing into tunnels, the wizard was up next. He used an action point to drop into the narrow ghoul burrows, a minor to create light, a move to crawl around the corner of the tunnel, and magic missile to blow apart the ghoul bride's spine. They really, really wanted something that wasn't going to miss. The whole group cheered.

Like anything, I think the spell is situational in its usefulness. Our wizard has a master's wand of magic missiles as well, so every use is a free unavoidable push.


----------



## Maximilia (Jul 12, 2010)

keterys said:


> That wasn't necessarily the spell sucking (though it might also have been), but it was definitely the monster and/or DM sucking.




I think I didn't express myself clearly--it was completely unfun because it felt like I was doing _nothing_. There was no roll, no anticipation of maybe missing, and no challenge, thus... unfun. I LIKE difficult games, and when things go wrong. Some of the best times in games are when things go completely wrong and to me, there's just no chance of that with MM. Now, a situation of the epic proportion described directly above would have been way more epic had the wizard rolled and then hit instead of auto-hitting (but it sounded pretty epic anyway, good story, hehe). 

I hate to admit it, but when things look the most desperate, I have the most fun because if we pull it off (without the GM fudging of course, I frown upon that but understand the necessity of it at times) then I feel like we pulled it together. For example... one of the fights we had was in a semi-nil magic area--anything with the keywords arcane or holy had a 50% chance of not firing at all. We ended up running away, but to me it really underscored what a one-trick pony I kinda was since all my powers had the arcane keyword. I learned something about my character (and am moving to compensate for that) and had fun at the same time.

>.>

I realize though that not many may like that level of difficulty.


----------



## keterys (Jul 12, 2010)

I've done an 18 round plinking away with magic missile combat. It wasn't noticeably more exciting cause I got to roll.

It was just a boring combat, where the DM could have made the combat more interesting to start, and certainly could have done so in play.


----------



## Mentat55 (Jul 12, 2010)

Yeah, if you are basically forced to use at-will after at-will, especially because of something like range, then something is amiss.


----------



## DracoSuave (Jul 12, 2010)

Mentat55 said:


> Yeah, if you are basically forced to use at-will after at-will, especially because of something like range, then something is amiss.




Or you're low level.

I heard that happens in some games.


----------



## Victim (Jul 12, 2010)

Maximilia said:


> I think I didn't express myself clearly--it was completely unfun because it felt like I was doing _nothing_. There was no roll, no anticipation of maybe missing, and no challenge, thus... unfun. I LIKE difficult games, and when things go wrong. Some of the best times in games are when things go completely wrong and to me, there's just no chance of that with MM. Now, a situation of the epic proportion described directly above would have been way more epic had the wizard rolled and then hit instead of auto-hitting (but it sounded pretty epic anyway, good story, hehe).
> 
> 
> I realize though that not many may like that level of difficulty.




Having a reliable default power doesn't really change the fact that if you can't swing a more effective power than your default, things are kind of bad.  If things are actually challenging, then autohitting for weak damage isn't going to turn things around.  It's just going to let you say "Look! I'm helping!" while things fall apart.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jul 12, 2010)

If the combat was terrible for the wizard because they auto-hit with MM for 18 rounds, how must it have been for the other party members who had nothing whatsoever they could do for those same 18 rounds. 

Sorry, but terrible encounter design or a very unusual encounter does not prove much to me.


----------



## Nifft (Jul 12, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> Or you're low level.
> 
> I heard that happens in some games.



 Being low-level only happens at low levels, so we can safely disregard it.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Maximilia (Jul 13, 2010)

Dice4Hire said:


> If the combat was terrible for the wizard because they auto-hit with MM for 18 rounds, how must it have been for the other party members who had nothing whatsoever they could do for those same 18 rounds.
> 
> Sorry, but terrible encounter design or a very unusual encounter does not prove much to me.




There was another creature within melee that the others were dealing with. Also, I did have Force Orb (and hit with it, I have a +10 mod to hit and hitting most things isn't a problem unless the dice hate me that day), but that was my only other range 20 power. Usually, I have Fireball memorized, but that day I was going to try another power instead and thus didn't. It wasn't necessarily the encounter make up--I just listed the relevant details to the discussion.


----------

