Author Topic: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style  (Read 45092 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

NineInchNall

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
  • I am NOT a cat.
    • Email
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #60 on: July 08, 2008, 04:22:18 PM »
Ultra quick proofread:
------------------------
[spoiler]
Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards: God - 4e style

4E and the God Wizard:

In 3.5 I wrote about the party roles and referred to the role of Battlefield Control, Buff, and Debuff as God.  God didn't get his hands dirty; that was the job of the Big Stupid Fighter and the Glass Cannon.  God simply changed reality so that they would win rather than lose.

God did not need to be a Wizard.  In fact, spellcasting was so versatile in 3.5 there were a number of classes that made decent Gods.  The Archivist, the Spirit Shaman, the Sorcerer - they could all technically fill the role.  It was simply that Wizard's did it best.

In 4E the classes are more pigeonholed.  Furthermore, there are fewer Battlefield Controls available to players than ever.  The Wizard, however, gets the lion share of those powers, and does it significantly better than other classes.  So now it is questionable whether anyone else can fill the role at all.  This may change as 4e splatbooks are released.  In fact, I may at some point take "wizard" right out of the title of this guide if other equivalent options present themselves.

This is not to say the wizard did not take a dive in power compared to other classes.  All spellcasters did.  Wizards are not weak compared to the other classes, but neither are they the most powerful, which they arguably were in 3.5.  However, the role of God unquestionably still belongs to Wizards at this time.  If you wish to play God in 4e, Wizards really are the only choice right now.

In addition: This is a work in progress!  My experience with 4e, as you might imagine, is virtually non-existent.  After reading the rules, however, I've come to some opinions and am sharing them here.  I reserve the right to change those opinions (and edit this work) as I learn with experience! :D  Since this handbook's original incarnation I've pretty much gutted and rewritten it based on different perceptions.  Such a major revision is not likely to occur again.



Merriam-Webster: God: ...one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality

Introduction:



So what am I offering that's different?  Squirrelloid's handbook really is like 8 in 1.  He goes over how to make a blast mage, a bleed mage, a status effect mage, a terrain mod mage etc.  These builds do one thing and that's it - every decision made adds to that one specialty.

I like my God to be more Buff/Debuff/Battlefield Controllers.  With 4e it's more like Buff/Debuff/Battlefield Control/Blasters.  In my God builds I will try to throw a bit of all those things into the pot, while sticking with powers that are good choices.  If a blast is just a better spell than a status effect due to increased size, range, and so on, then I'll choose it regardless of the God build I've made.

It's more about optimizing your Wizard overall than optimizing one aspect of your wizard.  If that's what you want, read on.

Naturally, this is just the beginning, and I expect both Squirrelloid and I will have changes of opinion as we build our experience with the game.  As always, however, this is CO, and when it comes to CO, viewpoints differ.

Options are good.  That's the one (and only) point I'll make on this entire thread that I will claim is indisputableA little side note about style. Be prepared for my presenting a black-and-white D&D world.  These are opinions, and I'm intentionally presenting them strongly.  There's really no point in presenting what is essentially an opinion paper and being wishy-washy.

A guide to color: Due to restriction in the number of images (including smilies) that can be used in a single post, I will often be using color to identify good options from poor ones.  Here's a rundown:

Blue: This is a great option and my personal preference.
Green: This is a good option; it's not my favorite, but it is still worthwhile.
Black: This is a so-so option; it's not terrible, but neither is it good enough to recommend.
Red: This is a bad option; you should avoid this choice.

Treantmonk: This looks like your last handbook doesn't it?What do you mean God?



In my previous handbook I redefined the party roles in my own style.  The iconic Tank/Skillmonkey/Healer/Arcane blaster went obsolete with 2e, I suggested, replaced by new roles.  Those roles were Big Stupid Fighter, Glass Cannon ,and God.  Anything else was a waste of space.

I was as surprised as any when 4e revealed an epiphany by the designers that they broke down the party roles into Big Stupid Fighter, Glass Cannon, and God.  Really they did!  They just used different terminology, and, as you might expect, they realized the God role was so important that it needed double designation.



The Defender: This role involves two things: Doing HP damage to BBEG, forcing BBEG to attack you with his vicious weaponry.  Sound familiar?  In my world I call this the Big Stupid Fighter.  The Big Stupid Fighter is not always a fighter by class, though he always is by description.  Consider "fighter" to be flavour text.  In order to qualify as a Big Stupid Fighter he should be any character that actively tries to be the target of enemy attacks.  Those who wonder why I would label this character as stupid, regardless of their INT score should reread the previous sentence.

The Striker This role involves one thing: Doing HP damage to BBEG.  Sound familiar?  In my world I call this the Glass Cannon.  The Glass Cannon is like the Big Stupid Fighter except he does not want to take damage.  Usually this is not due to superior intelligence - but instead due to inferior HP or defenses (or in most cases both).   The 4e PHB suggests that Rogues (or Rouge for our young readers) and Rangers are strikers.  In this one case I need to disagree.  Wizards can also be Glass Cannon.  They are called "Blaster" wizards.

Leader: This role usually means being a Big Stupid Fighter who rallies allies with religious rants or inspired speeches. (Does anyone else picture a Drill Sergeant for a Warlord?  "Soldier!  On your feet!  Only two types of creatures go down on all fours when hurt - queers and steers - and I don't see no horns on you boy!").  Basically a very loud Big Stupid Fighter.  These guys buff, which is a useful role and a help to God.  You could call them God's avatars.

Controller: This role entails making adjustments when reality would entail the above three meeting a rather messy end, adjustments that allow the above three to meet glorious victory instead.  Sound familiar?


Yes, there you go: Controller and Leader are both "God" roles.  In my previous thread, Battlefield Control was the primary role of a God wizard, while buffing and debuffing were secondary.  Now Buffing is a role all on its own according to the PHB.  Debuffing is a minor trait for wizards, which means your role is more clearly defined.  You must be a Battlefield Controller first, a buffer second.  Yes, it can be done.

Are Clerics and Warlords Gods? In a word: no.  However, their buffing abilities make them closer to God than the other classes.  Buffing alone, however, does not a god make, especially when you are spending the majority of the battle smashing the enemy on the head with your big weapon.  Clerics and Warlords mainly fill the Big Stupid Fighter role with a bit of godliness to back it up.  Both are useful classes, but neither will successfully fill the God role in your party.

Aren't all Wizards blasters now? In 3.5 we called a spell that had both a battlefield control effect and did damage a dual threat spell.  My suggestion to all players back then who still wanted to blast with their wizards to look for these spells.  The blast effect is nice, but it's not the primary purpose of your spells.

What about the Waste of Space?Can the Wizard still cover all the roles? Being a God:



This is the role this thread is based upon.  Mortals live and die, all never appreciating that it is the Gods who determine their fate.  Gods do this through three methods, in order of ascending importance:

Buffing:



When effective at buffing, you turn your Big Stupid Fighter into a Colossal Stupid Fighter on Crack and your Glass Cannon into an Adamantium Chain Gun.  This will make the BSF and the GC win the combat with little damage to themselves, and they will feel like they won.  That's the point.  You're God after all; let the mortals have their victory.

Debuffing:


When effective at debuffing, you turn your enemies into immobilized, weakened, dazed, stunned helpless critters so that your Big Stupid Fighter and Glass Cannon win the combat with little damage to themselves and feel like they won.  That's the point.  You're God after all; let the mortals have their victory.

Battlefield Control:



When effective at battlefield control, you consider your primary goal to line up your enemies flanked by your Glass Cannon and Big Stupid Fighter one at a time and backwards, all while standing on their heads.  This will make the BSF and the GC win the combat with little damage to themselves and feel like they won.  That's the point.  You're God after all; let the mortals have their victory.

« Last Edit: July 08, 2008, 07:29:19 PM by NineInchNall »

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #61 on: July 08, 2008, 05:10:25 PM »
For the sake of demonstration, you might want to have highlighted your changes in some funky font or color, just so Treantmonk/we could see the difference.

lotofsnow

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #62 on: July 08, 2008, 05:11:36 PM »
For the sake of demonstration, you might want to have highlighted your changes in some funky font or color, just so Treantmonk/we could see the difference.

I'm sorry, but if you don't have the handbook memorized, you're not a true fan.

NineInchNall

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
  • I am NOT a cat.
    • Email
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #63 on: July 08, 2008, 07:20:10 PM »
There were too many changes for that, and I didn't want to fuck with his formatting.

Primary Gripes:
1. Pluralizing with 's.
2. Comma splices.
3. Hyphen splices.
4. Superfluous quotation marks.
5. Various minor spelling and grammar gaffes.  For example, I'm pretty sure that the "viscous" nature of the BBEG's weapon is irrelevant.

Yes, I am Lawful Evil when it comes to grammar.  :eh

Treantmonklvl20

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
    • Email
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #64 on: July 09, 2008, 10:06:06 AM »
OK - switched.
If at first you don't succeed - maybe failure is your style.

Endarire

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
    • Email
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #65 on: September 01, 2009, 04:24:36 PM »
Much appreciated.  I still request you add material from Arcane Power and non-core books.
Hood - My first answer to all your build questions; past, present, and future.

Speaking of which:
Don't even need TO for this.  Any decent Hood build, especially one with Celerity, one-rounds [Azathoth, the most powerful greater deity from d20 Cthulu].
Does it bug anyone else that we've reached the point where characters who can obliterate a greater deity in one round are considered "decent?"

Omen of Peace

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
  • Wise Madman
Re: Treantmonk's guide to Wizards: God 4e style
« Reply #66 on: September 11, 2009, 11:05:52 PM »
He doesn't play 4E anymore.
The Malazan Book of the Fallen, Steven Erikson