Wand of Force Missile would also apply since it has both the Arcane and Force traits on the card.
Its hard to know what traits will be on what is coming. Force Sling + 3 might have the Arcane and Force trait. But we can't say for sure. I'm sure if they put it as a power it will be useful for more than just 2 cards.
Looking at spells coming up, Disintegrate and Sign of Wrath *might* have the force trait, but I wouldn't be on it. The power is probably more useful for the followup powers (add to fire, lightning, cold, and acid)
Chad clarified that it means you get to add 2 if your check has the appropriate trait(s).
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2q8um?Leveling-Up-Ezren-Advice#36
Wand of Force Missile would also apply since it has both the Arcane and Force traits on the card.
I don't think it would though.
Add +2 to your Arcane check with the...
(emphasis mine)
the wand of magic missile/scorching ray don't make arcane checks. they just roll flat damage (4d4 for the magic missile wand, and 4d6 for the wand of scorching ray).
Well, it is an arcane check. Or it would be more accurate to say a check with the arcane trait. Maybe that isn't exactly the same thing as an arcane check. And I suppose there might actually be an issue with the word "your" in his power as it relates to the Wand of Force Missile. It's Ezren check in the sense he is the one making the check, but it isn't Ezren's check in the sense it isn't his arcane skill being used.
That is a bit unclear in my mind. Not sure which way to read that.
I'll check when I get home, but unless it's been errated, the wand of force missiles (and the wand of scorching ray) both say something like "for your combat check roll 4d4/4d6 instead of your normal check". I know that Ezren has arcane, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't use your arcane die (which would be a d12 for ezren). If it was your arcane die +4d4/6, those items would be redonkulous.
I'll check when I get home, but unless it's been errated, the wand of force missiles (and the wand of scorching ray) both say something like "for your combat check roll 4d4/4d6 instead of your normal check". I know that Ezren has arcane, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't use your arcane die (which would be a d12 for ezren). If it was your arcane die +4d4/6, those items would be redonkulous.
It doesn't use Ezren's arcane die, but the card has the arcane trait. So you are making a combat check that has the arcane and force traits. The question is, does Ezren's Evoker power apply in that situation?
Or put another way is a check with the arcane trait the same as an arcane check?
And also, when Ezren's Evoker power says add to "your arcane check" does "your" mean (1) a check Ezren is making or (2) a check made with Ezren's skill?
having reread the section on page 11 on making a check, I think that it would apply to the check, as anything with a keyword adds that keyword to the check.
Chief Technical Officer
|
...put another way is a check with the arcane trait the same as an arcane check?
Traits also determine the type of check; for example, if you’re attempting a combat check and you played a weapon that added the Ranged trait, it counts as a Ranged combat check.
So yes, a check with the Arcane trait is an Arcane check.
And also, when Ezren's Evoker power says add to "your arcane check" does "your" mean (1) a check Ezren is making or (2) a check made with Ezren's skill?
A check Ezren is making.
So yes, when Evoker Ezren uses a Wand of Force Missile, and has the appropriate feat, he gets to add 2 to it.
Also, another suggestion: Ezren's Evoker power should be errataed, or at least clarified, in the FAQ.
If I understand things correctly, everywhere else in the game the template "add X with the Y trait" is used, it means "add X to the check, and add the Y trait to the check," not "add X to the check only if it has the Y trait."
An example is in the rule book (the newest version, on the website) with the example of Kyra fighting a ghost on page 12. Kyra's power says to "add 1d8 with the Magic trait" against Undead enemies, and in the example, the power adds 1d8 to the check, and adds the Magic trait, even though the check didn't have the Magic trait before.
Similarly, I would assume that a power like that on Flaming Mace +1,, "you may additionally discard this to add 1d4 with the Fire trait" does not require the check to already have the Fire trait from another source to give you the 1d4. (If it did, the power seems like it would be almost useless.)
Since Ezren's power also uses the template "add X with the Y trait", but this time it means a different thing (add X to the check only if it has the Y trait) this should be clarified or errataed in the FAQ.
The difference is subtle, but its the placing the words "to your check" preceding the trait.
Add 2 with the Force trait to your check.
Add 2 to your check with the Force trait.
The first one gives you both 2 and the force trait, the second gives you 2 if you check already has the Force trait.
Add 2 with the Force trait to your check.
Add 2 to your check with the Force trait.The first one gives you both 2 and the force trait, the second gives you 2 if you check already has the Force trait.
To make the distinction clearer between the two cases, I think a good alternative to the first would be something like this:
Add 2 and the Force trait to your check.
How about "If your check includes the Force trait, add 2 to the check"
You don't always have to use the least possible amount of words.
Looking at spells coming up, Disintegrate and Sign of Wrath *might* have the force trait, but I wouldn't be on it.
Sign of Wrath should be force, for what it's worth. The original spell is after all.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
How about "If your check includes the Force trait, add 2 to the check"
You don't always have to use the least possible amount of words.
We kind of do.
It's actually really important that we keep our templates (that's game designer lingo for "the consistent way you say a thing") short. Longer templates mean you run out of room on cards faster, and when you run out of room, you sometimes have to drop interesting concepts from the game.
When there are multiple ways we could say a thing, we pick the shortest way that we think is clear.
Looking at spells coming up, Disintegrate and Sign of Wrath *might* have the force trait, but I wouldn't be on it.Sign of Wrath should be force, for what it's worth. The original spell is after all.
I would say that's a safe assumption.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Call it a hunch.
