Circle Magic - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Circle Magic

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 11:59:29 Did this make sense to anyone who has read it in the FRCG? The example used 1 mage and 6 assistants. It takes 1 minute for each additional assistant to complete the casting and adds d6 damage/helper and also boosts range and area parameters. Now, in the heat of battle how are you going to get 6 minutes of uninterrupted casting?

Just wondered..
#2
markustay63
Aug 19, 2008 14:04:01 They made it useless in combat?

Of course... thats weird, considering it adds damage; they should have just left it for rituals, I would think.

Or they could be prepared ahead of time (while the minions kept the party busy, the Wizards began their circle in the next room).
#3
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 14:22:39 Ya, the time thing just didn't make sense. But then the whole magic system seems crazy to me which is why I'm sticking with an adjusted 3.5.
#4
ChrisTheS
Aug 19, 2008 15:12:59
Now, in the heat of battle how are you going to get 6 minutes of uninterrupted casting?

That puts it about in line with medieval artillery, actually. It wasn't terribly useful as a tactical option because the barrels had to cool between each shot or they would crack, so you'd be lucky if you got off one shot in an hour (the biggest guns could only be fired once or twice a day). It's more useful for breaking entrenched formations or fortifications. Same principle applies here: you keep your war-casters behind the lines and then direct them at a hard target to soften it up before you send in the ground troops.
#5
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 16:08:57 IMO, with the fact that you need line of sight and the fact of movement rates you are not going to get minutes to cast spells. If anyone sees a group of spellcasters in a circle chanting they are going to double move their arses to get there and chop em up. The range of spells in 4.E is not what it used to be in 3.5.
#6
naex
Aug 19, 2008 16:19:30
IMO, with the fact that you need line of sight and the fact of movement rates you are not going to get minutes to cast spells. If anyone sees a group of spellcasters in a circle chanting they are going to double move their arses to get there and chop em up. The range of spells in 4.E is not what it used to be in 3.5.

"First wizard casts a spell, second wizard counters, 1st wizard counters the counter, and while the two are doing this, the armies come along and chop both wizards to pieces." (paraphrased from R.E. Feist)
#7
ChrisTheS
Aug 19, 2008 16:28:14
IMO, with the fact that you need line of sight and the fact of movement rates you are not going to get minutes to cast spells.

This is why you need good defensive tactics, and why spellcaster armies don't automatically roll right over everyone. Just as your real-world artillery needs its cavalry support (both for supply lines and defense) or it's useless, your wizard cabal needs a good infantry unit (preferably archers supplemented with halberdiers or spearmen, to be effective vs. both infantry and cavalry) standing between it and the enemy.
#8
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 19:17:13 In 4E wizards are supposed to roll over a lot of the enemies they face. They are called 1HP "minions". Also, in 4E the example they give has a max range of 26 squares. I do not care how many archers you have as support or minions blocking, there is no way you are going to hold them off 6 minutes let alone have anything to blast after the 6 minutes are up.
#9
naex
Aug 19, 2008 19:57:27
In 4E wizards are supposed to roll over a lot of the enemies they face. They are called 1HP "minions". Also, in 4E the example they give has a max range of 26 squares. I do not care how many archers you have as support or minions blocking, there is no way you are going to hold them off 6 minutes let alone have anything to blast after the 6 minutes are up.

Wall of force... (just have to have a few more wizards to keep casting it)
#10
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 20:12:42 Well, wall of force no longer exists as a spell to cast in 4E. But I agree something like that would be a good idea. I much prefer using adapted 3.5 magic because of its versatility.
#11
naex
Aug 19, 2008 20:41:29
Well, wall of force no longer exists as a spell to cast in 4E. But I agree something like that would be a good idea. I much prefer using adapted 3.5 magic because of its versatility.

Not yet it doesn't but we have a whole book of magic coming out, so...
#12
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 20:50:40 Very true and I am looking forward to it. What I see as the issue is the fact in 4E wizards only get a handful of spells to choose for their entire career. Szass Tam can not go into his study and relearn spells like he once did based on situational factors. What you see in his stat block is all he has. Once they have them, that's it. So having more spells (powers) is nice but a little pointless as you won't be able to learn 95% of them. Rituals are where I think the most expansion is going to happen.
#13
naex
Aug 19, 2008 21:00:32
Very true and I am looking forward to it. What I see as the issue is the fact in 4E wizards only get a handful of spells to choose for their entire career. Szass Tam can not go into his study and relearn spells like he once did based on situational factors. What you see in his stat block is all he has. Once they have them, that's it. So having more spells (powers) is nice but a little pointless as you won't be able to learn 95% of them. Rituals are where I think the most expansion is going to happen.

The Simbul used wishes to alter her spell selection in 3.5, so I don't see why one couldn't create a high level ritual to accomplish the same thing in 4e.
#14
serphet
Aug 19, 2008 21:14:10
Very true and I am looking forward to it. What I see as the issue is the fact in 4E wizards only get a handful of spells to choose for their entire career. Szass Tam can not go into his study and relearn spells like he once did based on situational factors. What you see in his stat block is all he has. Once they have them, that's it. So having more spells (powers) is nice but a little pointless as you won't be able to learn 95% of them. Rituals are where I think the most expansion is going to happen.

but they say in the FR:CG that the npcs are listed as a suggestion, they all have access to a much wider array of powers, this is obvious advice, but coming from them makes it sink in much better (see FR:CG "Nonplayer Characters", p. 86)
#15
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 21:14:47 Again, I think that is a creative idea and should definitely be used. However, keep in mind that under 4E wizards can not collect spells in their spellbooks beyond the few powers they know and you can not even have encounter powers in your spellbook and those would be the ones changed the most IMO.

Discussing this is great because it's highlighting all the reasons I adapted 3.5 magic to use in 4E.

Thanks for keeping the discussion going.
#16
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 21:16:56 Serphet,

The NPC wizards can certainly have different powers chosen instead of the ones listed in the stat blocks. However, the limit on number of powers will remain the same as their blocks. This is in tune with the new 4E magic system. For example, Szass Tam might have different daily powers than listed, but he can not have more in use than already shown.
#17
naex
Aug 19, 2008 21:22:35
Serphet,

The NPC wizards can certainly have different powers chosen instead of the ones listed in the stat blocks. However, the limit on number of powers will remain the same as their blocks. This is in tune with the new 4E magic system. For example, Szass Tam might have different daily powers than listed, but he can not have more in use than already shown.

Strictly speaking they can have as many powers as the DM wants them to have.
#18
karazhan
Aug 19, 2008 21:25:46 Well, as the DM has the final say in all aspects of the game that is certainly true. The players could also have more powers as well. However, in terms of game balance (which is what 4E is all about) there would need to be a balance integrated.
#19
serphet
Aug 19, 2008 21:31:27 No problem as long as he follows the NPC guidlines in the DMG.

You can give him tons of different powers as long as they are within the damage parameters and such, and he's not using encounter powers every turn.
#20
banpai
Aug 20, 2008 5:47:57 Well regarding Tam, he´s essentailly an NPC wizard with the Lich template and some extras so changing out his wizard powers, or even giving him some more minor ones should not be a problem (I actually see him more as a Legions Hold type of mage..)

Circle mage is now only narrowly usefull, but I can see a use for it in certan scenarios (1 high level mage and about a dozen low level ones can fireball a pretty large area without having to go close.
Someone will eventually have to write something that allows to use circle magic in rituals (summonings, mythals) that allows the crafting of great works of art - (currently only 4 characters can help with ritual checks..)

I guess magic could be described like this

In netherils days magic was like high speed internet connections - it was easy to do big things with little personal investment and time consumtpion.
After the Mystrils death it was scales back to ISDN and now we have 56k modems again - you can still get those big "downloads" but it takes longer and is harder these days.
#21
markustay63
Aug 20, 2008 11:13:24 Simple Solution:
For Szass Tam, you give him a ring. Then you give 12 of his most powerful Unerlings a Ring (yes, it does sound like LotR, and the number 13 is cliché, but roll with it), The Ring allows him to INSTANTLY establish a circle (like having a prepeared quickened spell in 3e) with any six of the others (he has two groups of six, in case one group gets squashed).

By using a magical item, you can have the ritual already in place, and the ring is just the triggering device. Assume Tam has performed the ritual originally when he bound these other wizards to him (all of which he keeps nearby).

The Circle shouldn't be for everyday encounters anyway, and if you use it as part of the BBG at adventure's end, it will both more meaningful and increase the challenge.

Also, you don't neccessarily have to limit this to Tam (he's the obvious choice), because if you do use this and the adventurers win, you just lost your head honcho (which makes it a campaign-ender).
#22
colman
Aug 20, 2008 11:23:35 You could also spec him up as a full NPC if you want, with the full supply of powers just like a PC.
#23
markustay63
Aug 20, 2008 12:09:44 True.

But as a DM since way back -when we didn't have rules for every little thing - I found it very helpful to give NPC baddies magic items to explain some of their 'outside-the-rules' abilities.

And, of course, those items were usually keyed just to them, so they wouldn't work for anyone else.

Try to always keep in mind that when your the DM, what you say "over-rules" the rules - they call it 'rule zero', and it works, if you don't let your players steam-roll over you. ;)
#24
ChrisTheS
Aug 20, 2008 12:46:47 Just went and checked up on the rules again, and they do seem mildly problematic just in the area of range - +1 square per participant makes it less effective on a strategic level (note I say 'less effective,' not 'ineffective'), while at the same time 1 minute per caster makes it useless on a tactical level. It should be errata'd for more effective range - a circle of ten or so should be able to send an effect at least a mile.
#25
banpai
Aug 20, 2008 14:34:44
Simple Solution:
For Szass Tam, you give him a ring. Then you give 12 of his most powerful Unerlings a Ring (yes, it does sound like LotR, and the number 13 is cliché, but roll with it), The Ring allows him to INSTANTLY establish a circle (like having a prepeared quickened spell in 3e) with any six of the others (he has two groups of six, in case one group gets squashed).

By using a magical item, you can have the ritual already in place, and the ring is just the triggering device. Assume Tam has performed the ritual originally when he bound these other wizards to him (all of which he keeps nearby).

The Circle shouldn't be for everyday encounters anyway, and if you use it as part of the BBG at adventure's end, it will both more meaningful and increase the challenge.

Also, you don't neccessarily have to limit this to Tam (he's the obvious choice), because if you do use this and the adventurers win, you just lost your head honcho (which makes it a campaign-ender).

Linking them via Rings is not a bad plot idea, but I depending on what you want your bad guy to accomplish it should not be an instant effect I guess.
However maybe we are all looking at this the wrong way, we look at the little picture, but what if you could get several dozen wizards to fireball a keep or battlefield..... a burst 40 is pretty damn huge and all the damage dice would be enough to seriously damage the keep. Of course thats just low level, it gets funny with better powers.

Alternatively I am shure I could write up a ritual that dublicates the old versiion better, the ritual would be performed once per day, all the participats would have to have the same spell prepared as the head caster. In the ritual (about an hours IIRC from 3rd) they give their power to the head caster, making his spell more powerfull. Of couse this has to follow other rules of empowerment that the ones presented in the FRCG....I may try myself on it later.
#26
ChrisTheS
Aug 20, 2008 15:04:13
However maybe we are all looking at this the wrong way, we look at the little picture, but what if you could get several dozen wizards to fireball a keep or battlefield..... a burst 40 is pretty damn huge and all the damage dice would be enough to seriously damage the keep. Of course thats just low level, it gets funny with better powers.

That's how it should be seen. There's still a problem with range, however: the way the stuff is written is from a tactical perspective, which I think is wrong. This sort of stuff shouldn't be coming up in situations where the range can be measured in squares, it should be for situations where a group of spellcasters are hurling devastation over huge distances.

If it were down to me, I would add multiply the range by 5 for each additional spellcaster, not just add 1 square (so a circle of 4 could launch a fireball up to 65 feet in diameter up to almost a mile and a half away), and to heck with tactical balance because the time it takes to cast puts it out of the realm of general PC usage anyway, even if a party did have 4 characters capable of casting fireball.
#27
banpai
Aug 20, 2008 15:42:35
That's how it should be seen. There's still a problem with range, however: the way the stuff is written is from a tactical perspective, which I think is wrong. This sort of stuff shouldn't be coming up in situations where the range can be measured in squares, it should be for situations where a group of spellcasters are hurling devastation over huge distances.

If it were down to me, I would add multiply the range by 5 for each additional spellcaster, not just add 1 square (so a circle of 4 could launch a fireball up to 65 feet in diameter up to almost a mile and a half away), and to heck with tactical balance because the time it takes to cast puts it out of the realm of general PC usage anyway, even if a party did have 4 characters capable of casting fireball.

I am pretty shure that this goes against the spirit of 4th, giving wizards such a range advantage seems rather dangeraus from a game balance perspective.
#28
nymrohd
Aug 20, 2008 18:12:41 Especially as far as wizards are concerned, a high level wizard NPC should easily be considered as having the equivalent of Expanded Spellbook. Meaning you can pretty much change his spell selection on utility and daily attack spells every day between 3 choices per level which makes for a lot of utility. And you can have infinite rituals. Always remember, NPC statblocks are one-use only in 4E and are not intented to depict the full power of an NPC but rather how he would react in a single encounter.
#29
ChrisTheS
Aug 20, 2008 21:42:40
I am pretty shure that this goes against the spirit of 4th, giving wizards such a range advantage seems rather dangeraus from a game balance perspective.

It's not unbalancing at all, because it isn't an ability that PCs will ever invest in. It just doesn't work for tactical combat. The only thing it really can be used for is strategic artillery, and the short range that the ability as written provides makes it substantially less useful than it should be for that purpose.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 11:59:29	Did this make sense to anyone who has read it in the FRCG? The example used 1 mage and 6 assistants. It takes 1 minute for each additional assistant to complete the casting and adds d6 damage/helper and also boosts range and area parameters. Now, in the heat of battle how are you going to get 6 minutes of uninterrupted casting? Just wondered..
#2 markustay63 Aug 19, 2008 14:04:01	They made it useless in combat? Of course... thats weird, considering it adds damage; they should have just left it for rituals, I would think. Or they could be prepared ahead of time (while the minions kept the party busy, the Wizards began their circle in the next room).
#3 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 14:22:39	Ya, the time thing just didn't make sense. But then the whole magic system seems crazy to me which is why I'm sticking with an adjusted 3.5.
#4 ChrisTheS Aug 19, 2008 15:12:59	Now, in the heat of battle how are you going to get 6 minutes of uninterrupted casting? That puts it about in line with medieval artillery, actually. It wasn't terribly useful as a tactical option because the barrels had to cool between each shot or they would crack, so you'd be lucky if you got off one shot in an hour (the biggest guns could only be fired once or twice a day). It's more useful for breaking entrenched formations or fortifications. Same principle applies here: you keep your war-casters behind the lines and then direct them at a hard target to soften it up before you send in the ground troops.
#5 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 16:08:57	IMO, with the fact that you need line of sight and the fact of movement rates you are not going to get minutes to cast spells. If anyone sees a group of spellcasters in a circle chanting they are going to double move their arses to get there and chop em up. The range of spells in 4.E is not what it used to be in 3.5.
#6 naex Aug 19, 2008 16:19:30	IMO, with the fact that you need line of sight and the fact of movement rates you are not going to get minutes to cast spells. If anyone sees a group of spellcasters in a circle chanting they are going to double move their arses to get there and chop em up. The range of spells in 4.E is not what it used to be in 3.5. "First wizard casts a spell, second wizard counters, 1st wizard counters the counter, and while the two are doing this, the armies come along and chop both wizards to pieces." (paraphrased from R.E. Feist)
#7 ChrisTheS Aug 19, 2008 16:28:14	IMO, with the fact that you need line of sight and the fact of movement rates you are not going to get minutes to cast spells. This is why you need good defensive tactics, and why spellcaster armies don't automatically roll right over everyone. Just as your real-world artillery needs its cavalry support (both for supply lines and defense) or it's useless, your wizard cabal needs a good infantry unit (preferably archers supplemented with halberdiers or spearmen, to be effective vs. both infantry and cavalry) standing between it and the enemy.
#8 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 19:17:13	In 4E wizards are supposed to roll over a lot of the enemies they face. They are called 1HP "minions". Also, in 4E the example they give has a max range of 26 squares. I do not care how many archers you have as support or minions blocking, there is no way you are going to hold them off 6 minutes let alone have anything to blast after the 6 minutes are up.
#9 naex Aug 19, 2008 19:57:27	In 4E wizards are supposed to roll over a lot of the enemies they face. They are called 1HP "minions". Also, in 4E the example they give has a max range of 26 squares. I do not care how many archers you have as support or minions blocking, there is no way you are going to hold them off 6 minutes let alone have anything to blast after the 6 minutes are up. Wall of force... (just have to have a few more wizards to keep casting it)
#10 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 20:12:42	Well, wall of force no longer exists as a spell to cast in 4E. But I agree something like that would be a good idea. I much prefer using adapted 3.5 magic because of its versatility.
#11 naex Aug 19, 2008 20:41:29	Well, wall of force no longer exists as a spell to cast in 4E. But I agree something like that would be a good idea. I much prefer using adapted 3.5 magic because of its versatility. Not yet it doesn't but we have a whole book of magic coming out, so...
#12 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 20:50:40	Very true and I am looking forward to it. What I see as the issue is the fact in 4E wizards only get a handful of spells to choose for their entire career. Szass Tam can not go into his study and relearn spells like he once did based on situational factors. What you see in his stat block is all he has. Once they have them, that's it. So having more spells (powers) is nice but a little pointless as you won't be able to learn 95% of them. Rituals are where I think the most expansion is going to happen.
#13 naex Aug 19, 2008 21:00:32	Very true and I am looking forward to it. What I see as the issue is the fact in 4E wizards only get a handful of spells to choose for their entire career. Szass Tam can not go into his study and relearn spells like he once did based on situational factors. What you see in his stat block is all he has. Once they have them, that's it. So having more spells (powers) is nice but a little pointless as you won't be able to learn 95% of them. Rituals are where I think the most expansion is going to happen. The Simbul used wishes to alter her spell selection in 3.5, so I don't see why one couldn't create a high level ritual to accomplish the same thing in 4e.
#14 serphet Aug 19, 2008 21:14:10	Very true and I am looking forward to it. What I see as the issue is the fact in 4E wizards only get a handful of spells to choose for their entire career. Szass Tam can not go into his study and relearn spells like he once did based on situational factors. What you see in his stat block is all he has. Once they have them, that's it. So having more spells (powers) is nice but a little pointless as you won't be able to learn 95% of them. Rituals are where I think the most expansion is going to happen. but they say in the FR:CG that the npcs are listed as a suggestion, they all have access to a much wider array of powers, this is obvious advice, but coming from them makes it sink in much better (see FR:CG "Nonplayer Characters", p. 86)
#15 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 21:14:47	Again, I think that is a creative idea and should definitely be used. However, keep in mind that under 4E wizards can not collect spells in their spellbooks beyond the few powers they know and you can not even have encounter powers in your spellbook and those would be the ones changed the most IMO. Discussing this is great because it's highlighting all the reasons I adapted 3.5 magic to use in 4E. Thanks for keeping the discussion going.
#16 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 21:16:56	Serphet, The NPC wizards can certainly have different powers chosen instead of the ones listed in the stat blocks. However, the limit on number of powers will remain the same as their blocks. This is in tune with the new 4E magic system. For example, Szass Tam might have different daily powers than listed, but he can not have more in use than already shown.
#17 naex Aug 19, 2008 21:22:35	Serphet, The NPC wizards can certainly have different powers chosen instead of the ones listed in the stat blocks. However, the limit on number of powers will remain the same as their blocks. This is in tune with the new 4E magic system. For example, Szass Tam might have different daily powers than listed, but he can not have more in use than already shown. Strictly speaking they can have as many powers as the DM wants them to have.
#18 karazhan Aug 19, 2008 21:25:46	Well, as the DM has the final say in all aspects of the game that is certainly true. The players could also have more powers as well. However, in terms of game balance (which is what 4E is all about) there would need to be a balance integrated.
#19 serphet Aug 19, 2008 21:31:27	No problem as long as he follows the NPC guidlines in the DMG. You can give him tons of different powers as long as they are within the damage parameters and such, and he's not using encounter powers every turn.
#20 banpai Aug 20, 2008 5:47:57	Well regarding Tam, he´s essentailly an NPC wizard with the Lich template and some extras so changing out his wizard powers, or even giving him some more minor ones should not be a problem (I actually see him more as a Legions Hold type of mage..) Circle mage is now only narrowly usefull, but I can see a use for it in certan scenarios (1 high level mage and about a dozen low level ones can fireball a pretty large area without having to go close. Someone will eventually have to write something that allows to use circle magic in rituals (summonings, mythals) that allows the crafting of great works of art - (currently only 4 characters can help with ritual checks..) I guess magic could be described like this In netherils days magic was like high speed internet connections - it was easy to do big things with little personal investment and time consumtpion. After the Mystrils death it was scales back to ISDN and now we have 56k modems again - you can still get those big "downloads" but it takes longer and is harder these days.
#21 markustay63 Aug 20, 2008 11:13:24	Simple Solution: For Szass Tam, you give him a ring. Then you give 12 of his most powerful Unerlings a Ring (yes, it does sound like LotR, and the number 13 is cliché, but roll with it), The Ring allows him to INSTANTLY establish a circle (like having a prepeared quickened spell in 3e) with any six of the others (he has two groups of six, in case one group gets squashed). By using a magical item, you can have the ritual already in place, and the ring is just the triggering device. Assume Tam has performed the ritual originally when he bound these other wizards to him (all of which he keeps nearby). The Circle shouldn't be for everyday encounters anyway, and if you use it as part of the BBG at adventure's end, it will both more meaningful and increase the challenge. Also, you don't neccessarily have to limit this to Tam (he's the obvious choice), because if you do use this and the adventurers win, you just lost your head honcho (which makes it a campaign-ender).
#22 colman Aug 20, 2008 11:23:35	You could also spec him up as a full NPC if you want, with the full supply of powers just like a PC.
#23 markustay63 Aug 20, 2008 12:09:44	True. But as a DM since way back -when we didn't have rules for every little thing - I found it very helpful to give NPC baddies magic items to explain some of their 'outside-the-rules' abilities. And, of course, those items were usually keyed just to them, so they wouldn't work for anyone else. Try to always keep in mind that when your the DM, what you say "over-rules" the rules - they call it 'rule zero', and it works, if you don't let your players steam-roll over you. ;)
#24 ChrisTheS Aug 20, 2008 12:46:47	Just went and checked up on the rules again, and they do seem mildly problematic just in the area of range - +1 square per participant makes it less effective on a strategic level (note I say 'less effective,' not 'ineffective'), while at the same time 1 minute per caster makes it useless on a tactical level. It should be errata'd for more effective range - a circle of ten or so should be able to send an effect at least a mile.
#25 banpai Aug 20, 2008 14:34:44	Simple Solution: For Szass Tam, you give him a ring. Then you give 12 of his most powerful Unerlings a Ring (yes, it does sound like LotR, and the number 13 is cliché, but roll with it), The Ring allows him to INSTANTLY establish a circle (like having a prepeared quickened spell in 3e) with any six of the others (he has two groups of six, in case one group gets squashed). By using a magical item, you can have the ritual already in place, and the ring is just the triggering device. Assume Tam has performed the ritual originally when he bound these other wizards to him (all of which he keeps nearby). The Circle shouldn't be for everyday encounters anyway, and if you use it as part of the BBG at adventure's end, it will both more meaningful and increase the challenge. Also, you don't neccessarily have to limit this to Tam (he's the obvious choice), because if you do use this and the adventurers win, you just lost your head honcho (which makes it a campaign-ender). Linking them via Rings is not a bad plot idea, but I depending on what you want your bad guy to accomplish it should not be an instant effect I guess. However maybe we are all looking at this the wrong way, we look at the little picture, but what if you could get several dozen wizards to fireball a keep or battlefield..... a burst 40 is pretty damn huge and all the damage dice would be enough to seriously damage the keep. Of course thats just low level, it gets funny with better powers. Alternatively I am shure I could write up a ritual that dublicates the old versiion better, the ritual would be performed once per day, all the participats would have to have the same spell prepared as the head caster. In the ritual (about an hours IIRC from 3rd) they give their power to the head caster, making his spell more powerfull. Of couse this has to follow other rules of empowerment that the ones presented in the FRCG....I may try myself on it later.
#26 ChrisTheS Aug 20, 2008 15:04:13	However maybe we are all looking at this the wrong way, we look at the little picture, but what if you could get several dozen wizards to fireball a keep or battlefield..... a burst 40 is pretty damn huge and all the damage dice would be enough to seriously damage the keep. Of course thats just low level, it gets funny with better powers. That's how it should be seen. There's still a problem with range, however: the way the stuff is written is from a tactical perspective, which I think is wrong. This sort of stuff shouldn't be coming up in situations where the range can be measured in squares, it should be for situations where a group of spellcasters are hurling devastation over huge distances. If it were down to me, I would add multiply the range by 5 for each additional spellcaster, not just add 1 square (so a circle of 4 could launch a fireball up to 65 feet in diameter up to almost a mile and a half away), and to heck with tactical balance because the time it takes to cast puts it out of the realm of general PC usage anyway, even if a party did have 4 characters capable of casting fireball.
#27 banpai Aug 20, 2008 15:42:35	That's how it should be seen. There's still a problem with range, however: the way the stuff is written is from a tactical perspective, which I think is wrong. This sort of stuff shouldn't be coming up in situations where the range can be measured in squares, it should be for situations where a group of spellcasters are hurling devastation over huge distances. If it were down to me, I would add multiply the range by 5 for each additional spellcaster, not just add 1 square (so a circle of 4 could launch a fireball up to 65 feet in diameter up to almost a mile and a half away), and to heck with tactical balance because the time it takes to cast puts it out of the realm of general PC usage anyway, even if a party did have 4 characters capable of casting fireball. I am pretty shure that this goes against the spirit of 4th, giving wizards such a range advantage seems rather dangeraus from a game balance perspective.
#28 nymrohd Aug 20, 2008 18:12:41	Especially as far as wizards are concerned, a high level wizard NPC should easily be considered as having the equivalent of Expanded Spellbook. Meaning you can pretty much change his spell selection on utility and daily attack spells every day between 3 choices per level which makes for a lot of utility. And you can have infinite rituals. Always remember, NPC statblocks are one-use only in 4E and are not intented to depict the full power of an NPC but rather how he would react in a single encounter.
#29 ChrisTheS Aug 20, 2008 21:42:40	I am pretty shure that this goes against the spirit of 4th, giving wizards such a range advantage seems rather dangeraus from a game balance perspective. It's not unbalancing at all, because it isn't an ability that PCs will ever invest in. It just doesn't work for tactical combat. The only thing it really can be used for is strategic artillery, and the short range that the ability as written provides makes it substantially less useful than it should be for that purpose.