Magic Missile errata – the controversy over changing D&D4e to be more like older editions

Posted on July 8, 2010 by RupertG
  • Share
  • Share

Magic users - wizards

Update: We discuss this at some length on our latest (and new) podcast.

There has been quite a bit of chatter on the web recently regarding the latest errata for D&D 4e from Wizards of the Coast (WotC). The primary source of concern is the changing of the At-Will power Magic Missile to cause damage automatically. Those of you who have been playing the game for a while will immediately recognise that this is more than a casual reference to pretty much all previous editions of Dungeons & Dragons. Funnily enough, this is what is causing the most consternation.

You see, this sense of nostalgia is why WotC made the change. From the errata:

Magic Missile

Page 159: Replace the Attack, Hit, and Special entries with the Effect and Special entries in the power below. This update reflects an effort to restore the power to its classical form. [Emphasis ours...]

This, on a cursory inspection, seems like a very strange reason to change one of the primary At-Wills taken by almost all Wizards in the game. There are plenty of other reasons they could have given – its woeful underpowered general mundanity being just one. It is very interesting to see nostalgia being used as a reason to change the rules, and I certainly wonder if we will start to see more of it.

The general reaction of D&D4e has been quite mixed. While it has been viewed as a necessary change by most, there have still been many who have also felt that the core values of the game have been compromised during the process. When you look at the lineage of the game from Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st Edition through 2nd, 3rd, 3.5 to 4th, you can quite easily see that 4th edition stands out in a rather big way. Sure there were some massive problems with previous editions (save vs rod anyone?) and the rules could be easily nerfed thanks to real issues with balancing the rules, but it had a distinct character that kept it the most popular of all role-playing systems.

One of the key complaints with the current edition appears to be with the actual core mechanic of the game – combat. The negative reaction a lot of players have had to the 4-5 hour combats has led to a number of groups going back to previous versions of the game. Our gaming group for one has gone back to 2nd edition for the time being, and we know of many others that are doing the same. The sheer number of hits that we get every day to this site looking for ways to ‘speed up 4e combats’ seem to attest to the fact that a lot of people are getting a little tired of it. While the game itself hasn’t changed in focus – you can still role-play as much as you care to – just be aware, when combat breaks out, it will quite likely take the rest of the night to finish…

[By the way, if you are looking for a way to speed up combats, check out our Morale Rules...]

Does this actually mean anything?

So, the game designers have decided to change a power in the game – and a pretty iconic power at that. And they have decided to make this change to bring it into line with the more ‘classical form’. Does this actually mean anything?

The phrasing is actually where it starts getting interesting. Have the designers conceded something here? Have they finally, in a round-about way, suggested that older versions of the game were, well, more ‘classic’? We could very easily get into a bit of trouble trying to read too much into a single sentence, but it certainly is an interesting way of saying something needed to be changed. When you add that they are releasing a new version of the game in a Red Box, well, you can probably be a little excused for letting your mind wander a bit…

Will we see more ‘classic form’ changes to the rules? To be honest, I would be a bit surprised if did see many more. There may be a few things that get a classic make0ver, but I don’t think that there is going to be a huge swing back to the old way of doing things any time soon.

Does it actually matter?

Well, no. In short, it is just a change that your gaming group can choose to use or not. It may seem really surprising, but it appears that a lot of players and GM’s have yet to realise that the rules are there as a guide only to play. If you don’t like something, change it! The game is a framework, and you are free to change anything you don’t like. Sure, you can debate as much as you like the merits of one version of the rules or not, but at the end of the day, if you want to do it your way, go right ahead (with the GM’s permission of course).

If you want to get involved in the debate, try the following:

But before you go wading in, make sure that you read the errata first.

The Actually Important Rules Bit

Aside from the discussion about whether the change is valid or not, there is a distinction in the rules that is important for follow on and trigger effects in-game. The wording of the new version of Magic Missile states that the effect is to cause damage – it does not say that it is an automatic hit. This means that the new Magic Missile does not grant any ‘on hit’ triggers or similar.

There are also lots of other rules, powers, items, etc, that have been included in the latest edition of the errata, so whether you play a Wizard with Magic Missile or not, it is worth checking out anyway.

Similar Posts:

About RupertG

RupertG has been playing roleplaying games ever since he discovered Dragon Warriors at the age of 12. Since those days he has played many different RPG's, collected not insignificant Dwarf and Tomb Kings armies for Warhammer Fantasy Battles and even worked as a games designer in the heady days of the late 90's building a CCG. Now he runs a gaming blog and is a participant in the Grand Gaming Experiment
This entry was posted in Books, Dungeons & Dragons, Gaming, Nerdom, Role Playing Games and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://donjon.bin.sh/ drow

    whereas i’ve already allowed a wizard in my current 4e campaign take and use the 2e form of magic missile, i’m entirely in support of this. it probably should’ve been done this way originally, though. some groups, including mine, generally ignore errata and updates as needlessly fiddly and yet another thing to search through for a ruling.

    one excellent way to speed up combat, in my experience, is to avoid monsters of higher level than the party, and use minions. lots of minions. the occassional combat against nothing but minions is a blast.

  • http://donjon.bin.sh/ drow

    whereas i’ve already allowed a wizard in my current 4e campaign take and use the 2e form of magic missile, i’m entirely in support of this. it probably should’ve been done this way originally, though. some groups, including mine, generally ignore errata and updates as needlessly fiddly and yet another thing to search through for a ruling.

    one excellent way to speed up combat, in my experience, is to avoid monsters of higher level than the party, and use minions. lots of minions. the occassional combat against nothing but minions is a blast.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    Our groups tend to generally ignore errata as well – not deliberately, but usually because once you have identified the problem, you tend to make a house rule that fixes it. It’s kind of funny how often that house rule is pretty similar to the errata rule (as your example shows as well…).

    In an effort to change the way the players viewed combat in our campaign I actually started throwing monsters at them that were far too powerful for them to defeat, giving them a) the incentive to run away occasionally, and b) a healthy scepticism regarding each new encounter… Why wouldn’t they encounter enemies stronger than them? The EL and CR rules have always annoyed me a little…

    (I have to admit I haven’t tried a minion only combat – but I will now!)

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    Our groups tend to generally ignore errata as well – not deliberately, but usually because once you have identified the problem, you tend to make a house rule that fixes it. It’s kind of funny how often that house rule is pretty similar to the errata rule (as your example shows as well…).

    In an effort to change the way the players viewed combat in our campaign I actually started throwing monsters at them that were far too powerful for them to defeat, giving them a) the incentive to run away occasionally, and b) a healthy scepticism regarding each new encounter… Why wouldn’t they encounter enemies stronger than them? The EL and CR rules have always annoyed me a little…

    (I have to admit I haven’t tried a minion only combat – but I will now!)

  • http://diceofdoom.com/blog/author/ellisthion/ Ellisthion

    The new Magic Missile is interesting… it breaks a game mechanic. If they were going for nostalgia, I would have thought more missiles as you level up would have made more sense… but I guess they wanted to give it something that would make it actually valuable above more popular at-wills like Thunderwave.

    Cute side-effect: Since Magic Missile now ignores defences, a small army of several hundred 1st level Wizards could take out dragons and other powerful stuff really easily.

  • http://diceofdoom.com/blog/author/ellisthion/ Ellisthion

    The new Magic Missile is interesting… it breaks a game mechanic. If they were going for nostalgia, I would have thought more missiles as you level up would have made more sense… but I guess they wanted to give it something that would make it actually valuable above more popular at-wills like Thunderwave.

    Cute side-effect: Since Magic Missile now ignores defences, a small army of several hundred 1st level Wizards could take out dragons and other powerful stuff really easily.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    Hmmm… this is true… I wonder if this will feature in the October 5th Errata as well? It seems a pretty significant change when you put it that way.

    Also, I agree about the multiple missiles at higher levels – that would certainly appear to be more in keeping with the traditional nature of the spell/power.

  • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

    Hmmm… this is true… I wonder if this will feature in the October 5th Errata as well? It seems a pretty significant change when you put it that way.

    Also, I agree about the multiple missiles at higher levels – that would certainly appear to be more in keeping with the traditional nature of the spell/power.

  • Derek

    But, how does this affect the damage? I overheard a player stating that since you don’t actually make a damage roll, then a lot of the “normal” modifiers to your damage are not calculated into this damage, since most of them state that they have to be added to a damage roll.

    • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

      According to the letter of the law, that is correct. As it is not a roll but automatic damage, bonuses applied to damage rolls don’t apply. That is unless the GM says that it does, of course. This is one those things that I would be inclined to allow in all honesty, as it renders some items/abilities/etc redundant otherwise.

  • Derek

    But, how does this affect the damage? I overheard a player stating that since you don’t actually make a damage roll, then a lot of the “normal” modifiers to your damage are not calculated into this damage, since most of them state that they have to be added to a damage roll.

    • http://www.diceofdoom.com/blog/author/rupertg RupertG

      According to the letter of the law, that is correct. As it is not a roll but automatic damage, bonuses applied to damage rolls don’t apply. That is unless the GM says that it does, of course. This is one those things that I would be inclined to allow in all honesty, as it renders some items/abilities/etc redundant otherwise.

  • Pingback: 4e design philosophy: Errata « thelodahl – Danish DM

  • Persephonus

    Ahh, but the Magic Missile card says that you can fire one or two missiles. The only trouble is that it doesn’t say how this effects the damage. Perhaps you can split it evenly between the two.

  • Persephonus

    Ahh, but the Magic Missile card says that you can fire one or two missiles. The only trouble is that it doesn’t say how this effects the damage. Perhaps you can split it evenly between the two.

  • Cameron

    I’ve been playing 4e for awhile, and sure, combat took awhile at first, but now it’s completely different. It flies by like nothing for some reason. I’m not sure why. Maybe my group plays to much and knows all their powers by heart, haha

    • Anonymous

      I think it’s definitely true that everything speeds up once you get the hang of it, but also if you’re using non-MM1 Monster Manuals then the design of monsters has dramatically improved since the release of the game, and some people have reported faster combats just because of that.

  • kitamasu1

    dang….an at-will power should never always hit. Some dailies should, and if not…not be expended as said in the PHB since you can only use them once. At-wills can always be used…so who cares if you hit with them… its not expended :)