So, something I was NOT expecting, in Martial Power two, the ampersand previewed 'martial practices', which seems to be the equivelent of mundane rituals. Sounds like it's WoTC's answer to all those people who missed out on those "Craft: Basketweave" and "Preform: kill time in the tavern".....
But seriously....Hmmm, intersting maybe?
They previewed rituals for making disguises, forgieries, and speaking in sign. also hinted at improved adventuring, or even making magic weapons -- most cost gold, time like a ritual to both learn and cast, and ..healing surges while cast.
I think this might be the perverbial catch all for other skills taken out of 3.5
My only issue is the requirement for Martial classes only. I can see a few of these rituals practices being generic enough to be useful for several classes; specifically the disguise one from the article.
The other question I have is whether you can apply the effect of one of these practices to someone else, i.e. can the rogue use the disguise practice to disguise the bard?
My only issue is the requirement for Martial classes only. I can see a few of these rituals practices being generic enough to be useful for several classes; specifically the disguise one from the article.
The other question I have is whether you can apply the effect of one of these practices to someone else, i.e. can the rogue use the disguise practice to disguise the bard?
As per the reading I saw, it did say "you or one creature" (not sure the ability to post the article per batum). I suppose having the martial as a prerequisite is about the same though as ritual caster requiring either Arcana or Religion though. (which I tend to houserule for primal classes looking for nature rituals only).
Yeah, I was kind of psyched when I saw the Martial Practices in Ampersand. It is kind of odd that the Practiced Study ritual needs a martial class though. I can see a Bard using the Alter Ego practice for instance, and if there are practices for creating objects, mundane or otherwise, I can see an Artificer using them.
I suppose they could multiclass into a martial class, but that seems like a steep cost for the feat, and might not fit character concept.
I like the idea, but yeah...not limiting these to martial classes would be the way to go. Most seem applicable to multiple power source.
Yeah, I was kind of psyched when I saw the Martial Practices in Ampersand. It is kind of odd that the Practiced Study ritual needs a martial class though. I can see a Bard using the Alter Ego practice for instance, and if there are practices for creating objects, mundane or otherwise, I can see an Artificer using them.
I think the idea is that bards and artificers already have access to rituals for the purposes of producing such effects. Martial practices seems to be options to allow martial characters to gain access to ritual like abilities while retaining a distinctly non-magical flavor.
I was expecting more combat oriented material and was pretty surprised at what they showed us.
Of course Primal Power and Arcane/Divine Power 2 may have something similar in them.
Bel
I agree that these mundane abilities should apply to classes like Barbarian and Bard, who clearly straddle the magical and non-magical border.
However, there is one solution for those of us who don't like the Martial requirement: Multi-Classing. If you think you're the type of Bard that learns thiefy tricks, then you can just anti up and multi-class into Rogue to prove it.
I'm a bit unhappy with the Martial Practices. It's one more thing that makes Wizards less "special." The argument is always that Wizards are defined by their powers, and Rituals are an extension of previous edition spells, yet now Fighters can "cast" them.
It's a great addition to martial classes, but just one more of the Wizard's toes got stepped on.
(And before we rehash this old argument, I'm not someone looking for the "I cast critical win" Wizards of previous editions.)
I'm a bit unhappy with the Martial Practices. It's one more thing that makes Wizards less "special." The argument is always that Wizards are defined by their powers, and Rituals are an extension of previous edition spells, yet now Fighters can "cast" them.
Fighters could pick up the Ritual Caster feat and use rituals sence the launch of 4th.
I'm a bit unhappy with the Martial Practices. It's one more thing that makes Wizards less "special." The argument is always that Wizards are defined by their powers, and Rituals are an extension of previous edition spells, yet now Fighters can "cast" them.
Fighters could pick up the Ritual Caster feat and use rituals sence the launch of 4th.
Yeah, I'm well aware of that, but how many actually did?
I'm pretty sure the number of fighters taking this will jump exponentially over the number who took Ritual Caster.
I'd like to see a Feat that allowed non-martial classes to obtain these Martial Practices, similar to the Ritual Casting Feat. That's all I'd care for.
I'm a bit unhappy with the Martial Practices. It's one more thing that makes Wizards less "special." The argument is always that Wizards are defined by their powers, and Rituals are an extension of previous edition spells, yet now Fighters can "cast" them.
It's a great addition to martial classes, but just one more of the Wizard's toes got stepped on
That may be somewhat true, but the power level between the two will be immensly different. One moves mountains, the other improves the self a bit.
Fighters could pick up the Ritual Caster feat and use rituals sence the launch of 4th.
Yeah, by why bother with that when you can just buy a scroll and use it?
Yeah, by why bother with that when you can just buy a scroll and use it?
That makes me wonder if there will be a scroll version of Marttial Practices.
to me this looks like a suggestion box of how to play out innovative ideas that are not simple attacks. at my table, i've got pretty innovative players that don't find a personal gap in using the skills, abilities, and roleplaying to a defenitive edge against competition and enemies. honestly, they surprise and challenge me with their ideas of how to engage a problem i place in the story arc.
but, i've been at the table with players that simply don't get creative, they follow the rules and don't try reckless and wild actions, they don't use skills during roleplay encounters, they only use attacks during combat encounters, and most importantly, they question the actions of more innovative players. so, looking over the martial practices concept and the skill powers that was previewed a short time ago, this seems directed at the players that aren't pushing the edges of the rubber band that is the rules.
I'd like to see a Feat that allowed non-martial classes to obtain these Martial Practices, similar to the Ritual Casting Feat. That's all I'd care for.
That would bring it more in line with being "fair" I think. If a Fighter can steal a Wizard's ability, a Wizard should be able to steal a Fighter's.
I'm a bit disappointed by Martial Practices in that it shows that R&D realizes where they went wrong with Rituals, but is going to come up with a second system rather than fixing the first one.
If the PH were released today, I would be willing to bet that (a) a significant number of rituals would have class or power source prerequisites, (b) most (if not all) ritual casting classes would have one or more rituals they could cast for free, and (c) the component costs for most rituals would be renewable daily resources (healing surges, daily powers, daily magic item uses, action points).
Unfortunately, WOTC's philosophy appears to be to look forward, not back, so we end up with PH2 classes with free rituals (but not the wizard), PH2 and AP rituals only usable by certain classes (though they're certainly nowhere near as class-defining as something like Raise Dead) and with most rituals never being used because it's not worth giving up a nonrenewable resource like gold for a transitory benefit.
I'm glad that R&D is paying attention and realizing what didn't work. I do wish, however, that they'd spend the time to actually go back and fix things, rather than writing them off and using that knowledge on the next project.
Somehow, I see "grind black powder" to be a martial practice...
I'm a bit disappointed by Martial Practices in that it shows that R&D realizes where they went wrong with Rituals, but is going to come up with a second system rather than fixing the first one.
If the PH were released today, I would be willing to bet that (a) a significant number of rituals would have class or power source prerequisites, (b) most (if not all) ritual casting classes would have one or more rituals they could cast for free, and (c) the component costs for most rituals would be renewable daily resources (healing surges, daily powers, daily magic item uses, action points).
Unfortunately, WOTC's philosophy appears to be to look forward, not back, so we end up with PH2 classes with free rituals (but not the wizard), PH2 and AP rituals only usable by certain classes (though they're certainly nowhere near as class-defining as something like Raise Dead) and with most rituals never being used because it's not worth giving up a nonrenewable resource like gold for a transitory benefit.
I'm glad that R&D is paying attention and realizing what didn't work. I do wish, however, that they'd spend the time to actually go back and fix things, rather than writing them off and using that knowledge on the next project.
Kind of like how Clerics should be able to cast the Gentle Repose Ritual for free once per day in a similar manner to the PHB2 classes.
All they'd really need for those two though would be an addition to the erratta. In any event, I'm going to run it that way already. Not sure what Wizards might get to cast for free though. I mean, they get free rituals as they level up, something no other class does. Maybe that would be the offset; they don't get a "cast for free" one, but they do get new ones evey 5-ish levels.
I really don't like these practices. They all seem extremely silly and unnecessary. Several of them step on the toes of what skills are already supposed to do.
Do we really need a ritual for pantomiming or disguising someone? Seriously?
Rangers and warlords are better at putting on make-up than bards now? Really? And pantomime? How? Not only do these skills not seem at all martial (of or relating to war, warriors, the military, etc.), but how are they exclusively martial? Is martial the 4e word for nonmagical, because that's not what that word means.
Yeah, I'm not really sure what to think about this whole thing. Maybe after I see the final version in MP2. In the end, I'll either be fine with it, ignore it, or cannibalize it.
Rangers and warlords are better at putting on make-up than bards now? Really? And pantomime? How? Not only do these skills not seem at all martial (of or relating to war, warriors, the military, etc.), but how are they exclusively martial? Is martial the 4e word for nonmagical, because that's not what that word means.
Like many terms D&D has its own defintion.
See page 54 of the Player's Handbook.
Quote from the compendium about Martial powers:
Martial powers are not magic in the traditional sense, although some martial powers stand well beyond the capabilities of ordinary mortals. Martial characters use their own strength and willpower to vanquish their enemies. Training and dedication replace arcane formulas and prayers to grant fighters, rangers, rogues, and warlords, among others, their power.
I don't know but that seems pretty militaristic to me. Now it seems that the practices previewed pretty much favored the rogue, but as was suggested, this steps on the feet of the Thievery skill to begin with. Why do I need to go through all that rigamarole when a simple skill check would suffice?
I really don't like these practices. They all seem extremely silly and unnecessary. Several of them step on the toes of what skills are already supposed to do.Do we really need a ritual for pantomiming or disguising someone? Seriously?
Agreed. Needless things like this are just one more example of why I'm glad I gave up running or playing 4e; it no longer resembles the game that I grew up with or one that fits my playing style. I still hold out against hope that Wizards will bring back some of the things I miss with 5e, but I that remains to be seen.
I really don't like these practices. They all seem extremely silly and unnecessary. Several of them step on the toes of what skills are already supposed to do.Do we really need a ritual for pantomiming or disguising someone? Seriously?
Agreed. Needless things like this are just one more example of why I'm glad I gave up running or playing 4e; it no longer resembles the game that I grew up with or one that fits my playing style. I still hold out against hope that Wizards will bring back some of the things I miss with 5e, but I that remains to be seen.
Well, the makers of this edition seem to be the ones that loved 2nd edition.
So if 4th lives long enough, then perhaps 5th ed will be made by those who loved 3rd edition.
I can understand why this is martial only. Since martials are for the most part your organized or professionally trained fighting style.
The practices IMO seem like doing Yoga or going to the gym allows you to focus. So you spend gold and time and get a short duration buff. Be it a plus on Initative and the like.
I don't really seeing something like this for the Arcane and Divine I do but you can just expand the religion fanatism more.
Primal people could get theirs in PP2. Much like the Native American Indians draw power from Spirits. The Barbarian in 3.5 was able to do the like if he took an animal totem.
It just seems more of a fleecing of the parties gold and time. To give those that want to ROLEplay something to do when the others all want to ROLLplay.
While the execution seems a little weird, im glad they are doing something to give the martial classes unique out-of-combat stuff. If i were the one designing 4e, i would have given every class a set of "rituals" that fit the theme of their power source, as well as a set of more generic powersource specific "rituals". It would be nice if every class had easy access to a robust set of out of combat tricks.
Well, the makers of this edition seem to be the ones that loved 2nd edition.
So if 4th lives long enough, then perhaps 5th ed will be made by those who loved 3rd edition.
Hopefully not, as I didn't really like the needlessly complex rules of third edition or the lengthly combats. Fourth is better in those regards, but combat speed could still be improved (i.e.-shortened).
While the execution seems a little weird, im glad they are doing something to give the martial classes unique out-of-combat stuff. If i were the one designing 4e, i would have given every class a set of "rituals" that fit the theme of their power source, as well as a set of more generic powersource specific "rituals". It would be nice if every class had easy access to a robust set of out of combat tricks.
Aren't these already covered by the existing skills checks/challenges, roleplaying, and imagination? Seems redudant to reinvent the wheel.
Agreed. Needless things like this are just one more example of why I'm glad I gave up running or playing 4e; it no longer resembles the game that I grew up with or one that fits my playing style. I still hold out against hope that Wizards will bring back some of the things I miss with 5e, but I that remains to be seen.
I get the feeling that some people wouldn't be happy with any edition that wasn't just a reprint with a new cover slapped on. Though they would probably complain about the cover too.
Agreed. Needless things like this are just one more example of why I'm glad I gave up running or playing 4e; it no longer resembles the game that I grew up with or one that fits my playing style. I still hold out against hope that Wizards will bring back some of the things I miss with 5e, but I that remains to be seen.I get the feeling that some people wouldn't be happy with any edition that wasn't just a reprint with a new cover slapped on. Though they would probably complain about the cover too.
They would complain about the ink used to print.
I get the feeling that some people wouldn't be happy with any edition that wasn't just a reprint with a new cover slapped on. Though they would probably complain about the cover too.
Dear god, this.
Aren't these already covered by the existing skills checks/challenges, roleplaying, and imagination? Seems redudant to reinvent the wheel.
Skill challenges simply can't cover 90+% of the rituals. This is why we have rituals in the first place.
What would have been nice is giving every class a suite of exclusive out of combat abilities instead of just focusing on giving a class a huge set of exclusive combat powers. It would be nice if a rogue got as many choices of cool out-of-combat rogue stuff to do instead of just choosing ways to deal damage every level. It would be nice if wizards got an exclusive suite of utility rituals, while sorcerors got another set and clerics got another. It would be nice if fighters actually had some cool out-of-combat stuff to do that every other class with Athletics couldn't do at least as well.
That would be fun. Though a 500 page phb doesn't sound too appealing.
Well, either they're going to take off that "Any martial class" crock, or I'll just houserule it away. Just like the Bard class (no reason why those should be Bard only if Class =/= Concept).
I want to get this straight so we can all be on the same page here... a certain segment of the customer base complains that there aren't enough "out of combat options". Wizards concedes and creates and previews specifically non combat options for an upcoming splat book. Not only that, but it seems they were listening to those who claimed rituals were "too expensive". Now all hell has broken loose. It turns out, the side that wanted more "out of combat" options was really just looking for something to complain about and wouldn't be happy with anything less than wizards saying: "You know what, lets just go back to 3rd Edition guys!"
I like Martial Practices fine. The examples given weren't overwhelming but with a few (very notable) exceptions I find the previews in Ampersand to be pretty unexciting generally. That doesn't mean the idea is bad. It just means they previewed some stuff that wasn't exciting.
I really like the idea of these things costing healing surges though. It's an interesting mechanic that creates choices without costing hard earned gold.
I suppose it is entirely possible that the people complaining about martial practices aren't the same people that were complaining about wanting more out of combat options. It is also possible that anyone who did want more out of combat options isn't satisfied with the way they're implemented, like having to spend time and money every time you want to deliver a message with sign language, and only being able to do so if you're not magical in any way.
Not sure what Wizards might get to cast for free though. I mean, they get free rituals as they level up, something no other class does. Maybe that would be the offset; they don't get a "cast for free" one, but they do get new ones evey 5-ish levels.
Wizards can cast their cantrips all day long for free, whereas the "free-ritual" classes can only do their trick once per day. Also, like you said, they're the only class (I think) that gets rituals for free. Now what I think would be neat is another set of cantrips that wizards can learn or retrain.
Back on topic, I can't believe how many seem offended by this concept. It's just an option, you're free to use it or not as you see fit.
As for martial practices, they seem just fine. I don't envision any of my characters picking one up (maybe once I see a few more ... ). I agree that "martial" is kind of a silly prereq, and maybe a "martial ritual caster" feat is the way to go, or maybe not. Who knows? The idea, at least, is intruiging.
I want to get this straight so we can all be on the same page here... a certain segment of the customer base complains that there aren't enough "out of combat options". Wizards concedes and creates and previews specifically non combat options for an upcoming splat book. Not only that, but it seems they were listening to those who claimed rituals were "too expensive". Now all hell has broken loose. It turns out, the side that wanted more "out of combat" options was really just looking for something to complain about and wouldn't be happy with anything less than wizards saying: "You know what, lets just go back to 3rd Edition guys!"
Right, because people should just shut up and be happy with whatever WotC desides to graciously provide from on high.
I didn't say you had to like them. You're free to ignore the splat. Oh I forgot. Anybody who disagrees with you is some sort of die hard WoTC fanboy, right?
Like I said, I think the mechanic is fine even if the examples were underwhelming. I'm sorry I actually kind of liked it.
And of course, you're free to dislike the implementation. I could care less about what some dude on the internet thinks. I'm just making observations. They might be wrong.
I didn't say you had to like them. You're free to ignore the splat. Oh I forgot. Anybody who disagrees with you is some sort of die hard WoTC fanboy, right?
So people are calling you a "die hard WotC fanboy" and claiming "hey, lets go back to 3rd edition"? Are you just making things up to argue against here or are you replying to deleted posts that i cant see?
And of course, you're free to dislike the implementation. I could care less about what some dude on the internet thinks. I'm just making observations. They might be wrong.
Im free to dislike the implemenation, but apparently according to you i would just being "looking for something to complain about."
So people are calling you a "die hard WotC fanboy" and claiming "hey, lets go back to 3rd edition"? Are you just making things up to argue against here or are you replying to deleted posts that i cant see?
Right, because people should just shut up and be happy with whatever WotC desides to graciously provide from on high.
Sorry, guess I misunderstood you. The internet is a strange place where it's not always easy to understand subtlety. I apologize.
Im free to dislike the implemenation, but apparently according to you i would just being "looking for something to complain about."
It could be that I'm tired of going to a site to discuss a game I love playing and seeing thread after thread of people complaining. I didn't mean to put words into anybody's mouth but I honestly don't think we need to love every aspect of the game. There's plenty I don't like about 4e. You know what I do? Ignore it. I guess I just expect everyone else to do the same. But I understand that I'm not everyone else so I apologize.
Have a nice day. 
Well, im glad we could resolve this dispute of ours peaceably here. Sorry if i came off a little defensive. lol
I do like the concept of giving Martial characters the equivalent of rituals: ive been telling my group that they should have done this from the start. Im just a little boggled as to what the developers are thinking with the specifics and i can see where some of the detractors in the thread are coming from.
While i like 4E for the most part, one policy with this edition that im not digging is the patching of perceived problems through adding more "core" rules instead of either updating old material or providing alternate rule sets (like "rituals" for every class). This is another case where they seem to be trying to balance things out and end up including some wonky, hamfisted details for the sake balance (martial characters are the only ones who can put on make-up!).
I suppose it is entirely possible that the people complaining about martial practices aren't the same people that were complaining about wanting more out of combat options. It is also possible that anyone who did want more out of combat options isn't satisfied with the way they're implemented, like having to spend time and money every time you want to deliver a message with sign language, and only being able to do so if you're not magical in any way.
The only part I'm complaining about. They made rituals (except for Bard rituals, which I just houserule anyway) available to anyone with Ritual Caster for a reason; specifically, to get away from the "Fighters can't have nice things" mentality. Going too far the other way is where they're tripping themselves up here.
While i like 4E for the most part, one policy with this edition that im not digging is the patching of perceived problems through adding more "core" rules instead of either updating old material or providing alternate rule sets (like "rituals" for every class). This is another case where they seem to be trying to balance things out and end up including some wonky, hamfisted details for the sake balance (martial characters are the only ones who can put on make-up!).
Any one can "put on make up!" Disguising ones self is a basic function of the bluff skill.
What martial practices represent is a degree of skill mastery that goes beyond even typical heroic ability. This is entirely in keeping with the basic precept of the martial power source as the power source which instead of relying on magic takes normal mundane abilities and pumps them up to 11.
Could it make sense for a bard to be a master of disguise, sure, but being a ritual caster by default they have access to magical means of actually transforming their physical appearance, so they never have to learn to do it "the hard way". Further more nothing stops any character from multiclassing into fighter, ranger, rogue, or warlord in order to gain the ability to preform these MUNDANE rituals. Which is balanced by the fact that no martial class has Arcana or Religion on there class skill list (thus they must spend either a feat or a background in order to gain the skill training needed to meet the requirements of to become a ritual caster).
What martial practices represent is a degree of skill mastery that goes beyond even typical heroic ability. This is entirely in keeping with the basic precept of the martial power source as the power source which instead of relying on magic takes normal mundane abilities and pumps them up to 11.
The rogue can use Thievery to forge documents, but the artificer who has Thievery and can write scrolls cant do it...but then gets the option if he multiclasses fighter? I understand what they are trying to do from a balance standpoint but it just seems contrived.
Further more nothing stops any character from multiclassing into fighter, ranger, rogue, or warlord in order to gain the ability to preform these MUNDANE rituals. Which is balanced by the fact that no martial class has Arcana or Religion on there class skill list (thus they must spend either a feat or a background in order to gain the skill training needed to meet the requirements of to become a ritual caster).
Requiring a multiclass feat is a much more sever cost of entry than requiring training in a skill. A fighter can take an approriate Background and get training in Acrana for free while a Wizard has to blow his multiclass capability and spend a feat. Whats good for the goose is rather harsh on the gander.
I was under the impression that these gave bonuses to checks. So an Artificer with thievery could still forge a document but he wouldn't get a bonus to the bluff check like a rogue with the proper martial practice. Maybe I need to reread these.
The rogue can use Thievery to forge documents, but the artificer who has Thievery and can write scrolls cant do it...but then gets the option if he multiclasses fighter? I understand what they are trying to do from a balance standpoint but it just seems contrived.
Again though, the artificer is a natural ritual caster so probably has access to magical means of creating forged documentation. Anyway, to paraphrase myself, any one can forge documents, it's a basic function of a standard skill check. A character with a corresponding martial practice merely knows how to do it to a degree that seems magical without actually being magical. Taking seemingly mundane abilities an dialing them up to 11 has been the unique domain of the martial power source since the dawn of 4e. This "mundane magic" is the only thing that allows these otherwise seemingly ordinary characters to compete on the same heroic playing field as reality warping wizards and god powered clerics.
Sure it might seem odd that an artificer gains the ability to excel at mundane document forgery by multi-classing fighter, but that's more a matter of character/mechanical dissonance. it can be an all too common problem for any character that is designed purely around mechanical abilities and requirements without any regard to story based implications. Marital practices are likely primarily meant to be in flavor with the martial classes that share the appropriate skill. The only way to strictly enforce this though would be to actually put class restrictions on the individual practices, beyond the already present trained skill requirement.
So it's okay to dial mundane abilities up to 11 for martial characters, but they can also cast rituals, whereas a wizard can't forge a document without using a few rose petals and some bat dung?
That's where my problem lies. I don't have an issue with expanding the game. More options is a good thing. However, when you're putting in more options that are closed off to all but a select few, you have to expect people to be unhappy that they lost out.
Someone mentioned the game going in the opposite direction from "fighters can't have nice things" and I completely agree.
That was me and I'll explain further.
Fighter (any Martial class, really): In order to get access to Rituals, Alchemical Items, and Martial Practices, he must spend a feat for each, but his MC feat is still free and open for use. He can MC into another Martial class, or into a non-Martial class, or never MC at all.
Any non-Martial class: May have the slight advantage of starting off with Ritual Caster (which can be traded in for the Alchemy feat from the AV) depending on what class you're talking about, but otherwise still has to spend a feat just like before. Except he has to MC (or Hybrid) to get the Martial Practices.
Let's not get into Reverse Discrimination here, let's not just waver to "Wizards don't get nice things" until the next edition where we go back and the edition after than where we go forth (and on and on and on), let's strike a balance and end the disparity here and now.
Someone mentioned the game going in the opposite direction from "fighters can't have nice things" and I completely agree.
No kidding! I made a thread in the DDI General forum regarding fighter support. WotC has been putting out tons of options for fighters, causing them to literally have twice as many powers as some classes and many times as many feats as others.
So it's okay to dial mundane abilities up to 11 for martial characters, but they can also cast rituals, whereas a wizard can't forge a document without using a few rose petals and some bat dung?That's where my problem lies. I don't have an issue with expanding the game. More options is a good thing. However, when you're putting in more options that are closed off to all but a select few, you have to expect people to be unhappy that they lost out.
Again, it's not that the wizard couldn't learn how to dial it up to 11, but it's not his field of specialty and from his perspective he has easier ways to achieve the same goal (few rose petals and some bat dung).
It's not about closing off options, it's about giving each power source it's own unique shtick.
Let's not get into Reverse Discrimination here, let's not just waver to "Wizards don't get nice things" until the next edition where we go back and the edition after than where we go forth (and on and on and on), let's strike a balance and end the disparity here and now.
It's not about reverse discrimination. Martial practices are a character option being presented in MARTIAL POWER 2. The power books have been distinctly about supporting their own power source, with little or no support for anyone else. Complaining that only martial classes get these practices is like complaining that only divine classes get domains. Give it time, the wizard will likely get his fair share of "nice things" come Arcane Power 2.
That was me and I'll explain further.
Fighter (any Martial class, really): In order to get access to Rituals, Alchemical Items, and Martial Practices, he must spend a feat for each, but his MC feat is still free and open for use. He can MC into another Martial class, or into a non-Martial class, or never MC at all.
Any non-Martial class: May have the slight advantage of starting off with Ritual Caster (which can be traded in for the Alchemy feat from the AV) depending on what class you're talking about, but otherwise still has to spend a feat just like before. Except he has to MC (or Hybrid) to get the Martial Practices.
Let's not get into Reverse Discrimination here, let's not just waver to "Wizards don't get nice things" until the next edition where we go back and the edition after than where we go forth (and on and on and on), let's strike a balance and end the disparity here and now.
I'm completely with you on this one.
Someone mentioned the game going in the opposite direction from "fighters can't have nice things" and I completely agree.No kidding! I made a thread in the DDI General forum regarding fighter support. WotC has been putting out tons of options for fighters, causing them to literally have twice as many powers as some classes and many times as many feats as others.
Yeah, I've read that thread. I don't remember if I've responded or not, but I completely agree with the point of that too. Fighters are getting a lot of love in this edition. I don't have a problem with that, per se, but balance it out. Give everyone a lot of love. Especially if you're going to pump out half a dozen classes every year.
So it's okay to dial mundane abilities up to 11 for martial characters, but they can also cast rituals, whereas a wizard can't forge a document without using a few rose petals and some bat dung?That's where my problem lies. I don't have an issue with expanding the game. More options is a good thing. However, when you're putting in more options that are closed off to all but a select few, you have to expect people to be unhappy that they lost out.
Again, it's not that the wizard couldn't learn how to dial it up to 11, but it's not his field of specialty and from his perspective he has easier ways to achieve the same goal (few rose petals and some bat dung).It's not about closing off options, it's about giving each power source it's own unique shtick.
Let's not get into Reverse Discrimination here, let's not just waver to "Wizards don't get nice things" until the next edition where we go back and the edition after than where we go forth (and on and on and on), let's strike a balance and end the disparity here and now.
It's not about reverse discrimination. Martial practices are a character option being presented in MARTIAL POWER 2. The power books have been distinctly about supporting their own power source, with little or no support for anyone else. Complaining that only martial classes get these practices is like complaining that only divine classes get domains. Give it time, the wizard will likely get his fair share of "nice things" come Arcane Power 2.
I guess it depends on your definition of "easier." Personally, my wizard (who never gets near melee combat) would rather give up a healing surge or two to forge a document rather than a week's meals' worth of gold in components.
And again, the fighter can cast rituals. A wizard cannot use a martial practice. So one of them gets a unique schtick, but one doesn't.
And again, the fighter can cast rituals. A wizard cannot use a martial practice. So one of them gets a unique schtick, but one doesn't.
One gets a unique shtick in their second power book. Wait until Arcane Power 2 comes out and see what unique shtick wizards get then.