Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.47433477 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Thread starter question: What do you consider an ideal starting level for players who are experienced and comfortable with 4e?

If you are GMing, remember...
1. To strongly consider giving out at least one free "tax feat," like Expertise and pre-errata Melee Training.
2. To use Monster Manual 3/Monster Vault/Monster Vault: Nentir Vale/Dark Sun Creature Catalog math. Avoid or manually update anything with Monster Manual 1 or 2 math.
3. That skill challenges have always been scene-framing devices for the GM, that players should never be overtly told that they are in a skill challenge, and that the Rules Compendium has the most up-to-date skill DCs and skill challenge rules.

If you would like assistance with character optimization, remember to tell us what the what the rest of the players are playing, what books are allowed, your starting level, the highest level you expect to reach, what free feats you receive, if anything is banned, whether or not themes are allowed, your starting equipment, and how much you dislike item-dependent builds.
If you wish to talk about settings, 4e's settings are Points of Light (the planes and the natural world's past empires are heavily detailed in various sourcebooks and magazines), 4e Forgotten Realms, 4e Eberron, 4e Dark Sun, and whatever setting you would like to bring into 4e.

Nentir Vale locations: http://web.archive.org/web/20130520012550/http://community.wizards.com/nentir_vale/wiki/Nentir_Vale_Locations
Points of Light timeline (ignore everything else on this mostly-fanon wiki): http://nentirvale.wikidot.com/world
D&D 4e Compendium (for those who still have Insider subscriptions): http://www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/database.aspx
PDFs for 4e books: Search thepiratebay for "Dungeonsand_Dragons_4th_Edition_books_update__1[Nov_2012]"
Previous thread: >>47422558

>> No.47435442

>DED THREAD >DED GAME

Well I got an invite to play 4e today. What to expect, I only heard that battles are long and boring as fuck. Also what is the current class tier list?

>> No.47435471

>>47435442
>What to expect, I only heard that battles are long and boring as fuck.
Only when the players aren't on the ball.
When it's not your turn, pay attention and think about what you are going to do on your turn.
When your turn comes up, don't sit there indecisively hemming and hawing and complaining about analysis paralysis or 'too many options.' Just fucking do something.

>Also what is the current class tier list?
Just don't play Essentials classes. Everything else is fine.

>> No.47435484

>>47435442

As long as your group is using the fixed monster math, it should be fine. Just make sure your GM is using the M&M3 monsters and the recommended adjustments there- Pic related.

4e doesn't really have a tier list. Almost all the classes are completely functional, with a few unfortunate exceptions. Essentials classes are boring as fuck, Vampire and Assassin were released in a borked state and never fixed, and the Seeker psionic class is unfortunately underwhelming. Beyond that, you're good with picking whatever seems cool to you.

>> No.47435510

>>47435484

*MM3

Fucking autocorrect.

>> No.47435519

>>47435484

Seeker is Primal but yeah.

I think Seeker could have been good and more Archery classes would have been nice.

>> No.47435547 [DELETED] 

>>47435442

>battles are long and boring as fuck.

Provided that the GM uses Monster Manual 3 math and that the players are decisive and knowledgeable in how their characters work, combat should not last particularly long.

>Also what is the current class tier list?

It would be unfeasible to create a usable "class tier list" for 4e.

For one, they would all fit mostly into tiers 3, 4, and 5 under the JaronK tier definitions.

For two, many classes have builds that are plainly better than others within the same class (e.g. Mantle of Clarity ardents and Virtue of Prescience bards are woefully weak, and by paragon, Strength/Wisdom warlords are vastly overtaken by their Combat Commander-using brethren).

For three, party composition is very important in 4e. Some classes work spectacularly given the right party, and are mediocre otherwise (e.g. even the warlord, which is generally agreed upon to be the "best leader overall" by paragon, will have trouble in a party lacking in strong basic attacks).

Fourthly, many Essentials and post-Essentials classes start off strong at levels 1-2, then suffer a gradual slide downwards, with a brief resurgence at levels 11-12, as explained in this post: >>47422558

Fifthly, hybrid classes are part and parcel of optimization. Some hybrid classes are much worse than their parent class (e.g. a hybrid monk loses plenty), some offer incredibly good deals (e.g. hybrid cleric and Battle Cleric's Lore), and others still are actually *better* than their parent class (e.g. hybrid barbarian, hybrid druid [sentinel], hybrid paladin [cavalier], hybrid warlock).

The only way to assess which classes would be most ideal is to consider, as the opening post suggests, "what the rest of the players are playing, what books are allowed, your starting level, the highest level you expect to reach, what free feats you receive, if anything is banned, whether or not themes are allowed, your starting equipment, and how much you dislike item-dependent builds."

>> No.47435569

>>47435547

>(e.g. even the warlord, which is generally agreed upon to be the "best leader overall" by paragon, will have trouble in a party lacking in strong basic attacks).

Yeah, a warlord in a group with a Cha-paladin as defender and spell slinging strikers is going to be not that happy.

>> No.47435592

>>47435442

>battles are long and boring as fuck.

Provided that the GM uses Monster Manual 3 math and that the players are decisive and knowledgeable in how their characters work, combat should not last particularly long.

>Also what is the current class tier list?

It would be unfeasible to create a usable "class tier list" for 4e.

For one, they would all fit mostly into tiers 3, 4, and 5 under the JaronK tier definitions.

For two, many classes have builds that are plainly better than others within the same class (e.g. Mantle of Clarity ardents and Virtue of Prescience bards are woefully weak, and by paragon, Strength/Wisdom warlords are vastly overtaken by their Combat Commander-using brethren).

For three, party composition is very important in 4e. Some classes work spectacularly given the right party, and are mediocre otherwise (e.g. even the warlord, which is generally agreed upon to be the "best leader overall" by paragon, will have trouble in a party lacking in strong basic attacks).

Fourthly, many Essentials and post-Essentials classes start off strong at levels 1-2, then suffer a gradual slide downwards, with a brief resurgence at levels 11-12, as explained in this post: >>47422558

Fifthly, hybrid classes are part and parcel of optimization. Some hybrid classes are much worse than their parent class (e.g. a hybrid monk loses plenty), some offer incredibly good deals (e.g. hybrid cleric and Battle Cleric's Lore), and others still are actually *better* than their parent class (e.g. hybrid barbarian, hybrid druid [sentinel], hybrid paladin [cavalier], hybrid warlock).

The only way to assess which classes would be most ideal is to consider, as the opening post suggests, "what the rest of the players are playing, what books are allowed, your starting level, the highest level you expect to reach, what free feats you receive, if anything is banned, whether or not themes are allowed, your starting equipment, and how much you dislike item-dependent builds."

>> No.47435624

would anyone be interested in the offline aka legacy character creator updated with 4e material? I don't know if it's complete in regards to the 4e material; I only know it's an absolute pain to get up and running.

>>47435484
what was underwhelming about seeker? I had a great synergy with the warlord and building around world serpent's grasp and one of the at - wills that slowed on hit, though I suppose it was more the warlord's doing than anything. my seeker was much more viable than my runepriest, though they were both unoptimized as hell.

>> No.47435646

>>47435624

I consider cbloader an indispensable tool for 4e chargen, and as far as I know it's complete.

>> No.47435670

>>47435592
What's so great about hybrid barbarians?

>> No.47435671

>>47435471
>>47435484

With regards to Essentials and post-Essentials classes, it is far more complicated than merely "Do not play them because they are weak." I go more into the matter in the previous thread, and the summary of my assessments can be found here: >>47422558

It is true, however, that the original assassin and the seeker are both rather weak classes (and thus both the original assassin and the post-Essentials assassin [executioner] are underwhelming).

Additionally, it is important to note that some classes are underpowered "under the radar." For instance, PHB2 barbarians are actually fairly poor and quite fragile as strikers; even Whirling Slayers, who can actually have good defenses, are lacking in single-target output. A barbarian is *much* better off as a hybrid.
Likewise, a heroic-tier avenger *needs* to optimize for charging with Overwhelming Strike and Power of Skill, or else their damage output will be low due to a lack of Painful Oath.
In a similar vein, as weak as the warlock (binder) and the warlock (hexblade) are, the PHB1 warlock is only slightly better and still underwhelming unless they are of the Sorcerer-King Pact and take Mindbite Scorn. Even then, since their riders are spread out across so many builds, their encounter attack powers tend to be some of the weakest around. It takes a hybrid warlock to bring out the best in the class.

>>47435569

A Charisma paladin still has Virtuous Strike, but your point still stands; that generally is not powerful enough to make a warlord excited.

>>47435624

The seeker's powers are mostly soft control with slap-on-the-wrist punishments, whereas top-tier controllers like the druid, the invoker, the Intelligence/Charisma psion, and the wizard can dole out either hard control or highly punishing soft control.

World Serpent's Grasp is a parlor trick available to any class with access to slowing powers; it is hardly seeker-exclusive. Even the wizard has an area burst 1 slowing at-will, Stone Blood.

>> No.47435698

>>47435671
A control warlock need not be hybrid to be good

fey pact + twofold pact into star pact gives you access to pretty much all the good control riders and the at-will you want

>> No.47435747

>>47435671
what's hard control vs soft control? also do you have a good resource for hybridization? I want to run a 4e campaign in the next year or so and I've never dug down into its guts.

>> No.47435773

>>47435747
If you're running your first 4e, just don't allow hybrids

4e really doesn't need hybrids to be good or fun, and it's so much easier for you and everyone else if you're all fairly new to just not include it

>> No.47435818

>>47435670

The hybrid barbarian loses Barbarian Agility, but that was not going to see use short of a Whirling Slayer anyway. The hybrid barbarian also loses Feral Might, but it is a fairly minor class feature.

A hybrid barbarian can instantaneously solve their durability issues by pairing up with a cleric with Battle Cleric's Lore, a paladin (cavalier) with Hybrid Talent for paladin armor proficiency, or a warden with Hybrid Talent for Warden's Armored Might. The lattermost of these also gives the barbarian easy access to a low-heroic nova in the form of Thundering Howl, Savage Growl mid-Thundering Howl, action point, Wildblood Frenzy.

Such combinations result in a barbarian far more durable, versatile, and overall competent than a pure-classed barbarian would have been. As a cherry on the metaphorical top, this does not cause any net loss of trained skills compared to a regular barbarian anyway.

>>47435698

Playing a warlock simply to be a controller is pointless, because an actual controller class performs such a role significantly better and against more enemies to boot.

Besides, even under the context of a pure-classed warlock, by level 13, a Sorcerer-King Pact warlock Twofold Pacting into the Star Pact produces a more capable single-target striker/controller anyway.

>>47435747

Hard control directly disables an enemy in some fashion, or diminishes an enemy's capacities. Soft control offers an enemy a choice between being disabled/diminished, and taking some sort of punishment; this can be powerful if the choice is nasty enough, but for the seeker's powers, this is not the case.

This is the best resource you will find on hybrid classes: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?468788-Miscibility-Table-A-4e-Hybrid-Handbook%28by-MwaO%29

That said, I disagree with it on several counts. For one, I have no idea why anyone would ever consider the regular hybrid paladin to be better than the hybrid paladin (cavalier) when the latter gives far better a deal.

>> No.47435851

>>47435818
Oh, you mean hybrid barbarian with the busted as shit hybrid classes

I was hoping for hybrid barbarian/sorcerer or something fun like that instead of boring old battle cleric's bullshit

>> No.47435911

>>47435851

If you dislike the hybrid cleric and the hybrid paladin (cavalier), try a barbarian|warden. Focus on Strength and Wisdom and spend your first feat on Hybrid Talent (Warden's Armored Might).

You are now an all-primal striker|defender who can have an encounter attack power progression of Wildblood Frenzy at 1, Thundering Howl at 3, Curtain of Steel at 7, Storm of Blades at 13 (replacing Curtain of Steel), and so on.

A hybrid barbarian|sorcerer is not as good as it seems due to weapliment woes. Even with an ability to use, say, heavy blades as implements, such a hybrid will be unable to benefit from an item bonus to *both* implement and weapon damage rolls until they can afford an expensive Radiant Weapon. That said, a mid-paragon barbarian|sorcerer with such a weapon can certainly outdo a pure-class barbarian.

>> No.47435981

>>47435911
I was hoping sorcerer/barbarian would be good because a str/cha sorcerer gets strength to AC, combine that with hybrid talent" barbarian armor proficiency" (which comes coupled with barbarian agility) and you've got the frailty problems of both parent classes solved

Also there's a special paragon path for sorcerer/barbarians

>> No.47435982

>>47435773
not too new to the system, but I've only played maybe half the levels. Though my friends aren't super power-gamey, I'll keep this in mind.

>>47435818
thanks for the wisdom sempai.

>> No.47436005

>>47435982
The real problem with hybrids is that using them is like taking a trip back to 3.5

There's potential for crazy opportunity there, but there's so many trap options to work around to get to it. So for less powergamey people, it's more trouble than it's worth

>> No.47436050

>>47436005
by extension, wouldn't that concern extend to the base classes too? certainly I could see how hybridization could make a build go from bad to worst however.

>> No.47436077

>>47435981

Barbarian|sorcerers can indeed have fairly high AC, but their weapliment woes are no small deal, as it directly impacts their damage output. Again, this is solved once such a character can afford a Radiant Weapon and implant a Siberys Shard of Radiance in it, so a barbarian|sorcerer becomes significantly more viable by the paragon tier.

>Also there's a special paragon path for sorcerer/barbarians

Unfortunately, the Dragonfoe Ragespell's level 11 features' extra damage does not scale at all, and the level 16 feature is of limited use to a barbarian|sorcerer who probably wants to have Blazing Starfall as their sorcerer at-will power anyway. A dragonborn barbarian|sorcerer is much better off as a Mithral Arm.

>>47436050

There certainly are plenty of trap options amongst the base classes as has been covered previously in this thread (and in the last thread here >>47422558), but hybrid classes exacerbate the potential to fall into the trap of an awful character.

>> No.47436166

>>47436050
Not as much

The problem with hybrids is that even without looking inside the classes, some combinations look like they should work, but don't

rogue/ranger is fucking awful, for example. Monk/anything is not worth it even if the stats match up, and hybrid fighters learn quite quickly how much fighters need their class features to function

>> No.47436244

New fag here, you lovely people know of a good way to play D&D online with friends? kinda hard to get everyone in a room with a 1200km distance ya know

>> No.47436255

>>47435671
>Even the wizard has an area burst 1 slowing at-will, Stone Blood.
IIRC they added an at will to the wizard that slides 1, slows, and has a "wall" area type which usually results in including more enemies than a burst 1. It deals no damage, but who cares.

>> No.47436286

>>47436244
roll20 and skype

>> No.47436305

>>47436166

>rogue/ranger is fucking awful, for example

On the contrary, there are a few ranger|rogue builds that can be quite effective. A crossbow ranger|rogue can take Hybrid Talent (Sharpshooter Talent) for more accuracy and can use powers like Snap Shot to double-tap Hunter's Quarry and Sneak Attack damage in the same turn, and the downgrade to leather armor simply allows them to use Shadowdance Armor. Likewise, a ranger|rogue with Spiked Chain Training can put powers such as Low Slash to very good use in double-tapping Hunter's Quarry and Sneak Attack damage on the same turn.

>Monk/anything is not worth it even if the stats match up
This, however, is true. The hybrid monk is dreck.

>hybrid fighters learn quite quickly how much fighters need their class features to function
The hybrid fighter pairs well with the hybrid warden to spread marks around multiple adjacent enemies, but even then, a pure-classed fighter or a pure-classed warden would make for a better defender.

>>47436255

You are speaking of Howling Wall from Heroes of the Elemental Chaos. Unless you are specifically attempting to optimize forced movement, I would consider it a mediocre at-will power, as a lack of a damage roll hurts a wizard's damage output (which tends to be decent given a Staff of Ruin and a Siberys Shard of the Mage). Even then, if you are willing to drop your damage output in favor of pure forced movement, Beguiling Strands is the better, ally-friendly, minion-popping, Resplendent Gloves/Psychic Lock-compatible option.

If it is World Serpent's Grasp optimization you are after, Stone Blood is still the better pick.

>> No.47436466

>>47435911
The other advantage of barbarian/warden is that you can make a very thematic "frozen warrior" with stuff like the winter's fury paragon path and form of the winter's herald lvl 1 daily

>> No.47436543

>>47436466

By the time you gain the resist 10 cold and the cold damage benefit from being a level 16 Winter Fury, you will probably have swapped out your level 1 daily attack power (Form of Winter's Herald is level 1) for Form of the Rowan Sentinel anyway.

>> No.47436554

Have any of your recent or current campaigns included Beholders? If so, how were the Eye Tyrants used?

>> No.47436584

>>47436305
>The hybrid fighter pairs well with the hybrid warden to spread marks around multiple adjacent enemies, but even then, a pure-classed fighter or a pure-classed warden would make for a better defender.

Hybrid fighter/Paladin going into Champion of Order for DUNDUNDUN double mark punish and more marking?

>> No.47436615

I've been working on my own homebrew version of the slayer class

Basically removing all the essentials crap and making a fighter, with access to fighter powers, who's armed with striker features instead of defender features.

So fighting styles, like arena training, two and one handed weapon styles, and tempest technique remain, but combat superiority and fighter's mark are droppedin favour of I'm not sure what yet

Still working on it. I want to give it something "fighter-ish", but I don't want to just copy another striker's feature

>> No.47436786

>>47436554

For reference, here is a list of Monster Manual 3 math-using beholders and faux-beholders:

• Beholder gauth, level 5 elite artillery, from the Monster Vault, page 25
• Beholderkin eyeball, level 7 minion artillery, from Dragon Magazine #418, page 58
• "Beholder," level 9 solo artillery, from the Monster Vault, page 26
• Beholder eye of shadow, level 12 elite artillery, from the Monster Manual 3, page 22
• Beholder spawn, level 15 minion artillery, from the Monster Manual 3, page 22
• Ghost beholder, level 18 elite controller, from the Monster Manual 3, page 23
• Tyrannosphere, level 19 elite controller, from Dungeon Magazine #201's "Trobriand's Machinations" article
• Beholder eye tyrant, level 19 solo artillery, from the Monster Vault, page 27
• Gibbering orb, level 29 solo artillery, from Dungeon Magazine #192... which is bizarre, because the Compendium clearly shows its Monster Manual 3-updated statistics, yet Dungeon Magazines #191 through #193 lack a single article with the actual statistics block
• Voidsphere beholder, level 30 elite artillery, from Dungeon Magazine #201's "Far Realm Fiends" article

>>47436584

The hybrid PHB1 paladin's Divine Challenge is a lower-damage version that requires you to spend your immediate action. It is not especially synergistic with the hybrid fighter.

The hybrid paladin (cavalier), on the other hand, is a terrifying monstrosity with a fully-powered Defender Aura and Righteous Radiance, a milder version of a minor action leader heal each encounter, and the ability to take Hybrid Talent for plate and heavy shield proficiency.

>>47436615

Whatever it is, it should activate only once per turn so as to prevent fighters from detonating enemies with Rain of Blows. It should ideally key off the fighter's choice of Constitution, Dexterity, or Wisdom, so as to match the fighter's possible secondary scores.

>> No.47436854

>>47436786
>The hybrid PHB1 paladin's Divine Challenge is a lower-damage version that requires you to spend your immediate action. It is not especially synergistic with the hybrid fighter.

Champion of Order gets:
>In Defense of Order (11th level): When you are adjacent to the target of your divine challenge, the target provokes an opportunity attack from you if it makes an attack that does not include you.

So you get double mark punish; once for violating your mark (as the fighter mark punish doesn't specify "fighter mark") and once an opportunity attack because he attacked while under your divine challenge.

You never really use the Paladin punish unless you really must.

Plus you can mark 2 people (although you can double punish only one).

Combine with Weapon Master Strike: spear so you also double punish shifts, if you want to be really silly.

>> No.47436944

>>47436854

>So you get double mark punish; once for violating your mark (as the fighter mark punish doesn't specify "fighter mark") and once an opportunity attack because he attacked while under your divine challenge.

A pure-classed paladin/Champion of Order can already do this simply by allowing the Divine Challenge damage to go through (no action necessary) and then taking the opportunity attack. This is even better because it does not consume an immediate action, thereby saving it for the likes of utility powers and Guardian's Counter.

>Plus you can mark 2 people (although you can double punish only one).
This would be a good benefit for a fighter if it did not mandate stripping the class of Combat Superiority and Fighter Weapon Talent.

>Combine with Weapon Master Strike: spear so you also double punish shifts, if you want to be really silly.
A pure-classed fighter can already do this with Weapon Master's Strike, though due to the weapon choice necessary, it is impractical for anyone other than a dedicated polearm-build fighter.

>> No.47437056

Is it just for me or has the compendium stopped working?

>> No.47437067

>>47437056

It has.

>> No.47437086

>>47437067
fuck. That thing is super useful

Is there an offline version of it?

>> No.47437256

>>47436944
Right, but the paladin mark punish is kinda weak compared to the fighter one, especially with all the ways you can buff your MBAs (though probably using valorous smite for it is not a great idea). You give up the paladin Immediate actions for Fighter MBAs. That's pretty nice trade I think.

Admittedly, losing those class features kinda sucks.

>> No.47437338

>>47437086

The offline character builder with the CBLoader should cover you. Unfortunately, I would not know where to retrieve the CBLoader files.

>>47437256

While it does not pack as much of a punch as a melee basic attack with Shield Push, not having to use up an immediate action is *immensely* convenient for a pure-classed paladin Divine Challenge. A Symbol of the Champion's Code, which a pure-classed paladin will probably want anyway, improves challenge and sanction damage.

A fighter who wants to be able to mark multiple opponents at once is better off as a Tempest Technique fighter (preferably with the Master of the Fist monk multiclass feat) or as a fighter|warden. At least the latter would have Strength/Wisdom synergy.

>> No.47437440

>>47437338
Paladins also have some Wis based stuff, don't they? I mean, not as much as Wardens, obviously...

Also, the real benefit here is being able to grab Champion of Order (and also, you know, use it, which you can't really do with multiclass feats).

Like, looking at this objectively, fighter
loses:
-Combat superiority and weapon talent
Gains:
-Ability to mark multiple enemies
-Ability to enter Champion of Order (and other Paladin PPs, but that's the one I care about), for double attacks on punish.
-Option to spend a feat to regain a lost feature or paladin armor.

As long as Champion of Order + double mark outweighs the lost features + whatever PP you'd have went instead, I think it's good. And I can't off hand think of any PP that improves your mark by that much, tho there's probably a lot that give you plenty of other boosts.

>> No.47437545

>>47437440
>-Combat superiority and weapon talent

For a "generic" Strength/Wisdom shield fighter, this means that their opportunity attacks are no longer hyper-accurate and movement-stopping (no Combat Superiority), and, somewhat less importantly, they lose a +1 bonus to attack rolls (no Fighter Weapon Talent) that could have helped land a Shield Pushing Combat Challenge attack. The fighter also loses the ability to mark on a melee basic attack, such as during a charge or an opportunity attack.

>Paladins also have some Wis based stuff, don't they?
Yes, but their Wisdom-using encounter attack powers prevent a hybrid fighter from marking.

>Ability to mark multiple enemies
A hybrid paladin must be adjacent to the target of their Divine Challenge anyway, which begs the question of why the fighter is not simply a Tempest Technique fighter or a fighter|warden if they wish to mark multiple enemies adjacent to them.

>Option to spend a feat to regain a lost feature or paladin armor.
Fighters already have no shortage of top-notch feats to take. They are extremely well-supported.

>Ability to enter Champion of Order (and other Paladin PPs, but that's the one I care about), for double attacks on punish.
The Son of Mercy is another significant mark-improver.

>> No.47437576

>>47437440
The thing is, fighters have lots of good paragon paths, even if most of them seem to only exist for other classes to poach via multiclassing (kensei and shock trooper come to mind).

Champion of Order is nice, but a fighter doesn't need champion of order.

>> No.47437606

>>47437545

Additionally, it is worth noting that pure-classed fighters have Glowering Threat at level 2 and Kirre's Roar at level 6 for multitarget marking anyway. A pure-classed Charisma/Wisdom paladin has Valorous Smite at level 1, Call of Challenge at level 2, and Castigating Smite at level 13.

These should be individually enough to handle multitarget marking needs each encounter.

>>47437576

The Kensei is only *somewhat* good at levels 11-15, as while an unconditional +1 bonus to attack rolls is lovely, the action point feature and the level 11 and 12 powers leave much to be desired. It takes the level 16 mark for the Kensei to vindicate itself.

Before then, the Son of Mercy is the ideal paragon path for a Strength/Wisdom fighter concerned about their mark enforcement first and foremost. The Juggernaut is for those who wish to be able to power through debilitating conditions. The Shock Trooper is for those playing Tempest Technique fighters.

>> No.47437644

>>47437606
My point was that kensei and shock trooper are more desirable to striker classes than to fighters

>> No.47437675

>>47437545
>For a "generic" Strength/Wisdom shield fighter, this means that their opportunity attacks are no longer hyper-accurate and movement-stopping (no Combat Superiority),

Right, so there goes your hybrid talent feat....

You can get that back, right?

>Yes, but their Wisdom-using encounter attack powers prevent a hybrid fighter from marking.

Can still use/keep up the paladin mark for those turns.

>A hybrid paladin must be adjacent to the target of their Divine Challenge anyway, which begs the question of why the fighter is not simply a Tempest Technique fighter or a fighter|warden if they wish to mark multiple enemies adjacent to them.

Because those don't get an opportunity attack on top of an interrupt.

The double marking is the bonus.

>The Son of Mercy is another significant mark-improver.

Don't have my builder on me, what does that do?

>>47437576
>Champion of Order is nice, but a fighter doesn't need champion of order.

Right, never said it "needed" it, or that it was the most optimal even, just that it's a pretty viable path to take, and a possible reason for hybrid Fighter/Paladin (or at least a Fighter/Paladin that isn't worse than an average fighter).

>> No.47437771

>>47437675

>Right, so there goes your hybrid talent feat....
>You can get that back, right?
Fighters have so many good feats available to them that a feat spent towards Hybrid Talent is a feat spent *not* improving their capacities elsewhere.

>Can still use/keep up the paladin mark for those turns.
That is defeating the point of "keeping up two marks" which you are touting.

>Because those don't get an opportunity attack on top of an interrupt.
I really do not see it as that major an upgrade. If an enemy wishes to avoid it, all they have to do is shift to become non-adjacent (which would trigger a Combat Challenge attack anyway, the same as any other fighter).

>Don't have my builder on me, what does that do?
It augments a mark with Wisdom modifier extra damage and slowing.

>> No.47437781

>>47437606

>Juggernaut

And by this, I mean "Dreadnought."

>> No.47438121

Hey Touhoufag

Should a wis-fighter go 18-10-11-8-14-10 or 16-12-12-8-16-10?

Or should they go for some other stat array?

>> No.47438206

>>47437771
>That is defeating the point of "keeping up two marks" which you are touting.

I threw that in as a side benefit that lessens the pain a bit until you get to the PP. The main benefit is still Champion of Order.

>If an enemy wishes to avoid it, all they have to do is shift to become non-adjacent (which would trigger a Combat Challenge attack anyway, the same as any other fighter).

Yeah, and since combat challenge is triggered, you can slide them right back on a hit, and if they attack, you still get the opportunity.

>It augments a mark with Wisdom modifier extra damage and slowing.

Right, I remembered it was pretty good. Do note tho that that merely puts the Fighter/Son of Mercy on about the same level as Paladin/Champion of Order (as the upgrade in mark punish I estimate is about on par with the basic paladin punish+slow; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

Getting an extra MBA is still ahead of that imo, although the things you give up may admittedly be not in total.

>> No.47438260

>>47438121

As a defender, a fighter should not neglect their Reflex, Will, and healing surges. Strength 16, Constitution 12, Dexterity 12, Intelligence 8, Wisdom 16, Charisma 10 is the pre-racial array that I would recommend.

Currently, the most ideal race for a Strength/Wisdom fighter is probably the dwarf, for +2 Strength and Constitution, a minor action second wind, forced movement reduction (crucial for actually staying adjacent to enemies), and access to top-notch feats such as Dwarven Weapon Training, Devoted Challenge, and Stonefoot Reprisal. A good runner up would be the goliath, for +2 Strength and Wisdom, +1 Will, a damage resistance racial encounter power, and rolling twice and taking the higher results for the Athletics checks that matter during combat.

The weapon of choice for shield fighters is the alhulak (or, with Weapon Proficiency, the triple-headed flail), because that allows Flail Expertise and Footwork Lure to knock an enemy prone.

>>47438206

>The main benefit is still Champion of Order.
Which is a very good paragon path, no doubt, but probably not worth being a hybrid for.

>Yeah, and since combat challenge is triggered, you can slide them right back on a hit, and if they attack, you still get the opportunity.
Shield Push provides a push, not a slide. Even if it *did* impose a slide, since Combat Challenge's attack is an immediate interrupt that resolves before the shift, the target's shift would still occur immediately afterwards anyway.

>> No.47438282

>>47433477

>What do you consider an ideal starting level for players who are experienced and comfortable with 4e?

When I ran it, usually somewhere around levels 3-5 if we weren't starting as established paragon-levels. Get a few feats and more powers under your belt and brush away the first couple of levels and get into the fun stuff.

>> No.47438495

>>47438260
What about Str 16, Con 11, Dex 13, Int 8, Wis 16, Cha 10 as a pre-racial array? This way you can pick up scale armor specialisation in epic

Or is that not worth it?

>> No.47438675

>>47435671
>A Charisma paladin still has Virtuous Strike, but your point still stands; that generally is not powerful enough to make a warlord excited.
What's wrong with Virtuous strike. I ask because my Chaladin is main tank since our Cavalier player thinks he's playing a striker.

>> No.47439048

What are your thoughts on reducing HP and HP recovery for PCs and monsters by half for the purpose of speeding along combat and making it feel a bit more lethal? Has anyone tried something similar or can see any consequences of such a hotfix?

>> No.47439143

>>47438495

By the time you reach the epic tier, there will be *much* better feats to take than a mere +1 AC and +1 speed. Any one of the Epic Fortitude/Reflex/Will line alone will be a greater boost to your durability. Dual Challenge and Rapid Combat Challenges are must-haves for multi-marking and multi-mark-enforcement. Slashing Storm provides a constant stream of minion-popping damage. Martial Mastery is a recharged encounter power each time you spend an action point. Superior Initiative is a whopping +8 initiative. These are just the tip of the metaphorical iceberg.

>>47438675

Tell your cavalier to strongly contemplate switching to a hybrid barbarian|paladin (cavalier) instead. That will make them an *actual* striker with 6 hit points per level, plate and heavy shield proficiency, and a weaker minor action leader heal each encounter. Remind them that the paladin (cavalier) is an awful class for the reasons explained in >>47421560, and that its hybrid counterpart has far more potential.

As for Virtuous Strike, it is a near-mandatory power for Charisma/Wisdom paladins. Offense-wise, it is no more potent a melee basic attack than a generic melee basic attack save for its built-in radiant damage optimization potential, which is why >>47435569 was saying that a warlord could not count on a Charisma/Wisdom paladin to be an above-average basic attacker (because such a paladin is merely a mediocre basic attacker).

>>47439048

This is generally a poor idea, as it encourages a playstyle wherein going first and unleashing a alpha strike nova multiattack is the single best tactic possible. There is little reason to bother with controllers, defenders, and defensive leaders when a party of a warlord and several other strikers can go first and *delete* enough of the opposition for the rest to pose no threat.

It is worth noting that "go first and alpha strike nova" is already an exceptionally effective tactic in 4e given the right party and the right multiattacking builds.

>> No.47439292

So I'm pretty sure calm fury barbarian + divine oracle invoker/wizard/whatever is one of, if not the most, fun setups possible in 4e

Once per encounter, one enemy is getting a gigantic critical hit rage strike shoved down their throat. Typically removing said enemy from existance, even if said enemy is an elite

It's suboptimal as hell, as I'm sure touhoufag will be eager to tell you. But simply erasing an enemy from existance in one hit once per encounter is stupid fun.

>> No.47439340

>>47433477
Wow has the compendium fully gone down now?

>> No.47439357

>>47433477
>Thread starter question: What do you consider an ideal starting level for players who are experienced and comfortable with 4e?

Level 3. Second encounter power puts more damage in player hands without leading into decision paralysis. Two feats are enough to get started but not be hard to remember in heat of battle. DMG's recommendation of a magic item of lvl+1, lvl, and lvl-1 gives a good spread of +1 for neck, weapon, and armor gear, and lvl2 magic item worth in GP is a decent chunk of change to start with.

>> No.47439405

>>47439143
That's true and it was the first thing that crossed my mind. Maybe it'd be easier if I laid out what I was trying to accomplish: I want to be able to have the PCs go through 3 - 4 encounters between long rests while increasing the life-or-death stakes of combat. My sticking point during my time playing 4e was that every single fight had us using up all of our resources (powers, item powers, surges) would be gone and we'd be reduced to spamming at-wills until the end of combat. Obviously quite a bit of this falls on the DM who liked to cook up his battles that way (and we didn't mind, just not my preferred playstyle) and the players, myself included who were highly unoptimized save for our wizard. In addition, I don't know if he pulled/designed his monsters from MM3 or later, so that could be another issue. Sorry for getting a bit long-winded, just wanted to cover all my bases.

>> No.47439500

>>47439292

It *is* suboptimal, mostly because 4e's methods of eliminating an enemy in in a single round almost always involves multiattacks. Attempting to do so with a single attack will fail more often than not by the paragon tier (yes, even with a Prophecy of Doom + Rage Strike, which is not even a single attack to begin with seeing how it triggers a second attack from Rampage). Remember that the average level 14 standard monster has 120 + Constitution score hit points.

A low-paragon barbarian (hybrid or otherwise, though they really should be a hybrid) who really wants to ensure an enemy's death should use Thundering Howl with a Savage Growl in between the two damage rolls, an action point, and a Storm of Blades for a grand total of five damage rolls, possibly more if Rampage triggers (and given a Melegaunt's Darkblade and the Disciple of Divine Wrath avenger multiclass feat, it probably will).

The Calm Fury paragon path is mediocre for barbarians because it builds upon their worst daily attack power, Rage Strike (pure [W] is horrendous). The Divine Oracle, on the other hand, *is* top-notch for its overall package and its roll-attack-twice benefit at level 16, though Charisma-based characters might find the bard's Life Singer more useful due to that paragon path's lack of self-dazing.

>>47439340

Yes.

>>47439405

You absolutely, positively must ensure that you are using Monster Manual 3 monsters. It also helps to have monsters focus fire on any PCs they can lay their hands on; this is simply good tactics, and it makes the party's defender feel *much* more relevant by being able to break up the enemies' focus-firing by goading some of the enemies into attacking the defender instead.

>> No.47439562

>>47439500
Yes, true. But while multiattack is supremely optimal compared to damage per attack. Getting one humongous hit is much, much more fun.

Also the compendium is back

>> No.47439578

>>47439500
Thanks, I'll see if that doesn't address my issues.

>> No.47439591

>>47439562

You are certainly not banking on merely a single titanic hit if you are triggering Rampage anyway.

>> No.47439615

>>47439591
Well obviously the rampage is being used on some other enemy.

Charging rampage is a very fun feat

>> No.47439647

>>47439615

>Well obviously the rampage is being used on some other enemy.

Or perhaps not, if the first hit fails to take out the enemy. I could see it one-shotting lower-level standard monsters, possibly an equal-level standard monster given the right magic weapon critical line.

>> No.47441399

Which monster has the highest perception?

I'm building a thief of legend for an epic level game, and I want my passive stealth to surpass all passive perception that I might have to worry about

>> No.47443673

Any 4E D&D fans in here?

I'm fiddling around with my game's classes and I'd like some feedback.

My classes are going to be divided up into roles, but I'm deviating from 4E's striker/defender/leader/controller setup a little bit.

First off, striker will not exist as a dedicated role in my game. Instead, all classes will have striker features. Strikers have the most design space (ways to deal damage) of all the four roles so 4E is a bit lopsided with a glut of strikers. Splitting striker features up among the other roles should help to spread some design space out. Plus, giving increased damage potential to all of the classes should speed combat up a bit.

The classes will instead break down as follows:

Leader (Support)
Grappler (Melee single-target hard control)
Defender (Melee multi-target soft control)
Denier (Ranged single-target hard control)
Zoner (Ranged multi-target soft control)

Thoughts?

>> No.47443691

>>47443673
Doh. Sorry. I posted this in the wrong thread.
Meant to put this in /gdg/. Stupid me. :(

>> No.47444393

>>47443673
Well duh.
Anyway, it looks good, but how are you balancing the support/control elements with the striking? You could have single actions that do a bit of both, or separate actions doing either one better, forcing a choice.
Also, the support could be divided into heals, numerical bonuses, extra actions, and mixes thereof.
Divide the striking into high accuracy - high damage - high number of attacks, and the mix and match possibilities are... not infinite, but high enough.

>> No.47444544

>>47444393
>Well duh
Yup, I goofed and posted in the wrong thread. My face is red.

>Anyway, it looks good, but how are you balancing the support/control elements with the striking? You could have single actions that do a bit of both, or separate actions doing either one better, forcing a choice.
Single actions that do a bit of both will be weaker. Separate actions that do both will be more powerful.

>Divide the striking into high accuracy - high damage - high number of attacks, and the mix and match possibilities are... not infinite, but high enough.

Well, here are some different methods characters in 4E can use to deal more damage:

High number of attacks
High Accuracy
Power Attack (lower accuracy, higher damage per hit)
Crit-Fishing
Charging
Radiant Mafia/Permafrost
Ongoing Damage
Sneak Attack
Half Damage on a Miss
Suicidal Aggro (pay HP, surges, grant advantage, or take some other penalty to increase damage)

>> No.47446605

>>47441399

The non-MM3-math monster with the highest passive Perception is the god Vecna from Open Grave, level 35 solo controller, who boasts passive Perception 44.

The MM3 math monster with the highest Perception is the primordial Yan-C-Bin from Dungeon Magazine #199, who has "merely" passive Perception 43.

It should not be too difficult to raise your Stealth bonus to +35. Given level 30, Dexterity 28, skill training, and a +6 Stealth item, you should already have Stealth +35, and that is before any bonuses from race, background, theme, paragon path, or familiar.

If you could tell us more of:
>what the rest of the players are playing, what books are allowed, your starting level, the highest level you expect to reach, what free feats you receive, if anything is banned, whether or not themes are allowed, your starting equipment, and how much you dislike item-dependent builds

We could help you hash out your character's mechanics further.

>>47444544

Bear in mind that in 4e, "high number of attacks" is at the top of the list for a very good reason. It can be combined with nearly every other method to ensure devastating multiattacks that can rapidly put down enemies.

>> No.47447097

>>47446605
>Bear in mind that in 4e, "high number of attacks" is at the top of the list for a very good reason. It can be combined with nearly every other method to ensure devastating multiattack s that can rapidly put down enemies.

Got it. So give it to all of them (in some form) or give it to none of them.

Any other good methods of damage-dealing I should add to my list?

>> No.47447240

>>47447097

From a game design perspective, multiattacks only really bog down combat. There is no reason why a single large strike could not be flavored as multiple attacks.

>> No.47447272

>>47447240

That's an interesting point.
Not a fan of Twin Strike I take it?

What are your views on area attacks?

>> No.47447350

>>47447272

Twin Strike is probably one of 4e's most boring powers, as it inflicts nothing but raw damage.

Area attacks are all well and dandy, but they obviously have much higher overall damage output than single-target attacks.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action