PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on 4E strikers



Hzurr
2009-03-09, 04:08 PM
So, I've been DMing 4E for a while, and Strikers are...interesting. Here are my general impressions so far, with some questions about Barbarians and Animal Companion Rangers at the end:

Warlock: (Have seen played from levels 1-3 (both infernal pact and star pact)
By far the least damage-y of the strikers. While I love the flavor of the Warlock, it seems that in play, it always devolves into what we call the "Warlock Shuffle" (aka, move 3 squares and eldritch blast/eyebite/whatever. Rinse, lather repeat). For a class that's supposed to focus on doing damage, they seem to be far below the other strikers, and they become the least interesting (which is tragic, because their fluff is awesome)

Rogue: (Have seen played from levels 1-3)
Honestly, I have a bad impression of Rogues, because I hated the player who had the rogue PC (mainly because he whined and moaned if there was ever the possibility that he might not get combat advantage). He had crap for HP, but a nice AC and a nice to-hit, and did metric boatloads of damage. It was ridiculous how much damage this character did

Ranger: (Have seen played from levels 1 - 6)
TWF Ranger: Impressive. Did a decent damage, but was very mobile, and did excellent skirmishing. He didn't have the defenses to keep at it for large periods of time, but he could cut a path through enemies when need be.
Animal Companion Ranger: (Aka - "Puppy Ranger") Very unimpressed. The damage output seems to go down significantly, and the only real benefit is you have something to soak up a few hitpoints for you and who will be your flank buddy. I've got 2 of them in my current party, and they are without a doubt the weakest characters.
Bow Ranger - Haven't seen, but they look impressive

Barbarian (Have seen played from levels 4 -6)
Wow. Just...wow. Crap for AC, but damage output, average to-hit score, and tons of HP make up for it. The Barbarian slaughters things. The charge abilities of the barbarian seem...overpowered. The low AC is a nice balance, but I still find that very few things can go toe-to-toe against it.


So, here are my biggest questions:
What do you think of the Puppy Ranger? Do you agree that they're the least powerful of the rangers/strikers (as I do), or have they proven to be effective in your game? What's a good way to boost them (if you agree they need it)?
The Barbarian: Does it come across as overpowered? Specifically, do all the charging abilities that the Barbarian has seem overpowered? Since the Barbarian never provokes Opportunity Attacks on a charge, and can sometimes do more damage on a charge, is there ever a reason not to? (We refer to the Barbarian in the party as the wind-up car, because his favorite tactic if an enemy has shifted away, is to shift back one square, so that he can move the 2 squares for a charge).

Two last questions: Am I short-changing Warlocks? Are normal rogues as annoying as my experience has lead me to believe?

Myatar_Panwar
2009-03-09, 04:38 PM
Well, Barbarians do normally provoke attacks of opportunity on a charge. The only time they don't is if they are raging (which required the use of a daily) and if they have the Howling Strike at-will. And I'm not sure what you mean by "all those charging abilities". As far as I can tell, in the level frame you gave (4-6), the only charging ability is a class feature (immediately charge after dropping a foe), and its an encounter ability. The at-will can be used in a charge for sure, but its still an at-will.

Reason not to charge: To use more than just one ability? :smallconfused: You cannot use powers on the charge.

As for warlocks, I've had a very different experience in that he was a fairly big damage dealer. And our ranger faired worst. Though he was archery specced, not TWF, so idk.

Tygell
2009-03-09, 04:40 PM
I'm playing an AD Drow rogue right now at level 1. The first 3 rounds of combat I basically make my own CA, and after that I can usually find something to flank thanks to being in a melee heavy group. I try to help the defenders as well by deliberately provoking OAs as I move around.

I definitely do more damage than anyone else in the group, but I'm the only striker as well.

Edit: I don't know if the rogue in your group is a bad example of a rogue or not, but all other things being equal, I think I would be irritated if my party had an opportunity to provide flanking and didn't.

its_all_ogre
2009-03-09, 05:19 PM
my experiences are as follows:
warlock having seen star pact only so far: great damage causer, powers that lower enemies defences benefitting the rest of the party. one that grants CA to all allies AND reduces AC by1+int mod as a level 3 enc power. most accurate warlock due to star pact power. (specially if a tiefling with hellfire blood)

rogue: on a hit per hit basis the most damaging striker assuming you have backstabber, which you should. str rogues have poor hps though, cha rogues should spend points on con to mitigate this. get slaying action as a feat soon as possible and you can dish out two sneak attacks in a turn....nice!

ranger: seen twf and archer and both fare equally well. archer has advantage of being able to shoot any enemy while the melee one does not have this flexibility. both are fairly low defences but have sufficient hps to take a slapping about.

barbarian: not played but i have three ready for games! i think you've been doing it wrong as someone said above once per encounter they get a free charge after dropping a foe and charges do provoke OA unless raging, which is once per day until you are level 5.
however str 18 con 16 gives you 31 hps at level one...but AC14...who cares!!

Edge of Dreams
2009-03-09, 06:02 PM
The thing about ranger is that choosing Beast Mastery is almost always better than Archery Specialty, and here's why:

I can make an Archer Spec. Ranger, with a Greatbow, and twin strike every round for awesome damage, and have the feat Defensive Mobility for running away a tiny bit better.

Or I can make a Beast Mastery Ranger, with a Greatbow, and twin strike every round for the same amount of awesome damage AND have a bear or wolf or whatever standing right in front of me to protect me from charging enemies and soak damage. Or if I feel safe and get bored, I can send it into melee and not have it attack at all, just using it as an extra flanking buddy for the party. And it can also be used to grab dropped items, pull unconscious allies away from battle, etc. etc.

Beast Mastery is pretty much Strictly Better than Archery Specialty, with the exact same powers.

Hzurr
2009-03-09, 06:16 PM
Wow. Yeah, y'all are right, I went back and re-read, and we have been doing the Barbarian wrong. I think it was just an honest mistake by the player, so we'll fix that next session, and I'll see if it makes a significant difference.

Myatar_Panwar
2009-03-09, 06:18 PM
Yeah I agree Edge_of_Dreams (well not really an opinion here more like fact). I don't think I will ever play a ranged spec ranger without going for the pet, unless flavor tells me otherwise (and even then its not really all that big of a negative impact, you still are dealing good damage).

THAC0
2009-03-09, 06:33 PM
This is just my experience through play. I haven't seen a ranger or a barbarian in action ever. I've seen a melee rogue and a ranged rogue briefly. I've not done any math to support my experiences.

I think the choice of striker is particularly dependent on party composition. I've played a feylock from... about level 5 to level 14 so far. From my experience, a less damage-focused striker works best in a party with at least two defenders and a leader. The double defender slot provides a shield for the squishies, and I'm pretty sure my feylock is even squishier than the mage right now! And the healer makes up for the longer duration of fights due to less offensive output. If you had a high damage striker, or a melee striker, then you'd need the doubled defender less, and the party would probably cut through fights faster.

I love playing my feylock. No, I'm not putting out incredible amounts of damage all the time, but the encounter powers are solid and tactically useful. I'm definitely not spamming at-wills constantly, and I like the mechanical incentive to keep moving. That said, it is at times frustrating to not be dishing out the crazy damage all the time like our part-time rogue can do.

Artanis
2009-03-09, 06:55 PM
Beast Mastery is pretty much Strictly Better than Archery Specialty, with the exact same powers.
Two words:

Paragon. Paths.

PPs that involve actually shooting things are fairly rare, and having a kitten follow you around is a good way to disqualify yourself from much of what few exist.

ColdSepp
2009-03-09, 07:08 PM
Two words:

Paragon. Paths.

PPs that involve actually shooting things are fairly rare, and having a kitten follow you around is a good way to disqualify yourself from much of what few exist.

Actually, there only the PPs in the PHB1 require a style. Those in martial power just need Ranger. That said, Beast Masters do get a much lower damage output... until Level 21, when they can get Quick Beast Command, which effectively gives them two attacks every round. Or they can take the right Epic Destiny, and get two standard action a round, thus coming out slightly ahead in damage then the other two ranger variants. (according to the CharOPs, at least).

That said, the fact that Beasts only have 2 surges and you need to share yours with in out of combat can really hurt a front line striker.

Olo Demonsbane
2009-03-09, 07:22 PM
My level 1 rouge (4.0) threw a bugbear (3.5) off a 20ft cliff :smallbiggrin:

My level 1 ranger/1 fighter/5 wizard (4.0) was untouchable in melee combat.

...Yeah, I don't follow the rules closely enough with my groups to give much insight.

Belobog
2009-03-09, 08:25 PM
From what I've been told, The main problem with the Warlock disappears when you cease considering it as a Striker, and start thinking of it as a Controller, albeit a focused one. True, they have a lot of Striker qualities, but most of their powers deal with moving/debilitating enemies/creating zones/throwing people into another dimension. While you can get a lot of damage from a good amount of power [Eye of Delban is a winner, here], competing for damage usually doesn't work your way, so you should focus less on damage and more on tactics. At low levels, though...that's fairly hard to do, and is their weakest point.

Rangers are awesome no matter what you do with them. I have an Archery Ranger, and I really don't think I'd be better or worse being anything else. Beast powers look a little lame, though.

Rogues are nice, though difficult to work alone before Paragon level. Nice damage potential, though the Ranger probably beats them on average, if simply from sheer number of attacks per round.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-03-09, 09:41 PM
Bow Rangers are pretty awesome damage dealers. To start with, they get 1d10 weapons that have a short range of 20 squares. Secondly, their primary stat controls both offense and defense. Thirdly, they are primarily long ranged characters, meaning they draw less return fire than the melee types. Also: Battlefield Archer PP :smalleek:

Rogues can be very scary when played right. PPs aside (Infiltrator is scary) most of their powers provide extremely useful controlling effects in addition to doing a fair amount of damage (usually via Sneak Attack).

Warlocks are, as Belobog noted, more like Controllers than Strikers - albeit very beefy Controllers. Infernal Warlocks not only have loads of HP but they have a pretty steady flow of Temp HP to back it up - throw on 13 STR and you can be wearing Scale Mail and have a Light Shield in no time. I've never been a fan of Starlocks (though they are nasty if you use the Dragon Magazine stuff), and IMHO Feylocks make better thieves than Rogues - particularly if they MC Rogue.

Fun experiment: an 8th Level Warlock picks up the 2nd Level Rogue Utility that allows him to ignore movement-related penalties on Stealth Checks. He then hides while in Superior Cover or Total Concealment and begins walking at full speed across the courtyard. Thanks to Shadow Step, he has concealment until the end of each turn (overlapping, you see) which makes him essentially invisible so long as he can keep making those Stealth Checks. And he can do that all day.

Hzurr
2009-03-09, 10:38 PM
My level 1 rouge (4.0) threw a bugbear (3.5) off a 20ft cliff :smallbiggrin:

My level 1 ranger/1 fighter/5 wizard (4.0) was untouchable in melee combat.

...Yeah, I don't follow the rules closely enough with my groups to give much insight.

...er...none of what you posted makes any sense. Your 4E "rouge" (you mean "rogue," I assume) threw a 3.5E monster? And the second example...couldn't actually exist in 4E.

THAC0
2009-03-09, 10:48 PM
...er...none of what you posted makes any sense. Your 4E "rouge" (you mean "rogue," I assume) threw a 3.5E monster? And the second example...couldn't actually exist in 4E.

Hence this part, I believe: "...Yeah, I don't follow the rules closely enough with my groups to give much insight. "

Oracle_Hunter
2009-03-10, 12:42 AM
Hence this part, I believe: "...Yeah, I don't follow the rules closely enough with my groups to give much insight. "

Even so, I don't know what a "level 1 ranger/1 fighter/5 wizard" would even mean in 4E. I think he just wrote the wrong editions down, or he has a very interesting explanation for that line.

THAC0
2009-03-10, 12:51 AM
Even so, I don't know what a "level 1 ranger/1 fighter/5 wizard" would even mean in 4E. I think he just wrote the wrong editions down, or he has a very interesting explanation for that line.

I hope it's a very interesting explanation. Honestly, it's been bugging me all night, lol!

skywalker
2009-03-10, 01:06 AM
I don't have too much experience with strikers, but what I do have says this:

Warlocks are very hit-and-miss, very dependent on power selection. No, they are not failures, especially when you consider them as "focused controllers." But as strikers (what it says on the tin), they're pretty darned close some of the time.

Rangers - I haven't seen a beast-ranger yet. Personally I don't like the fluff all that much. But yes, there is only one reason to ever take the archery class feature, and that is two paragon paths. In my group, we have a ranger with the archery feature. She has never made use of it. While archer rangers deal great damage, I prefer the TWF ranger because they do tremendous damage without a crap-ton of char-op. TWF rangers also get toughness, and are quite capable at archery if you're going for the stormwarden PP.

Rogues tend to do a lot of CA-whining no matter who they are. That's because a rogue isn't much without CA. They're playing a striker, they want to do damage. Do the math.

I haven't experienced barbarians yet. As soon as I get my mitts on PHB2, tho.

Colmarr
2009-03-10, 01:11 AM
Rogues tend to do a lot of CA-whining no matter who they are. That's because a rogue isn't much without CA.

I personally feel that a rogue is a poor choice of striker in any party that doesn't include at least 2 other meleers (preferrably 3).

My recent party had 3 meleers, a wizard and the rogue, and she never had any trouble getting CA. However, one of the meleers pulled out of the campaign last session, and I'm interested to see how things go from now on.

AgentPaper
2009-03-10, 01:37 AM
Rogue is the best striker, since combat advantage is so easy to get. Even if you can't get flanking every round, there are other ways. A single other melee ally should be plenty, and it's not unlikely you'll have more. A beastmaster ranger probably makes a great rogue buddy, though. Especially if they take a wolf or similar, who can shift around a lot. Not needed if you already have some other melee types in your group, but if you don't it helps.

Sophismata
2009-03-10, 04:21 AM
But yes, there is only one reason to ever take the archery class feature, and that is two paragon paths.

This probably bears repeating - unless you want a PHB PP, the TWF variant is the better Ranger, whether you're looking to be melee or ranged.

The ability to wield one-handed weapons off-hand is unique, and Toughness is a better, and generally more useful feat than Defensive Mobility.

Furthermore, (almost?) all of the ranged powers can also be used in melee, if push comes to shove, provided you've got two weapons.

The ranged variant of the ranger is one of the (few) things that struck me as pretty poor design in 4e.

NPCMook
2009-03-10, 04:49 AM
This probably bears repeating - unless you want a PHB PP, the TWF variant is the better Ranger, whether you're looking to be melee or ranged.

The ability to wield one-handed weapons off-hand is unique, and Toughness is a better, and generally more useful feat than Defensive Mobility.

Furthermore, (almost?) all of the ranged powers can also be used in melee, if push comes to shove, provided you've got two weapons.

The ranged variant of the ranger is one of the (few) things that struck me as pretty poor design in 4e.

Yes, the Archery Ranger isn't all that great, most feats benifit the Melee Ranger better anyways. A TWR can make better use of Hunter's Quarry since they can just shift around through the combat and get close to whatever they want to Quarry, while the Archer has to sit farther out and just Quarry whatever is closer. Though with all those disadvantages they do have on of the most crowning pluses The Greatbow, Far Shot, and Hunter's Aim, they will never see close combat, 30 squares away, and you ignore cover and concealment on your Quarry. Average movement of the enemies is 6 squares, you'll have your 6 Squares(7 if you are an Elf) of movement so you can easily keep the enemy away from you for a nice long while.

PHB 2 helps them a bit with Distant Advantage, but then again this also just makes a Ranged rogue retarded.

kamuishirou
2009-03-10, 08:41 AM
Rangers - I haven't seen a beast-ranger yet. Personally I don't like the fluff all that much.

Just curious why you don't like the fluff? I've had rangers with beast companions since 2nd. I think it's very flavorful, but to each his own I suppose. You can always rewrite the fluff.

I have a TWF Halfling Ranger and I love the mobility and the damage. It's fun to deal the damage. After making a few levels and finding a magical throwing axe, it's great to switch it up between melee and range. Just found a +2 Pact Dagger I can't wait to have fun with it once I get back :).

toasty
2009-03-10, 08:51 AM
Forgive me for being a complete n00b... but where does it allow you to have animal companions for Rangers? I dont seem to remember reading about them in the PHB

Tengu_temp
2009-03-10, 09:04 AM
Martial Power. 4e has splatbooks, y'know.

Izmir Stinger
2009-03-10, 09:44 AM
Just curious why you don't like the fluff? I've had rangers with beast companions since 2nd. I think it's very flavorful, but to each his own I suppose. You can always rewrite the fluff.

They didn't really specify any fluff for the beast companion rangers. There is is sidebar text section that says, "How did you acquire your Animal Companion?" or something like that, and lists possible back stories that would explain why you have an animal companion as a permanent ally. Stuff like vision quests, raising them from a cub, saving them from poachers, tribal magic rituals, etc. It puts a lot of the impetus on the player to make his Beastmaster Ranger flavorful.

Which may be what he doesn't like about it.

toasty
2009-03-10, 10:01 AM
Martial Power. 4e has splatbooks, y'know.

Thanks.

I know 4E has splatbooks... but seeing as I haven't even looked at a single one I thought it'd be nice to know where I can get Animal Companions if I wanted to.

Burley
2009-03-10, 12:45 PM
I had always thought the Beast-Ranger build was boring, sub-par, and just added more headache than it is worth.
This is something I just noticed about the Beast-Ranger: Beast attacks all say “Level + #”. Where normal PC attacks are ˝ level plus stat, Beast attacks are PC Level + stat. That increases the odds to hit by quite a bit. Gives an actual reason to attack with a beast instead of a weapon.

kamuishirou
2009-03-10, 12:57 PM
They didn't really specify any fluff for the beast companion rangers. There is is sidebar text section that says, "How did you acquire your Animal Companion?" or something like that, and lists possible back stories that would explain why you have an animal companion as a permanent ally. Stuff like vision quests, raising them from a cub, saving them from poachers, tribal magic rituals, etc. It puts a lot of the impetus on the player to make his Beastmaster Ranger flavorful.

Which may be what he doesn't like about it.

I suppose. A lot of the books are about crunch with 4ed, except for the preview books which were all about the fluff. I guess I just don't have a problem seeing the fluff since Rangers have had companions for so long. (Including before WoW :P.)


I had always thought the Beast-Ranger build was boring, sub-par, and just added more headache than it is worth.
This is something I just noticed about the Beast-Ranger: Beast attacks all say “Level + #”. Where normal PC attacks are ˝ level plus stat, Beast attacks are PC Level + stat. That increases the odds to hit by quite a bit. Gives an actual reason to attack with a beast instead of a weapon.

Well, the problem with that is the beast doesn't get to wield a +3 Flaming Scimitar. Currently there are just a few items in the Adventurer's Vault for Animals. Though AV2 may have more to help buff them a bit. But there damage doesn't change so much.

Well, that's what I've read anyway. Haven't had a chance to play a BM Ranger yet.

Artanis
2009-03-10, 12:57 PM
Actually, there only the PPs in the PHB1 require a style. Those in martial power just need Ranger. That said, Beast Masters do get a much lower damage output... until Level 21, when they can get Quick Beast Command, which effectively gives them two attacks every round. Or they can take the right Epic Destiny, and get two standard action a round, thus coming out slightly ahead in damage then the other two ranger variants. (according to the CharOPs, at least).

That said, the fact that Beasts only have 2 surges and you need to share yours with in out of combat can really hurt a front line striker.
First, I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying that the term "strictly better" is flat-out incorrect.


Why do I say this? My reasoning is this: I count twelve bow-capable PPs between the PHB, Manual of the Planes, FRPG, and Martial Power combined. Of those:
*Three of the PPs are Genasi-only
*One of the PPs is Spellscarred Savant, which is indescribably bad if you try to use a bow with it, and is setting-specific.

So if can't or don't want to play a Genasi, you're down to nine. Eight, if Spellscarred Savant isn't an option. Of those remaining eight or nine, three require the archery fighting style. Taking the Beast Mastery style and using a bow removes fully one third of your options.

I don't know about you, but I consider "lose 33% of your PP options" and "strictly better" to be pretty much mutually exclusive.

MammonAzrael
2009-03-10, 01:10 PM
Except you're looking at things like this:

Beast 30 attack bonus = 32-36 (depending on the beast)

Ranger 30 attack bonus = 15(1/2 level) + 8-10(stat) + 6(Magic Weapon) + 2-3(Proficiency) = 31-34 and probably a couple additional +1s (Prime Shot, Weapon Expertise, etc.)

So the bonuses are pretty close to each other. And you'll still be doing much more damage with your standard ranged attacks.

I think the best way to fix the beast is to modify the powers that have them attack to deal more damage. It could be an extra [B], adding an extra stat to damage, etc. Not too drastic, and it won't be affected by Quick Beast Command since it doesn't touch basic attacks.

On that note, has anyone made any homebrew to make the Archery option more attractive? Perhaps switch out Defensive Mobility for a different feat, like Improved Initiative or Far Shot? And toss something in to compete with the TWF ability to use larger weapons. Perhaps increasing the die size of ranged weapons, or increasing their critical threat range, or making them all deal extra damage on a crit, or getting an Opportunity Attack within a couple squares, etc.

Awesomologist
2009-03-10, 01:21 PM
Warlock: While they are on the lower end of damage, their controller effects and survivability make them shine. I've played Infernal and Dark pacts, and I've seen Star and Fey pacts played. They are all viable but do require a certain amount of min/maxing to make them viable at low levels. My local group has completely given up on Wizards ("Dead Weight" as we call them) in favor of Warlocks.

Rogue: There is no reason whatsoever to not have or gain combat advantage. At early levels be sure to pick up powers that set you up for CA for the next round. Great way to tick off your DM :smallbiggrin: People really seem to like the Brutal Scoundrel build but I'm partial to the Artful Dodger. It's rare when other strikers do more damage. Sure Rangers get to attack more often, and Barbarians can do large amounts in a single attack, I find that Rogues have a higher chance to hit with their various modifiers.

Ranger:
TWF Ranger: Not bad a but a good DM can punish a TW Ranger very easily.
Animal Companion Ranger: Fluffy. Thats all they are. May not be a bad idea though for a party that doesn't have a fighter and instead went for a Paladin or Swordmage. Haven't played one though.
Bow Ranger: Sheer awesomeness. In the game I DM i struggle trying to build encounters where our Drow, Greatbow wielding ranger is actually threatened. The only time he's threatened is when the defenders have fallen and enemies are able to get in close late in the encounter because he's already expended his powers that let him get away. Those opportunities are rare and usually come at a great cost since it allows everyone else to gang up on the monsters.

Barbarian: While I think their damage will get ratcheted down a notch once PHB2 comes out they're actually pretty well balanced. If you're a DM make sure to use terrain and conditions to keep them under control. Otherwise your monsters are screwed.

Sorcerer: Okay so we only have a few levels and no feats for them but I've been playing one recently and let me say they feel like a slightly different version of the Warlock. I'm a big fan of their damage and their range but they don't have the mobility or survivability that some warlocks and rangers have. I guess that's the trade off though. Just play a Wild Mage though and use Chaos bolt. I was able to chain it 6 times with the 7th time it bounced back to me and missed. Everyone at the table cheered when that happen. Those moments are what D&D are all about. It's just an amazing at-will power. I imagine those situations are few and far between, but I did find that you will get the spell to bounce around a couple of times an encounter.

DM_Raven
2009-03-10, 01:26 PM
I think it's pretty badass that with a +1 dagger I can get myself up to a +14 to attack at second level as a rogue. Plus, if there is any full-cover on the battlefield, I can sneak-attack pretty much every round with the Fleeting Ghost utility power. If there are multiple sources of full cover...gg

EDIT* Excuse me, superior cover.

Izmir Stinger
2009-03-10, 01:51 PM
I think it's pretty badass that with a +1 dagger I can get myself up to a +14 to attack at second level as a rogue. Plus, if there is any full-cover on the battlefield, I can sneak-attack pretty much every round with the Fleeting Ghost utility power. If there are multiple sources of full cover...gg

EDIT* Excuse me, superior cover.

Or squares of total concealment. My old DM liked to do fights where there were no fixed light sources and the only lights were those we (or the enemy) carried. We used a lantern at first, but the switched to torches, which is all the enemy ever had, so the rouge would have darkness to hide in on the edges of everyone's light radius.

Hal
2009-03-10, 02:44 PM
My own thoughts, based on my current campaigns:

Rogues: It seems like rogues tend to trail behind other classes in per-round damage (X[W] damage being smaller with daggers), but their damage seems to be quite a bit more reliable. Enough bonuses to hit and powers that give multiple sources of bonus damage that they'll always do something useful. The downside: Crap for survivability. The worst part is if DMs use monsters that will ignore Defender penalties and attack a flanking rogue anyhow.

In my experience, ranged rogues can't get CA hardly at all, which takes away one of their biggest sources of damage.

Rangers: I've only seen this played by an, um, "inexperienced" player, and then only the TWF variety. Honestly, it seems like they're just reflavored rogues who can always get their bonus damage. Since I have yet to escape past level 5, I'm imagining this will change once better powers and paragon paths come into play.

Barbarians: I have a barbarian "companion," since there's no leadership feat just yet. He's awesome. You've gotta keep the healing on these guys like it's going out of style, but his damage is incredible. Putting a high crit weapon in his hands was one of the best ideas I ever had, too.

Overall, it seems like Defenders often do just as much damage as the Strikers. This could be because I'm still stuck in the low levels, but when the Defenders have their marks going off all the time, their bonus damage starts racking up quickly.

Izmir Stinger
2009-03-10, 02:59 PM
In my experience, ranged rogues can't get CA hardly at all, which takes away one of their biggest sources of damage.

Only if you are fighting in bare rooms. If they've got stuff to hid behind they can sneak attack to their heart's content.

Artanis
2009-03-10, 03:08 PM
On that note, has anyone made any homebrew to make the Archery option more attractive? Perhaps switch out Defensive Mobility for a different feat, like Improved Initiative or Far Shot? And toss something in to compete with the TWF ability to use larger weapons. Perhaps increasing the die size of ranged weapons, or increasing their critical threat range, or making them all deal extra damage on a crit, or getting an Opportunity Attack within a couple squares, etc.
I haven't made any of the homebrew you mention, but...

One thing to be careful of is that, while TWF Rangers may deal more damage than shooty Rangers, they're also more vulnerable. There has to be some price for staying out of harm's way. That price doesn't necessarily have to be damage output, but there's got to be something.

That said, I DO think that shooty Rangers can use some more options in certain areas. IMO, one of the most unattractive things about the archery style (regardless of balance) is that it has much fewer options than pretty much any class and build out there, and those it does have tend to suck. This is especially glaring in feats, and Martial Power only makes things worse in a way because shooty Rangers get an even smaller portion of its stuff. So before screwing with the foundation of the class itself, I think a good place to start would be some feats.

And Bracers of Perfect Shot vs. Bracers of Mighty Striking is just plain insulting.

Awesomologist
2009-03-10, 03:12 PM
In my experience, ranged rogues can't get CA hardly at all, which takes away one of their biggest sources of damage.
The first couple of rounds should be spent gaining CA from stealth and your encounter powers. After that use your friends and your mobility to gain CA. Go back to stealth and powers as needed. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.



Overall, it seems like Defenders often do just as much damage as the Strikers. This could be because I'm still stuck in the low levels, but when the Defenders have their marks going off all the time, their bonus damage starts racking up quickly.

Thats usually only the case for fighters, although Paladins and Swordmages have their moments and few nice dailies.

Mando Knight
2009-03-10, 03:50 PM
In my experience, ranged rogues can't get CA hardly at all, which takes away one of their biggest sources of damage.

Which is why they should always be Artful Dodgers unless they want to hide all the time, or wait for the PHB2 to come out with its Distant Advantage feat.

Artful Dodgers can easily run up to flank the opponent for the CA and then use a ranged attack at no distance, as their +Cha to OA AC means that they can have Paladin-level AC against OAs, and can be further reinforced with the Defensive Mobility feat and a Defender's mark on the target.

Colmarr
2009-03-10, 04:33 PM
I think it's pretty badass that with a +1 dagger I can get myself up to a +14 to attack at second level as a rogue.

Is this without CA? If so, how?

I see 5 (Dex 20) + 1 (half level) +4 (dagger prof.) +1 (enhancement) +1 (Nimble Blade) +1 (Weapon Expertise) = +13.

Even so, a fighter can get to +12, and any other weapon-based class can get to +11, so I don't think it's all that big a deal.

Shadow_Elf
2009-03-10, 06:17 PM
I am currently playing a Beast Master Ranger and loving it. My Spider Beast Companion runs up onto the ceiling and drops down behind enemies (avoiding the falling damage thanks to her fantastic Acrobatics bonus), and flanks for me so that my level 5 BMR gets +13 vs. AC attacks with her fullblade. The extra flanker often comes in handy, since with circling strike, I can attack with flanking, and shift the spider one square to give the rogue flanking for free. My damage/round is lower than the rogue's, but when I pull off an encounter or daily power, all hell breaks loose and things start dieing big time.

It also helps that I have rolled a Natural 20 four times in three encounters recently, each time on one of the attack rolls of "synchronized strike", making it a very deadly attack.

(For comparison, On an at-will, I deal 1d12 + 1d6 + 6 (16 average) damage with hunter's quarry, and the rogue does 3d8 + 11 (22.5) damage with sneak attack. But on a "Beast Latch" vs. "Setup Strike", I deal 2d12 + 1d6 + 9 (25.5), and he deals 4d8 + 11 (27), and he needs Combat Advantage to pull it of and I don't.)

Asbestos
2009-03-11, 02:26 AM
Which is why they should always be Artful Dodgers unless they want to hide all the time, or wait for the PHB2 to come out with its Distant Advantage feat.

Artful Dodgers can easily run up to flank the opponent for the CA and then use a ranged attack at no distance, as their +Cha to OA AC means that they can have Paladin-level AC against OAs, and can be further reinforced with the Defensive Mobility feat and a Defender's mark on the target.

And if they happen to be Halflings with Lost in the Crowd and Defensive Mobility... well, I'm not sure those guys ever worry about OAs.

Izmir Stinger
2009-03-11, 12:04 PM
Is this without CA? If so, how?

I see 5 (Dex 20) + 1 (half level) +4 (dagger prof.) +1 (enhancement) +1 (Nimble Blade) +1 (Weapon Expertise) = +13.

I think he meant with CA and without Weapon Expertise (which isn't released yet).

Izmir Stinger
2009-03-11, 12:33 PM
And if they happen to be Halflings with Lost in the Crowd and Defensive Mobility... well, I'm not sure those guys ever worry about OAs.

The gamiest way to play them is, on any turn you have excess movement you don't need, use your move action to run around daring monsters marked by the defender to try something. The Fighter has a much higher chance to hit them than they have to hit you, and does decent damage, and the Paladin gets automatic, if low, damage.

Joran
2009-03-11, 12:48 PM
In our current game, we have:

Defenders: Hammer Fighter, Swordmage, Swordmage
Leader: Warlord
Controller: Wizard
Striker: Rogue

It really does feel sometimes that the 4 melee are just there to serve as flanking buddies for the rogue. The rogue does awesome damage and had something like +17 to hit with flanking and furious smash.

I found warlocks to be a little lower on the damage, but the weaknesses that our feylock could bestow on the monsters were pretty amazing. -4 to hit for every attack in a round... That and she was nigh unhittable; if she did get into melee combat, she'd just eyebite and run.

sombrastewart
2009-03-11, 01:11 PM
I play a warlock in a weekly game, and last night our group got into a fight with a batch of undead, lead by a vampire lord. So, I cooked off Dread Star (yeah, it's a Star power and my guy is a Fey/Dark lock), which immobilized him and dropped his Will defense (his lowest) by 2. The cleric smiled, thanked me and utterly destroyed him.