Does anyone even play this anymore? I see daily 5e threads but 4e seems completely dead,
>>44019643
I dunno. I haven't played it for a few years, but that was because I dropped out of a group that played it. Since then I stopped playing dnd all together.
I did enjoy it during playing it though.
>>44019643
I do but I run my campaign with my friends, not online. There is nothing to discuss here since I know what I want, how the system works and what to do in pretty much the situations my group find themselves in.
The system is well done and there isn't much room for different interpretations, therefore less arguments and less internet bitchfights within the system itself.
I'm in a game of it. I was dismissive of it at first because I thought I was past D&D in general, but 4e is actually different enough from the standard formula to be really interesting. I prefer the unique elements of 4e to the humdrum of D&D which is what 5e seems to focus on.
There's this big thread arguing about it: >>44003498
Then there's a straight-up 4E versus 5E thread, plus one about making a 4E retroclone.
I feel like there's been a lot of interest in reviving 4E recently. I don't know why.
>>44019718
If you want to fight, I'm willing to fight you.
If you just want to talk shit, then you best be prepared for this thread to turn into another "Everything wrong with 4e" thread.
Keep your tongue in check, mate.
>>44019732
Woah there, looks like we've got an internet tough guy. I better show the subject the respect it deserves! D&D is shit.
>>44019727
>I don't know why.
Death throes? A last hurrah?
>>44019643
Another post but I am reminded of someone telling me that Bethesda deliberately make their games buggy and prone to crashes while seemingly full of potential to generate a lot of discussions and arguments which is free advertisement for them in every form. Also mods.
I'm actually finding that I might be DMing a group that wants to do 4e. I've accidentally skipped the edition for better or for worse, so I'm all for the "don't knock it until you try it" thing.
Is there anything I should be aware of the system as a DM that I might not pickup from reading the rules?
>>44019643
Which defender class is best at enforcing their mark?
>>44019787
I've heard that the first and maybe second monster manuals weren't super balanced? Apparently the third one was okay. I'm sure there are guides online to rebalance the monstars.
>>44019727
That's my fault.
I asked for the character builder a while ago and it kind of went into full general.
>>44019727
It's old enough that the people whose introduction to tabletop games was 4e are able to get a little nostalgic about it.
It doesn't have any new material coming out, so people have to make their own if they want new toys to play with.
There are a handful of flaws with the game that people have been bugged by for a while, and it's just a coincidence that people are all messing with it at once.
The shitposting has been going on for so long that they can enjoy the game that they enjoy in peace without a billion arguments about it.
It's established enough that you know if you like it or not so there's very few people asking what the shitstorm was about or why they should like it (the two most controversial topics) and people can talk about other things instead.
Really, it's the perfect time for it.
>>44019799
Not him but did Essentials fix it?
I mean they basically redid the core three books in a different format, right? Does Monster Vault have fixed stats for common monsters?
Lots of people play it, but holy shit never talk on /tg/ about it.
>>44019999
Essentials was crap. The classes are incredibly dull and basically a step back in 4e design. The only good thing was some of the feats.
>>44019799
Yeah, here's the gist of it. Pretty much all the MM3 monsters follow this formula.
>>44019787
>>44019799
Yeah. MM1 and 2 have pretty bloated HP values in general.
Make sure you know what keywords mean. Try to make sure people have a good way to access all their powers. (And the keywords on the powers)
We printed ours out as little cards via Magic Set Editor but you can figure out what works for you.
>>44020031
Yeah I saw the Player's Handbook equivalent and I didn't like how it was put together.
But does the Monster Vault at least update monsters, or does it just add new ones?
And what's in the Dungeon Master's Kit? DMG2 already had fixed Skill Challenges, what else is there?
>>44019643
Do we really need to have 5 4e threads going on at the same time?
I'm a 4rry but this is becoming ridiculous.
>>44019732
>I got BTFO the other thread so I'll shit up this one!
>>44019787
Why are you DMing it if you've never played it?
Why not just directly ask your players to gangbang you?
>>44020008
I can't blame them. It's only been fairly recently you could have a 4e thread without blatant, substanceless shitposting drowning the thread out.
I almost want to say having dedicated generals for different game systems has lead to this, which might be the first positive I've heard about generals in ages.
>>44020117
It's not that uncommon of a thing to do. I'll agree having some player knowledge does help running a system, but if you want to try a new system in your group you'll have to take the plunge anyway.
>>44020031
It's not that bad. I mean, Heores of the Whatever (the first book I mean) showed pretty bad how they wanted to get 3aboos back, but the later Essentials books have interesting things that muck around with the basic 4e paradigm and can be fun at the table.
It was a mess on the PR standpoint tho.
>>44020036
Note that what changed from the earlier PHBs is that solos have x4 hp instead of x5, and monster damage is calculated a bit differently.
The first 2 PHBs are not perfect but neither they are unusable. The main issue is that a lot of monsters from the old books are just boring or not much interactive.
>>44020089
I'm only following three, which seems fine given however many dozen D&D/40k/etc threads are usually going at any one time.
>>44020148
I just hope the dude doesn't get wrecked by pissy shits telling him "No this is the way this works even though the rules say otherwise, I know because I played with a handwavey DM once"
>>44019815
I remember that thread. It was good, at least we didn't have edition war shitposters for an entire thread (plus tohoufag came back).
Now we have 3 threads full of crybabies (on both sides of the fence).
What are the most interesting 4e classes?
>>44020466
A lot of the psionic classes looked pretty cool.
I've heard really good things about 4e monks in particular.
>>44020466
I'm playing a Warlord at the moment and it's really fun, there's a lot of tactical depth and things to do on other players turns. I'm also curious how the Runepriest plays, since all their abilities have two variants which seems like it'd be interesting to balance.
>>44019732
Reminder that 90% of the criticism and actual flaws that exist in 4e are brought up by 4e fans.
>>44019789
Paladin. Plop it down and it doesn't even matter if you get stunned, divine justice will punish your enemies for you.
Now who's punishment is best is a whole different argument. I'd say fighter with a pimped out MBA. Or some defender hybrid.
>>44020466
Monk has a lot of moving parts, and is quite engaging to play.
Berserker can switch from defense to attack mode but not really go back, so it requires a careful usage of resources.
Several controllers have completely non-damaging options so they play the control game quite differently than the classic blasty wizard.
But in the end it all depends on what you consider interesting.
>>44019753
That's some tinfoil hat shit. Bethesda's games are buggy because they're a small studio making massive games.
Bethesda is basically built like an indie studio in terms of manpower, but they crank out AAA games.
This lets them pull off some things that a bigger company couldn't, but also means that sometimes there's too much to do and things get cut or bugs go uncaught.
>>44020076
Yes, Monster Vault fixes the MM1 and 2 monsters.
>>44020466
Defenders I would say. Being good at your job entailed building a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario for your enemies, and that required a very tactical mindset. The same could be said of many controllers and leaders, but I give defenders the edge because they had the added risk of using themselves as bait for most of their setups
>>44020076
The DM books is 95% a rehash of the DMG, the only new useful thing are the treasure tables to ose in place of the parcel system.
Plus it's a smaller book so it's easier to handle I guess.
>>44020559
I remember a friend of mine played a Dragonborn paladin and got the feats that let him mark with his breath attack and another to extend the area of his breath.
Watching him engage an entire small room followed by enemies getting blasted with divine retribution was pretty funny. Also made my job as a bard a lot easier.
Honestly at this point we should try getting 4e generals. To minimalize potential shitposters and what not and to stop shitting up the board with multiple threads as well.
>>44021163
Generals are terrible places to talk about whatever the general is about.
>>44021163
IMO a 4e general would just be a big "4e haters, come here and shitpost" sign
Also what >>44021280 said
>>44019643
Still playing and loving it mang, my players just hit level 16 raiding one of mammon's vaults in Baator, plot is coming along quite well.
>tfw no turn-based SRPG 4e Vidya
With solid writing and decent power selections options shit would be fucking great
>>44022619
It's somewhat indirect, but Pillars of Eternity's combat system feels like it took a lot of inspiration from 4e, the way you have powers per rest and such.
>>44022619
Shame about the murder suicide of a the 4e map tool app, I was looking forwards to that.
The biggest problem was 4e was simply the fat in my opinion.
While not a MMMO despite what people claim, it did throw a mmo size build options at player at page one and kept going from there with splats.
Too many of the players options were just slightly variations on each other in actually play. 5e for all it's flaws dealt with that imho
>>44026250
that's just because they don't have the cash to crank out splatbooks nonstop, it'll be just as bad in a few years
>>44026305
Yes sadly. It's only a matter of time.
That said the players hand book steam lines a lot of class builds options pretty well I believe. The rogue's 'cunning action' for example reduced what would of been cover by half a dozen different powers in 4e. That's good from an easy of play point of view if nothing else.
>>44026305
>that's just because they don't have the cash to crank out splatbooks nonstop
For the first time ever earlier this year the Hasbro president mentioned D&D alongside their other big moneymakers. That's the first time it's ever happened, so it definitely did quite well since 5e's launch.
Money definitely isn't an issue.
>>44026305
>>44028184
I was mistaken--not the first time *ever*, but the first time in a long time.
Anyways, more detail: he specifically said 5e was "on a tear" in a public earnings thing, and it was a big deal that he noticed and mentioned.
I remember hearing once of a project to convert 4e's power system to a sort of mecha fighting game, where encounter powers represented attacks/weapons with limited ammo, and dailies represent attacks/weapons with big power demands or something that's destroyed/expended after one use and has to be replaced/repaired before you can use it again. Equipment would be other armor/weapons/movement systems on your mech and feats would be either AI or piloting skills. Only, I don't know if anyone ever made any progress with this. Does this ring a bell with anyone?
>>44020466
Personally I found 4e's version of the Bard the most interesting, if only because the quantity of powers they have with "target moves and/or attacks as well" make me imagine a Bard turning every fucking fight into a Bollywood Musical fight scene.
>>44026305
>>44026511
I'm wondering if they even really need to, other than adding new build options (I don't remember what they named them this time, Themes?) the classes seem deliberately made broad enough that they don't have to do what 3.5 ended up doing and having Prestige Classes for every fucking specific little thing.
>>44028475
I mean, it really doesn't need much mechanical work done.
You could probably run it RAW with some player buy in and how you described it in that post right there.
>>44019643
I haven't had much time to play, but my schedule will (hopefully) clear up a bit in a month or so, so maybe I cam try to get a game going.
Regardless, I'm still collecting the books myself. I think I have most of them now, in addition to all the Dungeons and Dragons for it (the online magazines).
>>44028475
I've played 4E as a mecha game.
It works pretty well as-is. All you have to do is change fluff and names for things.
>>44020655
I did this with a Paladin. It was HILARIOUS! Super fun. I made him pretty much impossible to hit outside of a crit. Pretty much strolled around not afraid of anything.
Best part was the minions. I took some of the mass-marking encounter powers. Basically, they'd either be useless, or the DM would forget and have them attack someone else- at which point they blew themselves up before they could connect lolTo be fair, I had a much more roleplay-y version beforehand, but then the DM told me to "Paladin up." He brought it on himself.
>>44020466
I think just about any class can be fun. There were tons that I always wanted to play- they almost all had something that appealed to me.
Personally, next time I play a game that's going to 21+, I really want to play either a Tiefling Psion (There's an Epic Level Feat that, combined with a level 5 Daily gives you a mass dominate- of enemies AND allies!) or a "Magic User" (Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlock) pyromaniac (ongoing fire damage every encounter!)
>>44019643
I play it every other month or so, running one-shot adventures for a couple of different groups. I'm running one this Saturday, in fact.
>>44029771
One I wanted to try was a Warforged Druid (leaning as heavily on the shapeshifted powers as possible). Pic related I guess?
>>44029826
I had a friend play a Warforged Druid, actually- he loved it. I don't think any of us made the possible Beast Wars connection though- I love that! I say go for it!
>>44020268
Soon to be DM here. Sure, I haven't done 4e before, but I've done 3.5, 5e, Pathfinder, Star Wars D6, and 7th Sea as GM.
I'm fine with picking up new rules quickly, but it's cool to be aware of things like the MM1 HP bloat that people have been decent enough to warn me about in this thread.
>>44028744
I think you're referring to archetypes. And it seems to be the direction that the edition is going in. The most recent splat adds no new classes, only a few archetypes for already existing classes.
There exists space for entirely new classes in 5e, but it seems that they're only going to do so for concepts that need them, like psionics.
>>44019643
God knows I want to. I just can't get time off work
>>44019643
I'm running a game of it for my friends! We're having a good time and it's very helpful for me in adding in interesting encounters, with traps and stuff! I feel I'm growing as a GM!
Having seen the threads, I want to run 4e again because I had some good times come from it. The problem I have is finding people who want to play 4e these days
>>44020125
But is it really a DnD thread without blatant tasteless shitposting?
>>44020559
Absolute best is a half-orc fighter/paladin hybrid
max strength, blessed strength and mighty challenge feats, champion of order paragon path, by level 11 an adjacent enemy thatattacks someone other than the paladin/fighter takes two MBAs and 18 radiant damage for doing so
>>44030185
I don't care if this a joke. This reflects my sentiment exactly. I've been running an online game for six years, and while 4e is definitely clunky, but it allows for fairly straightforward planning. And it doesn't suffer if you lean on skills over combat. Combat gets a bit messy as you increase in complexity.
>>44031888
>>44028475
I had someone's PDF for their mecha rules. I can post it when I get home in several hours.
>>44026250
>Too many of the players options were just slightly variations on each other in actually play. 5e for all it's flaws dealt with that imho
The "sameness" relative to 3e was one of the complaints against 4e that I rarely bothered arguing against, because it's legitimate. However, 5e did not fix this, if anything it made it even less versatile by slashing the number of "roles" and not being explicit with what the roles are.
>Role 1: I do resource dependent damage, and mediocre damage when whatever they decided to call my "mana bar" runs out
>Role 2: I do less damage than role 1, but still considerable, and it's not resource dependent. I'm really only here for when he runs out of [resource bar.]
>Role 3: I use my [Resource bar] to make the opponent's side lose an average of [Spell-equivalent-level] standard actions worth of actions on average rolls, while role 1-2 are wailing on the thing, assuming my spells don't get disrupted from concentration
>Role 4..... there's no role 4.
That's literally it, mana-bar damage, spam-damage, and "nets action economy gain by making them lose 1+X standard actions with his 1 standard action."
The problem that 5e DID fix was extremely long combats... they may have accidentally thrown the baby out with the bathwater and made the combats piss boring in the process, but at least they're over with quickly.
>>44028475
It rings a bell in that I've run such a game, though I don't recall anybody ever taking the time to actually make a codified book/pdf/1d4chan-article out of it. I mean, I suppose you COULD write "refluff everything into mecha, then play" on 200 pieces of paper, bind it, and sell it on amazon, but I'm not sure anybody would buy it.
>>44029423
We had one long-running campaign that was basically a space sci-fi adventure of the Not!Mass Effect school.
DM put a metric fuckton of work into his setting, fleshing out people, places, and other shit we would never run into.
Played a Vryloka Blackguard fluffed as a space-bat person Cryo-Jedi who eventually became a galactic evil overlord.
Such a great fucking game,
Which class is best for multi-target striking?
Everyone knows rangers are the kings of single-target striking, but multi-target striking is a very different style
>>44029887
I once played a Warforged Swarm Druid that I fluffed as a conglomerate hive-mind of clockwork wasps gathering together in a vaguely humanoid shape, and "wild shaping" was just them breaking off into an actual swarm.
Druid summons were just wasps breaking off the main swarm and taking other shapes.
Fought a steam-powered mecha-dragon I had pinned to the ground with a giant alligator made of robot bees while yanking it down anytime it tried to fly away with a giant frog also made of robot bees, while I punched it with my fists.My fists were also robot bees.
>>44028475
Here we go, mecha 4e pdf is go.
>>44034112
Fighter?
>>44034112
Monk, undeniably the monk.
>>44034112
Sorceror
>>44030399
>The problem I have is finding people who want to play 4e these days
There's a lot of people out there that want to play it, I feel like, but it's hard to get them together. I know the owner of my FLGS is kinda anti-4E. They did 5E encounters and have a night for 3.X/PF, I think, but never did 4E. Kinda discourages people in my area from using it to find peopleor at least it discourages me and I assume others feel the same way.
>>44031888
Oh man, that's one of the things I love about 4E. Session planning for it is a breeze. Designing encounters (social too, not just combat), worldbuilding, etc. is just easier for me. Maybe because I've done more in 4E than 3.5 but even early on when I had more 3.5 experience, 4E just seemed easier to DM.
I thought everyone hated 4E and said it was the worst thing ever?
Does anyone have any BG portraits of female gnomes? I'm making an illusionist/thief.
>>44034112
Controllers tend to have more/better AOE, so that might be one way to go. Classes that are Striker/Controller or Controller/Striker like Sorceror or Wizard would probably the best bet, I think.
>>44034157
That makes me think of a D&D version of Replicators from Stargate, to be honest. Which is pretty cool.
>>44036518
Seconded.
Self-contained stat-blocks. Jesus I miss those.
Not needing to know 30 feats and monster qualities. Not having players turns that lasted 20 mins.
4E had it's foibles, but it did a lot right, too.
>>44036534
Sold a million copies, too. Shit's popular, pun intended.
When will they make a Ravenloft update for 5E?
>>44036541
I don't think I have any, sorry :(
At least not anything outside the DDI sample portraits. Pic related.
>>44036545
The only way to make a blaster wizard that's really capable of doing striker-levels of damge with their multitarget spells that I can see would be to go genasi and to make a muscle wizard via the elemental empowerment spell.
Also, sorcerers are way less controller-ish than warlocks
>>44036534
That was mostly just ITS THE NEW ONE I HATE IT BECAUSE ITS NEW.
>>44019643
Love to play it again. Wanna try a Warden.
Also got a Vyrloka Barbarian/Paladin hybrid who's kinda teh sexxor. She can spend 7 HS's worth of temps and healing without another character helping, and they're buffed to 40% of her max hp.
Not real versatile, but Defender enough for just about anything.
>>44036565
Did we ever get anything for Ravenloft in 4E? I don't think there was a sourcebook for it, but was there something in Dungeon/Dragon I might've missed?
Or maybe it was in one of those evil-y or undead books- I should probably go check. I saw some posts yesterday that made me curious about running a Ravenloft game at some point, or at least learning about the setting.
>>44036541
lewdanon drew this in a smut thread ages ago.
I cut it to be a portrait... also less lewd
>>44036569
Maybe with Essentials mage? There were a couple options that had bonus damage and ignored resistances.
>>44036583
>Or maybe it was in one of those evil-y or There were a couple of "domains of dread" in Dragon, and possibly the boxed set about the Shadowfell might count. But it's pretty thin as far as a 4e Ravenloft goes.
>>44019727
Well it balances out nicely and lacks 5E's "dead zone" feeling areas.
Plus Marking is still nice, casters fit in a neat box, and it's the easiest D&D system to date for saying "Yeah, that's OP -you can tone it down or I can nerf it."
>>44036569
Yeah, but Sorceror's still had more AOE, I think. Part of the controller role was AOE, not just hindering effects in the like, as they were intended to handle the minions. Also, Wizards had a LOT of support and you could find ways to get a fair amount of damage out of them regardless (some cheesier than others).
>>44036591
yeah, but even that comes kind of short, especially considering that wizard spells just do less damage on average than sorcerer or warlock spells
>>44036597
Sorry I messed up the quote here.
>>44036568
>>44036587
Is that how gnomes look now? I still think of them how they were in 2E, like less hairy hobbits, basically.
>>44036597
Well, I'll have to take a look at those when I can, thanks!
>>44020052
Reduce the hp values to 80% of what's there and that's a decent hotfix.
>>44020466
Warlords, for sure. So many good ways to do that.
I love Fighters in 4.
Barbarians are fun, too.
Avengers can be wicked fun.
Also Hybrids. Require a bit of system mastery to make work, but for depth they're hard to beat.
Easier to pick out the classes that don't work: Seekers, for one.
>>44036625
Seeker was... kind of entertaining as an idea, but just too meh as either a damage dealer or a "controller".
>>44036611
To me, 4E Gnomes are to Elves what Halfings are to Humans- they're basically shorter, similar versions.
Male Gnome pic attached for another illustration of general gnome-y-ness.
>>44019789
Wardens can get multiple mark responses and thus can fuck with entire crowds.
>>44036611
Gnomes in 4e are Fey to better differentiate them from halflings. They're not native to the material plane, like Eladrin.
>>44036645
I remember seeing a Warden build that basically turned about a 3 square radius around him into a complete and utter clusterfuck of YOU CANNOT ESCAPE ME. Combined with oh lets say a Wizard with Coordinated Explosion and such... yeah good times.
>>44036633
Worst for me as far as conflicting class features go was the Binder.
Basically a squishier shittier Warlock who's class features rlied on them either killing enemies or standing next to them when they died. Again, on a squishy controller.
Glad they realized that shit belonged on the Hexblade (melee'Lock) though.
>>44029423
I had some notes at one point about converting 4E mechanics for 40k. Bastardizing in things like burst fire and using a flamer to close blast an area.
Didn't go anywhere, but looked viable conceptually.
>>44036633
I never could get into the Seeker. To me, it always just seemed like a controller version of the Ranger. I never quite figured out what made them different lore-wise.
>>44036625
Hybrids were fun. I liked that better than the original multiclassing. I think there was an article in Dragon towards the end about how to do more traditional multiclassing though- like basically taking a level in something else when you level up instead of using feats. I have a character or two I'd love to redesign using that. I'm also totally not drooling over that thought, just fyi.
>tfw no halfling gf
>>44036666
I could see what they were TRYING to do with Seeker (a weapon-based ranged area damage/debuff class) but the damage wasn't great, the debuffs were either woeful or completely ignorable, and they had no feat support.
>>44036625
>>44020466
I really like 4e sorcerers, especially storm sorcerers. Their powers and class features fit together very nicely.
The level 11 lightning fury power is my favourite power in all of 4e
>>44036672
And I will admit, they had some surprisingly, um, "well-created" halflings in some of their art.
Also, I feel I must go track down the source of your pic- she's pretty cute.
>>44036660
Binders aren't as good at control as actual warlocks.
Could be worse though, don't forget that bladesingers were a thing
Also, can I just say how awesome it is to talk 4E with people again? And in a good way, not with all the hate. I really appreciate that guys. This has been SO fun and nostalgic for me. You guys are awesome!
>>44036633
Seekers also had the problem of being the Controller that attacked AC instead of NADs, and of consequently needing to spend feats on anything that gave them hit bonuses.
No mistake, PHB 3 was pretty weak. The well was running dry at that point. IMO PHB 2 was the real sweet spot.
Ah, and some of the Basics classes were either too good -like the Knight- or imo a boring version of a better class -the Berzerker.
>>44036655
One of 4E's better qualities was how the Defenders differentiated out.
Fighters were the prima single-target Defender.
Paladins were straight damage + radiant synergies.
Wardens were un-fucking-killable herd masters.
Well designed expressions of very similar concepts. Not without flaws -2-handed Fighters/DW were sketchy, and there was no alt builds for Wardens, but I rolled a DPS Paladin and had a pretty good time being the only thing that needed healing.
>>44036666
>Hybrids were fun. I liked that better than the original multiclassing. I think there was an article in Dragon towards the end about how to do more traditional multiclassing though- like basically taking a level in something else when you level up instead of using feats. I have a character or two I'd love to redesign using that. I'm also totally not drooling over that thought, just fyi.
That article was a clusterfuck, basically amounting to "take whatever power you wish", which is exactly what 4e multiclassing wanted to avoid.
Also,
>traditional multiclassing
Only 3.x has the "level up in whatever" multiclass style.
I'd be running this if I could. Out of all of the editions of D&D, this was the easiest to DM. I just don't have the time between classes, and a part time job.
>>44036714
You didn't even mention swordmages, the most different of all defender classes, the only one who could choose to do no damage with their mark punishment...
Even if they were mostly used as multiclass fodder for strikers looking to get their amazing epic utility or their stupidly good paragon path
>>44019799
Monsters in 4e had a problem where they and the PCs both got hitpoints pretty fast, but the monsters' damage lagged way behind the PCs'. It made for very boring fights once you left the early levels. MM3 to some extent corrected for this by trading a bit of that defense for offense, although the game still got easier as you leveled regardless.
>>44020587
This. Plus, I've never seen an open world game that wasn't buggier than a cheap motel. RPGs? Just slightly behind that. Combine both, and well..
>>44036729
Not true, 5e does as well, as does some other, non-DnD games, like Legend of the Five Rings
>>44036708
Ouch, Bladesingers.
I wanted that too work so bad. Can't lie, full out marked out...
Ach, the pain.
>>44036713
Surely. I don't mind at all.
>>44036687
They did at least conceptually make a pretty good "Sniper" class. Fire big ass shots long distances and dance around with Reactions when danger got close.
I tried one -took that background that gave the characters silver weapons for free- and fluffed her as a Moonshae (Celtic) Werewolf Hunter -awful accent and all, but when the dice went cold things got kinda sad.
>>44036734
>Monsters in 4e had a problem where they and the PCs both got hitpoints pretty fast, but the monsters' damage lagged way behind the PCs'. It made for very boring fights once you left the early levels. MM3 to some extent corrected for this by trading a bit of that defense for offense, although the game still got easier as you leveled regardless.
mm3 literally traded no defense. Just upped the damage charts a bit.
>>44036731
I didn't!
My fail. Totally glossed over them. Also SM's had some cool concept synergies with Eladrin and Genasi. Plus a no-armor Int based elemental Defender?
Some serious cool points there.
>>44036743
>5e has 3.x style multiclassing
This does not surprise me.
>>44036743
>5e
>traditional
You can't really use that as a justification since it came out after 4e. Level-by-level multiclassing should've died with 3.x
>>44036672
Short people need love too.
>>44036762
It works a bit better than it did in 3.5, because feats are tied to class level rather than character level
Oh, for non-starter classes what about the divine controller?
The Invoker.
>>44036714
I had to look up Seeker because that's just horrible if true. A lot of it is against AC, but at least their powers have the Weapon keyword which balances it out (AC is usually two points higher than NAD's, and Weapon Keyword adds +2 or +3 to the Attack Roll, so it should balance out).
From PHB3, I kinda liked Psion and Runepriest but that was just me.
And I think Paladins were more Defense+Radiant Synergy. I think it was easier to get them to a higher AC than the other classes and were just a pain to kill, moreso than the other two. I'd say the paladin is more "unkillable" than the Warden, but the Warden was the best at shaking off effects. I think Warden had a little more starting health too, it's been a while.
>>44036776
I know people who didn't want to play 4e because it lacked level-by-level multiclassing alone
They were fine with all classes getting powers, they understood what healing surges actually are instead of thinking that they're free healing, they were happy to see utility being granted to all classes instead of just spellcasters and specific skill monkeys, but they wqould just not play any DnD that didn't let them use levels as a point-buy system
>>44036798
I like the idea, and seperating the SMITE THE HEATHENS spells out from Cleric did make things easier for WOTC to keep them from having a CoDZilla Scenario, but I never actually played an Invoker. I don't think it's possible to play one without shouting about UNBELIEVERS BURNING IN RIGHTEOUS FIRE though.
>>44036729
Even still, it made it much less of a feat tax if you wanted to make something focused on specific theme or concept, which I appreciated.
>>44036812
Wardens always had the most health
highest starting health and highest increase in health per-level, by level 20 a warden with 10 constitution would have higher health than a fighter with 20 constitution and the toughness feat
>>44036822
Malediction invokers are my favourite controllers
No need to shout about blasphemy when your quietest words shake their very souls.
the malediction powers are just awesome
>>44036746
Ooh, I like the idea of a sniper. I bet a Seeker/Ranger would be fun to play like that...
>>44036730
I feel your pain. Law school is kicking my butt time-wise. (I really should be studying right now). I'm hoping it gets better my last semester but man, life gets in the way. I suddenly understand those older guys in my gaming groups a lot better.
>>44036760
I think we skipped over Battleminds too.
There's also that Essentials stuff, but most of it is more of the same or like, the weird Defender/Striker Hybrid stuff.
>>44036819
Jesus Christ how horrifying.
>>44036798
>>44036822
I played a Paladin/Invoker hybrid for a while. I'd love to play a full on Invoker sometime. I may steal that religious fanatic approach though lol
One of my favorite 4e combos I used on a character
>Warlock, minimum level 10
>Take Destiny Inversion
>Destiny Inversion: Immediate Interrupt
>Trigger: An attack hits you
>Effect: You take no damage from the triggering attack. Instead, you take ongoing damage equal to half the triggering attack's damage.
Follow up with either
>Fortune Binding
>2d8+COn psychic damage. You end one effect on you a save can end, and the target gains that effect until the end of your next turn.
Great if you have any way to stretch EoNT effects out.
Or if you really want to be a dick:
>Armor of Sudden Recovery
>Daily, Minor Action: Use this when suffering ongoing damage. The ongoing damage ends and you gain regeneration equal to the amount of ongoing damage until the end of the encounter.
The look on my DM's face was priceless when I basically had regen 50 for an encounter once.
What do you think about Obsidian's announcement that they're working on a BG-type game using 4E rules?
>>44036910
Pillars of Eternity didn't work out that well though
>>44036910
Do what now? This is the first I'm hearing of it. I'd LOVE a 4E-based game though. (I think Neverwinter was technically based on 4E a bit, but it was kinda meh for me. It wasn't bad, it just didn't hold my interest.) They did a decent showing on the second KOTOR game so I'd probably play that pretty hard.
>>44036942
Nah, it was Pillars
>>44036948
Aww. Bummer. I looked it up and Pillars was some random system they created. I'll just sit and wait patiently and HOPEFULLY, maybe, get a 4E game someday.
>>44036812
Controllers were, and probably remain, my blind spot. I couldn't find a Wizard build I could fall in love with.
No, not a build -a concept. Something that wasn't "Teh Wizard" and that did cool things with spectral blades.
...
I had a lot riding on Bladesinger. It's sad.
As for Seeker I might have been thinking about their At-Wills targeting AC, if not all their powers. Seekers also had a real lack of rider effects -if I missed, I got nothing at all instead of generating a zone or the like.
So, thing I noticed that I came to love about 4E:
Each grouping -Martial, Arcane, Divine, etc, had a kind of mechanical theme.
Martial was about focusing fire and manuevering. Warlords to generate more attacks, Rangers and Rogues to attack from all angles, and Fighters front and center being the sticky obstructive thing.
Weaknesses were general bro-level tactics -stick together to thrive because people who tried to go solo got picked off. And while everyone packed some kind of effect nobody was an actual Martial Controller.
Martial got 2 Strikers for that instead.
Divine was about straight effects and Radiant stuff.
Paladin mark? Damage. Lots of it with no fail attached. No attack roll, no save, no quarter.
Cleric? Heal. Heal. Heal some more. No real sexy riders, but didn't matter. Divine was a wall of Radiant powers and plate armor. Divine marched up to the door and kicked the fucker in. Everything would die -the only question was who would get the killing blow.
Weaknesses? Control. No freakin' Control. Even Avengers tended not to slow targets when they could instead run them down.
Arcane was all about control and elemental synergies, but lacked durability.
Nobody wanted to be the front line -even Sword Mages tended to Mark one thing and go stand in front of another.
Arcane used blasts and terrain effects and delaying tactics to shoot things dead.
>>44036978
Your point on the divine kind of falters when invokers get an AoE stun at level 1
Not daze, stun, that's far harder control than any other controller at level 1
>>44036887
I played a Deva Avenger refluffed as a Sisters of Battle Repentia.
Straight-ALLAH AKBAR charged into combat, Covenant of Retributon lol, ranted about sin and ungodliness and how the Prime Material was such a pit of depravity compared to the beauty and harmony and ORDER of the heavens, and was generally a ham.
Had a good time though, and was funny watching other people react when I also gave away tons of gold and did the most heroic things I could find to do because starving wretched peasants are ALSO sinful in the eyes of Tyr!
Smite the wicked! Tear down the blasphemous! FEED THE WEAK! CLOTHE THE FORGOTTEN! rAAAaaa-
>>44036870
Losing my Defender cred here, shit. Battleminds. Haven't even got a place to start on them.
>>44036957
The F2P MMO Neverwinter is kinda 4E based-ish if you squint. Has At-wills and Encounters and the like on cool downs. Is set in Forgotten Realms.
Not a bad game for the time the download takes.
>>44037030
That's probably because battleminds are kind of weird, and sort of fail at their own job of defending without some serious optimisation thanks to being as sticky as WD-40
>>44032522
>The problem that 5e DID fix was extremely long combats...
In terms of real time length, maybe, but it was at the cost of anything approaching tactical combat. In terms of how long a fight takes in rounds, no, and that's just as important - 5E monsters have 3E HP and 5E PCs have damage that's barely better than 2E's. Unless you're a spellcaster, there's not a whole lot of impact to each action.
>>44019643
i'm getting ready to run a level one game this weekend but am not sure what would be good.
looking for any level one pdfs please
>>44036942
If it was Divinity: Original Sin style I'd be all over that. That game was my GotY for 2014 and its enhanced edition is my GotY for 2015 almost solely because it's the closest thing anyone's ever made to a genuine 4E CRPG.
>>44037023
Fair point.
IIRC that was a daily, too.
True that the Divine Controller was worthy of the job, but compared to Martial and Arcane who could get CC at-wills and encounter powers...uh...at will Divine was falling behind.
>>44036978
Oh, and finally Primal.
Primal is about straight strength.
Barbarians? Striker damage, Defender toughness -get out there and fuck their shit.
Wardens? Wade in and smack them around. Give the enemy 2 losing choices -attack me and get nowhere, or attack the Barb and experience the literal Rage Boner.
Shaman just hang in the back making life better for everyone.
I didn't get a lot of time on the Druid, but it seemed like the Wildshape Druid could do double-duty as a controller/striker while the Guardian Druid mostly got to say she wasn't a furry.
Primal's weaknesses? Poor collective synergies.
Most everything's Physical damage.
Everyone is either a beatstick or twig.
Thaneborn Barbs were kinda meh for being the "follow me!" Barbarian.
Primal at full throttle is a front line of frothing murder that's only loosely an actual party. Everyone can do their thing damn good without much real support, but they also lack the collective burst-y flow of Martial.
So anyway, might be blowing smoke up my own ass but that's the picture that I gradually found.
Each Archetype had a mechanical theme and I dug it.
I liked that Divine was a marching wall of sacred might and radiant death -with Monks and Avengers marauding around the flanks.
I liked that Martial was maximum tacticool looking to carve out the enemy's heart step by step.
I LIKE that Primal is just "WAAAAAAGH RIP AND TEAR"; fucking 4E Barbs just _feel_ good. More Charging, more Raging, more BFS's.
And I respect that Arcane's solution is More Fire.
Got too much Fire? Nope. Admix that shit with some Force/Acid. Got no where to go and no reason to hurry -ask the Bard to bust out that dope heroic poetry while we watch the enemy melt under a rain of abyssal frogs.
>>44037052
Probably.
I have a shamefully strong grudge against Psions from 3.X.
Did play an Ardent for a bit tho', wasn't bad. Just wasn't...distinctive.
Was rules-heavy, and felt like a lot of melee basics.
>>44037074
I've heard good things about The Slaying Stone adventure, but don't have a pdf handy. And whatever you do, don't touch Keep on the Shadowfell.
>>44037138
Even if it was a daily, it was still one of only two level 1 stunning powers in the game, alongside the monks stunning palm, which is single target as opposed to AoE
>>44037167
is keep on the shadowfell hard? bad? to complex to run for a first time?
just found the slaying stone pdf, is this fun, easy to run, enjoyable?
>>44037174
Ouch.
Fair enough, nothing to trifle with.
>>44037030
I played Neverwinter for a while. I think what I liked best was the fan-made dungeons. I think that's probably the best thing I've ever seen in an MMO. I'd love if more games gave you that option.
(Also, love Deva. I tend to be drawn towards stuff that are super "good" or super "evil" like Deva, Tiefling, Divine Classes, Warlocks, etc.)
>>44036978
Honestly the best Wizard build I came up with that I liked was technically a Hybrid+Multiclass so I'm kinda right there with you.
I think I'm pretty much with you on Martial, Divine, and Arcane.
>>44037138
Primal- I'd say toughness in general is there thing. They tend to be more durable than their other counterparts.
As far as synergy goes, they have great synergy with non-Primal classes. I know one campaign I DM'd had a Shaman and a Rogue in it. I don't think the Rogue ever attacked WITHOUT Combat Advantage.
Also, I love that the Radiant Mafia is a thing.
I'll have to think about Psionics. I don't think I've played enough with those to determine general strengths/weaknesses.
>>44037074
I've run a couple of times the adventure in the Red Box. It's a pretty basic dungeon but the rooms are interesting.
>>44037067
Oddly enough, it seems like my groups spent more time in combat in 5E than in 4E. Granted, I was running the 5E Encounters modules compared to my own campaigns for 4E, so that might affect it, but the 5E module was just a lot of hack and slash.
>>44037074
Level one characters or level one adventures? It looks like adventures but I want to make sure.
>>44037081
I'll have to look that one up when I get the chance.
>>44037192
KotS is mostly boring. It's a big-ass dungeon with little to do except dungeoning. There is a pretty hard encounter near the beginning that was notorious for causing many TPKs, but I don't recall it being particularly hard otherwise. But it's linear and long, with room after room of combat and little else.
You can probably salvage something by taking away some of the encounters and trying to dig deeper into the story of the place, but I don't know if it's worth the effort.
>>44037156
For what it's worth, 4E is VERY MBA-friendly. You can get all sorts of crazy damage or effect bonuses on MBA's from feats and magic items.
>>44037199
Same.
Clarity of nature and purpose is a good baseline character motivator.
"Why am I here? To smite the wrong and defend the right. Bring me your gut-twisting ethical dilemmas for I sleep too soundly!"
>>44036978
Oh, right -Seekers, the Martial Controller.
Still more of the same. Decent alone, but very good at making life miserable for one specific thing. A target with a Fighter and a Seeker on it can lose all it's movements options to at-wills alone.
Seekers also got to bring some Elemental effects and some decently large damage dice thanks to being gear-based.
Still were a weak Controller, but at least they fit the Martial schema.
Yeah had it's dogs ("another article on Dwarves/Dragonborn?!) and feat taxes and feat bloat and Blackguards were a crappy core class and on and on...
But goddamn did it do what it intended to.
....
Been good talking about something non-toxic for once. Something not about rehashing a grudge or trying to dress up some old-as-Vecna's-balls prejudice in "2 edgy 4 u" pseudo-logic.
This, this is what being a fa/tg/uy community is about. Being heroic, fighting for a worthy cause, banding together. The adventure isn't about the reward, it's about the brotherhood.
Or sisterhood.
Hey, bring your sister next time, Anon. She's hot. And into Cheetoh Fingers, right?
>>44037258
Yes, but the best way to optimise your MBAs is still to be a half-elf and to take eldritch strike as your dilletante power
>>44037258
And then add a Warlord to the party, and watch the DM sigh as he tries to figure out a way to make enemies immune to basic attacks.
I liked the idea of your Fort, Ref, and Will being passive defenses rather than having to roll saving throws for them
I'd take it a step further and have Reflex basically replace AC, essentially making it a "Dodge" stat
>>44037192
Personally, it's been fun enough when I ran bits of it. You can always change it up a bit if needed. The important thing is to use the corrected numbers. I want to say they made an updated version (as a pdf maybe?) or released Errata for it. The Penny Arcade/PVP Podcasts based on it were pretty enjoyable too. You can always listen to those and decide if it's an adventure you want to run or not.
>>44037272
That's basically what Reflex is now, by my understanding. Reflex is dodging, AC is the armour just taking the blow.
>>44037265
And even then, you still have some good options for mixing it up or playing against type.You get some good range but with a very distinctive feel.
If you can find a girl to lick the Cheeto off your fingers, she's either a keeper or really creepy (and the two are not mutually exclusive)
>>44037282
I'd rather convert AC into damage reduction and make Reflex the new AC
>>44037267
>>44037269
True, but it makes it a bit easier for those that want to play a Battlemind but not feel like they're too outclassed in combat. I love that in 4E, you can play as the "sub-optimal" classes and still be fine. You can find all sorts of fun ways to make them work- don't have to play the best possible character every time.
My FLGS still plays it and I had no trouble selling all my books once my gaming group disbanded.
So, there are some people out there.
>>44037229
Psionics....super specialists, maybe?
Battleminds could be very durable, but couldn't Strike for crap.
Psions were manipulative, but not very deadly...?
My Ardent was a pretty decent Leader and could slap vulnerabilities on things, but I never could work out how to hit worth a crap. Which was weird for having like +5 to damage on a d8 with a 19 crit at level 8 or so.
That's not inconsequential, but I sure don't have any strong feelings about it.
I don't remember the Psionic striker.
You couldn't kill a BM. Couldn't escape a Psion. Couldn't out-recover an Ardent.
But...that was it. Like Martial, but more extreme in strengths without the versatility.
Cogs turning without error, but without brilliance either.
Hmm.
>>44037258
Oh, no doubt.
I suppose I was musing on the lack of...oomph. Like, I new what I was doing, how I was doing it, when and why, but I never really felt like I had a strong direction.
My Warlord was Inspiring to the core -more heals, more front line leadership, more "Be Awesome Comrade For I Am Awesome with my 21 Charisma and 9 Intelligence and together we will drill that pierces the heavens or whatever!"
My friend's Shaman was that creepy guy with the loincloth and the bone rattle that just caused nasty things to happen -never really bombastic, but always consequential.
My Ardent felt...mechanical.
Spend PSP's.
Attack.
Hit? Give out Temps/bonus damage.
Miss?
20 go to 10.
>>44037358
Psionic Striker is the Monk, who's all crazy combination Attak+Move Actions to flip all over the room and kick three dudes at once.
>>44037358
The psionic strikers were monks
Utterly amazing at multi-target and the most mobile class in the game, but are worse at single-target striking than fighters and strength-based paladins
>>44037337
That's good to hear. Mine is seriously lacking in 4E books. I have all the major stuff, but it'd be nice to fill out a few of the edges.
I do have two copies of one of the Forgotten Realms... Campaign Guides, I think? I was planning on taking it up to mine so they can find a way to give it away (and maybe drum up some 4E interest.)
>>44037318
Also this.
And no stat penalties was damn nice.
It was possible to be sub-optimal (Pixie Barbarian!) but there wasn't the "useless ass Fighter who bought the 15 strength at character creation" syndrome either. Also less dramatically pathetic dump stats (6 int, 6 cha 1/2 ork lolz).
Also Annette Rat-stabber the Pixie Barb was nothing to fuck with. Just sayin'.
Bitch could fly up your ass and Howling Strike your colon with that Dire Spider fang rapier of hers, fly out your throat eating a chunk of your liver, too.
>>44037358
Maybe Psionics just have good utility but are lacking in damage. That seems to be the vibe I'm getting from them (Monk included- they were definitely lower on the Striker totem pole but had great mobility and the like, a la >>44037365 and >>44037368).
>>44037368
>>44037365
Oh, right -thanks.
Thought Monks were Divine for some reason... but no, they were in PHB 3.
Yeah. Time to pack it in....
>>44037385
pixie brawling fighters are fun too
you can't make a grab attempt against something two sizes larger than you, but if an ability has the rider effect that says you grab the target, that doesn't apply, so pixies can grapple dragons no problem. AND IT IS AMAZING
>>44037392
What was the other class in PHB3? The four Psionic classes, Seeker, and... was it Runepriest?
>>44037385
side note, 15 str fighters are fine in 3.x, the best fighters have a wide range of stats
int, dex, cha, and str, most damage bonus is power attack anyway
tier 4 at best and odious to build but the finished product is decent
>>44037385
I was getting ready to say something like :You gotta admit though, there's something EPIC about being a Pixie Barbarian and whaling on people" but you already have an example- that's EPIC!
I think I remember... an article? A video? About them asking at a con who played a Halfling Barbarian when the... PHB2? came out. They commented on how awesome it was that there were more hands up than they expected. I love the weird Class/Race combinations.
>>44037396
yes
runepriests were a good idea, choosing different riders on their powers based on which rune-state they were in, but like seekers, they got no fucking support
>>44037417
Coming at the end of the cycle when they were already starting to ramp up for 5e kind of screwed those classes over.
>>44037396
Rune Priest, yeah.
Maybe.
Sold my PHB 3 for drugz (not really) way back in the day.
Kept my PHB 2 though.
3 did have Minotaurs and Wilden tho'.
>>44037399
The ones I knew best were super-zerkers who bought the 18 out the gate and just kept going. Eventually had like a 5 AC thanks to a campaign feat, but dished out ~250 a round if he got his whole sequence.
True that a rounded Fighter with Spring Attack and some capacity with a bow was nothing to laugh at. Or Improved Disarm and a Spiked Chain. While Large.
>>44037392
I'm sure you could flavor one as more of a Gregorian monk.
>>44037395
I'm picturing Tiamat getting grappled by a Pixie and screaming about how she can't escape.
>>44037396
I actually have it right here (since I had to look up the Seeker AC thing earlier) and yes, it's Runepriest.
(I always get Runepriest and... blast, what was it? One of the other Leaders confused. But I checked the book again just to be sure so we're good).
>>44037358
>Battleminds could be very durable, but couldn't Strike for crap.
Hammer
of
Blows
It had 5 hits in 1. It deals a stable 50 damage as an at-will when you get it, and prones to boot.
>>44037399
I actually went with max 16 stats on a Paladin in 4E during character creation. Never noticed any problems with attacks and it was nice having the extra points in my NAD's.
>>44037365
>>44037368
Wouldn't have minded a PP using psionic striker desu.
>>44037396
>>44037447
Artificer! I get Runepriest and Artificer mixed up sometimes. I had this awesome thing made up for Sigils for a character I never got to play and it's the Sigils and Runes that'd I'd get mixed up.
>>44037473
damage-focused battleminds do work
you just sort of forget you are supposed to be a defender and go nuts with damage instead
Also the wilder theme was the incredibly half-assed attempt at giving us something that kinda-sorta is a PP-using striker
>>44037442
The 4e version of Minotaurs always struck me as something begging for finding a way to cheese the fuck out of that "gore" attack they got.
>>44037484
Artificers were introduced in the eberron player's guide, which came out quite a bit before the PHB3
>>44037416
No doubt.
A buddy of mine played a 3.X Halfling Barb who earned the name "The Kneecapitator."
GOOD times! He retired him after a while though; didn't scale so neatly.
Annette's story was that she got too drunk to fly, fell into a Dire Spider's (was actually a common bird-eating spider but it looked really huge) web, tore her wings apart fighting out of it, and ended up killing that bastard by tearing out one of it's fangs bare-handed.
Ann nearly drowned in it's ichor as she rammed holes through it's abdomen, but that's how it had to happen.
That kind of story doesn't get you invited back to Equestria; time to flit off to the human bar and start pestering people about work...
>>44037441
I remember that.
It was also a sour joke that, at least at my location, 4E started an accelerated death when 5E was "just around the corner!"
Yeah.
Two years of "just around the corner."
>>44037491
I knew a kid who did that.
Got nerfed eventually though.
>>44037448
I'm...not sure I actually read that.
Oh well, time to call it a night.
>>44037503
Doesn't mean I didn't get the two classes confused. Never got to play them for any extended period of time.
I did play a Deva... Artificer, I think? For a short period of time. Oddly enough, it was a random table role for a DARK SUN game based on that Spartacus show. I found a way to make it work too, and the DM had a great sort of vignette for us to play with. Like, it took place back before Dark Sun lost all it's gods and went all dessert-y. Had us with the guy who wound up being the BBEG (who was supposed to be responsible for making the setting like it was, and there was a machine or something involved- it's been a while since that game or since I went over Dark Sun lore, sorry). Natrually I died and reincarnated waaaaay later.
>>44037491
You can do a LOT with MBA's and charging in 4E. You can make it cheesier than nachos.
>>44037505
I love "Kneecapitator"
I'm sure a lot of things look big to a Pixie. (And yes, I realized how dirty that probably is after I typed it). So did she make a rapier out of the fang or was it literally just a fang?
Yeah, I kinda wished they had kept up with more 4E support. Their website seemed pretty dead in the time leading up to 5E too, even with Next and the like. I know it's probably hard to work on development for two games at once but still.... it would've been nice.
>>44037532
A character with no race and no class with the right feats can actually do pretty damn good damage just via charge attacks in 4e
>>44037562
[bad pun] Then just think of what you could accomplish with a little class! [/end bad pun]
You know what would be fun? A 4E character thread. Like, just us making and posting characters and backstories, swapping stories about characters we played, maybe even making one together (like the way they do stuff in quest threads). Just a thought
>>44036672
At least Incase draws lots of lewd shortstacks
>>44037640
Ain't nothing wrong with that!
It took a lot of self-control not to ask for the lewd version of >>44036587
>>44019727
renewed intrest in 4e is a side effect against the fact people are starting to see the shit in 5e.
>>44037677
Here you go!
>>44037692
I gave 5E a try, I really did! But I just didn't like it as well as 4E.
>>44037629
You know what? I think I may roll up a character later just for the heck of it. It's been a while, and I need to do something creative. I just need to decide what to make...
>>44037629
You should start one
>>44037265
Seekers were primal controllers. Hunters, the post essentials ranger subclass, was the closest to a martial controller the game had.
>>44038470
Apropo hunters, can you believe that one of my players is bitching that proning as a ranged at will is not strong enough?
Well, technically he's bitching about no AoOs on standing up, but my point stands, I think.
>>44039566
proning at range does kind of suck without grounding shot
>>44039629
you do get to deny melee fighters their attacks if you make sure they can't charge
>>44039629
It has moderate tactical usage, but yeah it's definitely not a damage-improving ability.
>>44019727
In that thread I argued against the anon pointing out that 4e was a large revenue hit and had unsustainable profit for WotC when compared to the cost of its advertisement and production, I even questioned your spurces hurriedly, I was rushed to go into work and I'm sorry.
It was a misunderstanding and I agree with you.
>>44039942
I think that was me. No worries man.
>>44034112
Genasi blaster wizard, or tiefling (fire) blaster wizard. Like a sorcerer gensais can add a second ability mod (STR) damage to all their attacks, making them THE muscle wizards. Tieflings can get similar static buffs to their fire powers through feats, and access to a feat in epic which turns stuns into dominates. Why wizards? Massive area attacks, and adding static modifiers (much like sorcerers can) through feats.
In the striking game you either win out by making tons of attacks (or bursts), accurate attacks, and powerful attacks. Static modifiers are king for the last approach.
Sorcerers are good, and excellent if optimized, but wizards can just kick ass with the right feat support. I particularly like storm sorcerers, shit just gets silly. I also believe the current reigning DPR king is a dragonborn sorcerer cheese build.
>>44036746
Just make a swordmage and mc wizard. Grab a wand of bladesong (it is a level 1 encounter power) for your offhand. Then grab more wands of bladesong.
I may have a thing for wands.
>>44036902
Amazing.
>>44040595
Sorcerers get loads of fun stuff, especially with their paragon paths
Blizzard is the most fun level 20 daily, the dragon guardian bonuses on close bursts are hilariously fun to use, lightning fury's just get an absolutely amazing array of powers and features and arcane wellspring is wonderfully thematic
>>44040652
Or, forget that the book tells you to build int/dex and build str/dex instead, and forget that the book tells you that you're a controller and play like a striker instead.
Bladesingers are actually better than binders, vampires, O-assassins and even witches and sha'ir, but you just have to remember that the book is fucking lying to you and trying to make you build them wrong
>>44040692
Oh, I know. Just itching to play the pixie storm sorc I have brewed... pixies are just the best.
Blizzard is silly as hell but I've never gotten to the level to actually get it. Still prefer lightning fury.
>>44036572
Not really, since 5E is pretty good too.
>>44040863
pixies are terrifying strikers so long as the stats line up for them, goblin totem weapons are like staffs of ruin for them
>>44019643
My group played 1 campaign in 4e, then moved to pathfinder and 5e.
I really wish we could go back for a bit, I enjoyed 4e the most and wanted to play a Knight subclass
>>44040951
knight, unfortunately, sucks.
It's a side-effect of how 4e did defenses, if your main two stats are strength and constitution, dexterity and intelligence, or charisma and wisdom, you suck, always
>>44040717
Oh god vampires. What the fuck were they thinking. Not that any of those others are much better.
>>44040717
The fact that the bladesinger's only damage feature (bladesong) is so easily poachable makes me personally favor the wand approach. Stacking damage features from two striker classes can be FUN, though wand proficiency may require a multiclass. (Only warlocks, bards, wizards and artificers get them)
>>44040932
Makes an awesome offhand weapon with two-implement spellcasting. A +6 gives +12 damage in addition to your main hand +6 lightning lancing dagger.
>>44041095
an eldritch strike warlock with bladesong and the academy master paragon path has the most terrifying MBAs
>>44040652
wand of bladesong?
what?
>>44041184
The list of wands presented in the phb are non-exhaustive. Every non-capstone encounter power of every class can be a wand. For 680 gp you can get a wand of any level 1 encounter power*, which allows you to use said power 1/day. But you can carry multiple wands...
*of a wand using class
>>44041095
I've moved on to 5e, but god did I love the defenders in this edition. Nothing was more fun that watch my DM struggle to do anything against us while I locked down half his baddies.
>>44041322
Cough cough skald's aura, words of friendship, etc. Level 1 features are a goldmine, especially ones that don't require specific attributes to use effectively (majestic word, etc.)
>>44038043
I may have to.
>>44039819
Well, technically, it is if there's a melee attacker in the party. If memory serves, there was a bonus to attack prone enemies with melee attacks and accuracy increases DPR.
>>44040595
Sorcerer, really? I thought it was still Ranger, to be honest. I guess it's been a while since I've been tot he CharOp boards. I'm assuming there's a presumption that the Sorc can hit multiple targets reliably for it?
There any way to get the character builder that Wizards made for D&D Insider subscribers offline?
>>44019643
when we play D&D we play 4e instead of the other editions or pathfinder. No one in my area likes 5e, I don't know anyone who plays it or even has the books.
>>44040982
At least you get the extra HP with Con, which helps make up for sub-par defenses. And there's feats you can take to help with that but feat taxes suck.
>>44041642
It was a pure cheese build based on machine gunning dragon breaths...among other things. I can't remember exactly how he did it, but it was pure cheese.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?468970-DPR-King-Candidates-3-0/page6&p=6739654&viewfull=1#post6739654
AHA, found it. 14.6 KPR average. Wew. Of course it was a damn revenant. Pure cheese: the race.
>>44041322
There's usually easier ways to get power bonuses (which don't stack) and I'm not sure that works since the utility doesn't have a level (at least according to your picture).
>>44041669
I think you can still download the offline version if you look around, but I don't think you can get the online version they switched to with the more recent stuff.
>>44040883
Hah. You wish.
>>44041322
Are you sure you can do that even with non-leveled class powers?
>>44041818
CBloader. You can get EVERYTHING on the old builder.
>>44041818
I know it exists, I have a version using CBloader that has even a good amount of essentials stuff.
Unfortunately I got my wotc.index file off of someone's personal website, and I think they took the .xml files down since then (this was about a year and a half ago). But I presume this shit still exists somewhere.
>>44019643
>I see daily 5e threads but 4e seems completely dead,
That's what cancer does to you.
>>44041893
Pic
>>44041794
This is absolutely true. These bonuses tend to be smaller at each tier, however. Take the quintessential power bonus item: iron armbands of power. The level 6 version gives a +2 power bonus, while bladesong gives +5 and +2 to attack rolls. The highest level version gives +6, at the cost of a level 26 item, while bladesong gives +15, for 680 gp.
Now, clearly bladesong has its limits, namely the fact that it doesn't last long. But nothing stops you from using both (though not at the same time). You only have to apply the higher bonus.
>>44041794
This I have no idea. I'm not the one to come up with the idea, but the * is worrisome. It hasn't been errata'd, so make of that what you will. Wands aren't exactly gamebreaking, due to their cost and the fact that they work 1/day each. The best use imo is out of encounter healing via a wand of skald's aura. Here you don't have to worry about the power's terrible action economy.
>>44041893
I misread as "non even leveled". I am a retard. The "or lower" clause is interesting though.
>>44042025
True, but there's plenty of items that give the bonus for the entire encounter, for every encounter, without the cost of an action. Likewise, there's plenty of powers that will give power bonuses.
To compare it to the Iron Armbands of Power (since you picked that one- which gives and Item Bonus, not a Power Bonus, just fyi), a +2 Bonus for 2 Encounters, each lasting 5 Turns (I'm going pretty minimal here) is going to be double the damage bonus (20 versus 10) that you'd get from Bladesong once per day.
I think if you're going for damage, there's probably better, more cost-effecient ways to go about it. If it's an RP thing though, have at it.
How much of a lesser experience is getting the 5E starter pack compared to jumping straight into the full game?
