PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Avenger Essentials



Gralamin
2009-12-06, 09:49 PM
This article is up here (http://wizards.com/dnd/downloads/dragon/382/382_Avenger_Essentials.pdf) if you are an insider.

The article basically consists of 12 AMAZING feats for Avengers. And it's the sort of major boost Avengers need. Avenging Resolution is a bit worse then a free brutal 2, Distant Vengeance let Avengers use bows, Painful Oath is free +wis damage each turn. It's amazing, and you should go look at it.

Break
2009-12-06, 09:51 PM
The sad part is, amazing feats like these are what they need to bring them up to par. Let's see if the Class Acts: Avengers article gives them a suite of powers worth using, so I can stop with this Avenger rewrite already. >_>

....and yet, they're still feat fixes, like Weapon Expertise and the like were. Some of them might have to be integrated into the class itself.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-07, 03:32 AM
Wow, this seems to be becoming the most controversial class in 4E. Should we start discussing Character Tiers?

Gralamin
2009-12-07, 03:35 AM
Wow, this seems to be becoming the most controversial class in 4E. Should we start discussing Character Tiers?

The IRC has thought about it. Ultimately came to the conclusion it'd be very difficult to include leaders in it.

Since I might as well make my stance clear: Avengers are broken just like 3.5 fighters: They have a few cheap tricks (Crit Fisher is the Ubercharger equivalent), but the class if played how most likely intended simply cannot keep up with other strikers. Thus, anything that helps the class is good to me.

Tackyhillbillu
2009-12-07, 04:55 AM
I'm curious. I haven't been keeping track of 4e (my group started a 3.5 game.)

How's the Rogue holding up against all the fancy new Strikers?

Thajocoth
2009-12-07, 05:01 AM
I'm curious. I haven't been keeping track of 4e (my group started a 3.5 game.)

How's the Rogue holding up against all the fancy new Strikers?

Rogues still deal great damage, but their damage is very situational (combat advantage required). My upper-paragon Rogue, when he doesn't have CA, deals about 1d4+10 with an at-will. No other striker class will ever go as low as a Rogue without CA. A new feat seems to fix this for Rogues with Rapiers though... Lets them deal sneak damage when they and their target are the only creatures adjacent to one another, which when a Rogue doesn't have CA, that's the most common reason. (With CA, he deals 1d4+3d8+14 with an at-will)

All the other strikers either get to deal their damage by attacking someone specific (Quarry, Curse, Shroud target), get it when they hit (Flurry of Blows), get it passively (Barbarian, Sorcerer) or don't get a special damage bonus at all (Avenger). Though, Avengers can use ANY weapon with their powers... Though, so can Barbarians, who still generally deal 1[W] + Another die + Str mod for their at-wills.

tcrudisi
2009-12-07, 05:08 AM
Wow. Every single one of those feats was at least decent and most were great. I am very happy to see this. Suddenly, I want to try an Avenger again. I'm disappointed that in the epic game that just begaon on Saturday I decided to play a Ranger instead. I might have to try an epic Avenger in a couple of weeks. Kudos, WotC, for the much needed boost to Avengers.

And to you, Tacky: I consider Rogues to be the baseline for strikers. They have some neat tricks and their damage is about average for a striker. Sure, Rangers and Barbarians do more, but Avengers and Warlocks do less. Sorcerers just don't count.

Tackyhillbillu
2009-12-07, 05:08 AM
Hmmm. That's good. I was rather fond of my charismatic Rogue, even if he wasn't optimized. Good to know he still is hanging in there.

And Rangers do more, really? Wonder what our Ranger was doing wrong then. I usually did way more damage then him.

Boci
2009-12-07, 05:16 AM
And Rangers do more, really? Wonder what our Ranger was doing wrong then. I usually did way more damage then him.

Didn't take twin strike as an at will power?

Jerthanis
2009-12-07, 05:40 AM
Whoa, the Avenger is bad? I thought it was pretty amazing. Can someone quickly summarize what's wrong with it that makes it so bad just to get me up to speed?

Kurald Galain
2009-12-07, 05:51 AM
Rogues still deal great damage, but their damage is very situational (combat advantage required).
That's not situational: getting combat advantage is very easy, and a well-played rogue will have CA over 90% of the time.


don't get a special damage bonus at all (Avenger).
The damage bonus for avengers lies in the fact that they hit more often. Note that rogues also tend to hit very accurately.

hamishspence
2009-12-07, 05:52 AM
Lack of damage compared to other strikers.

the gap is not huge, but it is there.

Blackfang108
2009-12-07, 09:53 AM
Lack of damage compared to other strikers.

the gap is not huge, but it is there.

Pretty much.

And the fact that their censure bonus tends to be triggered much less (except Unity, which is lower anyway).

Break
2009-12-07, 10:11 AM
Whoa, the Avenger is bad? I thought it was pretty amazing. Can someone quickly summarize what's wrong with it that makes it so bad just to get me up to speed?

Low damage, generally bleh powers, two of the censures are problematic to activate (which adds to the first problem), while the other doesn't grant enough bonus damage to keep up, poor PPs, for starters.

Basically, WotC really overestimated the power of Oath of Enmity, and the rest of the class suffers as a result. When your best build for a class is to multiclass out and systematically replace all of the class's powers with another's, there's something wrong. The article is basically WotC's way of saying "we screwed up! Here's yet another feat fix."

Thajocoth
2009-12-07, 01:25 PM
That's not situational: getting combat advantage is very easy, and a well-played rogue will have CA over 90% of the time, which for some sessions is never.


The damage bonus for avengers lies in the fact that they hit more often. Note that rogues also tend to hit very accurately.

I've generally had a lot of trouble getting CA. Part of why I'm retiring the character. The other part is that I put a lot of focus into his 18-20 crit range, which happens only 15% of the time.

Does the avenger really hit more often?

Rogue - +1 to hit with daggers, which are already +3 prof, Nimble Blade feat adds +1 with CA and is a must for Rogues
Warlock - +1 Prime Shot
Ranger - Two tries to hit, and +1 Prime Shot
Monk - +3 prof with their unarmed strike
Barbarian - +1 Charge
Avenger - Roll twice, take the better

Hit-wise, they're better than some, but a Ranger or Rogue will hit at least as often. I know my Rogue's hit things on a nat 2, and so has the other Rogue I've seen. Hitting often is part of being a striker. The other part is dealing a lot of damage when they hit. An Avenger can, for a feat, wield a Mordenkrad or Execution Axe. But... A Barbarian can too and still gets a damage bonus implicit to his powers. A Ranger can grab a Greatbow or a pair of Waraxes for 1d12 per half their Twin Strike for that same feat.

So an Avenger is, really, on-par hit-wise and below par damage-wise.

Break
2009-12-07, 01:33 PM
I've generally had a lot of trouble getting CA. Part of why I'm retiring the character. The other part is that I put a lot of focus into his 18-20 crit range, which happens only 15% of the time.

To be fair to the avenger, Prime Shot really doesn't come into play often unless you take a couple of feats like Called Shot or Prime Punisher, and Oath of Enmity really is a great boost to hit. I haven't verified the math myself, but I've heard - probably on CharOp back at WotC, but my memory is fidgety - that if you need around a 10 on a d20 to hit, Oath basically acts as a +5 to hit.

So yeah, Oath is a nice accuracy spike, but this isn't alone to make the class worth taking, as their damage is still lacking with this this taken into account, among other problems. So, you're half right.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 01:37 PM
Monk - +3 prof with their unarmed strike, tagets NADS with a weapon

By weapon, you mean implement, right? :smallwink:

Gralamin
2009-12-07, 01:45 PM
To be fair to the avenger, Prime Shot really doesn't come into play often unless you take a couple of feats like Called Shot or Prime Punisher, and Oath of Enmity really is a great boost to hit. I haven't verified the math myself, but I've heard - probably on CharOp back at WotC, but my memory is fidgety - that if you need around a 10 on a d20 to hit, Oath basically acts as a +5 to hit.

So yeah, Oath is a nice accuracy spike, but this isn't alone to make the class worth taking, as their damage is still lacking with this this taken into account, among other problems. So, you're half right.

It's actually if you need an 11 to hit, it's a +5, and that's basic probability:
If you have a 50% chance to hit, and a 50% chance to miss, thats the same as flipping a coin. If you define heads as a hit, then an avenger could get:
HH, HT, TH, TT
Of those four possibilities, three contain a hit, and so that means the avenger in this scenario is 25% (or +5) more likely to hit.
There is a number of decreasing returns though, but there is a convent chart CO had already put together:


The table below lists the probabilities (rounded to 2 decimal places) of getting a roll of X or above, if you can use your Oath and have fair dice.

2 0.9975
3 0.99
4 0.98
5 0.96
6 0.94
7 0.91
8 0.88
9 0.84
10 0.80
11 0.75
12 0.70
13 0.64
14 0.58
15 0.51
16 0.44
17 0.36
18 0.28
19 0.19
20 0.10

Also, I'd like to remind everyone in this thread that the Avenger does technically have bonus damage, They do have Censure after-all. Just because it is difficult to activate doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Artanis
2009-12-07, 02:32 PM
To add to what Gralamin said:

That chart also shows how Oath of Enmity increases crit chance. The Avenger has the same crit chance as a non-Avenger with a 19-20 crit range by default. If you manage to get an actual 18-20 crit range, the Avenger is going to be critting on more than one in four attacks.


It's still not enough, of course. It's just worth noting as one of the effects that WotC seems to have overestimated.

Gralamin
2009-12-07, 02:35 PM
To add to what Gralamin said:

That chart also shows how Oath of Enmity increases crit chance. The Avenger has the same crit chance as a non-Avenger with a 19-20 crit range by default. If you manage to get an actual 18-20 crit range, the Avenger is going to be critting on more than one in four attacks.


It's still not enough, of course. It's just worth noting as one of the effects that WotC seems to have overestimated.

And good luck to anyone fighting a Keen Eagle Shaman that is helping an Avenger. 16-20 crit range you say? Yes, I'd like to crit on almost half of my attacks!

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 02:39 PM
The avenger is underpowered? :smallconfused:

I mean, it did look sorta weak compared to all the other strikers, but underpowered?

Then again, I'm not much of an optimizer.

Gralamin
2009-12-07, 02:42 PM
The avenger is underpowered? :smallconfused:

I mean, it did look sorta weak compared to all the other strikers, but underpowered?

Then again, I'm not much of an optimizer.

This isn't the difference between say, a fighter and a wizard in 3.5. It is smaller then that, but, to keep up with a lot of the other strikers, an avenger pretty much must focus on criticals, and multiclass immediately to replace as many of his powers as possible. When it is optimal to pretty much abandon your class except for Oath of Enmity, then this is a bad thing.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 02:48 PM
This isn't the difference between say, a fighter and a wizard in 3.5. It is smaller then that, but, to keep up with a lot of the other strikers, an avenger pretty much must focus on criticals, and multiclass immediately to replace as many of his powers as possible. When it is optimal to pretty much abandon your class except for Oath of Enmity, then this is a bad thing.

Are you sure? The Ranger always seemed a lot like a 3.5 wizard in comparison with other strikers in terms of powers, but again, I am not much of a optimizer so If I am wrong it is simply my lack of skill when it comes to optimization.

Gralamin
2009-12-07, 02:51 PM
Are you sure? The Ranger always seemed a lot like a 3.5 wizard in comparison with other strikers in terms of powers, but again, I am not much of a optimizer so If I am wrong it is simply my lack of skill when it comes to optimization.

Ranger is definitely the big problem, but you can pretty easily build a Barbarian, Assassin, Sorcerer, or Rogue that can out damage a pure Avenger. I'm not sure if Warlock's can, but Warlock's have always been the "Odd" striker.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 02:54 PM
Ranger is definitely the big problem, but you can pretty easily build a Barbarian, Assassin, Sorcerer, or Rogue that can out damage a pure Avenger. I'm not sure if Warlock's can, but Warlock's have always been the "Odd" striker.

I didn't say the other couldn't out damage a avenger, any striker can out damage a avenger, which is sad, because the avenger has some interesting fluff, and is a nice concept, just poorly executed.

Everyone will be hard pressed to out damage a ranger though.

Gralamin
2009-12-07, 02:55 PM
I didn't say the other couldn't out damage a avenger, any striker can out damage a avenger, which is sad, because the avenger has some interesting fluff, and is a nice concept, just poorly executed.

But thats the entire point - Strikers are supposed to do good damage, and if they are consistently being out-damaged, that makes them bad at their job, and thus likely underpowered.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 02:57 PM
But thats the entire point - Strikers are supposed to do good damage, and if they are consistently being out-damaged, that makes them bad at their job, and thus likely underpowered.

Yeah I know. With hope, WOTC will fix the avenger soon, these feats hopefully being the start.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 03:22 PM
Warlocks can't out-damage an Avenger very well, especially if the Avenger picks a large enough weapon, and definitely not if the Avenger MCs into the Pit Fighter Paragon Path. Those two don't rely so much on pure damage to be a Striker, but rather use controller, leader, and defender-like rider effects that help set the monster up for a brutal multi-man beatdown or just a simple lockdown/lockout.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 03:25 PM
Warlocks can't out-damage an Avenger very well, especially if the Avenger picks a large enough weapon, and definitely not if the Avenger MCs into the Pit Fighter Paragon Path. Those two don't rely so much on pure damage to be a Striker, but rather use controller, leader, and defender-like rider effects that help set the monster up for a brutal multi-man beatdown or just a simple lockdown/lockout.

Never seen a warlock in action,or read their section in the PHB in much detail, so I can't comment.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 03:41 PM
Never seen a warlock in action,or read their section in the PHB in much detail, so I can't comment.

Most of their powers deal roughly the same amount of damage as a Rogue using a Short Sword or Rapier (with a few exceptions), their Warlock's Curse cannot be boosted to d8 damage dice, unlike the Rogue or Rangers' similar abilities, and without Pact weapons they can't benefit from Weapon Focus. However, like the Avenger, they get more rider effects to their powers than most other Strikers, including Eyebite's single-target relative invisibility.

Their main way of out-damaging the Avenger is to grab 13 Dexterity for Dual Implement Spellcasting, and perhaps Arcane Implement Proficiency (Staff) for Staff of Ruin. Avengers can make use of Iron Armbands of Power, massive-dice weapons, and high-damage enchantments.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 03:44 PM
It is too bad that Avengers always have to use greataxes or greatswords, cause I have trouble seeing it work with their fluff, but that is probably just me.

tcrudisi
2009-12-07, 03:57 PM
It is too bad that Avengers always have to use greataxes or greatswords, cause I have trouble seeing it work with their fluff, but that is probably just me.

What are these "Greataxes" and "Greatswords" you speak of? I only know of 4 weapons: the Dagger, the Staff, the Fullblade, and the Executioner's Axe. All else is unimportant in the scheme of things.

Artanis
2009-12-07, 04:00 PM
*stuff about comparisons between strikers*

From what I've read and seen, it goes something like this:


The Ranger is the highest-damage striker, but the downside is that they have less versatility than the others. I guess you could say that the Ranger is the "purest" striker: very, very good at making things die, but can't do a hell of a lot else (relatively speaking).

The Warlock is on the other end of the spectrum. Like Mando Knight says, they can do a lot more than just hurt things. However, this versatility comes at the cost of not being quite as good at killing things as the other strikers.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 04:02 PM
What are these "Greataxes" and "Greatswords" you speak of? I only know of 4 weapons: the Dagger, the Staff, the Fullblade, and the Executioner's Axe. All else is unimportant in the scheme of things.
Never heard of the last two.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 04:03 PM
What are these "Greataxes" and "Greatswords" you speak of? I only know of 4 weapons: the Dagger, the Staff, the Fullblade, and the Executioner's Axe. All else is unimportant in the scheme of things.
Double Scimitar, Mordenkrad. Double Scimitar brings in the High Crit tomfoolery with a TWF/Pit Fighter (or TWF/Shock Trooper) Avenger build, just as Daggers bring in Daggermaster and its crit-fishing capabilities.

Never heard of the last two.
Adventurer's Vault superior two-handed melee weapons. A friggin' huge axe and a BFS. One rerolls all your 1s and 2s in your damage dice, the other is the only +3/d12 weapon in the game so far. Both have High Crit.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 04:08 PM
Adventurer's Vault superior two-handed melee weapons. A friggin' huge axe and a BFS. One rerolls all your 1s and 2s in your damage dice, the other is the only +3/d12 weapon in the game so far. Both have High Crit.

I see, well since I'm getting the AV for Christmas*, I will see them soon.



*How do I know I'm getting it? I hacked into my mothers amazon account and checked the list of recently placed orders. I have a level in rogue:smalltongue: !

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 04:18 PM
A level in makeup? What did you do that for? :smallconfused::smalltongue:

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 04:20 PM
A level in makeup? What did you do that for? :smallconfused::smalltongue:

Woopsie! :smalltongue:

DSCrankshaw
2009-12-07, 05:14 PM
It used to be that the Avenger made up for the lack of damage with a high AC and taking on a defender like role--isolating an enemy and wailing on him until he died. The combination of high AC and HP, along with high accuracy, allowed him to do that, even if his damage was a little low. Unfortunately, the recent errata brought down the AC significantly (technically only by 2, since he could no longer use his Armor of Faith with leather, but it's enough to take the Avenger down from defender-like levels to just high end striker). So I think this article was WotC's way to give the avenger back some damage to make up for the loss of AC, the big draws being Painful Oath and Hand of Divine Guidance. Avenging Resolution is less beneficial. It's okay for low hit dice weapons, or if you have extra damage die, but it only moves a fullblade from an average of 6.5 to 6.75.

It remains to be seen how this alters the way the avenger is played.

Hzurr
2009-12-07, 05:27 PM
Never heard of the last two.

I tend to ignore the last two, because they strike me as being exceptionally cheep and cheesy.

AtwasAwamps
2009-12-07, 07:16 PM
I thought this topic said "Avengers Assemble" and got excited.

I am sorely disappointed.

Asbestos
2009-12-07, 07:24 PM
What are these "Greataxes" and "Greatswords" you speak of? I only know of 4 weapons: the Dagger, the Staff, the Fullblade, and the Executioner's Axe. All else is unimportant in the scheme of things.

The staff? Explain.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 07:25 PM
By staff please don't mean the quarterstaff.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 07:52 PM
Unfortunately, the recent errata brought down the AC significantly (technically only by 2, since he could no longer use his Armor of Faith with leather, but it's enough to take the Avenger down from defender-like levels to just high end striker).

Nope. Improved Armor of Faith still brings the AC up to higher levels than other Strikers can get with only one feat, and still has Two-Weapon Defense and a Defensive Weapon to work with. They don't reach Defender-level AC at low levels anymore without higher feat/stat investment, but the scaling bonus from IAF is one of the best AC boosts out there.

By staff please don't mean the quarterstaff.
Yes, the Quarterstaff. One feat with Wis 13 makes it a double 1d8 weapon with the Off-Hand and Defensive properties.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 07:52 PM
Yes, the Quarterstaff. One feat with Wis 13 makes it a double 1d8 weapon with the Off-Hand and Defensive properties.

What is the feat's name?

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 07:53 PM
What is the feat's name?
Staff Fighting. It's in Dragon.

Gamerlord
2009-12-07, 07:56 PM
Which issue?

Y'know what, never mind, I'll look it up in the compendium.

Asbestos
2009-12-07, 08:11 PM
Nope. Improved Armor of Faith still brings the AC up to higher levels than other Strikers can get with only one feat, and still has Two-Weapon Defense and a Defensive Weapon to work with. They don't reach Defender-level AC at low levels anymore without higher feat/stat investment, but the scaling bonus from IAF is one of the best AC boosts out there.

Yes, the Quarterstaff. One feat with Wis 13 makes it a double 1d8 weapon with the Off-Hand and Defensive properties.
I figured it was that feat, I imagine this particular sort of Avenger only materialized after the other double weapons were errated.

Boci
2009-12-07, 09:01 PM
I tend to ignore the last two, because they strike me as being exceptionally cheep and cheesy.

Any particular reason? You have to spend a feat for them, and for strikers like the avenger who do not want to multiclass they are a must.

Asbestos
2009-12-07, 09:18 PM
This article is up here (http://wizards.com/dnd/downloads/dragon/382/382_Avenger_Essentials.pdf) if you are an insider.

The article basically consists of 12 AMAZING feats for Avengers. And it's the sort of major boost Avengers need. Avenging Resolution is a bit worse then a free brutal 2, Distant Vengeance let Avengers use bows, Painful Oath is free +wis damage each turn. It's amazing, and you should go look at it.

Finally got home to an actual computer (damn iTouch) and checked out the article. Avenging Resolution: Not sure how useful this actually is. Either you grab a Mordenkand or Executioner's Axe and ignore this feat (this feat seems like it negates Brutal) or you grab a Fullblade and waste a feat on this so you can do that tiny bit of damage more. Distant Vengeance: I guess this is good against flying enemies or those trying to kite your Avenger? Beyond that, it doesn't seem too useful.

tbarrie
2009-12-07, 10:31 PM
Finally got home to an actual computer (damn iTouch) and checked out the article. Avenging Resolution: Not sure how useful this actually is.

Not very. Exotic Weapon Proficiency generally increases your expected damage by 1 per [W]; this does significantly less. It'll bump a dagger's expected damage from 2.5 to 3.25, a d6 weapon's from 3.5 to 4, a d8's from 4.5 to 4.875; the damage bonus continues to get worse as the die size increases, which means that taking this after Exotic Weapon Proficiency to get a further damage increase won't work very well.


Distant Vengeance: I guess this is good against flying enemies or those trying to kite your Avenger? Beyond that, it doesn't seem too useful.

When I first saw Distant Vengeance, I was worried it would eventually become overpowered as the number of ranged Avenger Powers increased. But it only works with ranged basic attacks, so that's okay. It still seems fairly decent; I don't yet have a good handle on how hard it is in general to set up your Oath rerolls normally, but if all you need is a space within ten squares of the victim with no enemies around, it's got to be really easy.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 10:46 PM
Not very. Exotic Weapon Proficiency generally increases your expected damage by 1 per [W]; this does significantly less. It'll bump a dagger's expected damage from 2.5 to 3.25, a d6 weapon's from 3.5 to 4, a d8's from 4.5 to 4.875; the damage bonus continues to get worse as the die size increases, which means that taking this after Exotic Weapon Proficiency to get a further damage increase won't work very well.

However, by investing in a weapon like the Double Scimitar...

Asbestos
2009-12-07, 10:53 PM
However, by investing in a weapon like the Double Scimitar...

I still feel like you could spend that feat better, it is certainly far from a priority.

Shadow_Elf
2009-12-07, 10:56 PM
Alternative: Take Avenging Resolution in conjunction with a Vorpal Falchion...

DSCrankshaw
2009-12-07, 11:12 PM
Nope. Improved Armor of Faith still brings the AC up to higher levels than other Strikers can get with only one feat, and still has Two-Weapon Defense and a Defensive Weapon to work with. They don't reach Defender-level AC at low levels anymore without higher feat/stat investment, but the scaling bonus from IAF is one of the best AC boosts out there.

That was before Hide Expertise, or Whirling (Dex-secondary) Barbarians. Barbs now have +1/2/3 AC (and reflex!) as a class feature (a better effect than Improved Armor of Faith), the secondary stat as their AC stat, and +3 AC armor. Like I said, it's on the high end of the striker ACs, but it's no longer defender level.

Whirling barbs probably have the best AC of any of the strikers, as they don't even need a feat, and naturally gravitated to Defensive weapons and the Two-Weapon Defense feat.

Mando Knight
2009-12-07, 11:19 PM
That was before Hide Expertise, or Whirling (Dex-secondary) Barbarians. Barbs now have +1/2/3 AC (and reflex!) as a class feature (a better effect than Improved Armor of Faith), the secondary stat as their AC stat, and +3 AC armor. Like I said, it's on the high end of the striker ACs, but it's no longer defender level.

It is Defender level. Count it up again, then compare it to a Paladin or Swordmage of similar level. In this case, it's less of the Avenger being weak than it is the Barbarian being the second most ridiculous Striker.

Starsinger
2009-12-08, 08:44 AM
The article is basically WotC's way of saying "we screwed up! Here's yet another feat fix."

I prefer "yet another feat fix" to "Okay, we printed the class, it's not in the PHB, let's let it languish and die."

Break
2009-12-08, 12:58 PM
I prefer "yet another feat fix" to "Okay, we printed the class, it's not in the PHB, let's let it languish and die."
Eheh, true enough. I think the only classes that have any chances of really languishing and dying in 4E are any Dragon exclusives, though.

Starsinger
2009-12-08, 03:02 PM
I don't know... I imagine Shadow Power, whenever that is, will have something to say about Assassins.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 03:17 PM
Never bothered to read the assassin, whats wrong with it?

Artanis
2009-12-08, 03:18 PM
It's in Dragon. If Dragon classes are the only ones in danger of abandonment, that means that the Assassin is in danger of abandonment. However, Shadow Power may (or may not) give it more support.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 03:20 PM
I know it is in Dragon, I have a DDI subscription, I just never read it, what is wrong with it?

Artanis
2009-12-08, 03:23 PM
Nothing's wrong with it. It's just that being in Dragon means that, unlike book classes, it has some chance of being abandoned the same way that a ton of 3.5e classes were.

Starsinger
2009-12-08, 03:24 PM
I know it is in Dragon, I have a DDI subscription, I just never read it, what is wrong with it?

Absolutely nothing is wrong with it, as far as I'm aware.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 03:25 PM
Nothing's wrong with it. It's just that being in Dragon means that, unlike book classes, it has some chance of being abandoned the same way that a ton of 3.5e classes were.

Ah I see, sorry, a misunderstanding.

Boci
2009-12-08, 03:32 PM
I don't know... I imagine Shadow Power, whenever that is, will have something to say about Assassins.

So the rumors I heard about a shadow class series are true? Cool.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 03:35 PM
So the rumors I heard about a shadow class series are true? Cool.

Yep, we already have one in dragon.

Boci
2009-12-08, 03:37 PM
Yep, we already have one in dragon.

I know about the assassin for striker, but I thought it was a one off. So, maybe Necromancer for controller, Deathknight for defender and something some kind of leader.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 03:38 PM
I know about the assassin for striker, but I thought it was a one off. So, maybe Necromancer for controller, Deathknight for defender and something some kind of leader.

We so need Hexblade for controller as well as necromancer.

I want a Hexblade 4e revision! As well as a spellthief revision!

Boci
2009-12-08, 03:48 PM
We so need Hexblade for controller as well as necromancer.

I want a Hexblade 4e revision! As well as a spellthief revision!

Good point. Necromancer could always be the leader instead. However, beofre shadow power we will need all the shadow classes in one book (or a number of books, but not just dragon). Probably PH 4.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 03:51 PM
I think that is the official plan. PHB 4 and everything.

Hexblade could also be a defender...

Hzurr
2009-12-08, 03:57 PM
Any particular reason? You have to spend a feat for them, and for strikers like the avenger who do not want to multiclass they are a must.

I have a problem with any weapon that is "strictly better" than others that should be equal in power. Also, the attitude that weapons like these are a "must" for strikers is a complete lie. Are you more effective with these weapons? Most likely. You're also more effective with the Weapon Expertise feat; but that doesn't make them a "must," despite what people on the boards say (My characters survived on the PHB1 without that feat for a long time). I also have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that's used almost exclusively in power-gamer builds. It's completely possible to have an excellent character with a non-superior weapon. And if the character does decide on a superior weapon; there shouldn't be two that are exclusively better than all the others.

Boci
2009-12-08, 04:16 PM
Also, the attitude that weapons like these are a "must" for strikers is a complete lie. Are you more effective with these weapons? Most likely. You're also more effective with the Weapon Expertise feat; but that doesn't make them a "must," despite what people on the boards say (My characters survived on the PHB1 without that feat for a long time).

Sure, but they help. Strikers need to inflict damage, so they need high damage weapons, and in order to do damage they need to hit. My optomized swordmage almost died last fight. So if he wouldn't have been optimized...


I also have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that's used almost exclusively in power-gamer builds. It's completely possible to have an excellent character with a non-superior weapon.

But that character gains nothing by not using the best tool for the trade.


And if the character does decide on a superior weapon; there shouldn't be two that are exclusively better than all the others.

Are there any other non-reach two handed weapons they compare to?

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 04:17 PM
So what should a Hexblade be? A striker? A defender? A Controller?

Not a leader to be sure.

Boci
2009-12-08, 04:20 PM
So what should a Hexblade be? A striker? A defender? A Controller?

Not a leader to be sure.

Hexblade would be controller, necromancer a leader and a deathknight for a defender, since the assassin is already the striker.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 04:21 PM
Sounds reasonable.

Mando Knight
2009-12-08, 04:34 PM
And if the character does decide on a superior weapon; there shouldn't be two that are exclusively better than all the others.

Of course not. That's why the Double weapons got hit with errata. Now, the Superior weapons are the best there are at their particular situations: Fullblade, Mordenkrad, Fullblade, and Urgrosh are the best two-handed non-reach weapons. Greatspear and Spiked Chain are better than the military reach weapons. Bastard Sword, Waraxe, and Craghammer are solid one-handed versatile weapons. Rapier is the best Rogue melee weapon without taking the new Dragon feat that allows them to use one-handed Heavy Blades. Greatbow and Superior Crossbow are the best bows. Double weapons now have their place, with some allowing the Whirling Barbarian and Tempest Fighter to switch it up between two-weapon and two-handed fighting styles, and others allowing the Tempest Fighter high defenses and decent damage output. Tratnyrs and Drow Long Knives are the best Heavy Thrown weapons.

All superior weapons have their place. It just so "happens" that all of the weapon-based classes take a good look at getting a better weapon to work with, and depending on the build, one to three stand out as vital while the others are negligible.

Gamerlord
2009-12-08, 05:23 PM
What do you think of the shadow power source?

Sir Homeslice
2009-12-08, 06:33 PM
I have a problem with any weapon that is "strictly better" than others that should be equal in power. Also, the attitude that weapons like these are a "must" for strikers is a complete lie. Are you more effective with these weapons? Most likely. You're also more effective with the Weapon Expertise feat; but that doesn't make them a "must," despite what people on the boards say (My characters survived on the PHB1 without that feat for a long time). I also have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that's used almost exclusively in power-gamer builds. It's completely possible to have an excellent character with a non-superior weapon. And if the character does decide on a superior weapon; there shouldn't be two that are exclusively better than all the others.

So you're against Maces, Greatclubs, Morningstars, Mauls, Longspears, Heavy Flails, and Glaives? Also Slings, Shortbows, and Shuriken.

Shadow_Elf
2009-12-08, 07:56 PM
What do you think of the shadow power source?

I know the subject stems from this thread, but this really is the wrong thread to speculate on the Shadow Power Source.

Anyway, do you all think that Spiked Chain Mastery shall be the weapon of choice for Avengers now? 2d4, Brutal 2 (with the new feat), reach 2, +3 prof, defensive... it seems to have everything going for it now.

Gralamin
2009-12-08, 07:58 PM
I know the subject stems from this thread, but this really is the wrong thread to speculate on the Shadow Power Source.

Anyway, do you all think that Spiked Chain Mastery shall be the weapon of choice for Avengers now? 2d4, Brutal 2 (with the new feat), reach 2, +3 prof, defensive... it seems to have everything going for it now.

It is good, but it still loses some damage out. Plus, it stops you from multiclassing (without windrise ports cheese), which is basically needed for Avengers to function well.

Kurald Galain
2009-12-08, 08:04 PM
Now, the Superior weapons are the best there are at their particular situations: Fullblade, Mordenkrad, Fullblade, and Urgrosh are the best two-handed non-reach weapons.
I'm really okay with characters having to spend a feat for a better weapon. It means that other characters can have different priorities; for instance, I am of the opinion that improving my damage dice by one step isn't worth a feat for heroic characters other than strikers.

On the other hand, I'm not exactly happy that about half of the already-shortened weapon list simply doesn't get used. The same goes for armor - is there any character that does not wear the best light armor (resp. heavy armor) that he's proficient with?

Oracle_Hunter
2009-12-08, 08:28 PM
On the other hand, I'm not exactly happy that about half of the already-shortened weapon list simply doesn't get used. The same goes for armor - is there any character that does not wear the best light armor (resp. heavy armor) that he's proficient with?
(1) Of course adventures use the best (i.e. most suitable) gear they can get their hands on - it's how you survive.

(2) There is no armor in 4E that is abandoned. Even Chainmail, a pretty inferior armor, is worn by Battleragers so that they can get their bonuses.

I partially agree with the weapons complaint, but I can see where WotC is going with this. Every one of the Superior weapons requires some feat to get it; they are explicit upgrades to your character. Simple weapons are just that - basic weapons used by people with little military training that, well, aren't as good as the more difficult to use ones. If you plan on using a weapon to solve your problems, you'll probably want to get some extra training - and that means forgoing other potential skill sets.

While this does mean that pretty much every Dwarf with a weapon is either swinging a Morkenrad or a Craghammer, well, there is a reason that Dwarves are usually pictured with hammers rather than swords :smallbiggrin:

Gametime
2009-12-09, 01:49 AM
I have a problem with any weapon that is "strictly better" than others that should be equal in power. Also, the attitude that weapons like these are a "must" for strikers is a complete lie. Are you more effective with these weapons? Most likely. You're also more effective with the Weapon Expertise feat; but that doesn't make them a "must," despite what people on the boards say (My characters survived on the PHB1 without that feat for a long time). I also have a knee-jerk reaction against anything that's used almost exclusively in power-gamer builds. It's completely possible to have an excellent character with a non-superior weapon. And if the character does decide on a superior weapon; there shouldn't be two that are exclusively better than all the others.

If superior weapons aren't better than non-superior weapons (that is to say, if they are exactly as good, or even worse), then there is absolutely no benefit to spending a feat to use a superior weapon. At this point, superior weapons become completely superfluous.

On the other hand, it seems like your reaction is mostly just a knee-jerk response to a cartoonishly evil perception of those nasty powergamers. You might want to examine that.

The Glyphstone
2009-12-09, 02:03 AM
Hey, I work hard on those perceptions. In fact, I've got an appointment with the barber to touch up my twirling mustache tomrrow, right before I see my Evil Laughter Coach for weekly practice.

DSCrankshaw
2009-12-09, 05:13 AM
(2) There is no armor in 4E that is abandoned. Even Chainmail, a pretty inferior armor, is worn by Battleragers so that they can get their bonuses.

Chainmail's not great armor, but it does have the advantage that it's easy to get and it has the heavy armor progression. If you have a build that dumps Dex and Int but doesn't automatically get heavy armor (some melee rangers, starlocks maxing Con and Cha, Con Shaman), then it's the biggest AC bump you can get for a single feat. I like Chainmail for that reason.

Hzurr
2009-12-09, 02:25 PM
If superior weapons aren't better than non-superior weapons (that is to say, if they are exactly as good, or even worse), then there is absolutely no benefit to spending a feat to use a superior weapon. At this point, superior weapons become completely superfluous.
I agree that superior weapons should be superior, but I don't like that there are superior superior weapons.


On the other hand, it seems like your reaction is mostly just a knee-jerk response to a cartoonishly evil perception of those nasty powergamers. You might want to examine that.
This is very possible. After gaming with a hardcore powergamer/munchkin in 3.5 (plus one other person that thought he was, but was really bad at it); my initial reaction is usually pretty negative.

I also feel I see these kinds of builds more on the boards than I would in real life, because odds are that very few people are going to show up on the boards saying "Hey, I'd like to make a thoroughly decent build. What are some average to slightly above average things I can take?"

Gamerlord
2009-12-09, 02:28 PM
Hey guys, anyone know a weapon that does more then 2 damage dice? One of those feats gave me a idea.....

Asbestos
2009-12-09, 02:35 PM
Hey guys, anyone know a weapon that does more then 2 damage dice? One of those feats gave me a idea.....

Nope, no 3dN weapons, but plenty of N[W] powers out there.

Gamerlord
2009-12-09, 02:43 PM
Nope, no 3dN weapons, but plenty of N[W] powers out there.

Darn it, well, at least there are powers....

Asbestos
2009-12-09, 03:04 PM
Sure, but they help. Strikers need to inflict damage, so they need high damage weapons, and in order to do damage they need to hit. My optomized swordmage almost died last fight. So if he wouldn't have been optimized...


It depends, is your swordmage optimized for AC, to-hit, damage, defending his friends, minion clearing?

Boci
2009-12-09, 03:55 PM
It depends, is your swordmage optimized for AC, to-hit, damage, defending his friends, minion clearing?

In the following order of importance: AC ties with to-hit then damage. I was assualt so the best way I could defend my allies was to mark and hit hard at every possible option. I am useless at minion clearing because I only have single target powers, since my DM rarely uses minions.


I agree that superior weapons should be superior, but I don't like that there are superior superior weapons.

So what other two handed, non-reach superior weapons are there that the fullblade and executioner's axe are superior to?