Houseruling the Elementalist - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Houseruling the Elementalist

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Ironblue
Mar 14, 2012 23:33:15 From a thread over in CharOp:

82427181 wrote:
#2
Eisenritter
Mar 15, 2012 16:05:33 Ruins a perfectly good method of making a decent Striker out of the sorcerer.
#3
Ironblue
Mar 15, 2012 17:34:29 As much as I am a fan of ruining things, that's not exactly the intent behind the houserule. Perhaps a more detailed critique of my ruination is in order.

The problem that did not guide any decision-making is:

1. Elementalists don't have enough DPR.

I don't think they have a problem in this area. You want DPR, you take your 1d12 RBA and go to town. Everybody knows how to do this. If the absolute maximized optimum you get spamming E.bolt is less than the ranger or more than the warlock or less than the rogue, I will lose no sleep at night. Regular DnD players don't recognize such distinctions.

The problems that did guide my decision-making are twofold:

1. Elementalists straight out of the book are boring, boring, boring snooze fests with no interesting choices presented to them during a fight.
2. No Resist piercing.

Giving every elementalist the option to upgrade their powers with any escalation power handles both in one fell swoop. The bog-standard 'I champion one element and despise the rest' fluff is lame. There are plenty of classes that can make a one trick pony. Elementalists are about the elementsss... All of them. They should handle resistance issues by attacking with a different element.

Now it may be harder/more dangerous for them to do so. That's why the easy, optimizable stuff (elemental bolt) is locked into their specialty. I just made it more feasible/attractive to dip into the other at-wills or mix and match toppings.

Toppings incidentally are the hidden theme behind the elementalist, and thing that makes them exciting during play. Sliding a bunch of dudes 1 square at-will is not exciting. Popping an escalation to deal more damage AND slide them 1 square AND give them a -2 to their next attack AND fly out of the way so the defender can waltz into their clump with relative impunity is far more interesting.

None of the effects in the powers and features above are very useful by themselves. It's the way the elementalist knits them together into one power that makes it an interesting class.

But I am interested in what you have to say, Eisenritter. I'm new at this houserule thing and not at all sure I wrote everything in a coherent/legible fashion.
#4
mellored
Mar 16, 2012 3:18:13
1. Elementalists straight out of the book are boring, boring, boring snooze fests with no interesting choices presented to them during a fight.

Umm... that's kinda the point of the elementalist...

If you wanted some thing with variety, pick the sorcerer.

#5
Ironblue
Mar 16, 2012 13:08:58 I'm not quite sure how to respond to that. DnD being a game and all, 'interesting' and 'choices' would tend to be desirable vocabulary.

Off-topic, is Mellored seriously a thing that exists? Like Melloyello except with a cherry twist? That would blow my mind.
#6
estlor
Mar 16, 2012 14:08:28 Not always. Not all classes in 4e are designed to hit the same level of complexity. They're all supposed to hit a minimum benchmark of effectiveness, but the reason you have a Weaponmaster and a Slayer is because some people like the fiddly bits and some people don't.

The design goal behind the Elementalist was to make a ranged spellcaster as simple as the Slayer. So obfuscating the class in the name of making them interesting invalidates the entire point of their existence.

Now, that doesn't mean it isn't fair to 1) give them resistance piercing and 2) give them dailies. But the dailies should be in the format used for the Acadamy Master paragon path's daily. Namely, "Use an arcane at-will attack power you know and add X damage dice and effect Y to it."

That way, if you're drawn to the elementalist, your choices are still simple - what at-will am I using, and do I want to make it a big hit, a bigger hit, or the biggest hit I can make it - but you've got a little more going on.
#7
Ironblue
Mar 16, 2012 16:01:36 I was honestly not expecting that. The one answer that makes a good deal of sense. Well then.

Consider my perspective thoroughly realigned. At this point I could stick to my guns and say I like my version of a more complicated power-bending elementalist, but I'm interested in exploring the potential of a ranged spellcasting slayer.

Will revise in a bit with a new direction for the houserule.
#8
mhbjarkistef
Mar 21, 2012 2:29:35 It's a bit clunky to read, use the block-builder in my signature for the official-feel ^^

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Ironblue Mar 14, 2012 23:33:15	From a thread over in CharOp: 82427181 wrote:
#2 Eisenritter Mar 15, 2012 16:05:33	Ruins a perfectly good method of making a decent Striker out of the sorcerer.
#3 Ironblue Mar 15, 2012 17:34:29	As much as I am a fan of ruining things, that's not exactly the intent behind the houserule. Perhaps a more detailed critique of my ruination is in order. The problem that did not guide any decision-making is: 1. Elementalists don't have enough DPR. I don't think they have a problem in this area. You want DPR, you take your 1d12 RBA and go to town. Everybody knows how to do this. If the absolute maximized optimum you get spamming E.bolt is less than the ranger or more than the warlock or less than the rogue, I will lose no sleep at night. Regular DnD players don't recognize such distinctions. The problems that did guide my decision-making are twofold: 1. Elementalists straight out of the book are boring, boring, boring snooze fests with no interesting choices presented to them during a fight. 2. No Resist piercing. Giving every elementalist the option to upgrade their powers with any escalation power handles both in one fell swoop. The bog-standard 'I champion one element and despise the rest' fluff is lame. There are plenty of classes that can make a one trick pony. Elementalists are about the elementsss... All of them. They should handle resistance issues by attacking with a different element. Now it may be harder/more dangerous for them to do so. That's why the easy, optimizable stuff (elemental bolt) is locked into their specialty. I just made it more feasible/attractive to dip into the other at-wills or mix and match toppings. Toppings incidentally are the hidden theme behind the elementalist, and thing that makes them exciting during play. Sliding a bunch of dudes 1 square at-will is not exciting. Popping an escalation to deal more damage AND slide them 1 square AND give them a -2 to their next attack AND fly out of the way so the defender can waltz into their clump with relative impunity is far more interesting. None of the effects in the powers and features above are very useful by themselves. It's the way the elementalist knits them together into one power that makes it an interesting class. But I am interested in what you have to say, Eisenritter. I'm new at this houserule thing and not at all sure I wrote everything in a coherent/legible fashion.
#4 mellored Mar 16, 2012 3:18:13	1. Elementalists straight out of the book are boring, boring, boring snooze fests with no interesting choices presented to them during a fight. Umm... that's kinda the point of the elementalist... If you wanted some thing with variety, pick the sorcerer.
#5 Ironblue Mar 16, 2012 13:08:58	I'm not quite sure how to respond to that. DnD being a game and all, 'interesting' and 'choices' would tend to be desirable vocabulary. Off-topic, is Mellored seriously a thing that exists? Like Melloyello except with a cherry twist? That would blow my mind.
#6 estlor Mar 16, 2012 14:08:28	Not always. Not all classes in 4e are designed to hit the same level of complexity. They're all supposed to hit a minimum benchmark of effectiveness, but the reason you have a Weaponmaster and a Slayer is because some people like the fiddly bits and some people don't. The design goal behind the Elementalist was to make a ranged spellcaster as simple as the Slayer. So obfuscating the class in the name of making them interesting invalidates the entire point of their existence. Now, that doesn't mean it isn't fair to 1) give them resistance piercing and 2) give them dailies. But the dailies should be in the format used for the Acadamy Master paragon path's daily. Namely, "Use an arcane at-will attack power you know and add X damage dice and effect Y to it." That way, if you're drawn to the elementalist, your choices are still simple - what at-will am I using, and do I want to make it a big hit, a bigger hit, or the biggest hit I can make it - but you've got a little more going on.
#7 Ironblue Mar 16, 2012 16:01:36	I was honestly not expecting that. The one answer that makes a good deal of sense. Well then. Consider my perspective thoroughly realigned. At this point I could stick to my guns and say I like my version of a more complicated power-bending elementalist, but I'm interested in exploring the potential of a ranged spellcasting slayer. Will revise in a bit with a new direction for the houserule.
#8 mhbjarkistef Mar 21, 2012 2:29:35	It's a bit clunky to read, use the block-builder in my signature for the official-feel ^^