PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Need playtesters and critique for new 4e class



osito
2008-10-09, 01:10 AM
My friend and I spent some time coming up with rules and powers for a homebrew class-- the Duelist. He's a dexterity-based defender, with two different builds: one that focuses on the defender role and another that is a defender-striker hybrid. I'd really appreciate feedback, especially from people willing to play test or at least roll up test characters.

The rules in progress are available here: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd555t2h_70fqbqp8fb

Yakk
2008-10-09, 10:25 AM
Charismatic Feint should maybe be vs Will?

Marking/defending mechanics seem too similar to fighters -- and, in fact, inferior.

The per-encounter feint power should be an IMPLEMENT power that uses any magic weapon as an IMPLEMENT. (otherwise it becomes pretty useless at higher levels -- defenses go up at a faster rate than skills do)

Your Dex vs Reflex power is a mechanical copy/paste of the Rogue power.

osito
2008-10-09, 11:27 AM
Thanks for the observations.

i I'm not so concerned about sudden thrust being identical to a rogue at-will. "Sure strike" and "careful strike" come to mind as two identical at-wills.

I'll definitely take a look at retooling the mark, but could you be more specific about how it is "inferior" to the fighter's combat challenge?

The feint check is opposed by an insight check, not a defense. There's no reason two skills won't scale apace, especially when the ability for the skill is the build's secondary.

Yakk
2008-10-09, 12:51 PM
Thanks for the observations.

i I'm not so concerned about sudden thrust being identical to a rogue at-will. "Sure strike" and "careful strike" come to mind as two identical at-wills.
Yes, and it was bad design in core too. :-)


I'll definitely take a look at retooling the mark, but could you be more specific about how it is "inferior" to the fighter's combat challenge?


When the duelist makes a melee attack against an enemy, he may mark the target. The duelist may only mark one enemy at a time, and marking a new enemy ends the mark on any previously marked creature. Once per round as an immediate reaction, if an adjacent enemy marked by the duelist shifts, the duelist may shift up to 2 squares to a square adjacent to the enemy. An enemy marked by the duelist who makes an attack against a target other than the duelist takes a penalty to the attack roll equal to the duelist's Intelligence modifier.

Combat Challenge can be on as many targets as the fighter can attack. Yours lasts .. forever?

Combat Challenge lets the fighter deal damage if the target shifts away or attacks a different target.

Your penalty ends up relatively small at low levels, and (admittedly) grows to being crippling at high levels. Is that supposed to be restricted to "within melee range" by the way? (It should probably). I will admit that an int penalty with no range limitation, or even attack limitation, could get abusive at high levels.

Move-away becomes an option for the target.

The double-shift ability isn't bad.


The feint check is opposed by an insight check, not a defense. There's no reason two skills won't scale apace, especially when the ability for the skill is the build's secondary.
Oh. That is strange. Note that the default feint rules are opposed by Will.

...

Some ideas for the at-wills:
Change Chink in the Armor to be Dex vs Reflex, and have it do [W] damage, and give a -2 power penalty to AC until the end of your next turn.

That makes Chink ... more unique. And gives your Duelist a vs Reflex attack that isn't a clone of one from another class.

Change Sudden Thrust to have a Shift 1 before the attack (increasing to shift 2 at level 11, and shift 3 at level 21), and have it deal [W] damage (increasing to 2[W] at level 21). Call it Lunge.

Clean up Defensive Flourish. The bonus to AC/Reflex can apply to all attacks from that target until the beginning of your next turn without causing a problem.

A penalty equal to your intelligence modifier from an at-will is probably too large. Look at what leaders give up (in terms of at-will power) to grant 1 ally a bonus equal to a stat to a single attack. That power grants such a bonus against all AC attacks for an entire round.

Just some musings. :-)

osito
2008-10-09, 01:46 PM
I just double checked the PHB and errata. Looks like feint checks are always against active insight.

I can see your point that harrying fencer is not as powerful as combat challenge, and I don't want to sidestep the issue, but it comes down to a design choice. We were looking to create a dex-based defender that could very easily be played as a defender/striker hybrid. Even the non-hybrid build has a lot of potential for damage dealing, so we didn't see a need to make a damaging mark.

As to the purposes of marks, in general, they all serve to keep enemies engaged with the defender-- in my gaming groups, defenders rarely get to use the benefits of their marks, because the DM plays most monsters smart enough that they realize it is in their best interest not to try to disengage from the defender that marked them. Thus, the mark ability itself is in many ways stylistic.

Our Duelist is a highly mobile defender who spends a lot of time repositioning himself and his enemies. He is also a one-on-one kind of guy, so it made sense to me that his mark would end as soon as he happened to mark a new enemy. I think I will change it so the mark is automatic when the Duelist attacks, which means that he can't mark one enemy and then move off to engage another without ending the mark.

The penalty is likely to be equal to or better than that from combat challenge, depending on how the Duelist is built. Do you think it would make sense to change it to "a penalty equal to -2 or your Intelligence modifier, whichever is higher"?

As for ranged attacks and the mark, I think it will make sense once I implement the mandatory marking. Does this make sense?

If I am seeing things correctly, the consequence is that an enemy attacked by the duelist in melee is pretty stuck. There is a significant penalty to attacking other PCs. Moving will provoke an attack that will either hurt a bunch or leave him prone. Shifting will allow the duelist to reposition, potentially for combat advantage. Additionally, because the duelist stays adjacent by shifting, ranged attacks will provoke opportunity attacks. It's not quite as hurty as the fighter's "I will bash you no matter what you do," but I think it's just as fun, and just as likely to keep the enemy engaged with the Duelist, which is the primary purpose of the mark anyway.

Yakk
2008-10-09, 02:09 PM
Hmm. The standard -2 -- plus half of the Duelist's intelligence modifier, if the duelist is adjacent to you when you make the attack?

An immediate interrupt melee weapon-based Int vs Reflex attack that, if it lands, makes the attack miss?

The issue is that you don't want it to be _too_ dependent on a given stat. And we want it to 'scale properly' -- growing modifiers to d20 rolls are dangerous.

I like the 2nd one...

Distracting Threat Duelist Feature
I'm sorry, did you just try to ignore me?
At-Will + Martial, Melee, Weapon
Immediate Interrupt + Melee 2 Range
Trigger: A Harried opponent makes an attack that doesn't include the duelist
Target: The Harried opponent
Effect: The Duelist may shift 1 before the attack. The Duelist must be able to shift into range for their weapon for this power to work.
Attack: Int vs Reflex
Hit: The attack fails.
Special: The harried opponent can choose to ignore the distracting threat after it lands. In that case, the interrupted attack proceeds with an additional -4 power penalty to hit, and the harried opponent takes 2[W]+Dex+Cha damage. The damage dealt increases to 3[W]+Dex+Cha at level 11, and 4[W]+Dex+Cha at level 21.

---

This is a kind of block -- but the attacker can choose to ignore the block and get a sword in the gut.

It requires that the Duelist be a credible threat to the target -- able to hit the target (with a reflex attack)

osito
2008-10-09, 02:26 PM
While distracting threat is totally badass, it just seems like way too much for an at-will class feature. If we compare it to other defenders:

Fighter: Melee mark, -2 penalty to attacks, melee basic attack
Paladin: Long-range mark, -2 penalty to attack, 3+ cha mod damage (from anywhere, but you have to engage to keep the mark)
Swordmage: Short-range mark, -2 penalty to attack, teleport and melee basic attack or reduce damage by 5 + con mod

Distracting threat blows everyone but the swordmage out of the water, pretty much, and we're not trying to build the Duelist to be even "as good" a defender as those classes, let alone better.

I agree we don't want the common class features too dependent on a secondary stat, since we want the choice of build to be one made out of preference/race selection, not a perception that one is just better than the other.

String
2008-10-09, 02:32 PM
Hey there. havent checked the link yet but just looking at this power, its worded awkwardly. Might Isuggest that the last part of distracting threat read

Special: The harried opponent can choose to ignore the distracting threat after it lands. In that case, the interrupted attack proceeds with an additional -4 power penalty to hit and make a Secondary Attack,
Secondary Attack: Int vs Reflex
Hit: 2[W]+Dex+Cha damage. The damage dealt increases to 3[W]+Dex+Cha at level 11, and 4[W]+Dex+Cha at level 21.
Miss: Half-damage

osito
2008-10-09, 03:08 PM
OK, so I have made some preliminary edits to the class features:

Fighting Style
Choose one of the following fighting styles and gain its benefit.
Canny duelist: Because of your focus on fighting smart and dirty, you gain the where do you think you're going at-will power. Since you are used to taking hits to spare your allies, you also gain Toughness as a bonus feat. When a creature triggers your harrying fencer interrupt ability, you may shift a number of squares equal to 1 + your Intelligence modifier (minimum 2).
Swashbuckling duelist: Because you've learned to keep your enemies confused, once per round when you have combat advantage, you may add your Charisma bonus to a damage roll against the creature you have combat advantage against. This bonus increases to twice your Charisma bonus at 16th level. You also gain the charismatic feint encounter power. When a creature is marked by your harrying fencer ability, the penalty to attack rolls is equal to 1 + your Charisma modifier (minimum 2).
Harrying Fencer
When the duelist makes a melee attack against an enemy, the target becomes marked by him. A marked creature takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls against creatures other than the one that marked it. The duelist may only mark one enemy at a time, and marking a new enemy ends the mark on any previously marked creature.
Once per round as an immediate reaction, if an adjacent enemy marked by the duelist shifts, the duelist may shift up to 2 squares to a square adjacent to the enemy.

the document has been updated to reflect these changes: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd555t2h_70fqbqp8fb

Yakk
2008-10-09, 03:08 PM
While distracting threat is totally badass, it just seems like way too much for an at-will class feature. If we compare it to other defenders:

Fighter: Melee mark, -2 penalty to attacks, melee basic attack
Paladin: Long-range mark, -2 penalty to attack, 3+ cha mod damage (from anywhere, but you have to engage to keep the mark)
Swordmage: Short-range mark, -2 penalty to attack, teleport and melee basic attack or reduce damage by 5 + con mod

Distracting threat blows everyone but the swordmage out of the water, pretty much, and we're not trying to build the Duelist to be even "as good" a defender as those classes, let alone better.

Hmm. So you have a roughly 60% chance to block the attack using Distracting Threat. (Remember: the damage portion only exists if the target wants to ignore your Threat). So (at worst) it reduces enemy damage down to 40% of base.

That could be too much. Change it to Int vs AC reduces it to 50%.

We could also reduce the negative impact of choosing "I ignore your threat".

One issue with the original implementation as written is that by level 30, you can give a -10 penalty to hit -- which is basically an auto-miss on the target.

All marks have to grant the -2 to hit anyone except the marker: avoiding that is a bad idea.


I agree we don't want the common class features too dependent on a secondary stat, since we want the choice of build to be one made out of preference/race selection, not a perception that one is just better than the other.

It is ok if they are based off of it -- like the paladin mark, which is 3+cha. Making it too important (just int, for example) doesn't work so well.

osito
2008-10-09, 03:14 PM
I'd like to separate the idea of distracting threat from the issue of the mark - i just feel like it has awesome potential as a daily attack, and i'd rather let it stay powerful and fit that role than try to shoehorn it into a power that isn't over-powered for a 1st level at-will.

i did make some changes to the harrying fencer stuff, as you can see above, but it might still get too good at higher levels. in that case, i'd probably just default to a flat -2, 2 square shift for all builds from 1-30.

*edit*
I decided that the canny duelist should get a bonus to his shifting, but took away the improved penalty for the swashbuckling duelist. The swashy guy already has a lot going for him, and I don't want to weight things any further in his favor.