Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 meretri Dec 01, 2008 18:41:48	The target is "Every creature in burst". Every creature in burst includes allies, does it not? If this is the case, then unless the druid is all by his lonesome, he will hit his friends with this attack and they would be forced to attack each other or take psychic damage.
#2 Mock Dec 01, 2008 18:46:36	Yeah, that's how it would work.
#3 kouk Dec 01, 2008 18:46:59	It may very well be an oversight, but at the same time a Wizard's Scorching Burst makes no distinctions between friend or foe -- it just scorches them all. The user of the power has to take some care.
#4 Haldrik Dec 01, 2008 23:05:17	Requiring players to attack other players is a mistake and needs errata. Good catch.
#5 Haldrik Dec 02, 2008 3:22:43
#6 Cailte Dec 02, 2008 5:40:46	Call of the Beast is a ranged attack and should be used as such. The problem isn't the fact it affects your friends its the fact it realistically does absolutely nothing to enemies. "Hey you, go beat on my buddy there" "Sure thing druid" It seems to be trying to make the Defender be the "target of choice" but in reality it will be a horribly situational power not worth taking most of the time.
#7 Nived Dec 02, 2008 5:57:14	Nothing requires you to target allies. Aim the burst off to one side of avoid allies. You know like wizard's to with Scorching Burst. Its rare to have an At Will AoE, having to aim it carefully is a small price to pay for it.
#8 gmtroll Dec 02, 2008 6:02:13	The target is "Every creature in burst". Every creature in burst includes allies, does it not? This is how it would work. An as Kouk points out... It may very well be an oversight, but at the same time a Wizard's Scorching Burst makes no distinctions between friend or foe -- it just scorches them all. The user of the power has to take some care. ...other powers work this way also. I would have not issue with this as a player or DM, it encourages group tactics. I think it would be very difficult to single out which creatures to affect and which not to affect with a burst of psychic energy, particularly at lower levels. If this is the case, then unless the druid is all by his lonesome, he will hit his friends with this attack and they would be forced to attack each other or take psychic damage. The power is an area attack not a close attack (PHB p271), it has a range or 10 and a burst of 1. So the druid does not need to be "all by his lonesome" and given that you can chose the origin square, within the range limit, you have the flexibility to apply this power to maximum effect. And it only last until the end of your next turn. Sometimes sacrifices need to be made to achieve your goals. Your fellow players might not be impressed to start with if you affect or harm them with a power but they may forgive you if the end result if favourable. And don't forget that combined with other (players) powers it may be possible for allies caught in the burst avoid or reduce the outcome of an affect.
#9 Haldrik Dec 02, 2008 6:12:44	Psychic attacks are mental. The attacker inherently chooses who to influence. Enemies. Flavorwise, it disresembles a big explosion.
#10 Haldrik Dec 02, 2008 6:14:49	Just because someone official wrote it down, doesnt mean you have to like it. Its ok to improve it. Calite: Call of the Beast is a ranged attack and should be used as such. The problem isn't the fact it affects your friends its the fact it realistically does absolutely nothing to enemies. ... Horribly situational. Good point. It would make more sense if the Druid could simply choose an ally that all enemies need to attack.
#11 gmtroll Dec 02, 2008 6:40:57	Psychic attacks are mental. The attacker inherently chooses who to influence. Enemies. Flavorwise, it disresembles a big explosion. I agree psychic attacks are mental, but it still could be an indiscriminate explosion of psychic energy unleashed over an area rather than directly at a creature(s), granted you may not see it but you feel it's affects. Nothing wrong with changing mechanics and rules to fit your gaming group.
#12 rhianni32 Dec 02, 2008 16:13:16	I wish there were more AoE powers that affect enemies and players. Heaven forbid players have to use strategy when throwing around large explosions of magical power.
#13 Haldrik Dec 02, 2008 16:29:24	:D Heaven forbid, people play Wizards if they want flashy Area explosions.
#14 gambor Dec 02, 2008 16:40:30	Heaven forbid, people play Controllers if they want flashy Area explosions. Fixed that for you.
#15 Haldrik Dec 02, 2008 18:20:09	Classes that are in the same role should fulfill it in different ways. For example, the Berserker, Rogue, and Warlock are all Strikers but they fulfill it in different ways. Likewise, the Druid and the Wizard should fulfill the Controller role in different ways. A literal Fireball explosion is the Wizards thing. Its annoying when other classes step on the Wizards toes. Not-to-mention, there will also be an Elemental power source, IIRC. That will already have Fireball while dancing on the Wizards feet. Keep classes different.
#16 gambor Dec 02, 2008 18:49:06	Likewise, the Druid and the Wizard should fulfill the Controller role in different ways. A literal Fireball explosion is the Wizards thing. Its annoying when other classes step on the Wizards toes. I'm sorry, are you trying to claim that the power is to Wizard like because it needs to be used carefully? Remember, one of the goals of the controller role is AoE influence, as stated in the PHB. If this power were to only target enemies, it would be too powerful, in that it could be used centered on a defender to reinforce/mark onto them all foes adjacent to them as an at will. Considering that fighters, in particular excel at pulling foes in and keeping them close.
#17 Haldrik Dec 02, 2008 19:14:28	Gmb: If this power [Call of the Beast] were to only target enemies, it would be too powerful. As-is, Call of the Beast is worthless ('horribly situational'). Whoever the nearby allies are is too random. Too often the Druid couldnt even use it because a vulnerable ally was too close to the enemies, making the power useless. Moreover, it should just affect enemies. Forcing players to attack eachother strictly contradicts the 4e design goals of teamwork. As an At-Will, forcing players to attack eachother .all.the.time. will get really annoying, really fast. (Think Kender Halflings.) Finally, the Druid couldnt even use the power to help out an ally whos already being attacked by an enemy, because the power would effect the ally too. Which is a stupid design - and the opposite of 'control'. As is, the wording 'creature' instead of 'enemy' is an obvious error. In that it could be used centered on a defender to reinforce/mark onto them all foes adjacent to them as an at will. Considering that fighters, in particular excel at pulling foes in and keeping them close. As is, compelling enemies to attack the nearest ally is usually worthless. Choosing which ally they must attack is more helpful. It may need a balance-check but its probably ok. In any case, Call of the Beast only lasts for one round, and isnt indefinite like the Fighter class Mark. In order to sustain it, the Druid would have to keep attacking the same target only, which is probably balanced gamewise. It would be nice if the Druid had the option of also selecting oneself as the one the enemies must attack, since the Druid already does an awesome job at bodyguarding as a Defender.
#18 gambor Dec 02, 2008 19:35:07	As-is, Call of the Beast is worthless ('horribly situational'). Whoever the nearby allies are is too random. Too often the Druid couldnt even use it because a vulnerable ally was too close to the enemies, making the power useless. Defenders are melee characters, they will often be the closest ally if they are in the fight. In the D&D games I play, fights tend to fall into hot spots, and melee characters are usually closer to enemies than ranged ones. As far as the fact that it could target the ally as well, that is why it requires careful placement. I will guarantee you that the number of situations where you can't use it without also hitting your allies is pretty limited, even less so if they work with you. The only one that comes to mind would be of two allies have an enemy flanked who is the same size as them. In that case use a different power, otherwise you can almost certainly find a safe spot to throw it if you try a little bit. Which is a stupid design - and the opposite of 'control'. As is, the wording 'creature' instead of 'enemy' is an obvious error. And I firmly disagree with you, it is design that requires some thought to use, and much better than the alternative. In any case, Call of the Beast only lasts for one round, and isnt indefinite like the Fighter class Mark. In order to sustain it, the Druid would have to keep attacking the same target only, which is probably balanced gamewise. A fighter mark lasts for one turn, to sustain it, he has to keep attacking the marked target, the difference is that none of the fighter at-wills are AoE.
#19 koltec Dec 06, 2008 13:43:21	And here I was going to say that the Druid, as written, was overpowered as a controller, partially because of this at will. In nearly every fight, the defender runs forward on the first round & meets their soldiers. They form a front line. Everyone else stays in two breadbaskets, back from the lines. The exception is melee strikers & enemy lurkers. But every striker class so far (except barbarian) actually does better damage with ranged attacks than melee ones (rogues give superior crossbow some sweet lovin'; only very well optimized two-weapon rangers can beat an archer, and then only at high levels). Thus, your own strikers should tend to stay back (and safe). Thus, there's no one out there to be caught in your Call of the Beast. Drop it just behind their defensive line to affect their soldiers / minions and not your defender, or drop it into their breadbasket for some true meyhem. The only reason not to use this power every round is if circumstances make something else even better (or your defender gets too beat up from taking all ranged and melee attacks). Of course, the druid has a number of other nice little min/max loopholes, so there'll often be something even better to do.
#20 Cailte Dec 07, 2008 1:24:30	So you spend and action to say "hey monsters you do what you were going to do anyway" yeah that was a well spent action. I cannot imagine choosing this power, the other options simply offer greater control and do gaurenteed damage with a hit. Even in the at-will catergory. Now I do wish that Wizards were as good at Controlling as Druids are....
#21 Haldrik Dec 07, 2008 15:22:20	Cailte: So you spend and action to say "hey monsters you do what you were going to do anyway" yeah that was a well spent action. I agree. For Call of the Beast, the Area attack vs Will is great for an At-Will, but its so-called tactical 'control' seems ... inane.
#22 Aegeri Dec 07, 2008 22:44:05	This has to target allies or it is hideously, brutally overpowered. It is fine as it is written and needs no errata to fix what is a balanced ability. Also, I disagree a Druid can pull a defender very easily because a defender forces enemies to attack him and is very "sticky" (the druid does neither of these). The Druid is also the polar opposite to the Wizard already and doesn't need blatant overpowering of his abilities to make him different.
#23 Haldrik Dec 12, 2008 15:37:18	Thats only one way to fulfill the Defender role: "a defender forces enemies to attack him and is very sticky". There are many ways to prevent enemies from attacking the defendee. Just like there are very different ways of being a Striker - Skirmisher (Ranger), Lurker (Rogue), Brute (Barbarian) - there are also very different ways of being a Defender.
#24 Aegeri Dec 13, 2008 0:12:56	While you are correct, the Druid is a terrible defender. I had a game with a druid deliberately to try it out with some friends. They had no defender. I assure you, the idea that a Druid can pull off a defender fails miserably in practice and the said red stain that was such a druid (and the rogue) is indicative of that. They don't have the armor, defenses and abilities to be an effective defender. He's an excellent controller though.
#25 Haldrik Dec 13, 2008 21:27:34	Aeg: He's an excellent controller though The Humanoid form seems to be an excellent Controller. But the role(s) for the Beast form seem underdeveloped.
#26 Aegeri Dec 14, 2008 1:38:24	The Humanoid form seems to be an excellent Controller. But the role(s) for the Beast form seem underdeveloped. No, because the beast form is best for A) escaping and maneuvering or B) fighting in the front lines next to the parties defender and limiting enemies mobility. The beast form does not function as well at control because it has more defenses for a dedicated front line beast form (con is secondary stat, con bonus is added to AC) and so it should not be better than a wizard when it exchanges some control for front line melee ability. The Druid is a ranged controller who doesn't quite have the power of a wizard at range. He makes up for this by being able to function as a melee based controller, something that is almost impossible for the wizard to do. He does not need to be unequivocally "better than the wizard in every single way" to be an effective controller.
#27 llirreh Dec 17, 2008 12:12:56	So, I just reread this power and noticed the first line: The target can't gain combat advantage until the end of your next turn. That implies to me right off the bat that this is meant to target lurkers and skirmishers who would otherwise be trying to move past your front line defenders to hit the softer strikers, controllers, and leaders. This ability would certainly make then consider their options when used early and often...
#28 DSCrankshaw Dec 17, 2008 19:32:47	This has to target allies or it is hideously, brutally overpowered. It is fine as it is written and needs no errata to fix what is a balanced ability. I'm just not sure I see the point in a power that actually does more harm to allies than it does to enemies. I mean, I can see the point when it does the same amount, forcing you to be cautious, but as written, it would force your allies to attack each other or take damage, while merely forcing your enemies to attack their nearest opponent (what, in many cases, they'd do anyway). I agree that the real purpose of this is not to target those who are going toe-to-toe with the defender. It's what they would do anyway. It's to target skirmishers, lurkers, and probably most importantly, artillery, who would otherwise bypass the defender. It still wouldn't be my first choice as a power, though.
#29 Haldrik Dec 21, 2008 18:59:26	And what role is this? Aegeri: No, because the beast form is best for A) escaping and maneuvering or B) fighting in the front lines next to the parties defender and limiting enemies mobility. Regarding the Beast form: 'Escaping and maneuvering' seems more like a Skirmisher, but 'fighting in the front lines and limiting enemies mobility' seems more like a Defender. Its possible to have a high-mobility Defender, but in either case, whatever 'role' that the Beast form is supposed to fulfill seems unfocused and undeveloped.
#30 Aegeri Dec 21, 2008 20:59:56	but 'fighting in the front lines and limiting enemies mobility' seems more like a Defender From actual play experience, the Druid is a miserable defender and fails at stopping the creatures defenders are designed to stop. He cannot stop enemies marching past him (no marks ala Paladin, Fighter or Swordmage), he cannot stand toe to toe with soldiers (he doesn't have the HP or AC of a true defender) and he cannot make it dangerous for an enemy to attack an ally over him. He is a controller, he does what all controllers in 4E are designed to do: impede enemy movement and ability to function. He does this in melee and at range (better at range IMO). This does not make him a defender. If you really want to see how hilariously bad a druid as defender is, go try a party without a defender and the druid being the defender. When the druid fails and they have soldiers like ghouls running the entire party though, you'll see he's a controller: not a defender. He can help a defender, but he does not have the abilities, AC, defenses and HP to make him a defender (talking about beast form with guardian here btw).