The wizard was set up as a possible second character, it was between the DH and the Wiz, but now it's definitely going to be a demon hunter now that the wizards spell damage is based on weapon %. When I think of Wizards I don't think of someone wielding a sword or axe, I think of a wand or even a scepter. Personally it ruins the image, and I doubt there will be a wand out there capable of having the same damage as some of the higher end 1h swords or axes. Perhaps this is an absurd complaint, but I just can't see myself playing that way.
You aren't the only one who has this complaint, but there's a misconception floating around that swords and axes will somehow be superior to wands and staffs. Caster weapons have lower DPS than other weapons, but to make up for it they have mods like "Increase wizard damage by 100%".
It makes sense from a lore standpoint to require a powerful weapon to cast powerful spells. Look at fantasy stories like lord of the rings and harry potter, the wizards need staffs and wands to cast their spells.
A wand would require an offhand to match that DPS. A staff might do enough DPS to equal a sword or an axe.
At first it seems they made this so that you don't stack MF like an idiot as did by Sorcs back in D2, but with MF being on a separate stat table from normal stats... I'd say it is because that way you can use a cool sword you found, that is not bound as a Wiz only weapon and still benefit from its DPS, and then throw it to your barb and still own.
On the other hand I might be completely wrong and making a fool out of myself. :]
Personally it ruins the image, and I doubt there will be a wand out there capable of having the same damage as some of the higher end 1h swords or axes.
Why would you doubt that?
Now, if you mean just straight DPS on the weapon, I agree with you. But if you look at the high-end wands already showing up on the item list, most of them have their base DPS, then have a property that adds damage to all wizard spells, and it seems to be a hell of an addition. Look at Ruinstroke- 156 dps, then up to +251% extra damage to wizard spells. That's over 391 dps equivalent. Many others are lower, but still over 100%.
The point is, the developers have an aesthetic they're going for for the various classes, and they're very likely to put out a game where adhering to their aesthetic is a viable strategy. It might end up being a strategy that has competition with others- maybe weapon wielding wizards will do well too- but I seriously doubt you're going to be gimped for using a wand. Every class has their individual gear types, and it's pretty clear that the developers are going to make those gear types appealing options.
You aren't the only one who has this complaint, but there's a misconception floating around that swords and axes will somehow be superior to wands and staffs. Caster weapons have lower DPS than other weapons, but to make up for it they have mods like "Increase wizard damage by 100%".
It makes sense from a lore standpoint to require a powerful weapon to cast powerful spells. Look at fantasy stories like lord of the rings and harry potter, the wizards need staffs and wands to cast their spells.
I just think that eventually all Wizzards will be carrying high end swords and axes purely for superior DPS. Perhaps somehow the wands will do some awesome things along with the increase damage by 100% or what have you. It's definitely to early to tell, but it just seems like my theory may have some good standing.
Personally it ruins the image, and I doubt there will be a wand out there capable of having the same damage as some of the higher end 1h swords or axes.
Why would you doubt that?
Now, if you mean just straight DPS on the weapon, I agree with you. But if you look at the high-end wands already showing up on the item list, most of them have their base DPS, then have a property that adds damage to all wizard spells, and it seems to be a hell of an addition. Look at Ruinstroke- 156 dps, then up to +251% extra damage to wizard spells. That's over 391 dps equivalent. Many others are lower, but still over 100%.
The point is, the developers have an aesthetic they're going for for the various classes, and they're very likely to put out a game where adhering to their aesthetic is a viable strategy. It might end up being a strategy that has competition with others- maybe weapon wielding wizards will do well too- but I seriously doubt you're going to be gimped for using a wand. Every class has their individual gear types, and it's pretty clear that the developers are going to make those gear types appealing options.
Wow, I didn't look at the weapon list purely because none of the items are set in stone. So to me looking at them like they are viable future weapons would potentially lead to a let down. I hope there are plenty of wands like that out there, that offer viable alternatives to the usual melee's for strong DPS.
Don't be fooled by it saying "weapon damage"... this doesn't mean you are going to be running around with the biggest axe you can find (at least, not once any random white item that drops might be an upgrade).
All that this means -- working together with +% damage to wizard spells stat -- is that your damage scales by item. With the +% damage to wizard spells stat, wizards essentially have two damage numbers on a weapon. One is the regular DPS if you want to walk up and hit something with an axe, or zap it with a wand. The real number is the spell damage from the weapon, which is the DPS modified by +% damage to wizard spells.
Once you have some reasonable gear, you will want the wizard gear. Of course, swinging a 300dps axe will do a lot more damage than zapping with a 100 dps/+400% damage to wizard spells... but you will do a lot more damage with your spells -- the stuff you actually USE -- with the wand.
What the system does is make wizards actually care about/scale with the quality of their weapon, but at the same time, still rely on their spells for damage. As bad as it would be for wizards to not care about their weapon, it would also be bad if they were to run around hitting like a freight train with an axe... it just doesn't fit the wizard's role. This system solves both.
There was a decent argument in another thread (which is probably where this post should go ><) about it potentially being difficult to determine whether an amazing axe is better than a mediocre wand; but I think that will be the exception rather than the rule. I'm guessing that will only really happen if the axe is really a MUCH higher quality item than the wand.
Of course, this may go out the window with a spectral blade/magic weapon battle-wizard build -- but really, that is kindof the point of a battle-wizard build, so that may still be a good thing.
Don't be fooled by it saying "weapon damage"... this doesn't mean you are going to be running around with the biggest axe you can find (at least, not once any random white item that drops might be an upgrade).
All that this means -- working together with +% damage to wizard spells stat -- is that your damage scales by item. With the +% damage to wizard spells stat, wizards essentially have two damage numbers on a weapon. One is the regular DPS if you want to walk up and hit something with an axe, or zap it with a wand. The real number is the spell damage from the weapon, which is the DPS modified by +% damage to wizard spells.
Once you have some reasonable gear, you will want the wizard gear. Of course, swinging a 300dps axe will do a lot more damage than zapping with a 100 dps/+400% damage to wizard spells... but you will do a lot more damage with your spells -- the stuff you actually USE -- with the wand.
What the system does is make wizards actually care about/scale with the quality of their weapon, but at the same time, still rely on their spells for damage. As bad as it would be for wizards to not care about their weapon, it would also be bad if they were to run around hitting like a freight train with an axe... it just doesn't fit the wizard's role. This system solves both.
There was a decent argument in another thread (which is probably where this post should go ><) about it potentially being difficult to determine whether an amazing axe is better than a mediocre wand; but I think that will be the exception rather than the rule. I'm guessing that will only really happen if the axe is really a MUCH higher quality item than the wand.
Of course, this may go out the window with a spectral blade/magic weapon battle-wizard build -- but really, that is kindof the point of a battle-wizard build, so that may still be a good thing.
The only problem I see with this is that in the beginning all wizards will be using the melee weapons over the wands, because progression in diablo starts out slowly. So we could be talking perhaps the entirety of act 1 and part of act 2 before you get a wand that has such attributes. If D3 has only 4 acts like D2 then that's about 1/4th of the game.
It's not that I'm claiming this is game breaking, but to me it ruins the chances that I will use it as an alt.
The only problem I see with this is that in the beginning all wizards will be using the melee weapons over the wands, because progression in diablo starts out slowly. So we could be talking perhaps the entirety of act 1 and part of act 2 before you get a wand that has such attributes. If D3 has only 4 acts like D2 then that's about 1/4th of the game.
It's not that I'm claiming this is game breaking, but to me it ruins the chances that I will use it as an alt.
for a first character, meh... i doubt it. depends on luck of course, but making the general itemization work so this is unlikely is the kind of think blizzard delays games for.
for an alt? no way. if you haven't tossed a half decent wand and orb in your stash, you can pop some out at the smith that will beat most physical weapons you will find. that is what the smith is -- a slightly different take on gambling. say you get 20 weapon drops, all different types, all random stats. if none float your boat, you can turn those into maybe 5 or 8 wands with random stats. chances are one of those wands will be better than one of the axes in the original 20.
You aren't the only one who has this complaint, but there's a misconception floating around that swords and axes will somehow be superior to wands and staffs. Caster weapons have lower DPS than other weapons, but to make up for it they have mods like "Increase wizard damage by 100%".
It makes sense from a lore standpoint to require a powerful weapon to cast powerful spells. Look at fantasy stories like lord of the rings and harry potter, the wizards need staffs and wands to cast their spells.
These are my sentiments. While damage for other classes will be something of a transition from older games, I think for Wizards it's going to be very similar to the Diablo II approach. Modifiers and such.
Swords will be superior to staffs because all real wizards will use "Magic Weapon" as their primary ability.
Why would a wizard use an ability that increases their physical damage?
If you're taking about melee wizards sure, but I have the feeling you think for some reason that "magic weapon" increases weapon damage, therefore it increases magic damage. It specifically says "Physical Damage" though.
I think it makes a lot more sense to do it this way than just scaling with level - the old way basically removed an entire consideration from itemizing a Wiz character. Also big agreement that it would take a weapon significantly greater in tier to approach a wand with +spell % modifiers. I suppose its theoretically possible that you wouldnt have found an orb/wand for 3 or 4 tiers but crafting means you always have an out - unlike D2 where you might be stuck for a long time with your orb.
Swords will be superior to staffs because all real wizards will use "Magic Weapon" as their primary ability.
Why would a wizard use an ability that increases their physical damage?
If you're taking about melee wizards sure, but I have the feeling you think for some reason that "magic weapon" increases weapon damage, therefore it increases magic damage. It specifically says "Physical Damage" though.
Think about it spells dmg are based off weapon dmg and that increases weapon dmg. If this spell didn't increase spell dmg then why would you ever use it? Blizzard made a melee wizard viable but even the melee wizard only casts spells. They just happen to be melee range spells.
On a side note though I have a feeling this would be ok for early game lvling as a spell. From what I've seen in the beta the mage wands at low lvl give so little bonus % dmg that axes are probably better. Highest wand i've seen was 13% more dmg and thats about 1 more dmg. You could just equip a 2h axe that does double the dmg and put magic weapon on that.
The % damage from wands would still make them plenty viable, and they could simply make it so that wands have high damage values, if they are even going to make this kind of change to Wizards anyways.
Lore: all the wizard needs is something to channel the energy through. It could be a brick for all it matters, but wands, orbs, and staves are specially designed to enhance the arcane power as it ripples through them. A sword is just good for pointing and shooting lightning bolts and stuff.
Mechanics: wizard (and witch doctor) damage will actually keep scaling at the same rate as the "physical" classes, especially in inferno mode. All this means is "weapons = damage output." For everyone. Wiz and WD have specific weapons that they will prefer over everything else for the damage bonus, so there's no practical reason to carry a big 2H sword, because your damage output with it will be lower than with a wand and orb. Now I just wish they'd do this for the monk's skills that are still on scale-by-level.
#1- Can't all affixes appear on all gear? Couldn't you pick-up a sword that has that same "+dmg to Wiz spells" affix that you are attributing to wands/staves alone?
#2- If the "+dmg to Wiz spells" affix is exclusive to wands/staves, then what's point of basing spell damage on weapon damage? Just use that affix on Wiz-only items and be done with it. Having and incentive to use a damage-oriented melee weapon when playing a non-melee caster is dumb.
#1 No, they can't. Witch Doctors and Wizards have +damage modifiers on wands/sacrificial daggers and orbs/mojos respectively. There aren't any melee weapons with +% damage to a class.
#2 The point is that players were ignoring the quality of an item and looking only at the modifiers. For many players, this meant their starting wand is what they used all the way through the skeleton king. Now players have to consider the DPS of the wand as well as the modifiers, but they'll still want to use wands because of the +% damage to wizards.
So here's the ultimate effects of this system:
1. Spell oriented Wizards will still want to use wands and staffs.
2. Wizards will need to upgrade their weapons as they progress, even if a lower level weapon has slightly better modifiers than a higher level weapon (like all classes).
That's pretty much it. If there's a problem with that system, I don't see it.
I will grant you that in the early game you might find a melee weapon that beats your starting wand. But am I really all that worried about carrying whatever works for the first hour of the game? Not really. If it really bothers you, the smith and the AH are great sources of wands that will beat any other melee weapon of comparable level.
You aren't the only one who has this complaint, but there's a misconception floating around that swords and axes will somehow be superior to wands and staffs. Caster weapons have lower DPS than other weapons, but to make up for it they have mods like "Increase wizard damage by 100%".
It makes sense from a lore standpoint to require a powerful weapon to cast powerful spells. Look at fantasy stories like lord of the rings and harry potter, the wizards need staffs and wands to cast their spells.
Something tells me that they're going to be removing the +Wizard Damage and equalize the DPS of caster weapons to that of melee weapons. The item database on the site is old, and reflects the beta game database. This announced change, as far as I know, hasn't hit beta yet has it?
It really doesn't matter if a staff has 500 DPS on it, because a Wizard smacking stuff with their staff is going to be suboptimal anyway, and a Barbarian probably isn't going to use a Staff over an Axe or Sword. The abilities that makes a casting Wizard into a melee Wizard will then be affected by the weapon DPS, and not modifiers. This would also have the affect of people upgrading their weapons to that of current "tier", rather than keeping their Staff because the upgrade only has +200% rather than +300%.
It just makes sense to me. Modifiers makes it unnecessarily complicated not only from a player standpoint, but from a coding standpoint (yes I understand that it would be rather simple math. But it's rather simple math that doesn't need to happen. Every line of you code you add, increases size and read time). Their goal is simplicity and consistency and equalizing weapon damage is the best way to accomplish that.
Having to upgrade your weapon as you progress is infinitely better than the D2 system (where casters didn't care what they had equipped weapon wise as long as it had mods like +resists, +fastcast, +mana, etc).
It didn't make any sense in D2. The "best weapons" for casters were often just low stat required stuff that rolled high mods, or runewords that did the same thing.
Now, you actually have to put some thought into what you are using. Are there going to be times where a more "melee" oriented weapon will be an upgrade? Sure. I don't see the problem with that.
You aren't the only one who has this complaint, but there's a misconception floating around that swords and axes will somehow be superior to wands and staffs. Caster weapons have lower DPS than other weapons, but to make up for it they have mods like "Increase wizard damage by 100%".
It makes sense from a lore standpoint to require a powerful weapon to cast powerful spells. Look at fantasy stories like lord of the rings and harry potter, the wizards need staffs and wands to cast their spells.
Something tells me that they're going to be removing the +Wizard Damage and equalize the DPS of caster weapons to that of melee weapons. The item database on the site is old, and reflects the beta game database. This announced change, as far as I know, hasn't hit beta yet has it?
It really doesn't matter if a staff has 500 DPS on it, because a Wizard smacking stuff with their staff is going to be suboptimal anyway, and a Barbarian probably isn't going to use a Staff over an Axe or Sword. The abilities that makes a casting Wizard into a melee Wizard will then be affected by the weapon DPS, and not modifiers. This would also have the affect of people upgrading their weapons to that of current "tier", rather than keeping their Staff because the upgrade only has +200% rather than +300%.
It just makes sense to me. Modifiers makes it unnecessarily complicated not only from a player standpoint, but from a coding standpoint (yes I understand that it would be rather simple math. But it's rather simple math that doesn't need to happen. Every line of you code you add, increases size and read time). Their goal is simplicity and consistency and equalizing weapon damage is the best way to accomplish that.
Just a hunch though.
They just did equalize weapon damage? a sword should have roughly the same damage as a staff with a modifier. Keep the plus % to a class, I like it. If you want to go really simple, why have any modifiers? I mean complexity at this level keeps the game interesting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Am I the only one who has this complaint?
It makes sense from a lore standpoint to require a powerful weapon to cast powerful spells. Look at fantasy stories like lord of the rings and harry potter, the wizards need staffs and wands to cast their spells.
At first it seems they made this so that you don't stack MF like an idiot as did by Sorcs back in D2, but with MF being on a separate stat table from normal stats... I'd say it is because that way you can use a cool sword you found, that is not bound as a Wiz only weapon and still benefit from its DPS, and then throw it to your barb and still own.
On the other hand I might be completely wrong and making a fool out of myself. :]
Ha. Bagstone.
Now, if you mean just straight DPS on the weapon, I agree with you. But if you look at the high-end wands already showing up on the item list, most of them have their base DPS, then have a property that adds damage to all wizard spells, and it seems to be a hell of an addition. Look at Ruinstroke- 156 dps, then up to +251% extra damage to wizard spells. That's over 391 dps equivalent. Many others are lower, but still over 100%.
The point is, the developers have an aesthetic they're going for for the various classes, and they're very likely to put out a game where adhering to their aesthetic is a viable strategy. It might end up being a strategy that has competition with others- maybe weapon wielding wizards will do well too- but I seriously doubt you're going to be gimped for using a wand. Every class has their individual gear types, and it's pretty clear that the developers are going to make those gear types appealing options.
I just think that eventually all Wizzards will be carrying high end swords and axes purely for superior DPS. Perhaps somehow the wands will do some awesome things along with the increase damage by 100% or what have you. It's definitely to early to tell, but it just seems like my theory may have some good standing.
Wow, I didn't look at the weapon list purely because none of the items are set in stone. So to me looking at them like they are viable future weapons would potentially lead to a let down. I hope there are plenty of wands like that out there, that offer viable alternatives to the usual melee's for strong DPS.
All that this means -- working together with +% damage to wizard spells stat -- is that your damage scales by item. With the +% damage to wizard spells stat, wizards essentially have two damage numbers on a weapon. One is the regular DPS if you want to walk up and hit something with an axe, or zap it with a wand. The real number is the spell damage from the weapon, which is the DPS modified by +% damage to wizard spells.
Once you have some reasonable gear, you will want the wizard gear. Of course, swinging a 300dps axe will do a lot more damage than zapping with a 100 dps/+400% damage to wizard spells... but you will do a lot more damage with your spells -- the stuff you actually USE -- with the wand.
What the system does is make wizards actually care about/scale with the quality of their weapon, but at the same time, still rely on their spells for damage. As bad as it would be for wizards to not care about their weapon, it would also be bad if they were to run around hitting like a freight train with an axe... it just doesn't fit the wizard's role. This system solves both.
There was a decent argument in another thread (which is probably where this post should go ><) about it potentially being difficult to determine whether an amazing axe is better than a mediocre wand; but I think that will be the exception rather than the rule. I'm guessing that will only really happen if the axe is really a MUCH higher quality item than the wand.
Of course, this may go out the window with a spectral blade/magic weapon battle-wizard build -- but really, that is kindof the point of a battle-wizard build, so that may still be a good thing.
The only problem I see with this is that in the beginning all wizards will be using the melee weapons over the wands, because progression in diablo starts out slowly. So we could be talking perhaps the entirety of act 1 and part of act 2 before you get a wand that has such attributes. If D3 has only 4 acts like D2 then that's about 1/4th of the game.
It's not that I'm claiming this is game breaking, but to me it ruins the chances that I will use it as an alt.
for a first character, meh... i doubt it. depends on luck of course, but making the general itemization work so this is unlikely is the kind of think blizzard delays games for.
for an alt? no way. if you haven't tossed a half decent wand and orb in your stash, you can pop some out at the smith that will beat most physical weapons you will find. that is what the smith is -- a slightly different take on gambling. say you get 20 weapon drops, all different types, all random stats. if none float your boat, you can turn those into maybe 5 or 8 wands with random stats. chances are one of those wands will be better than one of the axes in the original 20.
These are my sentiments. While damage for other classes will be something of a transition from older games, I think for Wizards it's going to be very similar to the Diablo II approach. Modifiers and such.
Why would a wizard use an ability that increases their physical damage?
If you're taking about melee wizards sure, but I have the feeling you think for some reason that "magic weapon" increases weapon damage, therefore it increases magic damage. It specifically says "Physical Damage" though.
On a side note though I have a feeling this would be ok for early game lvling as a spell. From what I've seen in the beta the mage wands at low lvl give so little bonus % dmg that axes are probably better. Highest wand i've seen was 13% more dmg and thats about 1 more dmg. You could just equip a 2h axe that does double the dmg and put magic weapon on that.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Mechanics: wizard (and witch doctor) damage will actually keep scaling at the same rate as the "physical" classes, especially in inferno mode. All this means is "weapons = damage output." For everyone. Wiz and WD have specific weapons that they will prefer over everything else for the damage bonus, so there's no practical reason to carry a big 2H sword, because your damage output with it will be lower than with a wand and orb. Now I just wish they'd do this for the monk's skills that are still on scale-by-level.
Also, this:
#1 No, they can't. Witch Doctors and Wizards have +damage modifiers on wands/sacrificial daggers and orbs/mojos respectively. There aren't any melee weapons with +% damage to a class.
#2 The point is that players were ignoring the quality of an item and looking only at the modifiers. For many players, this meant their starting wand is what they used all the way through the skeleton king. Now players have to consider the DPS of the wand as well as the modifiers, but they'll still want to use wands because of the +% damage to wizards.
So here's the ultimate effects of this system:
1. Spell oriented Wizards will still want to use wands and staffs.
2. Wizards will need to upgrade their weapons as they progress, even if a lower level weapon has slightly better modifiers than a higher level weapon (like all classes).
That's pretty much it. If there's a problem with that system, I don't see it.
I will grant you that in the early game you might find a melee weapon that beats your starting wand. But am I really all that worried about carrying whatever works for the first hour of the game? Not really. If it really bothers you, the smith and the AH are great sources of wands that will beat any other melee weapon of comparable level.
Something tells me that they're going to be removing the +Wizard Damage and equalize the DPS of caster weapons to that of melee weapons. The item database on the site is old, and reflects the beta game database. This announced change, as far as I know, hasn't hit beta yet has it?
It really doesn't matter if a staff has 500 DPS on it, because a Wizard smacking stuff with their staff is going to be suboptimal anyway, and a Barbarian probably isn't going to use a Staff over an Axe or Sword. The abilities that makes a casting Wizard into a melee Wizard will then be affected by the weapon DPS, and not modifiers. This would also have the affect of people upgrading their weapons to that of current "tier", rather than keeping their Staff because the upgrade only has +200% rather than +300%.
It just makes sense to me. Modifiers makes it unnecessarily complicated not only from a player standpoint, but from a coding standpoint (yes I understand that it would be rather simple math. But it's rather simple math that doesn't need to happen. Every line of you code you add, increases size and read time). Their goal is simplicity and consistency and equalizing weapon damage is the best way to accomplish that.
Just a hunch though.
It didn't make any sense in D2. The "best weapons" for casters were often just low stat required stuff that rolled high mods, or runewords that did the same thing.
Now, you actually have to put some thought into what you are using. Are there going to be times where a more "melee" oriented weapon will be an upgrade? Sure. I don't see the problem with that.
They just did equalize weapon damage? a sword should have roughly the same damage as a staff with a modifier. Keep the plus % to a class, I like it. If you want to go really simple, why have any modifiers? I mean complexity at this level keeps the game interesting.