[4e] Surfing Complexity

[Yakk]

So I discovered something neat in 4e: one thing the Hybrid rules provide is a way to make more complex characters.

Going from a Swordmage to a Warlock|Swordmage has taken my combat problem from "mark whomever I want each turn, get away from them, and AOE burst as many opponents" to "figure out who I want to commit my mark on, and if I should do it this turn. Figure out who I want to curse. Decide if this is a defender or a striker turn. Figure out where I need to go."

It is neat that the character (by being rebuilt) has gone from a character I was pretty confident I could play optimally, to one in which I notice (every combat, at least once) that I missed a chance to pull off something slightly more effective (I should have warlock's cursed earlier, or later, or used a warlock power instead of a swordmage power, or ...)

The character is not much stronger, but is much harder to play -- which is a fun thing.

Anyone else have a story, or a 4e build, that results in lots of nice tough in-combat decisions?

[Hal]

Well, not in the way you're describing, but yes.

All of my characters in 4e have so far been leaders (a cleric and a warlord, respectively). It's always been a challenge to figure out the best use of my limited actions each turn. Do I dish out some healing/temp HP? Give out attack bonuses? Extra attacks? Defenses?

It's not always clear which benefit is going to be best at any given time. Well, except when someone is dying. Then it's pretty clear what I need to do.

[Saph]

Anyone else have a story, or a 4e build, that results in lots of nice tough in-combat decisions?

Unfortunately, I haven't managed to find a 4e character yet which has required all that much thought. It mostly comes down to "which power should I blast them with?" and the effectiveness of that comes down to luck - if I roll low, it didn't matter which attack power I was using anyway.

Do the Hybrid classes really add all that much - as in, do you have substantially more options than a single-class character?

[vasharanpaladin]

The answer tends toward a "no, you don't," at least with the current rules. Hybrid classing is strictly worse than simply multiclassing, especially when you're allowed Windrise Ports.

Also, Controller builds seem to be tactical nightmares for me. Druids especially.

[Yakk]

The complexity comes from the fact that I now have minor, move and standard actions, all with competition. And because it is a close burst

I guess I built a hybrid (defender sub controller) | (striker sub controller), took all controller powers, and resulted in a controller build.

...

Hybrid gives you a higher degree of mixture between two classes than simple multiclassing, or at least by default.

The complexity in my case comes from picking two classes with minor action class features who both lean controller, and heading more controller-wise.

...

And hell, if you are going windrise ports, you can play a hybrid A|B(C/D) character.

Swordmage|Warlock(Wizard/Fighter) thunderball feycharging feytouched anyone?

(Yes, you run out of feats)

[Swordgleam]

What is Windrise Ports in?

[Gralamin]

What is Windrise Ports in?

A Dragon article, I think. It's probably one of the most broken backgrounds in the game.

[Mando Knight]

Except if you're already a Bard.

[TheOOB]

I find most the tactical decisions I make don't hinge on how to make me fight the most effectively, but how to work in the group. Designing a battle situation where the fighter has the most dangerous enemies under control, the wizard can blast without hitting team-mates, and the rogue gets combat advantage most of the time can be difficult, especially if your GM uses a lot of good tactics.

Oftentimes the hard choice is the one where you are actually doing less, but enabling an ally to do more. Sometimes the fighter needs to use Tide of Iron to hit the foe into range of the wizards daily rather than use a daily of her own.

[Kurald Galain]

Unfortunately, I haven't managed to find a 4e character yet which has required all that much thought. It mostly comes down to "which power should I blast them with?" and the effectiveness of that comes down to luck - if I roll low, it didn't matter which attack power I was using anyway.

I find myself in agreement with this. Despite marketing buzz to the contrary, 4E really isn't a very tactical game (nor does it need to be: after all, it is an RPG). That is, you frequently have choices to make, where the outcome doesn't meaningfully depend on your choice.

As I've said in the past, a key to having fun in 4E is realizing that doing 20 damage now is preferable to thinking for a minute and then doing 23 damage.

That said, it would seem that archer rangers are the easiest role to play, followed in that order by other strikers, defenders, leaders, and finally controllers.

Do the Hybrid classes really add all that much - as in, do you have substantially more options than a single-class character?

No. They simply take their powers from two class lists rather than one, and get one class feature from each class (usually with a restriction or two). For instance, a cleric|rogue could pick cleric powers and rogue powers, and gets Healing Word once per encounter as well as Sneak Attack on his rogue powers. He doesn't get e.g. Channel Divinity or First Strike.

Overall, hybrid classes tend to be weaker and less synergistic than single-class characters, except if you find a powerful combo somewhere. It's quite easy to end up with the equivalent of a 3E fighter/mage multiclass (i.e. mediocre at both his roles).

[Yakk]

Cleric|Rogue would be an either-or character -- they act like a cleric, or a rogue, or a rogue who occasionally uses cleric powers.

Take a Warden|Ranger who doesn't do the "I load all my striker powers into minor actions" path. Warden powers will generate defender-like effects, while Ranger powers will dish out damage. Picking if the character wants to dish out damage, or defend more, each turn.

Now, the complexity of the Warden|Ranger is limited, because there tends to be a single choice each round (what do I do with my standard action); there are few Warden minor actions.

Going up the complexity scale, a Chaladin|Illusionist Wizard in a game where divine challenge is interpreted conservatively (ie, you need to recharge it if they violate the challenge, because the damage portion only works once). The Wizard traditionally uses minor actions to sustain their encounter-long control effects, while the Paladin uses the minor action to move around the Paladin's mark.

It is easier to play a character who is only good at one thing, because the decision of what to do on your turn is clear. If you are half-decent at two things, it generates at least one choice -- and if you have two good things to do with your standard, move and minor actions most rounds, it makes the character even more complex to play. Toss in lots of positional (close burst/blast, say) powers (standard and minor close burst!), round choice being a function of action order, and...

As noted, the complexity in my case hasn't generated a marked increase in effectiveness. A simple thunderball swordmage made choices simple: create clumps via mark-and-move, then grind biggest clump I can down.

The thunderball/feylock hybrid is both setting that up, and attempting to waste enemy actions on "not attacking us". Both the clumping, and the wasting of actions, are most efficiently done near the start of the fight -- unless, of course, I can clump then cause a mass action waste.

When I hit paragon, setting up feystep uses also becomes key.

[Doc Roc]

Overall, hybrid classes tend to be weaker and less synergistic than single-class characters, except if you find a powerful combo somewhere. It's quite easy to end up with the equivalent of a 3E fighter/mage multiclass (i.e. mediocre at both his roles).

Consigning that to mediocrity is an undeserved kindness. I think the hybrid system is probably strictly better than 3e style multiclassing.

[Kurald Galain]

Consigning that to mediocrity is an undeserved kindness. I think the hybrid system is probably strictly better than 3e style multiclassing.

That depends on how you define "strictly better".

[Yakk]

The 3e fighter/mage (level 10 fighter, level 10 mage) is not just mediocre, but abysmal at both roles compared to a non-CharOp build. (actually, it might end up being better than the 20 fighter, but...)

The 4e fighter|sorcerer will be middling at both roles, compared to a non-CharOp build. (hmm. A Fighter|Sorcerer dragonborn could be a fun character. Admittedly, the Paladin|Sorcerer probably works a tad better.)

[Kurald Galain]

The 3e fighter/mage (level 10 fighter, level 10 mage) is not just mediocre, but abysmal at both roles compared to a non-CharOp build. (actually, it might end up being better than the 20 fighter, but...)

The 4e fighter|sorcerer will be middling at both roles, compared to a non-CharOp build. (hmm. A Fighter|Sorcerer dragonborn could be a fun character. Admittedly, the Paladin|Sorcerer probably works a tad better.)

I'm not convinced that is the case. Fighter/wizard is probably the worst example of a 3E multiclass; the gish problem is well known, and fighter is a pretty poor class to begin with. Yet still, he's not exactly abysmal; you've got all the versatility of the spellbook, and a decent if not great BAB.

On the other hand, fighter|wizard in 4E? Fighter gets zero synergy with intelligence, whereas wizard gets zero with strength. You have to juggle a weapon and an implement. You can't mark on wizard attacks, and you don't get most wizard class features. And your fighter half wants to be in melee whereas your wizard half wants to be ranged. Seems to me this doesn't work too well, either.

Last time I read the hybrid rules, it struck me that you simply won't get the cool features that make a class special. So you can call yourself a cleric|ranger, but you'll get neither the cleric's iconic turn undead, nor the ranger's iconic dual wield; so this ends up feeling like neither a cleric nor a ranger. I'm sure there's examples that do work (wizard|swordmage comes to mind) but picking two classes at random seems more likely than not to end up mediocre.

[skywalker]

I find myself in agreement with this. Despite marketing buzz to the contrary, 4E really isn't a very tactical game (nor does it need to be: after all, it is an RPG). That is, you frequently have choices to make, where the outcome doesn't meaningfully depend on your choice.

As I've said in the past, a key to having fun in 4E is realizing that doing 20 damage now is preferable to thinking for a minute and then doing 23 damage.

I'm going to remember this for quite a while. Very simple, and yet very insightful.

[Yakk]

On the other hand, fighter|wizard in 4E? Fighter gets zero synergy with intelligence, whereas wizard gets zero with strength. You have to juggle a weapon and an implement. You can't mark on wizard attacks, and you don't get most wizard class features. And your fighter half wants to be in melee whereas your wizard half wants to be ranged. Seems to me this doesn't work too well, either.

Last time I read the hybrid rules, it struck me that you simply won't get the cool features that make a class special. So you can call yourself a cleric|ranger, but you'll get neither the cleric's iconic turn undead, nor the ranger's iconic dual wield; so this ends up feeling like neither a cleric nor a ranger. I'm sure there's examples that do work (wizard|swordmage comes to mind) but picking two classes at random seems more likely than not to end up mediocre.

Human Fighter|Wizard
Array: 16;15;14;11;10;8
17 Str 11 Con 8 Dex 16 Int 14 Wis 8 Cha
Feats:
1: Hybrid Talent: Fighter's Armor
1: Focused Expertise (Longsword)
2: Arcane Implement Proficiency (Heavy Blades)
Powers:
Wizard 1 at-will: Thunderwave
Fighter 1 at-will: Tide of Iron
Wizard 1 at-will: Storm Pillar
Wizard 1 encounter: Burning Hands
Wizard 1 daily: Flaming Sphere
Wizard 2 utility: Shield
Equipment:
Dwarven Scale +1, Shield, Longsword +1, Amulet +1, any level 3 magic item

Defences: 21 AC, 16 Fortitude, 17 Reflex, 15 Will
Attacks: +6 Wizard/+9 Fighter
Damage: +4
HP/B/HSV: 28 / 14 / 7
HSes: 7

This is a traditional fighter/magic user build, with no attempt to really build synergy between the two roles. He uses a longsword and shield, and wears heavy armor.

For a better build synergy, dual wielding a quarterstaff and dual implement and staff of ruin, with tempest technique, might generate a better build. It would take longer to mature, and it would start out with poorer AC.

For that build, I'd go 16 str/16+2 int/13 dex/10/10/18, pick up leather armor, tempest technique, and dual-wielding of a quarterstaff for (10+4+2+2 = 18) my "baseline" AC boost -- that requires 3 feats however. Then go on to dual-implement caster (+enhancement to damage with all arcane spells) at level 4 and a staff of ruin (+enhancement to damage ... period).

Your fighter attacks get +str+enhancement+enhancement damage (+2 on offhand, +1 mainhand, +1 to hit offhand). Your wizard attacks get +str+enhancement*3 to damage. You attack with your "offhand" side of your staff to get +1 to hit with wizard powers (tempest technique) possibly.

You end up as a viable defender who can also cast wizard spells. It gets tricky casting wizard spells while in melee, so you focus on close burst and blast wizard spells -- as it happens, wizard close bursts and blasts tend to be better, in order to encourage the wizard to mix it up, so you don't mind that much. (the exception is zones).

With the tempest build, I'd go for dual strike (2 marks) and probably footwork lure from fighter. Don't know what I'd take from wizard -- maybe even magic missile, or the ranged burst 1 illusionary attack?

In short, you get almost enough features to make the class work, and the ability to burn a feat to grab a hybrid talent (which is a must-do, and gives you a pile of stuff). With a bit of work and system mastery, you can make a viable character.

It is easy, however, to make a non-viable hybrid character. You are often trying to figure out what stats that are nominally important that can be sacrificed, you are looking for ways to mix and match equipment and strategies from two different classes so they overlap, etc.

Note the odd/even thing is a bit of quirk I do. I like having one odd/one even stat in the stats I'm planning on bumping, in order to make the level 4/8/14/18/24/28 more exciting in general. It works out to being better than even/even on 15/30 levels anyhow! (the problem is that it is worse at level 1-3 and 28-30, the most played and "endgame" levels).

[Ichneumon]

I feel I can finally build the character I wanted to play all along: a bard|sorcerer. The right combination of damage and support that I like.

[Hal]

On the other hand, fighter|wizard in 4E? Fighter gets zero synergy with intelligence, whereas wizard gets zero with strength. You have to juggle a weapon and an implement. You can't mark on wizard attacks, and you don't get most wizard class features. And your fighter half wants to be in melee whereas your wizard half wants to be ranged. Seems to me this doesn't work too well, either.

But Fighter|Sorcerer? That should have decent enough synergy to somewhat replicate the idea.

[Indon]

In short, you get almost enough features to make the class work, and the ability to burn a feat to grab a hybrid talent (which is a must-do, and gives you a pile of stuff). With a bit of work and system mastery, you can make a viable character.

Since you made that character as wearing scale, it seems he has already taken the hybrid talent feat to give him access to scale, unless you spent a stack of feats on every armor proficiency between cloth and scale.

That said, I, too, have enjoyed playing around with hybrid characters.

In my next 4E group I've called the Leader role, so I'm trying to make a Leader/Leader hybrid class (or maaaaaybe Leader/Striker). So far, leaning towards Cleric/Shaman. Some Warlord/Intclass combination may also not be bad.

[Kurald Galain]

But Fighter|Sorcerer? That should have decent enough synergy to somewhat replicate the idea.

That sounds like it should work, yes. I think, so far, that for a hybrid to be viable the two classes should rely at least partially on the same stats.

[Yakk]

Since you made that character as wearing scale, it seems he has already taken the hybrid talent feat to give him access to scale, unless you spent a stack of feats on every armor proficiency between cloth and scale.

That said, I, too, have enjoyed playing around with hybrid characters.

In my next 4E group I've called the Leader role, so I'm trying to make a Leader/Leader hybrid class (or maaaaaybe Leader/Striker). So far, leaning towards Cleric/Shaman. Some Warlord/Intclass combination may also not be bad.

Yep, I wanted a 'traditional' fighter/mage, so I bought fighter's armor at level 1:
1: Hybrid Talent: Fighter's Armor
Before, it had a 'base' AC of 13 -- after, 19 with a shield.

The tempest technique option doesn't go for scale armor -- it goes leather, 18 int at level 1, tempest technique for TWDefence, a double-weapon quarterstaff for a defensive weapon, giving it (2 armor, 1 TWDefence, 1 quarterstaff, 4 stat = +8) near-scale+shield AC. It either delays leather armor or tempest technique to level 2 (without leather, that is 16 AC at level 1 -- without tempest it is 17 AC).

Both of these characters are fighter|wizards. Both are viable, if not ridiculously optimal, characters. They play quite differently than either fighter or wizards, and even differently than swordmages.

And I think they'd both be fun to play, and quite viable as secondary defenders in a group (or even primary defenders in a pinch).

[valadil]

Heh. When I read the title I thought you were trying to figure out what skills could be used for surfing in 4e. I would have gone with some combination of athletics and acrobatics.

Anyway your actual topic is much more interesting. I haven't played a lot of 4e yet, but I noticed that my Dragonborn Paladin pretty much always follows the same script. My rogue is a little more interesting, but for the most part it's "hit someone you have CA against, or position yourself to have CA next turn."

My next character is going to be an invoker. There's a lot of movement based options. Even if all I'm doing is using the same power to slide people around there will be plenty of choices to make with that. I'm hoping this character is an improvement on complexity. If it isn't I'm probably going to have to join you in going for hybrid characters.

[Shardan]

fighter/warlock with a con build and pact weapon would work too. too bad you can't mark with your spells too

[RebelRogue]

fighter/warlock with a con build and pact weapon would work too. too bad you can't mark with your spells too

Has it been errataed or is it a special rule for Fighter hybrids? Because the usual Combat Challenge rules state that you may mark an enemy whenever you attack them. No mention of melee being required.

[Yakk]

Has it been errataed or is it a special rule for Fighter hybrids? Because the usual Combat Challenge rules state that you may mark an enemy whenever you attack them. No mention of melee being required.

Hybrid Fighters can only mark using Fighter and Fighter Paragon path powers.

[Mando Knight]

Special rule for Hybrid Fighters. No fair if the Fighter/Ranger can mark on Ranger attacks, dealing both striker damage and marking targets on the same move.

[RebelRogue]

Ah, that makes sense. So the class features are generally restricted to the relevant class powers? I've never actually read the hybrid rules...

[Kurald Galain]

Ah, that makes sense. So the class features are generally restricted to the relevant class powers? I've never actually read the hybrid rules...

That is the point, yes. Also, most classes have about three class features; hybrids usually get one, plus one from their other class, and can get one more through a feat.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Having finally gotten DDI, I found that the Shadowthief is, in fact, ridiculously easy to build.

Spoiler

Show

====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&D Character Builder ======
Shadowthief, level 2
Halfling, Rogue|Warlock
Eldritch Pact (Hybrid): Fey Pact (Hybrid)
Hybrid Warlock: Hybrid Warlock Will
Hybrid Talent: Shadow Walk

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 10, Con 12, Dex 18, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 18.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 10, Con 12, Dex 16, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 16.


AC: 18 Fort: 13 Reflex: 17 Will: 17
HP: 29 Surges: 7 Surge Value: 7

TRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics +12, Athletics +6, Stealth +10, Bluff +10, Thievery +12

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Arcana +1, Diplomacy +5, Dungeoneering +1, Endurance +2, Heal +1, History +1, Insight +1, Intimidate +5, Nature +1, Perception +1, Religion +1, Streetwise +5

FEATS
Level 1: Hybrid Talent
Level 2: Skill Focus (Stealth)

POWERS
Hybrid Rogue at-will 1: Sly Flourish
Hybrid Warlock at-will 1: Eyebite
Hybrid encounter 1: Sprite War Call
Hybrid daily 1: Decree of Khirad
Hybrid utility 2: Fleeting Ghost

ITEMS
Pact Blade Dagger +1, Leather Armor of Resistance +1, Amulet of Protection +1

A LV 2 Warlock/Rogue with at-will invisibility for a single target, and nigh at-will invisibility in general.

Seems overpowered to me.

...oh right, the topic!

I agree with Yakk about the added complexity, though I'm not sure whether that complexity is useful to any but a select few who like the "which standard shall I use now?" game.

Personally, I find combat in 4E fun not because I have a list of 20 powers I could choose to use, but that the powers I do have are flexible enough to use in a variety of situations. For example, Pressing Strike (Barbarian At-Will 1) is handy for setting up flanks, knocking baddies off ledges, maneuvering while dazed - and all this for a Barbarian! My Eladrin Wizard (MC Rogue), naturally, has a much broader spectrum of action - yet both are a blast to play