Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread II: Electric Boogaloo

[obryn]

Q526
Yes. Damage type charop is one of the areas of decent damage charop in 4e.

A decent way to exploit this is to add "cold" vulnerability, then deal small amounts of small static cold damage to the target repeatedly.

Very good. That's the basic plan. I was going to recommend adding Thunder to Ice Prison, then going with Resounding Thunder ... but this saves a feat, sticks to the Cold theme, and makes Static Charge less of an outlier in his power selection.

[Alejandro]

Q527

So my group wants me, the wizard, to prepare some ritual scrolls (heroic.) I want to make sure I'm reading this right:

- 16 hours to write a heroic ritual scroll
- I must pay the ritual component price up front to prepare the scroll
- I then have to pay the component price again when I actually cast the scroll

Is this actually how it is?

[ArcturusV]

A527:

You take twice the time to cast the Ritual to make the scroll, and pay the performance price. Then have to pay the normal price when you cast it, but it takes half the time. And anyone can cast it.

So it doesn't take 16 hours unless the ritual takes 8 hours to cast.

[NecroRebel]

A 527

No. In fact, it's actually worse than that.

Creating a ritual scroll takes the same monetary cost as creating a ritual book, but twice the time. Creating a ritual book takes 8 hours and costs an amount of gold equal to the ritual's market price. Then, once you use the scroll, you need to provide the components, but doing the ritual takes half the normal time. The important thing to note is that creating the scroll costs the ritual's market price, not its component price. Unfortunately, the market price is typically somewhat higher than the component price.

So, for example, to create a scroll of Raise Dead would take 16 hours, since it's a heroic-tier ritual, and 680 gold pieces, since that's the ritual's market cost. Then, using it would cost 500, 5000, or 50000 gold, depending on whether the target was heroic, paragon, or epic, and would take 4 hours.

[Alejandro]

Well. Thank you. At the risk of discussion in a Q&A thread, that sounds stupid, and I see no reason for my wizard to ever make a ritual scroll, as it would cost all the gold I currently have to create that one raise dead scroll. And why does it take 16 hours to write a scroll but 1 hour to create a magic item?

[ghost_warlock]

Q 528

Can a warlock using Eyes of the Vestige elect to place his warlock's curse on himself or an ally when he hits with the power, assuming he/they is/are within 3 squares of the target?

"Choose the target or a creature within 3 squares of the target and within the target’s line of sight. You place your Warlock’s Curse on that creature; if the creature is already cursed by you, you can deal your Warlock’s Curse extra damage to that creature instead of to the target."

[obryn]

A 528
The wording of "creature" would normally imply that you can. However, the wording of the Warlock's Curse feature states outright that it's only usable on enemies.

Since the specific power of Eyes of the Vestige doesn't have the limits (it should say "enemy" if it means "enemy"; it says "creature") I think it's probably kosher, but it's reasonable to expect pretty significant table variation and I'd check with the DM for a final ruling before basing my entire character on it.

I'm guessing Bloodied Boon is the point?

-O

[Mandrake]

A 528 cont.

If I read correctly, it overrides the general. But, really, two things:

1) a sensible DM that is trying to fish out "abuses" would not allow this
2) if it would be allowed, just plain and simply curse your friend (yeah, he becomes an enemy) and then make friends again with a free action of speaking

My point is that is almost the same thing and should not be allowed because it's an abuse.

[ghost_warlock]

A 528 cont.

If I read correctly, it overrides the general. But, really, two things:

1) a sensible DM that is trying to fish out "abuses" would not allow this
2) if it would be allowed, just plain and simply curse your friend (yeah, he becomes an enemy) and then make friends again with a free action of speaking

My point is that is almost the same thing and should not be allowed because it's an abuse.

This is incorrect: the terms ally, creature, and enemy all have specific meanings in the mechanics of the game and, no, cursing your friends would not change them mechanically from allies into enemies. Cursing yourself would not turn you into your own enemy, either.

As to whether it's an abuse, that's beyond the scope of this thread. As such, this topic has its own discussion thread now for debating that sort of thing. SPOILER ALERT: it's really not that big of a deal because almost every applicable use of Warlock's Curse requires the cursed creature be an enemy.

[Yakk]

Q 528

Can a warlock using Eyes of the Vestige elect to place his warlock's curse on himself or an ally when he hits with the power, assuming he/they is/are within 3 squares of the target?

"Choose the target or a creature within 3 squares of the target and within the target’s line of sight. You place your Warlock’s Curse on that creature; if the creature is already cursed by you, you can deal your Warlock’s Curse extra damage to that creature instead of to the target."

A 528: No. While specific beats general, the effect of "Eyes of the Vestige" does not specifically replace the rules for "Warlock's Curse". If "Eyes of the Vestige" had said "any creature", or the words "even an ally", it would specifically replace the general rule of "Warlock's Curse". As it stands, the target of a "Warlock's Curse" is (in general) a creature, and more specifically an enemy, so reading "Eyes of the Vestige" consistently with "Warlock's Curse" does not require "Eyes of the Vestige" gaining the ability to place "Warlock's Curse" on an ally.

There is no text in 4e that says a subrule being vague does not mean that restrictions from the general rule are removed. Rather, subrules can be specific and override general rules. As an example, "You can treat a quarterstaff as a double weapon" specifically changes the properties of a quarterstaff, overruling the general rule that it is a two-handed weapon.

[LaZodiac]

Q539: Do you have to be proficient with wands/staves/tomes and what not to use the powers on them? It seems like an obvious question, but I'm not actually sure!

[ArcturusV]

A539

You require some form of Implement Mastery (Usually granted by your class, but you can also pick it up as a feat), as well as a power that has the Implement Keyword.

[ghost_warlock]

A 539

Yes, you need proficiency in an implement to use any of its powers, properties, or other effects (Rules Compendium, p.283).

(Implement Mastery is an arcanist wizard class feature and is something altogether different.)

@v: Yep, you were essentially correct. And I actually didn't know you couldn't use the powers/properties on an implement until I looked it up a minute ago. You apparently can use the powers/properties on magic armor and weapons you aren't proficient with, though - you just suffer the usual penalties associated with wearing/wielding them.

[ArcturusV]

So corrected. I had the right idea, just used the wrong word.

[Hyena]

Q540. Offhand weapon quality states that dual wielding a weapon is much easier and better. But there are no penalties for dual wielding, so how is it?

[Badgerish]

A540
If you attempt to dual-wield without either:

a weapon with the 'offhand' tag in your off-hand
or
a class feature that allows dual-wielding with any one-handed weapon (Two-Weapon Ranger/Whirling Barbarian)

then you simply can't use dual-wielding attacks.

[Tegu8788]

A 540 Clarification

There are specific attacks that indicated you attack with two weapons. Unless you are using one of those powers, and the above conditions are met, then you can dual wield and attack with no penalty.

If you aren't using a power that let's you hit with two weapons, then you can only attack with one weapon at a time. Could be on- or off-hand, but only one. There is no way to take a penalty to get a second attack.

To dual wield you need what Badgerish said. To dual attack, you need that and a specific power.

[Newoblivion]

Q541

If a monster have both resist necrotic 5 and resist cold 5 and my attack is doing cold and necrotic damage, will the monster resist each element separately? (aka resist 10 damage) or will it resist only 5 damage from my attack?

[Kurald Galain]

A541

Against cold-and-necrotic damage, you use the worst of your two resistances, not the sum of both. So if you don't have resist necrotic (i.e. resist zero) then your cold resistance doesn't help either.

[Newoblivion]

Q542

How does powers work out of cambat? can PCs just spam encounter and at-will powers all day long? can thay use an at-will power to interact with the dungeon? break traps, doors, walls, etc'?

[ArcturusV]

A 542:

Kinda on the At-Will Spamming. Remember that powers, particularly attack powers, need a valid target to go off. The often called "Bag of Rats" rule. However there are a lot of At-Will abilities which DEMAND out of combat use as well. Light. Mage Hand. Prestidigitation. Etc. And you can use them, well... at-will.

Encounter Powers are in a similar boat. Outside of the "Bag of Rats" ruling and such, there is nothing preventing them from being used out of combat. In fact some (Like the Bard's Words of Friendship) DEMAND out of combat use more than anything. However the rules for Encounter Powers remain valid, you need a short rest before you can use them again, even if you didn't have a "Combat" between the use of the power and the next time you want to use the power.

[ghost_warlock]

A 542 Clarification

The "target" line of each power tells you who that power can be used against. Usually, it's one of the following:

• "Creatures" means just what it says - any creature within range, friend or foe, can be attacked. Note that, while powers normally only affect characters and monsters, objects can be valid targets with the DM's discretion (Rules Compendium p. 107).
• "Allies" mean the other PCs. Note that the character that used this power is specifically not included, unless the power says "you and allies." This would include any NPCs traveling with the party.
• "Enemies" means the monsters and villains controlled by the DM. These powers are normally referred to as "friendly" on the various online character build guides as a PC can use them without fear of hurting his friends.

As for your specific question about using powers on walls, doors, chests, it's really up to you as the DM. In some cases, letting PCs do this can open up the game to potential abuse. On the other hand, the way many powers are described makes them seem good candidates for smashing chests or breaking down doors (thunderwave, for example).

Note that objects do not have a Will defense (and are immune to any power that targets Will) and are also specifically immune to necrotic, poison, and psychic damage. It's up the DM to determine if a specific object is particularly resistant or vulnerable to a specific kind of damage otherwise.

The DMG should have general rules for determining an object's AC, Fort, and Ref and how many hit points it has. These rules can also be found on pages 176-177 of the Rules Compendium.

[Vallum]

Q543

I am wondering what to make for a D&D Encounters group, and the party make-up is;

• Artificer (that's all I know)

• Dagger Rogue (I'm thinking Cha-secondary, DM described him as an 'oppertunist')

• TWF Ranger

• Orb Wizard, (doesn't know much about rituals)

We 'might'* be having a cleric and fighter (or some defender), show up... Which throws off planning ahead of time for a character, and why I am asking.

My thoughts are, (in my opinion, feel free to opt for other and/or better options),

• Bard, very versatile and can cover the ritual casting that our Wizard has no idea about, (imo, very important with Encounters to make sure for good gear we need)

OR

• Defender, (Swordmage or Warden), due to how squishy this party is, (unoptimized Ranger, so low AC)

OR

• Something else

The part that sucks is about who will show up. If the Cleric OR fighter show up, I am unsure what to roll up and could use some advise... Thank you everyone!

[ArcturusV]

A543:

I'd suggest going for Bard. It has a lot of utility, and you can make up the loss of Defenders with more Healing. Also remember bards CAN mark enemies as well with some powers, so you can still get marking out there in case one of your characters tends to have a good defense against whatever the enemies are bringing. I'd go with a ranged type Bard only because you seem a bit melee heavy regardless of what the other "might" players bring.

[NecroRebel]

A 543

This question is outside the scope of this thread; it isn't a matter of explaining or interpreting the rules. You should make a new thread for this sort of advice.

[Tegu8788]

Q 543

This needs it's own thread.




HYBRIDS!!!

[tcrudisi]

A 543

I agree with the couple before me that this needs its own thread. I'll go ahead and give a brief answer, anyway.

IMO, the defender is the least important role. You've got 2 melee strikers, a leader who might be melee, and one definite ranged person (wizard). The Artificer will probably lean melee with options for ranged once they find out how to best support the party.

With that being said, your melee roles are covered. I wouldn't do a defender. Yeah, it could fill some holes. Bard? Well, you could make an argument for that. I like it slightly better than defender, but I'm in no way thinking of rituals. Why bother? The wizard gets ritual casting for free. If you are worried about their knowledge of rituals, show them a list of your recommendations. Heck, buy them the rituals. There's no need to create a class just for rituals (which I do agree are extremely important) when someone else can already do them.

So, what does that leave? Controller, Striker, and Leader. Well ... the orb wizard is the finest controller out there. If well-built, he'll give you the control you need. Striker? You could make a strong case for it. Artificer buffs and the 3 strikers kill everything before they can mount a proper offense against you. If things go bad, well, they won't: the controller will make sure that things are always in your favor. If you go striker, definitely go ranged. I'm thinking Sorcerer for AoE blasting. Leader? This is another option. Warlord is a great option; you bring more heals to the table and you can wield the TWF Ranger and Rogue to do great damage (remember: Sneak Attack is per turn now, not round). You can also do the Warlord at ranged if you like.

So that's what I'd play: either a Sorc or a Warlord. Both fit with the party rather nicely.

[Tegu8788]

Q544

If someone took a Longsword Songblade threw it, what would happen? RBA I assume, then return to the hand of the thrower. Or something else?

Q545

Is there a check for drawing a weapon or handing off a weapon to someone mid move. Player 1 has a weapon, Player 2 moves past, taking the weapon from Player 1 and continuing to move past Player 1.

[ArcturusV]

A545

In your example I believe the level 2 Skill Power utility for Thievery: Quick Palm (PHB III) would be what was needed to do that. Possibly in conjunction with the other level 2 Skill Power utility for Thievery: Fast Hands.

[NecroRebel]

A 544

Since longswords do not have either thrown property, you'd adjudicate it as if you had thrown an improvised ranged weapon it you made an attack. Since improvised ranged weapons also do not have either thrown property () it's ambiguous as to what stat you'd use for this, but it would probably default to Dexterity. Since enhancement bonuses to attack and damage rolls from weapons do not specify that the weapon has to be used "properly" in order to take effect, you'd gain those, and the standard magic thrown weapon boomerang effect would occur.

If you had thrown the item but not in the process of performing an attack, there are to my knowledge no rules to cover that action. On the other hand, the magic thrown weapon boomerang effect would not occur, because no ranged attack would have resolved.