[4e] Avenger Essentials

[Gralamin]

This article is up here 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]

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]

Wow, this seems to be becoming the most controversial class in 4E. Should we start discussing Character Tiers?

[Gralamin]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Lack of damage compared to other strikers.

the gap is not huge, but it is there.

[Blackfang108]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Monk - +3 prof with their unarmed strike, tagets NADS with a weapon

By weapon, you mean implement, right?

[Gralamin]

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]

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]

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]

The avenger is underpowered?

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]

The avenger is underpowered?

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.