|
The concept of allowing wizards to duke it out with floating swords at a distance is very cool, and removes the idea of wizards being reduced to crossbows at 60 paces. However, the ability as written has two issues --- first, it’s limited to only generalist wizards and clerics with the magic domain, and second, the way it is written, it is too powerful at 1st level, allowing floating greatswords and Intelligence bonuses to damage.
So, what I recommend is changing Mage Hand to the following:
Mage Hand
Transmutation, Level: Brd 0, Sor/Wiz 0, Components: V, S, Casting Time: 1 standard action, Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels), Target: One nonmagical, unattended object weighing up to 5 lb., Duration: Concentration
Saving Throw: None, Spell Resistance: No
You point your finger at an object and can lift it and move it at will from a distance.
As a free action, you may draw a weapon from your person.
As a move action, you can propel the object as far as 15 feet in any direction, though the spell ends if the distance between you and the object ever exceeds the spell’s range.
If you choose to, concentrating as a standard action, you may use mage hand to make a single strike per round with a melee weapon of up to 5 lb, using your caster level as your attack bonus, and dealing regular weapon damage. You may attack with a weapon on the round that mage hand is cast.
And then, I would suggest changing the class abilities for generalist wizards and magic domain clerics to:
1st Level -- Hand of the Apprentice (Su): As a standard action, you may use mage hand as a spell-like ability at will. Unlike the normal mage hand spell, you may use it to wield a magical weapon of up to 5 lb.
Weight is an issue, but they are not getting the casting stat x1.5 like meleers are with strength. It needs to be restricted to melee weapons only, but great sword + casting stat isn't a problem in our game at all. Even if it is a little powerful at 1st, it quickly successes usefulness in later levels as early as 5th from our personal playtest experience.
I don't think that there should be a weight limitation for Hand Of The Apprentice. Instead, I believe that the description for this special ability should clearly state that it can only wield a one-handed weapon of the caster's size or smaller. That way, you don't have Wizards using Hand Of The Apprentice to hack people to death with Large Greatswords salvaged from (or given to them by) Fire Giants or the like.
|
Yeah, I ran into a bit of a dilemma with this as well. One of my players busted out his mage hand while invisible, had an artificer infuse the blade with Wraithstrike and was adding his Int to hit and damage on a touch attack that did not break his invisibility...
Any thoughts on this, I had initially said that the strike would break invisibility, but it seems the hand attacks independently. Most vexing...
Yeah, I ran into a bit of a dilemma with this as well. One of my players busted out his mage hand while invisible, had an artificer infuse the blade with Wraithstrike and was adding his Int to hit and damage on a touch attack that did not break his invisibility...
Any thoughts on this, I had initially said that the strike would break invisibility, but it seems the hand attacks independently. Most vexing...
The wizard must control it, and he's attacking. He loses invis.
The ability also dictates that the wizard must be proficient with the weapon, so great swords would be rare.
The wizard must control it, and he's attacking. He loses invis.
Actually, you wouldn't. The Mage Hand isn't being directed like a normal spell - you're basically controlling a summoned monster and giving it a sword to hack people up with. Just as summoning a monster and having them attack while Invisible doesn't break Invisibility, neither does sending your Mage Hand out to cut someone a second smile.
The ability also dictates that the wizard must be proficient with the weapon, so great swords would be rare.
Seems like a pretty good opening move for an Eldritch Knight. Cast Invisibility on yourself and send out your Mage Hand with the magical Large Greatsword to chop a few people up before you move in to strike...
Seems like a pretty good opening move for an Eldritch Knight. Cast Invisibility on yourself and send out your Mage Hand with the magical Large Greatsword to chop a few people up before you move in to strike...
I can see a couples of problems with that image.
1) Mage hand has a weight limitation of 5 lbs, a Greatsword is 8 lbs.
2) Even if the mage is enlarged, once the weapon leaves his person, it returns to normal size
The wizard must control it, and he's attacking. He loses invis.
The ability also dictates that the wizard must be proficient with the weapon, so great swords would be rare.
Agreed - loses invis. He's making the attack rolls himself, using his intelligence to hit and damage. If the weapon is ignored, it returns to the caster. Practically the definition of making an attack.
Also Great swords wouldn't be that rare for human wizards/clerics - free martial weapon proficiency can go a long ways.
I must be missing something.
How can mage hand be used to wield a greatsword?
Not only is it more than the weight limitation of the spell, but it requires two hands.
From my reading, mage hand provides for a single hand and a weight restriction of 5 lbs.
I must be missing something.
How can mage hand be used to wield a greatsword?
Not only is it more than the weight limitation of the spell, but it requires two hands.
From my reading, mage hand provides for a single hand and a weight restriction of 5 lbs.
Not only that, if 5 lbs of pressure is all you can apply, that's not going to deal a threatening wound. Even if you go with "moving the sword toward the target" concept, you're still limited to 15 ft. per round, or 2 1/2 feet per seconds (assuming a 6 seconds round). That's not a very high velocity...
I see a huge difference between moving a 5 lbs object 15 ft. per rounds and "swinging" that object in an efficient blow. You'd have a better chance of raising a 5 lbs hammer 15 ft. above your enemy's head and let it drop...
'findel
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The wizard must control it, and he's attacking. He loses invis.Actually, you wouldn't. The Mage Hand isn't being directed like a normal spell - you're basically controlling a summoned monster and giving it a sword to hack people up with. Just as summoning a monster and having them attack while Invisible doesn't break Invisibility, neither does sending your Mage Hand out to cut someone a second smile.
It may be like a summoned monster, but it's not a summoned monster. Summoned creatures, even if under your complete control (as with SM spells) still have their own will, and more to relevant to the point are listed as a specific exemption from invisibility. Directing other creatures to attack (whether they be party members, animated skeletons, trained attack dogs, or summoned monsters) doesn't break invis. Neither does activating traps or attacking unattended objects.
Any form of attack on a creature or an attended object, however, does. You could argue that firing a bow is not directly attacking someone, since it's the arrow flying away from you as an unattended object that is doing the work. You are controlling the weapon and directing it to attack a creature. That's an attack, whether you're pulling a bowstring or using telekinesis or using MH/HotA.
If the distinction you're trying to draw is based on whether you have to concentrate to direct the attack or if the weapon attacks "independently," the better comparison is to spiritual weapon, which also attacks on its own without the need to concentrate on it, but you have to first direct it to attack. It's not an ally or a minion, it's a magical effect generated by you being directed by you to attack a creature... which would break invis.
The ability also dictates that the wizard must be proficient with the weapon, so great swords would be rare.Seems like a pretty good opening move for an Eldritch Knight. Cast Invisibility on yourself and send out your Mage Hand with the magical Large Greatsword to chop a few people up before you move in to strike...
I agree, that would be a good move. It's a little wonky, though, and I think it would be a reasonable limitation to restrict it to weapons sized for the caster.
Anyway, it is just ONE hand and the limit is only 5 lbs, so maybe it's a problem that's already been solved - can't use big two-handed weapons if they're too heavy and you only have one hand!
It may be like a summoned monster, but it's not a summoned monster. Summoned creatures, even if under your complete control (as with SM spells) still have their own will, and more to relevant to the point are listed as a specific exemption from invisibility. Directing other creatures to attack (whether they be party members, animated skeletons, trained attack dogs, or summoned monsters) doesn't break invis. Neither does activating traps or attacking unattended objects.
Any form of attack on a creature or an attended object, however, does. You could argue that firing a bow is not directly attacking someone, since it's the arrow flying away from you as an unattended object that is doing the work. You are controlling the weapon and directing it to attack a creature. That's an attack, whether you're pulling a bowstring or using telekinesis or using MH/HotA.
Anyway, it is just ONE hand and the limit is only 5 lbs, so maybe it's a problem that's already been solved - can't use big two-handed weapons if they're too heavy and you only have one hand!
Sorry folks - I misread the description, and I stand corrected! Good to see that it is pretty much abuse-free! LOL
|
|
In my particular game, the issue is that a wizard has a spell allowing them proficiency with a target weapon. Not broken by any means in and of itself.
Then the second part here is that it's a longsword (4 pounds).
So, I'm going to have to rule that because you concentrate to make it attack, you are attacking and thus lose your invisibility. A summoned creature (which was his argument) does not take concentration to attack.
Still this combo allows the wizard to use a mage hand to attack from afar with a melee weapon using his int to hit and damage as a touch attack, while being proficient mind you.
Still this combo allows the wizard to use a mage hand to attack from afar with a melee weapon using his int to hit and damage as a touch attack, while being proficient mind you.
Well, not really very far... Mage Hand (which is the spell Hand of the Apprentice/Acolyte is based off) has a range of Close; plus, the wording of the power itself states that it can be used to strike a foe within 30 feet...
Some points:
• There is nothing about mage hand beyond its name to suggest that it actually creates an anthropomorphic hand. It is not a conjuration spell, and its target is the object upon which it is cast; it is simply a 5 lb telekinesis. My ruling (based strictly on the text of the Beta) would therefore be that hand of the apprentice can wield a two-handed weapon if that weapon weighs 5 lbs or less, and if the caster is proficient.
But that's not going to happen, right?
• Well actually, a mithral weapon weighs half the weight of a standard weapon of its type, putting a greatsword in hand of the apprentice range.
But you still need proficiency right?
• No. Because hand of the apprentice makes no concession for the size of the weapon wielded -- note that it is the weapon itself that attacks, and that while it borrows some of the caster's stats, it has no size of its own -- an elven wizard can wield a large mithral longsword without a hitch.
That's a really high ranged attack roll that effectively ignores firing-into-melee restrictions and does a metric tonne of damage.
Want to break it even more?
• Try it with a vicious weapon. A spectral hand would be destroyed by the mysterious untyped energy damage a vicious weapon deals, but the straight telekinesis of mage hand sidesteps this problem.
So my eighth-level wizard, for 10,015 gp, now has (about) +10 to hit from 30 feet away for 4d6+6 with his flying DOOM sword OF DOOM.
Also, this is also a supernatural ability, isn't it? Meaning I could use it in conjunction with transformation? That would be . . . vicious :D.
Snarky tone aside (And I'm only playing, of course), here are my suggestions:
• Change the wording of hand of the apprentice such that it doesn't refer to an actual "hand". There is no hand according to mage hand, and adding one would drastically increase the complexity of this ability.
• Add a proviso that the weapon affected must be a light or one-handed weapon of the caster's size.
• Add a further clause that any effect that would cause the weapon to damage its wielder (heat metal, damage from a vicious weapon, etc.) ends the effect.
• Also, in general this ability does more damage than spiritual weapon, which is a second-level spell of limited duration. It's not a force effect like spiritual weapon, but it can be augmented as suggested above, making it (in my oppinion) a little too good, even before being abused. A damage modifier more in line with spiritual weapon's seems like it would be more appropriate.