TOPIC: Wizard MEC, Relic and Legendary

Aeroneus Martellus wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

Reread the first post, and you’ll see Jeff suggested a wizard card redesign starting Monday, so it must be analyzed from that angle as well.

And I hate to say it - maybe that means we need to wait until we have the new character design before we can say what would be a good class legendary/relic.

If we simplify the MEC mechanic - that frees up designing both character/class specific. Toss in the OG Jinn spellbook so we still get some Wizarding love this year. And then we can take the time to get the character right,THEN the class specific.

I think we'd be far better off Keywording the Relic/Epic than putting it off completely.

Has anyone compiled a list of UR builds per class? It will be beneficial to see where wizard stacks up balance and damage wise at UR for proposing where the relic should be in comparison to BiS legendary.

If no list exists, and people would trust my builds, I can do it.

NightGod wrote:

Aeroneus Martellus wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

Reread the first post, and you’ll see Jeff suggested a wizard card redesign starting Monday, so it must be analyzed from that angle as well.

And I hate to say it - maybe that means we need to wait until we have the new character design before we can say what would be a good class legendary/relic.

If we simplify the MEC mechanic - that frees up designing both character/class specific. Toss in the OG Jinn spellbook so we still get some Wizarding love this year. And then we can take the time to get the character right,THEN the class specific.

I think we'd be far better off Keywording the Relic/Epic than putting it off completely.

Not trying to be obtuse - what do you mean by Keywording?

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

It doesn't seem like speculation when Jeff said that we should assume spell damage on the cards for Wizards will double. That sounds like the assumption Jeff wants us to use in the design of these three tokens. I agree that it is speculation whether other changes will be made.

Your complaint though was about what effect the character card redesign has on normal. That aspect of the conversation is what Arcanist asked you to hold off on as the impact to normal is not what is being discussed.

I get that. My comment was really aimed to Jeff to consider. If he's planning on part (or most) of the power level fix for Wizards being doubling the spell damage for Wizards on the cards, I did and still do think it's worth mentioning that going that approach might unbalance beginning groups. And that might impact these discussions, because if Jeff decides he can't double the spell damage on the character cards because it negatively impacts the balance of beginning groups (like maybe the other classes will wonder why they are even there if the Wizards can kill everything on normal mode), then that impacts this design.

Mike Steele wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

It doesn't seem like speculation when Jeff said that we should assume spell damage on the cards for Wizards will double. That sounds like the assumption Jeff wants us to use in the design of these three tokens. I agree that it is speculation whether other changes will be made.

Your complaint though was about what effect the character card redesign has on normal. That aspect of the conversation is what Arcanist asked you to hold off on as the impact to normal is not what is being discussed.

I get that. My comment was really aimed to Jeff to consider. If he's planning on part (or most) of the power level fix for Wizards being doubling the spell damage for Wizards on the cards, I did and still do think it's worth mentioning that going that approach might unbalance beginning groups. And that might impact these discussions, because if Jeff decides he can't double the spell damage on the character cards because it negatively impacts the balance of beginning groups (like maybe the other classes will wonder why they are even there if the Wizards can kill everything on normal mode), then that impacts this design.

There is precedent for changing spells between 4th and 5th level.

Maybe we can assume 4th level will stay the same, while 5th will get a boost with different, higher damage spells?

In this case, though, a level upgrade may be dramatically more powerful that any other class.

Aeroneus Martellus wrote:

NightGod wrote:

Aeroneus Martellus wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

Reread the first post, and you’ll see Jeff suggested a wizard card redesign starting Monday, so it must be analyzed from that angle as well.

And I hate to say it - maybe that means we need to wait until we have the new character design before we can say what would be a good class legendary/relic.

If we simplify the MEC mechanic - that frees up designing both character/class specific. Toss in the OG Jinn spellbook so we still get some Wizarding love this year. And then we can take the time to get the character right,THEN the class specific.

I think we'd be far better off Keywording the Relic/Epic than putting it off completely.

Not trying to be obtuse - what do you mean by Keywording?

Something like "Grants Overpower and Skill Bonus" and then you go to tokendb to find out what those keywords mean. No one making a token at this level is going to be put off by having to research what the token means,

NightGod wrote:

Aeroneus Martellus wrote:

NightGod wrote:

Aeroneus Martellus wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

Reread the first post, and you’ll see Jeff suggested a wizard card redesign starting Monday, so it must be analyzed from that angle as well.

And I hate to say it - maybe that means we need to wait until we have the new character design before we can say what would be a good class legendary/relic.

If we simplify the MEC mechanic - that frees up designing both character/class specific. Toss in the OG Jinn spellbook so we still get some Wizarding love this year. And then we can take the time to get the character right,THEN the class specific.

I think we'd be far better off Keywording the Relic/Epic than putting it off completely.

Not trying to be obtuse - what do you mean by Keywording?

Something like "Grants Overpower and Skill Bonus" and then you go to tokendb to find out what those keywords mean. No one making a token at this level is going to be put off by having to research what the token means,

Ah gotcha. Thanks.

Wade Schwendemann (Dr. Uid) wrote: Also, I really don't love the idea of breaking wands to deal a ton of damage, with a 25% chance of needing to be resurrected, unless you have over 100 HP.

+1 on not tying a consumable to an Epic item. I think I hate it slightly less than tying it to a slide, but it's real close.

Endgame wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It does us no good to consider what MIGHT happen in the class redesign and factoring that into the legendary design. The only one who can truly speak to what will happen with the redesign is Jeff.

How strong the Wizard is at printed on normal has no bearing on the Legendary token design, overpowered or not. That's a discussion for the class card redesign NOT for the Legendary token design that's down to mere hours or days to complete.

Adding speculation on the card redesign does not help the token design, it only succeeds in distracting from the actual conversation that needs to happen. Thus my request to avoid doing so.

It doesn't seem like speculation when Jeff said that we should assume spell damage on the cards for Wizards will double. That sounds like the assumption Jeff wants us to use in the design of these three tokens. I agree that it is speculation whether other changes will be made.

Your complaint though was about what effect the character card redesign has on normal. That aspect of the conversation is what Arcanist asked you to hold off on as the impact to normal is not what is being discussed.

I get that. My comment was really aimed to Jeff to consider. If he's planning on part (or most) of the power level fix for Wizards being doubling the spell damage for Wizards on the cards, I did and still do think it's worth mentioning that going that approach might unbalance beginning groups. And that might impact these discussions, because if Jeff decides he can't double the spell damage on the character cards because it negatively impacts the balance of beginning groups (like maybe the other classes will wonder why they are even there if the Wizards can kill everything on normal mode), then that impacts this design.

There is precedent for changing spells between 4th and 5th level.

Maybe we can assume 4th level will stay the same, while 5th will get a boost with different, higher damage spells?

In this case, though, a level upgrade may be dramatically more powerful that any other class.

I wouldn't assume that unless Jeff says it's what he is doing, but it's definitely one approach.

edwin wrote:

kurtreznor wrote: Ok, I feel the need to state this since a lot of discussion revolves around casting as a free action:

Your hands must be empty to cast. (Exception is focus items/weapons specifically designed to allow casting)

It takes a free action to empty your hands.

Free action spells are NOT as versatile as many are assuming. You CANNOT use a wand and cast as a free action.
You can use a scroll or throwing weapon then cast as a free action, BUT your hands are now empty and next round you will need to use your free action to put something in your hands. OR you will only be able to cast with no focus weapon bonus.
You can attack with a weapon and cast as free action ONLY IF that weapon is a focus weapon (or otherwise usable for casting).


Main point here is, unless the MEC or relic/legendary specifically allow something else, repeated free action casting mostly only allows double casting or melee attack plus casting and nothing else.

Thank you for the constructive feedback. I will go back and see if I can work something else out between card changes, wizard UR, relic and legendary to accomplishes what Jeff asked for and similar in power steps as what he proposed.

Update idea
“I appreciate your patience with me. I painted us into a design corner, and now we gotta break down a wall (nerfing MEC) to get to a good place. If it helps, I am open to redesigning the Wizards cards next week to increase spell damage there. It would be better to fix the game on the cards rather than with tokens. Let's assume spell damage is roughly doubled moving forward.”

Damage spells currently on character card (convert sliding spells to non-sliding spells) keeping targets and energy types. Retain non-damage spells on character card.
0-level: Does 3 or 9 damage for 1 target
1-level: Does 8 or 14 damage for 1 target; 6 or 12 damage for multiple targets
2-level: Does 13 or 19 damage for 1 target
3-level: Does 17 or 23 damage for multiple targets

New Wizard UR = May a cast 0-level thru-1st level spell as a free action when you cast a spell as a standard action.

Relic = As new Wizard UR + May cast a 2nd thru 3rd level spell as a free action when you cast a spell as a standard action. Skill Check bonus for spells add +12 pts (instead of +6) to spell upon successful skill test.

Legendary = As Relic & Skill Check bonus for spells add +18 pts (instead of +6) to spell upon successful skill test & Retributive Strike

Retributive Strike = may break any Rare Wizard usable Wand to cause a massive out-powering of magical energy. All monsters in the room take 100 points of Force damage. The Wizard takes sufficient damage to die unless they naturally roll an 6-20 on a d20. If they save they are left at 1hp. This damage and effect can’t be prevented. (1/game)

Two tokens I currently equip would be outdated by use of the above (Bracelets of the Zephyr and Carter's Tome).

I believe it may also affect the Cabal Set bonus.

Allow trade in any UR affected (and Bracelets of the Zephyr) for a current year UR of your choice +10 treasure chips (consistent with Charm of Brooching, etc.)

Require trade in for MEC similar to above trade in.

Adeya wrote: In my mind the Wizard role has always been about versatility. You have a intelligent magic-user who goes adventuring with tons of different spells at the ready to face a variety of different situations.

He or she has low hit points and stays in the back (this means not sliding to me in TD). But I don't see the Wizard as a 'one and done' character. Maybe in the last room, with a massive final spell, but not in every room. That's just going to be incredibly boring to play.

So I was so excited to see a spell book finally coming to us this year (versatility!) but now, not only is that gone, also so much of what I love about the class is being stripped away. (Please don't ruin the MEC!)

I may have to hang up my beloved Wizard robes and look for a new class because of this. I hear that the Druid school is a popular option...

For traditional D&D games (everything from 1e to 3.75e), this is the correct take. Maybe TPTB for True Dungeon want it a different approach but in my experience wizards never do the most damage in a round or in a combat with D&D style games.

I played many years of RPGA conventions including 5 years of the 3.x version of Greyhawk. In these conventions you encounter a great mix of players with most of them being top tier players. Players who make absolute world beating characters.

Without exception the characters other than wizards out damaged wizard by a wide margin. Two hand warrior characters, dual wield characters, archers, and druids put wizard damage to shame at these tables.

Having said that and without exception, wizard was still the strongest character at the table even though they wouldn't do the most damage. Wizard would routinely end encounters with a single low level spell.

6 troll barbarians racing at the group? Wizard casts slow. Encounter over. Level 15 archmage? Cast blind or telekinesis. Now what? Encounter over.

Given the post that started this thread, it sounds like this traditional approach to wizard isn't what this game is about. I think it's a shame because it undercuts the true power of the wizard class.

Leitz wrote:

Adeya wrote: In my mind the Wizard role has always been about versatility. You have a intelligent magic-user who goes adventuring with tons of different spells at the ready to face a variety of different situations.

He or she has low hit points and stays in the back (this means not sliding to me in TD). But I don't see the Wizard as a 'one and done' character. Maybe in the last room, with a massive final spell, but not in every room. That's just going to be incredibly boring to play.

So I was so excited to see a spell book finally coming to us this year (versatility!) but now, not only is that gone, also so much of what I love about the class is being stripped away. (Please don't ruin the MEC!)

I may have to hang up my beloved Wizard robes and look for a new class because of this. I hear that the Druid school is a popular option...

For traditional D&D games (everything from 1e to 3.75e), this is the correct take. Maybe TPTB for True Dungeon want it a different approach but in my experience wizards never do the most damage in a round or in a combat with D&D style games.

I played many years of RPGA conventions including 5 years of the 3.x version of Greyhawk. In these conventions you encounter a great mix of players with most of them being top tier players. Players who make absolute world beating characters.

Without exception the characters other than wizards out damaged wizard by a wide margin. Two hand warrior characters, dual wield characters, archers, and druids put wizard damage to shame at these tables.

Having said that and without exception, wizard was still the strongest character at the table even though they wouldn't do the most damage. Wizard would routinely end encounters with a single low level spell.

6 troll barbarians racing at the group? Wizard casts slow. Encounter over. Level 15 archmage? Cast blind or telekinesis. Now what? Encounter over.

Given the post that started this thread, it sounds like this traditional approach to wizard isn't what this game is about. I think it's a shame because it undercuts the true power of the wizard class.

That's because playing at the table allows a lot more use of battlefield control and drawing out the length of combats (by separating the mobs so your team can focus fire one at a time) can be a good thing-I play my casters as battlefield control and they absolutely dominate the battle, sometimes without ever doing damage.

In True Dungeon, you need to finish combat as quickly as possible because of room timing. There's no room for casting Create Pit + Grease to lock down the BBEG while you wipe up the minions because a) there's only one or two mobs in (nearly) every room and b) the horn of Gondor would sound about the time you got the minions dead.