Striker mechanics.

[Tegu8788]

I was thinking, as I was explaining different roles to a new player, how much striker mechanics have shifted as time has gone by. From the Warlock +1d6 to a specific target once per round to the rogue +2d6 for CA once per round to the executioner +1d8 to any at-will once per turn to the Slayer getting Dex modifier to all weapon attacks, it seems to me that there has been some increase in the damage coming from the mechanics. Do you think it's to compensate for weaker powers (Twin Strike versus Power Strike), an example of power creep, or to make the existing feat support balance newer classes?

[Zaq]

I doubt WotC put that much thought into it, honestly.

Of course, it's worth mentioning that after the very lowest levels, your bonus damage feature basically doesn't matter when compared to what your actual powers do. (There are some exceptions, the most obvious of which is a Desert Wind Monk who uses Flurry to tap vulnerabilities, but that's kind of an edge case.) A high-power Ranger probably won't even bother with Quarry until turn 3 or so, since they've got more important things to do with their minor actions (and since an extra couple d6s or d8s just doesn't compare to another true hit-and-damage sequence). Barbarians don't even have a native "extra damage every round" feature; Rage powers (if you even want to think of them as a "damage feature") are often ignored in favor of simple multi-tap encounter powers, and the Barb does fine.

Essentials damage features generally lock you into basic attacks, so they tend to suck. Honestly, the Sorc (non-Elementalist) is probably the striker with the most robust damage feature, just because it isn't limited to at-wills and it functions as many times per round as you can squeeze in hits.

It's an oversimplification to say that they don't matter at all, but a high-end striker is highly likely to just treat their bonus damage as, well, a bonus, rather than relying on it as a major source of power.

[Kurald Galain]

I doubt WotC put that much thought into it, honestly.
Yeah, this. Frankly it appears that WOTC has stopped paying attention to game balance somewhere around the PHB3. The latest books, particularly HOS/HOEC, are nowhere near balanced.

It's clearly not power creep, because the earlier classes are generally stronger than the newer classes (with a few exceptions like the elementalist, but the ranger is clearly stronger than the slayer).

[Kimera757]

I don't think striker features have changed much, other than there being no flat damage boosts in the PH1. (Most either had easy conditional damage boosts, such as Hunter's Quarry or Warlock's Curse, or swingier damage boosts such as sneak attack. The PH1 ranger gave us the potential to really rack up any static damage. When our runepriest and archer ranger get together, the ranger really racks up the kills, and my wizard actually does some damage.)

The sorcerer got stat-based damage boosts in PH2 and the barbarian just got some extra big [W]s (easy) and the avenger's damage boosts are based on the target doing what you want it to (not so easy). The blasting invoker got a flat damage bonus based on the number of targets (it's technically a controller). Since then new strikers have featured a mix of the early types.

The evoker (Essentials version) is technically a controller but is actually a striker. It's far superior to the PH1 wand wizard (also a striker pretending to be a controller), as it has an actual all-the-time striker feature (effectively brutal spell dice, very similar to the Pathfinder evoker).

[Dimers]

From the Warlock +1d6 to a specific target once per round to the rogue +2d6 for CA once per round to the executioner +1d8 to any at-will once per turn to the Slayer getting Dex modifier to all weapon attacks, it seems to me that there has been some increase in the damage coming from the mechanics.

I can't agree. Warlock and Rogue are in the same book; rogue does more damage because warlock has more of a controller sub. Slayer's extra 3 or 4 damage per weapon hit isn't as much as rogue's 2d6 unless the slayer is hitting way more often. Assassin's shrouds are d8s but are more limited in number and only get used once. Monks start with low or moderate bonus damage against a single target and have reasons to spread the hurt instead of focus-firing. Executioner bonus damage only works on lower-damage powers and is very strictly limited in usage compared with other features.

If anything, striker bonus damage has generally been decreasing over time.

[squiggit]

If anything, striker bonus damage has generally been decreasing over time.
Definitely this.

The warlock is a bit of unique case (because he's not so much of a full striker), otherwise generally the power levels go down the later in the series of books you go with only a couple exceptions.

Sure, E-classes have some good features... but that's because they don't have much better than at-will powers, a mediocre encounter power and sometimes some sort of gimmicky daily. Seriously, look at that executioner and ask again what he's going to do (unless you're letting malec-keth/claw gloves turn the kusari gama into super twin strike).

Nevermind that by paragon the Avenger is the only class that still really really cares about their striker feature on its own (there's feats and secondary effects that make other striker features worth tracking, but on its own it's peanuts).

Unless you're using WoTC charop's (fairly insane) interpretation of the Assassin's striker feature I guess.

[p.d0t]

Yeah, IMHO Slayers and non-human Blackguards get the short end of the stick.
Scout is also unfun to play if your d20 happens to be cursed.

[Kurald Galain]

Slayer's extra 3 or 4 damage per weapon hit isn't as much as rogue's 2d6 unless the slayer is hitting way more often.
Certain rogue builds can manage 2d8+4 right at level one, even. Plus rogues probably hit more (and attack more) than slayers do.

[Inevitability]

(Most either had easy conditional damage boosts, such as Hunter's Quarry or Warlock's Curse.


What's Hunter's Quarry? You must be confused, because it looks like you're referring to Rangers, but their striker feature is the ability to make two attacks at-will. :smalltongue:

[RedMage125]

Yeah, IMHO Slayers and non-human Blackguards get the short end of the stick.
Scout is also unfun to play if your d20 happens to be cursed.

I'd imagine that ANYTHING would be less fun to play with a poor-rolling d20.

Except maybe a Chaos Sorc. Then all those 1s you roll at lleast do SOMETHING, lol.

[Snowbluff]

I can't agree. Warlock and Rogue are in the same book; rogue does more damage because warlock has more of a controller sub. Slayer's extra 3 or 4 damage per weapon hit isn't as much as rogue's 2d6 unless the slayer is hitting way more often. Assassin's shrouds are d8s but are more limited in number and only get used once. Monks start with low or moderate bonus damage against a single target and have reasons to spread the hurt instead of focus-firing. Executioner bonus damage only works on lower-damage powers and is very strictly limited in usage compared with other features.

If anything, striker bonus damage has generally been decreasing over time.

Well, 2d6 averages as 7, and is conditional. One would think anyone who could get over 7 in their extra damage modifier would be in good shape.