The Gaming Den

There's been some gnashing of teeth about the change to Magic Missile (sic) of 4e, but nothing here.

I particularly think the reason for the change is fascinating:

http://www.gamertell.com/gaming/comment ... d-dragons/

>make a shitty new edition that dumps all over D&D traditions
>change shitty edition to more resemble old editions
>wonder why fans hate it

Implying implications.

I imagine the lack of caring has much to do with how boring 4e is and of all the legacy spells magic missle was probably the least interesting.

So basically a clusterfuck of whocouldcareless.

I think at some point the people in charge of designing 4e realized that their game sucked if you played it more than 3-4 sessions and the newness wore off.

The original magic missile created and fired +1 Crossbow bolts. I don't understand why anyone would get upset over whether or not Magic Missile had an accompanying attack roll.

While I'm sure there are jackasses out there who get their panties in a knot over the fact that some spell or another has mechanics that are different from their favorite edition, but I don't give a rat's ass. Magic Missile is a bad thing because you only have two at-will powers so you end up casting it as often as you right click in Diablo. So it's boring as fuck. That's what's wrong with it. No twaddling with the mechanics can ever make it interesting or worthwhile. What we have is a fundamental failure to understand the sheer degree of their failure.

-Username17

Was Magic Missile ever worth the space it took to write it in? I imagine that with the low hit point inflation in 2nd Edition it'd be useful for the first 9 or so levels when you would need something to take out an enemy at long range when weapons wouldn't do.

Well, it was "magic", which meant it could hit things that might not otherwise be affected by other spells. Granted, there were plenty of better spells, especially situationally better spells, but the sheer reliability of it made it acceptible, at least in a system where you didn't get to pick your spells. I mean, if your wizard rolls up "charm person", and that's his only useful spell, things are going to suck when the party's first adventure is the Dungeon of Oozes and Giant Rats.

Also, it could hit the stupid-low AC will-o-wisp. Big deal? No, but it was still more fun than 4e's "wizards no longer have to carry a crossbow because we're giving them a spell that's the same thing as carrying a crossbow and that's cool" that is 4e's magic missile.

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Was Magic Missile ever worth the space it took to write it in? I imagine that with the low hit point inflation in 2nd Edition it'd be useful for the first 9 or so levels when you would need something to take out an enemy at long range when weapons wouldn't do.

Yes, magic missile was well worth its spell slot in 2e. The fragility of the wizard coupled with large numbers of foes meant that having automatic damage (with, as you note, the lower 2e HP) was very good.

1. People are still reading the 4e errata? WTF?

2. The auto-hit should be a notable power-up, as in 4e you only hit 40-60% of the time no matter what, so this should roughly double the damage Magic Missile does - aside from the damage nerfs (see below)

3. You were dealing 2d4 (4d4 at 21st level)+Int+Implement+Other Implement+Item+Cheese damage before. Now, if I am interpreting the wording correctly, you are only dealing 2(3 at 11th, 5 at 21st) +Int +Implement+Cheese damage. The lack of a damage roll, means you lose out on the item bonus from Bracers of the Perfect Shot and the cheese factor is going down a bunch. This means the average DPR is probably about the same as it was before.

4. Cloud of Daggers still auto-hits for Wis in an area for a duration anyways.

5. Heck, maybe 4e could reduce the grindiness and mitigate padded sumo by switching all powers to auto-hits with equivalent DPR.

No twaddling with the mechanics can ever make it interesting or worthwhile.

I gotta disagree - albeit slightly.

Divine Power's "Power of [Blah]" feats which gave an optional secondary effect on at-wills were a neat idea not taken far enough, and if done differently could have made at-wills tactically interesting.

Making such effects cost feats was ass, but if each at-will came with something like 2 +1/5 levels riders where each time you used the power you could chose a rider something like: "give ally temp HP", "give target defense penalty", "change power's damage to [Type] and deal +N damage]", "grant ally saving throw", "grant ally combat advantage against target", "impose saving throw penalty on target", "power gets to hit bonus against [status] targets", "power can be used at increased reach", "you may ignore [status ailment] with power], etc - then you would have mechanics that made them interesting.

Of course you'd then you'd have to rewrite encounter and daily powers to keep up - and that's a stupid amount of work when I can just play 3e/ Champions /Feng Shui/ SR4 Rolemaster/ /KAMB instead.

At least in the Baldur's Gate games, Magic Missile was one of the best offensive spells in the game. It was especially good for killing dragons, I recall.

Do you know what the mechanics were in Baldur's Gate?

RobbyPants wrote:Do you know what the mechanics were in Baldur's Gate?

It was very fast to cast and allowed no save or resistance. It also helped that you could see when enemies were near death, so it was the perfect "finishing off spell".

Basically an ideal kiting spell or spamming spell.

Josh_Kablack wrote:1. People are still reading the 4e errata? WTF?

Bingo.

K wrote:

RobbyPants wrote:Do you know what the mechanics were in Baldur's Gate?

It was very fast to cast and allowed no save or resistance. It also helped that you could see when enemies were near death, so it was the perfect "finishing off spell".

Basically an ideal kiting spell or spamming spell.

In Baldur's Gate 2, magic resistance did apply to Magic Missile, but it was rolled separately for each missile. This meant you were almost certain to get some damage through, and meant that your mages had something to do in the many, many battles against magic-resistant fiends.

It might have also been good for wearing out defensive spells, but I don't remember for sure, as I favored waiting until the buff spells of enemy wizards ran out before seriously engaging them whenever possible.

Avoraciopoctules wrote:
It might have also been good for wearing out defensive spells, but I don't remember for sure, as I favored waiting until the buff spells of enemy wizards ran out before seriously engaging them whenever possible.

Notably, each Magic Missile removed a Stoneskin from a mage.

The fast casting speed meant that you also were frequently able to pause the game right before beginning a conversation with a big enemy, and order your mages to cast magic missile. The conversation would then play out as normal, and, if you timed it correctly, the missiles would fire just as it ended, before enemy mages had a chance for their five thousand contingency spells to take effect.

The new magic missile is pretty awful. Basically you cast it and the wizard doesn't touch the dice the whole time. The spell autohits and the damage is static. It's the perfect spell to spam if you just want to play video games the entire session and let someone else run your character for you. It's way shittier than cloud of daggers, but you benefit by not even having to be at the table.

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Was Magic Missile ever worth the space it took to write it in? I imagine that with the low hit point inflation in 2nd Edition it'd be useful for the first 9 or so levels when you would need something to take out an enemy at long range when weapons wouldn't do.

In 2ed MM was very useful for that rule that said that if you are hit for a single point of damage you can't cast spells for that round,with his long range and auto-hit was a great way to hinder a caster (well, one that didn't have cast Shield before, but AFAIR clerics didn't have it just to say one)

Blicero wrote:At least in the Baldur's Gate games, Magic Missile was one of the best offensive spells in the game. It was especially good for killing dragons, I recall.

I only played the playstation 2 one but in that version for the sorceress, the lightning ball was the shiznit. I'd just fire that thing down the map and laugh as stuff died. I'd clear rooms without ever entering them and only the strongest (non-boss) baddies took more than a couple lightning balls to wipe out.

The playstation version of Baldur's gate wasn't based on D&D mechanics even a little bit. It was just a D&D-branded diablo clone. IIRC.

Anyway, in my AD&D game magic missile was a big deal. a 10 level wizard did 18 points of autohit damage, no save. A fighter with 18 Strength, a +5 sword, and specialization, did 1d8+11 X 2, or 30 damage with attack rolls (admittedly, he always hit most enemies.)

You could feel perfectly okay with tourself after a fight were you did nothing but spam them.

In Neverwinter Nights, MM was acceptable. But the real shiznit was the "It's like MM but better". Probably level 4 or something, so as to not fight for space with Fireball. Seriously, it was autohit, multiple target Force damage, with the kind of damage that you expect of single-target "Save for half" spells.

Josh_Kablack wrote:
2. The auto-hit should be a notable power-up, as in 4e you only hit 40-60% of the time no matter what, so this should roughly double the damage Magic Missile does - aside from the damage nerfs (see below)

3. You were dealing 2d4 (4d4 at 21st level)+Int+Implement+Other Implement+Item+Cheese damage before. Now, if I am interpreting the wording correctly, you are only dealing 2(3 at 11th, 5 at 21st) +Int +Implement+Cheese damage. The lack of a damage roll, means you lose out on the item bonus from Bracers of the Perfect Shot and the cheese factor is going down a bunch. This means the average DPR is probably about the same as it was before.

Yes, apparently, making it auto hit and do static damage means that 98.9% of the feats, items, and buffs in 4E no longer actually work with it since it doesn't technicly have an attack or damage roll.

So aside from wierd dumpster diving and frankenstein like builds, I think a crappy staff, a shitty wand and the Wizard's Fury daily power are the only things that affect it at all now.

erik wrote:

Blicero wrote:At least in the Baldur's Gate games, Magic Missile was one of the best offensive spells in the game. It was especially good for killing dragons, I recall.

I only played the playstation 2 one but in that version for the sorceress, the lightning ball was the shiznit. I'd just fire that thing down the map and laugh as stuff died. I'd clear rooms without ever entering them and only the strongest (non-boss) baddies took more than a couple lightning balls to wipe out.

As someone who has played the same game, that's more a problem with the other spells sucking hard than that spell being awesome. Though it is nice. A few enemies were annoyingly immune though.

Koumei wrote:In Neverwinter Nights, MM was acceptable. But the real shiznit was the "It's like MM but better". Probably level 4 or something, so as to not fight for space with Fireball. Seriously, it was autohit, multiple target Force damage, with the kind of damage that you expect of single-target "Save for half" spells.

'Isaac's Lesser Missile Storm'. Gamewinner. Came in a 'Greater' version too, but that was a level 7 spell or something so competition for slots was harsher.