4e Magic Missile Change

[Cam_Neely]

Magic Missile used to have an attack roll, and this was change (just found out, but happen in July) doing about 6 dmg for a level 1 wizard (2+int Mod). http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateJuly2010.pdf

Seems to have some interesting consequences, most notably that this is a step back towards 3.5 and 2. Combined with the 're release' of the Red Box. Does this mean with that WotWC have realized a potential err in their progression from 3.5 to 4?

To sum up some of the consequences, ill quote an email I sent to my group, based on my understanding of the change.

1.) It is auto dmg. No stopping it. Cover, concealment, invisibility, prone, running, marked all that stuff that would normally make it harder to hit stuff is ignored.
2.) It only does about 7 (2+int mod) dmg, but that is equal to about 1d12+1. And when you can do this as a minor (via an daily power I think that enables this for the rest of the encounter), every turn, that is some nasty dmg.
3.) Minons in the game have only 1 HP, but they can be pretty hard to hit, they normally have higher AC will ect. You are now a Minion Pwner!
4. Magic Missile is the most iconic old school wizard spell in the book (next to fireball maybe). This change moved 4e back towards 3.5 where magic missile was an auto hit. Very interesting moves from the WtWC development team (in addition to the re release of the red box)
5.) There is no attack part of the spell any more. Just auto force dmg. Technically I think that means that stuff that is triggered by an attack does not take place. ie if someone is granted temp HP on being attacked, they dont get the Temp HP. If Ottis is marked, and he does Magic Missile, then its not an attack, so does not suffer an opportunity attack.
6.) A level 11 adult black dragon has 560 HP, so about 85 min/maxed 20 int lv1 wizards could kill it in one round (assuming a few are killed when the dragon goes first.)

Discuss

[Cam_Neely]

wow, no thoughts? I guess it is understandable as there are no real strong opinions showing up in the Pencil and Paper sub forum 8-)

Personally I think its a bit unbalancing, cause if a wizard focused on bumping this up, they could be an extremely strong single target caster with strong AoE and debuffs. There is no way to easily reduce a Wizards dmg besides killing (I dont have the DMG or PHB in front of me, but it seems weaking might not effect this?)

As a step back towards older versions of Magic Missile, I think its a step in the wrong direction. Would have been better implemented if you could add to the number of Missiles cast as opposed to making it auto hit (which in the setting of 4e does not fit well).

4e was to pull in new players that never considered playing D&D, but had played MMOs. It has gotten more people to play D&D. Now that they 'hooked' people, is 4e going to be a short lived version with a 5 coming out in the next +/- 2 years that is a step back towards 3.5 or ADD?

[voodoogroves]

Look for the Unholy Nonroller build on the CO forums over at Wizards for a build that (essentially) doesn't roll dice.

It's fun, but the fact that (a) there isn't an attack roll and (b) there isn't a damage roll means it is going to lag far, far behind many other attack options.

[Chai]

Its more of a step FORWARD toward 3.5 and AD&D, not a step back, heh.

As far as I can remember magic missile never had an attack roll. The low amount of damage it does is the counter balabce to this. If used at the right time its an awesome spell, but no lowbie wizard ever pew pew pewed their way to victory spamming 1d4+1 points of damage per round until the storm was over, heh.

If they needed to change the game to the point where a 30 year old low level staple spell that never caused an issue in the first place is now causing issues and needs to be changed, theres more of an underlying issue here than the magic missile spell.

We've already gone over our opinions on that however, so I will stick to the current topic at hand, and leave it at that.

[Cernunan]

Its more of a step FORWARD toward 3.5 and AD&D, not a step back, heh.

As far as I can remember magic missile never had an attack roll. The low amount of damage it does is the counter balabce to this. If used at the right time its an awesome spell, but no lowbie wizard ever pew pew pewed their way to victory spamming 1d4+1 points of damage per round until the storm was over, heh.

If they needed to change the game to the point where a 30 year old low level staple spell that never caused an issue in the first place is now causing issues and needs to be changed, theres more of an underlying issue here than the magic missile spell.

We've already gone over our opinions on that however, so I will stick to the current topic at hand, and leave it at that.

This pretty much sums up the response I was about to give

[Lorien_the_First_One]

wow, no thoughts? I guess it is understandable as there are no real strong opinions showing up in the Pencil and Paper sub forum 8-)?

Ok, fine... its 4.0 so its almost automatically completely stupid.

Contrary to your claim, this does not move it closer to 3.5, 3.5 did not work that way for MM, nor did any previous version. This is 4.0 continuing to move away from its D&D history, and not in any way that actually appears helpful. The advantage of MM was that you couldn't miss.

[Chai]

1.) It is auto dmg. No stopping it. Cover, concealment, invisibility, prone, running, marked all that stuff that would normally make it harder to hit stuff is ignored.

3.5 and previous answered this nicely with shield and nightshield, globes of invulnerability, mantles, etc. It could be stopped in the past. Whats the designers excuse now?

2.) It only does about 7 (2+int mod) dmg, but that is equal to about 1d12+1. And when you can do this as a minor (via an daily power I think that enables this for the rest of the encounter), every turn, that is some nasty dmg.

Per round? Reliable, yes, overpowering, no. The fact that they ALSO changed the damage calc on it, and not just the way it is cast, is what makes it ovewrpowered if anything.

3.) Minons in the game have only 1 HP, but they can be pretty hard to hit, they normally have higher AC will ect. You are now a Minion Pwner!

This was always one use for MM int he past. I'll slay your familiar and you lose his HP perminently (or at least semi perminently) MM is also imune to the miss chance due to incorporeal, so it was a good mage hand destroyer as well.

4. Magic Missile is the most iconic old school wizard spell in the book (next to fireball maybe). This change moved 4e back towards 3.5 where magic missile was an auto hit. Very interesting moves from the WtWC development team (in addition to the re release of the red box)

They realized they screwed up by making a change to a 30 + year old staple spell that never had balance issues in the first place. Their changes resulted in a worse case scenario, not better. There are many things in 3.5 that had balance issues, but MM wasnt one of them.

5.) There is no attack part of the spell any more. Just auto force dmg. Technically I think that means that stuff that is triggered by an attack does not take place. ie if someone is granted temp HP on being attacked, they dont get the Temp HP. If Ottis is marked, and he does Magic Missile, then its not an attack, so does not suffer an opportunity attack.

Its a spell cast action - how does 4e handle those again? heh. There never used to be any confusion about how spell cast actions were handled - regardless if it was an "attack" or not.

6.) A level 11 adult black dragon has 560 HP, so about 85 min/maxed 20 int lv1 wizards could kill it in one round (assuming a few are killed when the dragon goes first.)

I think the dragon would wipe more than a few.

[Cam_Neely]

Contrary to your claim, this does not move it closer to 3.5, 3.5 did not work that way for MM, nor did any previous version. This is 4.0 continuing to move away from its D&D history, and not in any way that actually appears helpful. The advantage of MM was that you couldn't miss.

Thats my point. You could miss with MM in its original set up in 4e, but now you cant. 4e took a step towards (^nod to above, def not back, more likely forward ) 3.5 in that originally you could miss, now you cant.

Per round? Reliable, yes, overpowering, no. The fact that they ALSO changed the damage calc on it, and not just the way it is cast, is what makes it ovewrpowered if anything.
...
I think the dragon would wipe more than a few.

Thats once per round as a minor, much more powerful then most other minors.

Would wipe a fair bit, assuming a 1 rolled, and some margin for error I worked in, the number is about right.

[voodoogroves]

Cam, honestly - it isn't.

An optimized 4e striker can kill itself with just at-wills in a round or two, and always on a nova. It may seem "uber" to not have to roll, but it IS NOT overpowered, even with an end-game-once-per-round-as-minor-action. Funny, reliable and a staple? Yes. Not remotely overpowered.

[Chai]

Would wipe a fair bit, assuming a 1 rolled, and some margin for error I worked in, the number is about right.

In 3.5 and previous, the dragon would cast nightshield or shield on itself, or have a mantle, or contingency spell that would activate a globe or a heal apon being awakened and damaged, depending on its level of casting power and chosen class. It would then grin when all the pew pew pews bounced off its level 1 defense to a level 1 spell, smash the entrance to its chamber trapping all the level 1 wizards, then eating them one round at a time, to the horror of all survivors waiting to be eaten, heh.

[Cam_Neely]

Cam, honestly - it isn't.

An optimized 4e striker can kill itself with just at-wills in a round or two, and always on a nova. It may seem "uber" to not have to roll, but it IS NOT overpowered, even with an end-game-once-per-round-as-minor-action. Funny, reliable and a staple? Yes. Not remotely overpowered.

I agree, never said it was overpowered. Bit unbalancing, yes. Nasty Dmg, ya for a minor at will on low level character, but on lv 2x, 14 dmg is not much at all. On the balancing part, its just that this is on a controller, not a striker in the 4e world. Def not 'uber', and never claimed it was.

Chai, as much as you love to turn these into a '3.5 is better, or I could have done this in 3.5' please don't. Have a look at the Original Post. Do you think this is good for WotWC? Is this a step towards something better?

"Does this mean with that WotWC have realized a potential err in their progression from 3.5 to 4?"

[voodoogroves]

Cam, I was too brief before - let me explain.

It does, say, 7 points of damage heroic tier. That is in NO WAY remotely close than anything with a die in the calc. It can't be boosted by (basically) anything but your implement which, if you're using Magic Missile, is a Staff of Missile Mastery. No dual implement spellcaster. No implement focus. No Gauntlets of Blood. No "x to damage rolls" bonus from the Warlord. Since there is no actual damage ROLL, all of those millions of ways the competitive at-will-ers get their DPR averages up in the 100s end-game won't work for magic missile. Since it isn't an attack, you can't trigger conditionals like White Lotus Riposte/Master off of it. No "when hit" abilities that your allies may have that trigger or enhance work either. It can't proc a crit. All of those things (crits, hits, damage rolls) are where the real power boosting comes into play. You can't even MC into a striker and get your bonus strikery damage since nearly all of them apply to damage rolls or hits.

It has nice advantages - it's an effect. You needn't roll a 1. You never miss. Then again, any end-game DPR calculation is taking to-hit into account and most of those builds are hitting on a 2+.

I'd wager to say in a low-optimization social party it may seem very strong. In a highly optimized party it's a fun trick and it's use is only the cockroach-like attrition game. You can optimize it, but you'll find that other options will in most cases outperform it and not by a small amount.

[Chai]

Chai, as much as you love to turn these into a '3.5 is better, or I could have done this in 3.5' please don't. Have a look at the Original Post. Do you think this is good for WotWC? Is this a step towards something better?

"Does this mean with that WotWC have realized a potential err in their progression from 3.5 to 4?"

I will continue to point out things that were resolved in 3.5 and previous that are messed up in 4.0, because this is my number one pet peeve one the massive rule change in the first place. I am trying to stick to how that applies here with MM rather than bantering about entire edition comparisons however

Like I stated in the past, in an effort to sweep alot of things that didnt work in the past away to make them work with a rule change, they also swept away alot of things that worked and didnt need to be changed. MM was one of those things. If you want to drill into any one thing and look at how it used to work -vs- how it works now, what type of issues its balance used to create -vs- what type of balance issues it creates now has to be discussed.

Yes I do believe they realize a potential error with this specific situation. The odd thing about it is the fact that it "isnt an attack roll" now underpowers it in certain areas of potential development and overpowers it in others. Its likely just as situationally balanced as it used to be in 4.0, previous -vs- 4.0 now, but the situations where it is less powerful -vs- more powerful have simply changed. Voodoo describes some of the specifics pretty well.

[Tobril]

In 3.5 and previous, the dragon would cast nightshield or shield on itself, or have a mantle, or contingency spell that would activate a globe or a heal apon being awakened and damaged, depending on its level of casting power and chosen class. It would then grin when all the pew pew pews bounced off its level 1 defense to a level 1 spell, smash the entrance to its chamber trapping all the level 1 wizards, then eating them one round at a time, to the horror of all survivors waiting to be eaten, heh.

+1 for the absolute hilarity. (and accuracy of what would happen)

[katana_one]

5.) There is no attack part of the spell any more. Just auto force dmg. Technically I think that means that stuff that is triggered by an attack does not take place. ie if someone is granted temp HP on being attacked, they dont get the Temp HP. If Ottis is marked, and he does Magic Missile, then its not an attack, so does not suffer an opportunity attack.

Can you cite this? My interpretation is that just because there's no die roll doesn't mean that it's not an "attack." If my interpretation is correct, temporary HP would still apply, as would other defensive abilities that trigger off of "being targeted" or "damaged by an attack."

[voodoogroves]

A few things to keep in mind, framing wise.

- The fluff of D&D worlds is essentially the same. The plot, the story, etc.
- The crunch and mechanics are different in each including 3.x and 4.x. It was so with each edition.
- The approach that 4e took was less of a minor adjustment and more of a holistically different design approach.

There are kind of 2 ways you can look at making a simulation rule set for an RPG. This isn't a simple 1-way axis with something at each end - there are several guiding principles at play. The reason people have a visceral reaction to 4e and compare it to an MMO is that some of the core, basic principles that the design uses are also similar to some used by MMOs.

I'm going to do a very poor job explaining, but take for instance the extremes of 3.5 classes. One on hand, things like the Fighter and Warlock who can essentially operate all day long. With enough cure potions, their performance and capabilities are the same in round 1 as they are in round 99999. On the other are the classes like the Wizard which mechanically trades versatility and peak power for that endurance. It has a very limited number of spells it can cast each day.

Assume you want a game that is more portable where you want to craft adventures and modules using some basic assumptions about how an adventure paces.

Now, tell me how many times in 3.x you essentially drop back and punt? Everyone rest up, buff like mad before the room and slaughter the contents. The casters dump half their spells in the first round and the fight is very brief. Wizard is tapped, Cleric didn't prep water breathing so everyone climbs the magic rope and rests so the dudes who can't go all day long get another "day". The fighter and warlock feel left out.

4e and 3.x approach that very differently.

Consider also the relative damage levels. 3.5 had a very "monsters level and progress like people" aspect that made things good in some ways, and really really bad in others. Combats of optimized groups were rarely more than a few rounds. Save-or-die is just one artifact of this.

4e has not only a pacing for multiple-encounters but also within an encounter. Nova rounds are possible, but except in extreme cases the NI loops and other huge cycles are removed. HP, defenses and damage output are scaled such that an encounter will "last".

Just some food for thought. I like them both.

[Cam_Neely]

Can you cite this? My interpretation is that just because there's no die roll doesn't mean that it's not an "attack." If my interpretation is correct, temporary HP would still apply, as would other defensive abilities that trigger off of "being targeted" or "damaged by an attack."

Sorry, got nothing. This was purely an off the cuff email to my P&P group to get their input, and thought I would farm a bit of input here too. Not sure how it would play out, anyone have concrete evidence?

The 'effect' of the new MM is purely dmg, no where does it mention an attack, its strictly a power. In my mind this makes it akin to a power (think a 'leader' power) that adds dmg onto someone elses attack. On using that power, they are not attacking, but purely dmg, but they would not trigger an opportunity attack.

Not sure if the Temp HP is triggered of "on being attacked' or 'on receiving dmg' (at work and cant look it up), but that would have a bearing.

Great post VooDoo +1
I think this quote from the update is the most interesting part "This update reflects an effort to restore
the power to its classical form." Maybe a tipping of their hand, of a willingness to change the basic principle of 4e to D&D's classical form?

[katana_one]

Fair enough. I don't have the Essentials books, and have not seen the revised Magic Missile. I'm just going by my gut and my experience with 4.0 thus far.

[voodoogroves]

Can you cite this? My interpretation is that just because there's no die roll doesn't mean that it's not an "attack." If my interpretation is correct, temporary HP would still apply, as would other defensive abilities that trigger off of "being targeted" or "damaged by an attack."

It works "on attack"; it is an attack.

It does not work "on attack roll" or "on hit" nor does it trigger anything that applies on or to a "damage roll" as those do not apply to the power.

[Mobeius]

4Ed DnD is proof of what happens when you keep fixing it till its broken. Which incidentally I am starting to see in DDO.