Starting topic: How would you go about converting 4e into mecha?
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]"
>>47343473
nice pic op
>>47343505
pls no bully
>>47343473
Stop stealing the 4e general thread format from Touhoufag.
>>47343473
The re-flavouring is easy, the hard part is figuring out how to deal with different capabilities of the pilot inside and outside the suit. Some savage worlds 4e amalgamation could work.
>>47343582
a picture with the text of OP from previous threads?
>>47343598
>>47343473
Well if you want the pilot to be significant you could make two 4e characters - you can only just be using one at a time EG if you eject or enter the mech. Then introduce 2 'scales' of combat - man-sized and ..mech-sized
Then just have it so man-sized stuff cannot do shit to mech-sized objects, and mech-sized squashes man-sized.
>>47343709
It just seems strange for pilots to have the same combat mechanics as their mechs, especially if you pick a melee class. I think not being in the mech needs to be limiting so that players have more reason to want to pilot and fight stuff, otherwise it's just a question of scale.
>>47343859
If you want more uniqueness/flavor, then yeah same mechanics might erode that. Description could make up for it a lot, though.
Dunno if I'd call Savage Worlds necessarily more "limiting" versus 4e, though. The limiting would be more of scale - a dude can't blow up a mech, traditionally.
Unrelated to the suggested thread topic, but is the seeker really as bad as everyone online says it is?
Is it playable but subpar, or just completely unplayable bad?
If they're truly unplayable, how do you fix them?I just really like the idea of a weapon-based controller class.
>>47344669
Seeker is subpar, but not unplayable.
This actually makes them a pretty good choice for powergamers in groups without other powergamers assuming said powergamer doesn't want to play warlord. Because an optimised seeker isn't impressive enough to steal the spotlight from anyone else, but isn't pathetic enough to be left in the dust either
>>47345110
Any ideas on how to make em...less subpar? Or would that be a lot of effort?
>>47345135
I heard hybridizing them with rangers works pretty well. Can anybody confirm?
I'm not a fan of 4e, never was, but I grew to appreciate it more over the years as I played a 2 year campaign in it (not my choice, it's what my friends were playing).
I liked the 1/2 level to AC, I liked how the power system worked for spellcasters, I liked some other stuff about it.
Unfortunately WotC threw all that shit out with 5e, which is an okay game, but it could have used some lessons from 4e. Vancian casting sucks ass.
I dunno where I was going with this. Have a bump faggots.
>>47345135
Seeker's flaws are sort of in built into their mechanics. You could just pull a wizard and give them OP feats and powers. But since they're designed around the idea of "soft control" rather than "hard control" that might not fit with their theme
>>47345214
I'm in the exact same boat as you. I strongly opposed 4e on launch, but the more I looked at it (and the more I struggled to make pathfinder work), the more I liked it.
5e seems like a huge step backwards, as if WOTC caved to player complaints about 4e, and just built 3.75 without fixing all the problems inherent to 3.5.
>>47345214
I think my least favourite thing about 5e is that hit dice in 5e are exactly what 3.5 fans erraneously thought healing surges in 4e were. And no one seems to complain about that
Total newbie to 4e here:
Would it break the game if one were to use a form of 'Encounter Power Points' (EPPs) where you have an amount equal to the number of encounter powers you have, but these points can be expended to use any enc power at a 1:1 cost?
Like say you have 4 encounter powers, so you have 4 EPPs - you can use those EPPs to cast whichever encounter powers you want, including a single one 4 times (and use all 4 EPPs)?
The goal here is that I want a resource management similar to Psionic classes available to other classes - where you use points rather than slots, but other classes have more support and/or different ways of going about their roles than the Psionic ones do (eg AoE debuff/control versus single target debuffing), but I don't know enough to see how the balance would change. Slight worry they'd have too much versus Psionics.
>>47346220
That sort of doesn't work for most classes, because encounter powers come with levels, and each levels encounter powers are typically better than the level before.
Unless you're a rogue
>>47346296
Ah. Well, shit.
What's the rogue do that is special here? They get worse, or somethin'?
>>47347072
They don't reall get worse, they just get three obscenely good powers available to them at level 3. Low slash, darting strike and startling offensive. A pure melee rogue is likely to have all three from level 13 to 17, when startling offensive is likely to be dropped in favour of tumbling strike, and pretty much every rogue is likely to keep low slash forever, because low slash is just that good.
They also get snap shot at level 7 for ranged rogues, but ranged rogues can't really hold a candle compared to melee rogues
>>47345135
There's nothing wrong with not being optimal, it just makes the game more challenging. If the rest of your party isn't optimising you should keep up with them fine.
Also controllers are a fairly loose role description, alternatives could be melee warlock or bard, possibly swordmage, they've got a lot of controller in them.
By turning all classes, monsters, species and other NPCs into robots
Thus making a mon-genre game
Are there any 4e rules for Siege Weapons?
Due to the death of most of the forums, does anyone know what are considered 'Must have' feats for a crossbow artificer?
>>47352149
crossbow artificers need crossbow caster, eldritch fusillade expertise, and probably superior crossbow proficiency
There are no explicit rules for seige weaponry outside of a few construct monsters which have seige weaponry as attacks. But those attacks do give a fairly good idea of how seige weaponry should work, mostly using area bursts vs reflex which high damage and bonus damage against inanimate objects
>>47352413
>There are no explicit rules for seige weaponry outside of a few construct monsters which have seige weaponry as attacks. But those attacks do give a fairly good idea of how seige weaponry should work, mostly using area bursts vs reflex which high damage and bonus damage against inanimate objects
Right. Mostly wondering because players in the game I'm in are getting a fort put together so the chance of them needing the statline for a catapault or such is pretty high.
I imagine you'd treat them as a power in and of themselves, not just a weapon statline.
>>47352462
Treat it as a monster controlled by someone. So it has it's own physical stats, HP, AC and NADs, as well as it's own attacks, but needs an operator in order to do anything
>>47343473
In a 4e-smashed-into-mecha game (or more accurately Gamma World 7) I decided to use the minion mechanics and exceptional defenses for the components of a helicarrier-like superbomber as they raced against the clock to disable it while also fighting other mech units.
It was pretty goddamn fun.
So how do I break it gently to my players that by not covering at least each of the four roles they're going to gimp themselves tactically in a lot of encounters in the long run and that they're just general fucktards for not even wanting to talk about roles when they chose classes?
Further, how do I as GM try to mitigate this so they don't wipe in the first half dozen encounters of the campaign? DMG just says they'll need lots of potions and controllers/leaders on my side of the screen get a lot stronger. Is that accurate?
>>47353851
Specifically, they chose to triple-up on strikers, lucked out with a defender and controller just from people wanting the class and not the role, with no leader for support/healing.
How viable is it to run Mines of Madness in a campaign?
I don't nessecary want players to die but they double crossed a big evil npc and now is forcing them on a sucide mission.
I'm in two minds, I don't want my players to lose attached PCs but then again I want to see them struggle a lot.
>>47353859
You're fucked
In a group of 5, the only truly necessary role is leader. No defender leaves the group a bit more fragile, but plenty of other classes can take defender-like bulk and defenses, no striker makes combat take a while, but you can still win in the end, no controller is the most easily countered out of them all, because controller-secondary is the most common secondary.
But no leader is no healing, and no off-turn attacks. Limiting offense and defense terribly.
Try to convince them that they need a leader, any leader, even a fucking sentinel druid would do
>>47352564
Sort of like a vehicle?
>>47354479
Err, yeah, I forgot about vehicles
>>47354538
I think even the developers did. Adventurer's Vault style vehicles were mostly left behind, and the mounts just got more useless as the rules were updated.
Gear ideas for low paragon warlock, rogue and cavalier? Their players are slackers and DM asked for my input.
>>47353851
Let them die
>>47356017
I'd say let them come close to dying instead of TPKing.
>>47353851
They should be OK, as long as they keep their weapons, armor and neck pieces current. Giving them a short rest after every encounter and keeping their days down to three or four fights at most will ensure their survival, unless they get sloppy or your die get hot.
>>47356934
Or you throw a bunch of minions at the and let them get swamped
>>47345135
There was material that boosted them release in later dragon magazines. New powers that weren't shit and the pp moonrise stalker.
>>47347178
I always viewed tumbling strike as an upgraded low slash and kept startling offense cause it was an off-turn attack
>>47353851
Houserule in minor action healing potions that aren't shit, but can only be used once per encounter/character.
That's about all you need.
>>47354685
Has anybody here used vehicles? I only ever used a wagon and a couple of horses, but it didn't come up much in game play since the GM arbitrarily decided we couldn't take it with us. "The roads are too rough" he said.
>>47345581
Yeah but they're called "hit dice," therefore they don't threaten immersionational verisimilitude. Totally different.
>>47353851
I dunno, I played in a party of all strikers and we got by decently. Secret is to kill everything by round 3, and if it isn't dead run
>>47361108
pro strats
>>47356017
>>47356934
>>47358736
>>47361108
>>47353965
They kinda are fucked, aren't they? I'm leaning away from lots of houserules, and instead resigned to toning things down on the fly so they feel how hard stuff is without it being a party wipe right away and turning them off the game. I'm preparing for when the complaints that the system is bad, because fights are too hard, they can't outlast any monsters, and they have to let bad guys get away because they're limited in encounters per day, the calm and polite explanation that they've been intentionally playing not as intended.
Thanks for the responses guys, it's given me more to think about with my little conundrum.
>>47363414
What classes are they precisely? Some have a good enough secondary to fill a couple other roles
>>47364099
Defender: Warden
Controller: Druid
Striker: Monk
Striker: Sorcerer
Striker: Ranger
The Druid I've hinted at that the group could use some more support if he would consider the sentinel, as the group has some controller off-spec with the Warden and Monk, but before we reach that point the system gets blamed and it's totally no fault of the players for not talking about roles beforehand. The Sorcerer and Ranger are the least locked-in at this point so I could be surprised at what shows up on game night.
This is after I've asked everyone to collaborate on party creation, communicate with each other and keep an eye out for the roles and cohesion.
>>47364238
A life warden could patch up the lack of a leader a bit. All warden builds are kinda controllery.
>>47364238
A bard makes an excellent leader, depending on why the sorcerer is playing a sorcerer, you may be able to convince him to go bard
Which is better for a strength rogue? Daggermaster or shock trooper?
I have the character builder program, but patches only through 2009. I know I'm missing a bunch of content, as there's absolutely nothing from Essentials that I remember having in it years ago.
So anyone know of any more up-to-date resources for the builder?
>>47367362
https://rogue-elements.obsidianportal.com/wikis/offline-character-builder
>>47367507
I appreciate it man, but the content on that page isn't available anymore. I already tried it with my own google-fu :(
>>47367529
I guess this really has become impossible to find. Give me an hour, I'll upload what I have saved.
For the people that actually like 4e here, what issues do you have with the system?
>>47368780
That all the times I get to be a player the game falls apart.
>>47368780
That the game was built with a large digital component in mind, that was poorly supported and killed off because the replacement devs like Mike Mearls personally don't like digital support. The game can look so intimidating without the ease of a character builder, and after the murder-suicide set back development it never recovered.
It's my only gripe with the system per-say.
Most issues I have are purely the larger community more than anything in the system, laughing about it being an MMO and then going back to Pathfinder or 5e and then spending weeks working on homebrew content to rebalance issues without trying an alternative that doesn't have those problems. The only friends of mine that like 4e are the same friends that tried 4e, and can't go to other editions now because they feel tactically shallow, rules-vague and crazy imbalanced.
>>47367529
>>47367672
https://mega.nz/#F!Z5V12TAC!4agCR0niwAiECeriIYo2WA
Here's everything I got. Not sure if I'm missing anything. Sorry it took so long.
>>47368780
I never liked having to swap out powers as you level. I would've liked lower level ones to scale, like how they did with some dark sun theme powers.
Feat taxes were dumb and should've been built into character leveling.
Psionics needed more love, and I think monks would've been more uniform with the rest of the psionic classes. movement techniques as agmentable at-wills might've been cool.
They toyed around with at-will stances a lot in essentials, and I think that would've been a good idea to integrate into the larger game. Essentials in general was too divorced from the rest of the game and ended up a jumble of bad ideas with a few gems.I wish we had gotten a cleaned up 4.5 instead of 5e
>>47369405
>I think monks should've* been more uniform with the rest of the psionic classes.
>>47368780
I hate how there's no fix for how bloody awful every build that puts your main and secondary stats behind the same NAD is. Meaning that no character ever will be both strong and tough, or nimble and clever, or observant and convincing.
Also, improved defenses and the expertise feats are maths fixes, which is awful. Because it means that absolutely everyone needs to spend two feats on them, and not on things for your build or for fluff. What essentials did to the melee training feats was also rather bullshit.
Another thing that bothers me is utility powers, they're kind of supposed to be there as out of combat stuff, things your character can do for fluff reasons, but most have in-combat utility, which means a bunch of the fluffier ones just suck.
My other problems are problems 4e shares with 3.5. Like things that should be always possible being made impossible by default via the creation of a feat that makes them possible
>>47368780
I always thought the +1/2 level to lots of different roles kind of eclipsed individual strengths characters had. I know that stats and stuff are still important, but I didn't like how it felt like your "strengths" weren't really as emphasized as I would have liked.
>>47369405
I think rather than monks being more uniform, that they should have just made wilder a full class instead of a theme, and make it a power-point using ranged psionic striker
>>47369405
You're a gentlemen and a scholar, sir.
>>47369405
>>I wish we had gotten a cleaned up 4.5 instead of 5e
Me too, anon. Me too.
>>47369497
Fluffier everything sucked by comparison. The tribal feats, guild feats, RP utilities, etc were all eclipsed by options that made you better at killing things.
I think it would've served them well to expand of the role of backgrounds and reserve all those fluffier out of combat bonuses to strictly background feature bonuses.
>>47369497
>Like things that should be always possible being made impossible by default via the creation of a feat that makes them possible
Personally how I treated that is if a player wanted to mimic something an actual feature would've let them do, I ask for skill checks in addition to rolls to hit or whatever.
>>47369519
>>47369586
Exactly my problem
>>47369648
Because I like 4e monks as they are
Although i would rather like them to have some feats for fighting unarmed on par with the weapon style feats like crashing tempest, shielding whirlwind and starblade flurry. Because as it stands, the unarmed class is one of the worst melee classes at actually fighting unarmed. Fighters, Barbarians, Rangers and even Rogues all do it better
A player in my campaign is playing a warlock and it feels like his damage isn't really that good considering his role is a striker. The group fighter seems to do roughly the same kind of damage (when he actually hits). Is he playing warlock wrong somehow or have I somewhat misunderstood what striker actually means?
>>47369716
Warlocks are not actually strikers, they're controllers in disguise
You can build them as strikers, but they'll never be as good at it as a sorcerer, let alone something like a ranger
>>47369716
Warlock was one of the lower tier strikers and fighter was a high damage defender. The secret was that Warlock was actually a single target controller in disguise
>>47369764
>>47369737
Ah, that explains things.
>>47369497
>I hate how there's no fix for how bloody awful every build that puts your main and secondary stats behind the same NAD is. Meaning that no character ever will be both strong and tough, or nimble and clever, or observant and convincing.
Anybody have ideas to fix this?
>>47369773
On another note, how should the monsters prioritise targets when in combat? So far I've had them try to get past the fighter to gank on the warlock and cleric, but whenever they get marked by the warrior they stick to just hitting him most of the time.
>>47369773
But HOLY SHIT they are good controllers.
They get a save ends dominate in heroic tier. and a paragon path that makes their save ends effects nigh impossible to actually end if the warlock is within 5 squares of his target. They also get a boatload of dazes and stuns, an attack that explicitly makes the target "make a melee basic attack against the empty air" as their next standard action (thus triggering defender marks, as they made an attack against something that wasn't the defender), and even weirder shit
Is there any class that is really good at acid?
And isn't shit?
>>47369805
I use a lot of humanoids, and play them like they know what they're doing. They'll target high damage or support pieces and generally tarpit or slow down defending players. That said, players should feel good when using abilities like marking and whatnot, so as long as they're going out the monsters are going to answer those challenges.
When I use less intelligent stuff like undead or animals, it's standard first come first attacked service.
Over-all, I'll go more tactically heavy on my end if I want a combat to be harder too, and I'll just auto-pilot movement and attack to be whatever if fights are meant to be easy too.
>>47369805
You never have to honor a defender's mark, but a good defender will make you regret not doing so. Half the time when I play defender I want monsters to violate the mark so I can show off my fancy punishments and kill them faster.
>>47369801
I've been working on a homebrew thing that gives a class feature to every class that has a primary/secondary-under-the-same defense option to use their secondary stat to apply to a different NAD instead of the usual stats for that NAD.
Rageblood barbarians, battlerager fighters and earthstrength wardens get con to will. Stormheart wardens get con to reflex, clerics can use charisma instead of con or strength for fort defense, enlightened ardents to wisdom to reflex, chaladins got wisdom to fort, cunning sneak rogues to intelligence to will and prescient bards got a unique at-will power to add their wisdom to all NADs against one attack per round (which might be overpowered, haven't tested it, I just thought it looked fun)
>>47369805
Depends on the monster
zombies and skeletons and other mindless things just attack whatever's closest unless marked by a paladin or swordmage. Predators and similar beasts attack whatever looks the most frail, while intelligent creatures aim for high-value targets and are fully aware of what marks do and respond accordingly
>>47369842Refluffed fire wizards
>>47369805
Skirmishers try to gank the most dangerous person on the field, Brutes/soldiers want to keep tough guys and heavy hitters focused on them, artillery pins down whoever needs mobility to be effective. Leaders are entirely dependent on the monster. Some wanna hang back and orchestrate, others want to fight in the meat of things with their units
>>47369842
Black Dragon dragonborn sorcerer with nusemnee's atonement and ancient soul
works for all damage types that dragonborn dragon sorcerers can specialize in
>>47370058
>masochistic black dragonborn purposefully targeting allies and redirecting the damage at himself
>"This hurts me more than it hurts youand I love it"
Could be an amusing character
>>47368780
I absolutely despise feat taxes and the absurd cost of rituals. First thing I houserule is ritual costs and giving people the necessary feats for free.
>>47369939
>All those specific case houserules
That just makes me think there's something wrong with the core system that needs to be overhauled
>>47369405
Thank you kindly for the link!
>>47369832
Plus, there's Armor of Agathys at first level. That's a freaking amazing minion killer.
>>47371124
That was my point back here >>47369497
I don't really want to overhaul because I fucking love how it works most of the time. But most of the time isn't all the time.
That said, i think the best way to make a 4e-influenced game that isn't 4e would be to use make each stat apply to one defense and limit the total number of stats to three or four
Was in my twice monthly 4e game last night.
We ran with a Cavalier, a PHB/DP Pally and 2 PHB rogues. Got through about 4 trolls and a couple Oni in a lvl+2 fight.
Will now take an extended rest to level our characters before taking a dimensional portal from the Feywild to maybe the Far Realm (?!) Spoke to him about using the downtime to update my companions' gear. His response:
> much of what the party has missed in previous sessions would've require investigation more specifically than a general ransacking.
As if there's a better way to search than a four-six hour ransacking.
Rogue player called out to the "Nocturne Circle" which he claimed was from 2e. Never heard of it myself did any of you?
>>47371303
>Nocturne Circle
Isn't that an Elder Scrolls thing?
>>47371303
>"Nocturne Circle"
maybe from the realms. i've never heard of it though.
What's your favorite 4e race?
What's your favorite 4e monster?
>>47373774
Half-orcs. STR/DEX 4 lyfe
>>47373774
Half-elf
Tarrasque with its "Fuck your flight" aura
4.5 or we riot
>>47374988
Fund it.
>>47373774
>favorite race
...fuck, there are like a dozen.
I'll go with Thri-Kreen.
>Favorite Monster
Again, there are just so many...
I would have to go with, and I know this is kind of a cop-out, "Homebrew monsters"
Because 4E just made it so easy and so fun to come up with new bizarre creatures on the fly.
>>47366707
The Daggermaster is the better option from levels 11-15 due to an 18-20 critical range. The Shock Trooper can overtake it from level 16 onwards due to a more direct Dexterity modifier to damage. However, with actual critical optimization (e.g. Two-Weapon Opening), the Daggermaster can beat even the Shock Trooper at level 16+.
>>47369716
Warlocks are roughly 50/50 striker single-target controller. However, during the heroic tier, they can have +2d8 curse damage simply by taking Mindbite Scorn (requires the Sorcerer-King Pact) and Killing Curse. At paragon, they gain a great amount of versatility from Twofold Pact, and at epic, they effectively raise their damage output by their Intelligence modifier with Cursed Spells.
There are also a few miscellaneous optimization tricks that can be achieved with the Hellish Rebuke at-will power.
That said, the player may eventually have to come to terms with the fact that overall, a hybrid warlock is better than a pure-class warlock in a few respects, namely the separation of pact and choice of at-will powers. There is a reason why most optimized warlock builds are actually hybrids. (The same goes for the barbarian, really.)
>>47369801
All characters can add the lower of their Strength and Constitution modifiers to their Will in place of their Wisdom or Charisma modifier. Being a dwarf warden or taking the Crippling Crush feat revokes this privilege.
All characters can add the lower of their Dexterity and Intelligence modifiers to their Will in place of their Wisdom or Charisma modifier.
All characters can add the lower of their Wisdom and Charisma modifiers to their Fortitude in place of their Strength or Constitution modifier, save for Charisma paladins.
>>47371303
Two paladins and two rogues might just be viable in terms of overall party effectiveness, especially if the paladins use their respective healing abilities to compensate for the lack of a leader.
I've idly thought about converting 4E to use a dice pool. Any thoughts on how to do it?
>>47375456
For what purpose?
That is such a massive change to the game's underlying math, you might be better off bolting 4E's powers on to a system that normally uses dice pools.
>>47375418
What are some other classes that hybridize well?
I know that paladins hybridize well because of their marking mechanic, and that wizards hybridize well because you are only there for the powers rather than class features. What else?
>>47375514
Open to that too.
I just really like dice pools because they play faster in my experience, especially if you convert penalties to dice mods (For example, a Defender's Mark now removes two die from your attack pool, etc)
It sounds silly, but people rolling a d20 and then trying to add all their mods on can take a really long time. Sure, each individual instance of it is like 30 extra seconds, but it really adds up over the course of a session.
Fucking players...
>>47375611
Well, 4E's designers were really transparent about their math. And they basically worked the game's math out by starting with the damage output and to-hit probabilities they wanted players to end up with and worked backwards from there.
You might consider using AnyDice to find a dice mechanic that outputs the same results and use that.
>>47375546
The *truly* remarkable hybrid builds involve candidates such as:
Hybrid clerics, who gain Battle Cleric's Lore (free scale proficiency and a constant +2 shield bonus to AC, plus the ability to grant attack bonuses with healing powers) and a 1/encounter Healing Word.
Hybrid druids (sentinel), who gain a full-scaling animal companion and other benefits, such as a 1/encounter healing word.
Hybrid paladins (cavalier), who can have plate and heavy shield proficiency with a single Hybrid Talent feat, and who have a full Defender's Aura with full mark punishment, plus a 1/encounter minor action heal from Spirit of Sacrifice.
Hybrid warlocks, who gain flexibility in their choice of at-will powers and pact boons (especially with Twofold Pact), and arguably make better warlocks than pure warlocks.
Those are the "big four" hybrid classes, in my assessment, although individual builds can certainly bring in other classes to great effect. The hybrid barbarian, for example, certainly has far more potential than a pure-classed barbarian would ever have.
>wizards hybridize well
A wizard's powers are effective, but low hit points, cloth armor (practically forcing either Unarmored Agility or a Hybrid Talent for armor), a lack of cantrips (actually quite effective at substituting Arcana for other skills), and a lack of rituals (far more optimizable than most would think) all cause it to mesh in a mediocre manner with other hybrid classes.
I would call a hybrid wizard unremarkable in the grand scale of hybrid classes.
>>47374988
Really surprised no one stole 4Es ideas and polished them.
>>47377556
There's 13 Age.
I'm working on my own project as well.
>>47375898
Please tell me more about clerics with Battle Cleric's Lore. I hadn't heard of that one until now, and I just looked it up. It's from an issue of Dragon?
>>47377592
13th Age is hardly 4e-like when it uses neither a grid nor any mechanics particularly reliant on precise positioning.
>>47377626
Battle Cleric's Lore is from Dragon Magazine #400.
>Battle Cleric’s Lore
>Alternative Class Feature
>Your study of warfare and divine magic has granted you the gods’ blessings in battle. You can choose this class feature in place of Healer’s Lore.
>Benefit: You gain a +2 shield bonus to AC, and you have proficiency with scale armor. In addition, whenever you use a cleric healing power to allow a target to spend a healing surge, that target gains a +2 bonus to attack rolls until the end of your next turn.
This is leagues superior to Healer's Lore for reasons that should be obvious.
There is contention over whether or not it can swap in for Healer's Lore as a hybrid cleric or as a non-cleric taking the Divine Healer multiclass feat. For what it is worth, the online character builder allows the former, but *not* the latter.
However, the online character builder also allows anyone with the Sorcerer-King Pact *build* (that is, a meaningless set of suggestions) to take the Mindbite Scorn feat, which requires the Sorcerer-King Pact as a class feature. Thus, one should take the online character builder's "rulings" with a grain of metaphorical salt.
>>47377556
There's vaguely Strike! which THF here will be happy to talk about (Maybe), but I dunno if an in-depth discussion of it here would be the best place for it.
Disregarding that, how's that rewrite of the non-combat section going, Touhoufag?
>>47377592
I don't really agree with that. 13th has a different flavor and doesn't have all the placement shenanigans.
>>47377705
I wish my version of the offline character builder had all these neat alternate class features.
What would you say are some other must-have class features? For any class.
>>47377707
>Disregarding that, how's that rewrite of the non-combat section going, Touhoufag?
Poorly. I am currently in a fair few games, and running games myself.
I have also decided to present this as a setting-specific rewrite (anime-fied Planescape) rather than something system-agnostic, because noncombat mechanics tend to work best when integrated into the setting so as to best highlight it.
>>47377877
>What would you say are some other must-have class features?
Each class has its own winners and losers in the class feature department (e.g. for warlords, Insightful Presence and Skirmishing Presence are obvious losers), but few are as blatant a mechanical upgrade patch as Battle Cleric's Lore.
>>47378028
Thanks! This inspires me.
For those of you who have been keeping up with my [Dragon Forest] project, I have been having a hard time with some of my classes. Particularly the Oracle. Part of the problem is that I've just been overthinking it.
What I may do is give my Oracle class some legally-distinct variation on Battle Cleric's Lore and just model the class more closely on clerics but with more of the divination/zen archery bent like I've been going for so far.
Hey, I uploaded all my pdfs for 4e because I'm an inhuman garbage man who does all their shit manually.
There's also a word doc in the "Dragon Magazine" folder that summarizes each issue so that if you're like me and you want to not use character builders, you can ctrl+f your class/race/role/deity/etc and find stuff for you.
I'll seed it until there's no more thread.
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:e6587c56602ab710dadb0ef8efa62e660a443ce2&dn=D%26amp%3BD+4e&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3A80&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.coppersurfer.tk%3A6969&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fexodus.desync.com%3A6969
>>47379895
Much appreciated mate.
>>47379895
>17KiB/s down
life is sufferingty
>>47380260
>>47380299
Yeh, sorry fellows. I'll keep it up as long as I see any activity.
This will most likely bite me in the ass down the road, but if you're looking for specific pdfs, most of the larger books are also on my googledrive:
drive google com
/folderview?id=0B6X_cqKj7796YTd2VjVqUUlOSGM&usp=sharing
>>47380299
>>47380682
I've leave it to seed for a while after I've finished downloading :)
>>47380809
I just never stop seeding things ive downloaded
>>47380809
>after I've finished downloading
In 15 years you mean.
While we all wait for the heat death of the universe and the seeding to finish shortly after, I was wondering if I could get some pointers for an Avenger of Kord
Right now I'm combining a Falchion with the feat Avenging Resolution, and Power of the Storm feat with a bunch of thunder damage boost feats.
We're rapidly approaching paragon, and those feats really pop off then, but I'm at a loss of what to take in the paragon tier.
Any tips?
Also I find myself only ever using Overwhelming Strike because of the bonuses to it's damage. Beyond the dailies with 3+ [W] nothing seems to match it's damage.
>>47381004
You had fucked up by the first line
"avenger of Kord". Such a thing is nonviable, because Kord is not of the skill domain, and you need the skill domain in order to be a good avenger
>>47381031
Just for the +1 bonus to trained skills?
Or the +2 for everyone to the one skill you just used?
Neither of those seem that required.
>>47381004
There is little point in using a falchion as an avenger when a fullblade (preferably a Melegaunt's Darkblade fullblade) will do the job better.
Power of the Storm is a poor feat for an avenger; an avenger absolutely wants Power of *Skill* for Overwhelming Strike as a melee basic attack.
>We're rapidly approaching paragon, and those feats really pop off then, but I'm at a loss of what to take in the paragon tier.
If you have the Censure of Pursuit, then the Ardent Champion is the single most powerful paragon path you could possibly take. Additionally, the Painful Oath paragon feat is absolutely mandatory for avengers.
>Also I find myself only ever using Overwhelming Strike because of the bonuses to it's damage. Beyond the dailies with 3+ [W] nothing seems to match it's damage.
While it is true that a heroic-tier adventure will be spamming Overwhelming Strike (especially with Power of Skill and Charge Optimization), they will still use non-standard-action encounter attack powers such as Fury's Advance and Relentless Stride. Furthermore, depending on the GM's ruling, Raging Tempest could very well be a double tap of static damage.
I do have the feeling that you have been playing a woefully unoptimized avenger all this time, however; a heroic-tier avenger absolutely *needs* to optimize charging, or else their damage output sinks to abysmal levels.
>>47381141
>Melegaunt's Darkblade
Disclaimer: A Vanguard Weapon works just as well, if not better.
>>47381031
Page 108 of Divine Power explicitly allows characters who worship multiple gods to avail of all of those gods' domain feats. A character could worship both Kord and Ioun or both Kord andBANE?and avail of Power of Skill that way.
>>47381092
Essentially, a heroic-tier avenger absolutely *needs* Power of Skill (granting Overwhelming Strike as a melee basic attack) and charge optimization, or else they are woefully weak strikers.
At the paragon tier, Painful Oath lessens the need for charge optimization, but upgrading Overwhelming Strike (and possibly Raging Tempest)'s charge damage is still tremendously helpful for having an avenger compete with other strikers.
>>47381180
Don't you need the Fickle Servant feat, which is Changeling specific, in order to to do that?
>>47381141
>>47381180
Fullblade requires a feat to get, where falchion is millitary, also 1d12 vs. 2d4 where rolls of 1 or 2 count as 3 seems the same average damage
What is the benefit of a charge beyond the +1 to the attack?
>>47381307
Page 108 of Divine Power stipulates that multi-god worship for access to all of their domain feats is fully legal.
>>47381313
Fullblades have a +3 proficiency bonus as opposed to a falchion's +2.
>2d4 where rolls of 1 or 2 count as 3 seems the same average damage
Falchions lack the brutal quality, last I checked.
>What is the benefit of a charge beyond the +1 to the attack?
Extra damage from a Horned Helm and/or a Vanguard Weapon (preferably both), plus Two-Handed Weapon Expertise, which are absolutely essential for heroic-tier avenger damage. A Badge of the Berserker and Boots of Adept Charging are also greatly beneficial.
The built-in +1 attack bonus for charging is simply a metaphorical cherry on top.
>>47381550
Then why the fuck does fickle servant exist?
It's a damn interesting idea, but why is it introduced and made obsolete in the same book?
>>47381608
Fickle Servant removes the restriction of having to worship the deity in question. It is a trivial benefit, but it is a benefit all the same.
It is a rubbish feat, of course.
>>47381647
So it has no reason to exist because it is introduced and made obsolete in the same book.
Damn, and here I thought changelings actually got something fun to mess around with, but it turns out anyone can do it
>>47381550
Avenging Resolution feat treats all 1&2 as a 3
And beyond the item bonuses to charges, the bonuses to thunder damage seem much more powerful both in heroic and paragon teirs
Power of the Storm makes OS thunder damage and adds +2 damage, then Echoes of Thunder and Raging Storm add +2 thunder damage each as well, meaning each OS attack I do right now does 2d4r1r2 + WIS + 6 thunder damage, and with Power of Strength OS gets another +2 damage. average of 7 damage, +5 wis mod, +8 with a double attack roll when the enemy is alone
I'm definately going to grab theBanedomain which would let me combine the above with basically all the stuff you noted as well
>>47381647
Given that your character's alignment has to match at least one of your deitie's alignments maybe fickle servant lets a changeling worship two disparate deities, like a CE and a LG without issue
still basically useless
>>47381725
>Avenging Resolution feat treats all 1&2 as a 3
This causes a falchion to deal (3 + 3 + 3 + 4) / 2 + (3 + 3 + 3 + 4) / 2 = 6.5 average damage per [W].
A fullblade deals the exact same 6.5 average damage per [W] and also has the high crit quality, but also has a proficiency bonus +1 higher. The falchion is objectively worse than the fullblade.
>Raging Storm
A feat bonus, which does not stack with Weapon Focus or, better yet, Githzerai Blade Master. Raging Storm is a worthless feat.
>Power of Strength
>I'm definately going to grab the Bane domain
Page 108 of Divine Power makes it clear that you can benefit from only one domain feat at a time.
Thus, all you have going for you is the extra damage from Power of the Storm and Echoes of Thunder, and nothing else. Meanwhile, the classic charging avenger reaps the benefits of Two-Handed Weapon Expertise, a Vanguard Weapon, a Horned Helm, a Badge of the Berserker, Boots of Adept Charging, and the built-in +1 attack bonus and extra movement for charging.
Also consider than an avenger needs to take Power of Skill for a decent melee basic attack *anyway*, making Power of the Storm superfluous.
>>47381826
Falchions have +3 proficiency
>>47381900
and the high crit property
they're literally the same damage with the avenging resolution feat, and you'd have to burn a feat to get the superior weapon proficiency anyway
>>47381900
>>47381932
I was confusing falchions with scimitars from memory. It seems I am incorrect in that regard.
Falchions are still worse than fullblades for an avenger, however, because a critical hit maximizes [W] damage dice. 2d4 from a falchion becomes 8, while 1d12 from a fullblade becomes 12. An avenger will be scoring critical hits often due to Oath of Enmity.
The Ardent Champion's Fanatical Flurry level 11 encounter attack power also targets enemies other than the avenger's Oath target, and a fullblade would be more helpful there as well.
The fullblade continues to be objectively superior.
>>47382031
Then what about a mordenkrad in place of a full blade? It's 2d6 and is brutal 1, so you could swap the avenging resolution for the weapon prof feat
that does essentially 2d5+2, (average 8) and has the same crit maximum as the d12 fullblade
>>47382111
Mordenkrads (and gouges, for that matter) lack the high crit quality, which is useful for an Ardent Champion. They are also incompatible with Githzerai Blade Master.
A gouge can have high crit at the cost of a feat, however, so that is certainly a good option. Impaling Spear also allows a gouge to target Reflex instead of AC on an Overwhelming Strike charge, which is likewise tremendously useful, though this takes a martial multiclass.
>>47382214
multiclassing into fighter also lets you take surprising charge for bonus damage with a gouge
>>47382031
Of course it's objectively superior, but the real question is, is it objectively superior enough to warrant spending a feat for it?
>>47382440
Also a fair feat to mention for a martial multiclass.
>>47382501
Compared to Avenging Resolution, yes, it is.
>tfw none of my friends optimize, but I do
>tfw I can play total meme builds and it works out because an optimized meme build is still good in a party which doesn't optimize>mfw friends all left 4e for Pathfinder or 5th
G-goodbye, Avenger of Sehanine who was literally Pepe Le Pew.
>>47382837
Halfling rogue with a bastard sword was my favourite befpre my friends dropped 4e for 5e
I have a sorcerer king pact warlock who can do decent damage, but I'm having a wicked hard time hitting. All the feats I've looked at for bonus to attack are only +1, which wouldn't help THAT much. Is there some way to get more than that when using a rod?
>>47382837
Explain this build of yours.
>>47382878
An expertise feat is mandatory for hitting reliably. Superior Implement Training in an accurate implement also helps.
Do be sure to take an Essentials expertise feat. Staff Expertise, a Staff of Ruin, a Siberys Shard of the Mage, and a multiclass feat or eladrin alternate racial feature for staff proficiency are all highly recommended. This will net you high accuracy and high damage.
You should also strongly consider being a hybrid warlock than a regular warlock.
>>47381550
Multi-god worship "with a common theme" is fully legal, you mean
>>47383491
Considering that all of 4e's gods (save for perhaps Tharizdun) were unified at one point during the Dawn War, even wildly disparate god pairings such as Corellon and Gruumsh can be justified.
>>47368780
My main ones are:
Rituals:
I'd love to see something to make 90% of rituals that don't have a long-term effect changed to work on Healing Surges. Right now they compete with 'Actual permanent items' in your progression and it's hard to justify rituals most of the time.
My ideal situation would be:
>Rituals with non-permanent effects almost always cost healing surges.
>There are rituals associated with literally every single skill as you fold Martial Practices and Rituals together.
>You can do a ritual with any skill you have training in.
>Squishier classes you want to be big on Rituals (Like Wizards and Artificers) get <X> surges worth of rituals each day before it eats into real surges.
Utility Powers:
There needed to be more non-combat utility powers and not making them try to compete with combat utility powers. Make some slots for just non-combat powers and give more options.
>>47383514
I'd shut down that shit pretty fast if I was running a game
What I'd take from page 108 of divine power is groups that share a specific quality, either an alignment, or a domain.
>>47383578
>either an alignment, or a domain
The example given is "the three gods of destiny, Avandra, Ioun, and the Raven Queen." They do not share alignments in common (Avandra is good while Ioun and the Raven Queen are unaligned), and the only domain they share in common is fate (both Ioun and the Raven Queen have it, but Avandra does not).
>>47383578
>>47383616
Well shit
Another little 3.5-ism worms its way into 4e, ruining it by the power of open-ended and poorly-written material
My main problem with 4E was how fiddly it was and how long combat could take even with experienced players and GM
>>47382837
>>47382856
I was having a blast with a dragonborn bard|barbarian before 5e blew up our 4e game. I miss my drug addled raging rockstar.
>>47384643
The length of time a 4e encounter takes is primarily determined not by experience, but by decisiveness
Players who umm and ahh about using their immediate actions are the greatest slowing factor
>>47384685
There is little synergy to such a hybrid combination, alas. The hybrid bard is good but not outstanding (unless you are very interested in the Signs of Influence class feature and your GM allows a hybrid bard to have it, although the online character builder does not allow this), and the hybrid barbarian pairs better with anything that can give it multiattacks and a better AC, such as the warden.
ive heard about hybrid vampires being useful for weird shit
i have no idea what that weird shit is
someone enlighten me pls
>>47384710
That is an issue, but just tracking little things like triggering OAs in niche cases, weird aura interactions, cascading interrupts...
>>47384714
The problem there is that bard/barbarian is fluffy and interesting, while warden/barbarian is practically identical fluff-wise to an ordinary warden or barbarian
>>47384754
I am not entirely certain what "flavor" you are looking for in a barbarian|bard that is missing from either class on its own, seeing how a barbarian's mechanics have nothing to do with actually growing ill-tempered (rages are simply encounter-long buffs vaguely themed after spirit-blessings), and nothing about the bard actually requires music or dance whatsoever (they work even on blinded and deafened allies).
>>47384714
I made it around the mythic skald PP, which requires bard mixed somehow with a primal class. The stat synergy helped for powers like heart strike, and I used draconic arrogance to slap damage onto my pushes/knockdowns, which were primarily staggering note and thunder hawk rage. The extra healing didn't hurt the party either. Not a great build, but serviceable and tons of fun regardless.
I never did figure out a way to set up thunder vulnerability for all the thunder damage I spit out though.
>>47384896
The Mythic Skald paragon path revolves around getting your *allies* to bloody enemies (not yourself, because you are ineligible for the bonus) and using Majestic Word multiple times in an encounter. The Mythic Skald is almost certainly worse on a hybrid barbarian|bard since a half-striker might just bloody enemies personally (as opposed to handing off attacks with Staggering Note and Blunder), and a hybrid bard has only one Majestic Word at level 16 as opposed to a whopping three.
Your build seems like it would have been better off as either an attack-granting Mythic Skald or as a pushing/proning Draconic Arrogance barbarian of Thaneborn Triumph, but not trying to blend both together.
>>47384947
I don't deny it would've, but I got by and still had my fun.
So apart from the official character sheet from Wizards still floating around, anyone have any cool variants for 4e? How about blank cards? Couple of my players prefer doing things oldschool instead of filling in a pdf or using the builder and I'd love to give them some options.
>>47384722
They last a full day of fights better than a typical class, with the regenerate to bloodied and healing surge theft. They always struck me as potentially good defenders cause of it, and I made a revenant vampire paladin around the idea but never got to test it in play.
>>47385140
I think one of the cheese builds is hybriding and multiclassing the vamp so it can access to the amount of Vampire/other class feats and get the ability to drink all the blood.
>>47385136
There is a power builder somewhere, gives you nice official-looking cards and all.
What I really miss is the monster creator. I had hours of fun tooling around in that, and there are some custom monsters of mine I really wish I still had access to...
>>47385140
>>47385228
This is not as good a benefit as it seems, because healing surge management is never, *ever* an issue in 4e with the low-cost Comrades' Succor ritual, available from level 1.
There is nothing significant at all to be gained from a hybrid vampire or a multiclass vampire that could not be more efficiently achieved through less arduous means.
How good is the Elemental Warlock? Because I've built one as a backup character for a game I'm in as a Ranger, just on the offchance we die, and it seems pretty powerful.
>>47385291
>There is nothing significant at all to be gained from a hybrid vampire or a multiclass vampire that could not be more efficiently achieved through less arduous means.
Well, aside from being a motherfucking vampire.
>>47385343
You can be one from the heritage feat or the vryloka race. The class has more downsides than ups. Or you could take all three and become the legendary triple vampire.
>>47385327
The Elemental Pact warlock is almost unplayably weak due to receiving no Elemental Pact encounter attack powers, and thus no riders on its encounter attack powers at all. Chromatic Bolt is a horrifically bad at-will power, as it is split between Constitution and Charisma; remember that Intelligence is the warlock secondary score.
You might think that the pact boon might have potential with elemental damage nova optimization (e.g. with the Sarifal Feywarden theme), but this is not the case, because the vulnerability keys off a randomly determined damage type (e.g. having a Frost Weapon will do you no good if you wind up rolling "fire damage").
You will want to keep to the usual strategy of being a Sorcerer-King Pact for Mindbite Scorn, and then Twofold Pacting at level 11 into your "real" pact of choice.
The Elemental Pact warlock (hexblade) is just as bad, because the one thing it could possibly have going for it, at-will application of vulnerabilities, is stuck at a non-scaling 3.
>>47385454
In terms of encounter powers I've been taking ones that do Necoritc, Psychic etc. to take advantage of the class feature that changes them. And I've done my best to dodge everything that uses Int and make Con my secondary, I don't think I have any powers or features that key off of int.
Plus I didn't really take into account items like a frost blade when building the character because we barely have any on the actual characters we're playing. Is it that important?
>>47385327
Elemental is the worst pact, the absolute worst.
You can still do standard warlock stuff with it, but since you're required to go for con/cha instead of con/int or cha/int, you aren't even as good at that stuff as a standard warlock is.
Just make an infernal pact warlock and pretend that your pact is with a great fire elemental instead of demons or devils
>>47385560
Anything you could possibly do to optimize an Elemental Pact warlock could be better achieved with the usual "Sorcerer-King Pact at heroic, Twofold Pact later" build.
Being split between Constitution and Charisma is horrid as a warlock, and lacking any riders on encounter attack powers is even worse.
Have you already been playing this character? What is this character's level?
>>47385565
>Just make an infernal pact warlock and pretend that your pact is with a great fire elemental instead of demons or devils
The sidebar in page 6 of Dragon Magazine #390 points out that the Sorcerer-King Pact could be reflavored into a pact with "powerful arcanists from antiquity—beings not necessarily evil, and who offer great power to those who study their lore. They could be archmages who have merged their essence with the cosmos or some other icons of arcane power."
It would not be much of a stretch to alter this to "primordials."
>>47385560
All the best warlock stuff is int though. You're making a handicapped warlock if you avoid int related features.
>>47385640
>Have you already been playing this character? What is this character's level?
I haven't, I've been playing an archery-based Ranger. This was just a little exercise I did with some friends when we were bored desu. I made the Warlock the same level as the Ranger, so he's level 9.
>>47385656
Well that sucks, I'll look at rebuilding I suppose. Might just do a Sorcerer instead and blow things up with fire that way.
>>47385640
True
My group has mindbite scorn as a general warlock feat rather than a sorcerer-king pact feat, so I sort of forget how superior Sorcerer-king pact is as far as striker-warlocks go
>>47385712
The fire sorcerer (elementalist) is arguably the weakest out of the elementalists, because all it has to boast is a non-scaling +1d6 damage on its Elemental Bolt. An air elementalist's vulnerable 3 likewise does not scale, but at least it can benefit from the Lyrandar Wind-Rider at the paragon tier, and an earth elementalist can optimize for slowing.
The water elementalist is perhaps the leader of the pack, because it can easily avail of Lasting Frost, Wintertouched, and a Siberys Shard of Merciless Cold all without having to pick up a Frost Weapon (thereby opening up a Staff of Ruin).
If you insist on creating a fire-themed character nevertheless, you will want to look into either a pyromancer wizard (mage) with the Burn Everything feat, or any melee weapon-using class with a Firewind Blade (though the latter is completely ineffective against any fire resistance). Either way, you will want the Infernal Prince theme for extra accuracy with fire attacks, and the tiefling racial feat Hellfire Blood for the same.
>>47385866
why would you assume elementalist and not fire dragon sorcerer?
Elementalists don't get flame spiral
>>47385866
Oh I was just saying fire off hand as an example, sorry. I just generally want to blow shit up.
>>47385959
A Dragon Magic sorcerer makes for a mediocre striker. It has few offensive capacities of note. (A +2 bonus to AC when you are first bloodied is pathetic.) It is outclassed significantly by the other Strength/Charisma sorcerer, that of Cosmic Magic.
Flame Spiral is a strong powerful, but it is hardly worth optimizing for fire damage for.
You are likely best off as a "generalist" sorcerer with Cosmic Magic (take Blazing Starfall) or Wild Magic (take Chaos Bolt) who simply happens to have Flame Spiral.
>>47386043
Lots of ways to do that
My personal favourite is storm sorcerer. You throw so much lightning, you don't even need flame spiral to blow shit up as a storm sorcerer, you get enough toys without it
Although it certainly still helps. Flame Spiral and Low Slash are best buds in terms of being the two level 3 striker encounter powers you'll take and then just keep forever
>>47386056
Yeah but cosmic sorcerers have that annoying bloody class feature involving shifting resistances and resistance piercing and thematically just makes me wish I was playing a star warlock
Also dragon sorcerers are damn good strikers, they can pull the nusemnee/soul combo, letting them dragonbreath every turn.
>>47386043
Consider looking into either a Primal Predator druid (protector) or a Covenant of Wrath invoker.
The former's "ideal" lineup of optimal attack powers from 1-7 (Magic Stones, Fire Hawk or Grasping Tide, Thorn Spray, Summon Giant Toad, Wind Wall, Vine Serpents, Charm Beast) contains a surprising amount of powers that target Fortitude or Reflex and could be flavored as flashy blasts of nature magic.
The latter is just as flashy and blasty in its level optimal level 1-7 attack powers (Hand of Radiance, Sun Strike, Thunder of Judgment, Silent Malediction, Lightning's Revelation, Grasping Chains of the Justiciar, Rain of Blood).
I would avoid a wizard, as their claims to fame mostly consist of Will-targeting, illusion- or enchantment-based attack powers.
>>47386070
Storm Magic sorcerers are generally mediocre, as they have nothing special as far as attack power riders are concerned. They cannot even make especially good use of the Lyrandar Wind-Rider paragon path.
>>47386174
Why would they want lyrandar wind rider? They get lightning fury
>>47386121
Okay, yes, I had neglected to consider rebreathing via Ancient Soul, Nusemnee's Atonement, and the Sensate theme. That is the one thing that can actually vindicate Dragon Magic, and it is quite a powerful one thing.
>>47386240
What do you consider so effective about the Lightning Fury?
>>47386275
They ignore lightning resistance and bypass immunity, letting you optimize for lightning damage without fear of it being blocked, have a semi-permanent damage aura at level 16, and three really, really fun powers.
Especially power bolt, power bolt is the second most fun level 20 daily sorcerers can get, and the most fun is attached to an otherwise shitty PP
>>47386174
>They cannot even make especially good use of the Lyrandar Wind-Rider paragon path.
That is actually something that really annoyed me.
I wanted to make a Lightning-focused mage in Ebberon but you can't actually line up Wind-Rider and Storm Sorc. My GM is considering allowing Wind-Rider to work off Dex (As that is the 'Storm' secondary stat) rather than Con.
Does that make Storm Sorc worth looking at?
>>47386375
No, lyrandar wind rider is still not that great a sorcerer PP, because while its passive effects are nice, its powers are garbage for you. None of them are arcane powers, and none have a damage type
>>47386323
Lightning resistance and immunity are rare to start with. Lightning resistance is most commonly seen on demons' variable resistance, and even when it does appear, a Storm Magic sorcerer's basic resistance penetration should be sufficient.
Only 7 out of 5,135 monsters in the Compendium (~0.1363%) have lightning immunity.
Lightning Field is a pleasant benefit and is perhaps the only major upside to being a Lightning Fury, especially for a sorcerer who uses Mark of Storm to slide enemies adjacent to themselves (though this takes some tricky and risky positioning).
Overall, I would say that a Storm Magic sorcerer is still better off as a Demonskin Adept, if only so that they can make use of their high initiative and eliminate an enemy on their first turn with the triple attack that is Demon-Soul Bolts.
>power bolt is the second most fun level 20 daily sorcerers can get
It is also pathetically weak by level 20 daily attack power standards.
>>47386465
What about first turn furious bolts?
Being able to wipe out every minion in the first turn of combat is pretty damn nice, it's a tad unreliable, but superior reflexes helps
>>47386549
I recall at least one type of sorcerer having access to a heroic-tier item or feat that allowed them to ping every enemy within X squares for automatic damage, thereby clearing out all minions. It may or may not have been tied to second winds.
Would anyone happen to recall such an item or feat? My 4e knowledge is metaphorically rusty.
>>47369801
Increase three abilities instead of two at *4 and *8?
>>47386832
That is a terrible fix, because it buffs everybody else and keeps those class options weak
Anyone want to run/play an online game of 4E? I can do most days of the week in the evening BST if anyone's interested.
>>47386056
Speaking of cosmic magic, got any tricks for optimizing blazing starfall?
>>47369801
House rule that the good feat fixes for NADs not require a minimum ability score?
GM's: What are your favorite 4E monsters to use in encounters?
>>47387195
I'm interested. Roll20? Any particular setting you want to do?
>>47391332
Contacttommy.middleton1on Skype. Setting will likely be homebrew.
>>47391623
Sorry, that's actually 8, not 1.
>>47345214
Same
>>47391791
Cool. Will send a message later today, thanks!
>Page 10
Not today.
>>47389449
Blazing Starfall deals radiant damage by default, so the normal methods of radiant damage optimization are compatible with it. It is also a fire attack; thus, fire optimization is possible.
Even with the June 2012 errata to the power, it can still trigger off forced movement once per *turn*, so if you can attach a slide to Blazing Starfall, you may be able to trigger the fire damage easily.
I'm building a warlock based around forced movement, in particular boosting the slide on eldrich strike with a staggering weapon, rushing cleats etc. to slide enemies into sustained aoe zones.
If I want to use use a fullblade as both a weapon and an implement, what proficiency feats do I need to achieve this?
>>47353911
Weird failure state then, have them face down something they can't kill. They lose but instead of death they end up in a nightmare realm for an arc till they escape
I miss the Compendium and Monster Builder so bad
>>47396452
arcane implement proficiency, fullblade proficiency
heavy blades are arcane implements for swordmages, and thus can be used with arcane implement proficiency
>>47396452
>>47397277
Blade Initiate or Heart of the Blade, both swordmage multiclass feats, would be a more convenient method of gaining swordmage implement proficiency (which covers light blades and heavy blades).
Alternatively, since warlocks tend to be more effective as hybrids, >>47396452 could simply be a hybrid swordmage|warlock outright.
Given the once-per-turn nature of most damaging zones, however, I doubt that such a build would be particularly effective.
What's a good way to make Magic Stones work together with Polearm momentum?
Suppose you were to make a character, and it had to have these four things:
>worships Asmodeus
>Tiefling
>Warlock
>Warlord
What would you take on them? Assume paragon tier, and that the last two criteria assumes either hybrid or MC, whichever is more effective.Working out an enemy for the player characters, wanted to make them with character stats rather than monster stats.
>>47398483
Be a Primal Predator druid (protector). Multiclass into fighter via Brawling Warrior (circumventing a need for Strength) and then take Polearm Momentum. Wear Gauntlets of the Ram (level 8) and use an Alfsair Spear (level 3/8/13/18/23/28).
You should then be able to push 2 and knock prone with each hit from Magic Stones.
At level 11, take Hindering Shield and carry a light shield (you need not be proficient with it), thereby also slowing each enemy you push.
That said, I generally would not recommend a Polearm Momentum druid build, as it tends to be either a one-trick pony with Magic Stones or a build that hamstrings its selection of powers to those compatible with Polearm Momentum.
>>47398660
>Working out an enemy for the player characters, wanted to make them with character stats rather than monster stats.
Under the context of 4e, this will always be a deplorable idea that has no merit to it whatsoever. PCs' math (e.g. hit points, defenses, attack and damage bonuses) assumes that they will be battling NPCs/monsters, not other PCs. PvP in 4e is an utter farce of rocket tag and powers that were never meant to interact with one another.
This is before we get into the debacle that is the standard loadout of PC magic items being dropped into an NPC's hands, which will have to be modified into some mix of alternative rewards and inherent bonuses.
>>47398660
Do you want this to be a TPK encounter?
Warlocks are all about curses and eldritch pact.
Eldritch pacts trigger when a cursed enemy is reduced to 0 hit points or fewer. Now, granted, reducing a PC to 0 HP doesn't kill them right away, but still...
For purposes of a boss encounter, I would give the guy a homebrew pact that lets him summon an imp minion when a cursed PC drops to 0 HP.
You could use warlord powers to buff the minions whenever the guy attacks a PC he cursed, but remember that the warlord's class features do nothing for monsters since only elites and solo monsters have action points anyway.
>>47398748
Got it. What would be a better build for polearm momentum then?
>>47398912
Any build that can be guaranteed to push 2+ or slide 2+ on *every* attack would be most ideal for Polearm Momentum.
This means picking up the Mark of Storm feat, Rushing Cleats, and either a Lightning Weapon (level 5/10/15/20/25/30) or a Thunderbolt Weapon (level 13/18/23/28), though note that the latter can be placed only on ranged weapons, which means a trident for you.
Such a build is highly item-dependent, of course, so its effectiveness will vary depending on your starting level. Additionally, such a build does not have *that* much of a benefit over a Flail Expertise and Dragging Flail build, which can accomplish a "slide and prone with every attack using the Mark of Storm and a Lightning Weapon" trick with even greater ease.
>>47398857
>>47398823
I see. Suggestions taken, I retreat to the drawing board.
Can anyone answer me on what the fuck makes pursuit/chase avengers decent in heroic tier? Playing one and it feels like the 3rd worst class I've played after Vampire and cavalier.
>>47399491
Charging, minor action encounter powers, big weapons.
>>47399491
I have covered this earlier in this thread: >>47381141
>a heroic-tier avenger absolutely *needs* to optimize charging, or else their damage output sinks to abysmal levels
Charging is the only, and I do mean *only*, way for a heroic-tier avenger to stay relevant. Take Power of Skill for Overwhelming Strike as a melee basic attack, then either Raging Tempest or Whirlwind Charge (depending on your DM's interpretation) as your level 1 encounter attack power. Take Relentless Stride and Fury's Advance at levels 3 and 7 in either order.
Spend as many turns as you can charging with the help of a Vanguard Weapon, a Horned Helm, a Badge of the Berserker, Boots of Adept Charging, and Two-Handed Weapon Expertise.
You may also wish to be a githzerai for Githzerai Blade Master.
A heroic-tier avenger who does not optimize for charging is profoundly incompetent as a striker.
>>47399900
What would you think of boots of the fencing master as an alternative? Rushing cleats/polearm momentum? Also, in paragon tier what is there to look out for as an avenger?Different guy from before, I'm at the cusp of level 10 atm.
>>47400104
Boots of Adept Charging will always be more effective than Boots of the Fencing Master for charge-related mobility, and the former are significantly cheaper as well.
Overwhelming Strike is inconvenient to make compatible with Polearm Momentum; you will need not only Rushing Cleats, but a way of increasing your shift distance as well. At that point, it becomes too high an opportunity cost, particularly considering that you are lowering your damage output by using a polearm or spear.
Paragon-tier avengers have a saving grace in the form of Painful Oath, which adds their Wisdom modifier to damage against their Oath target once per turn (i.e. it is compatible with a leader's granted attacks). This single-handedly turns around the entire class. However, charging is *still* the optimal method of combat for a paragon-tier avenger, who can avail of a gouge and Impaling Spear for Reflex-targeting Overwhelming Strikes, in addition to everything else charging brings along.
By the paragon tier, the only other type of avenger that can compete with a charging avenger is a half-elf Twin Striker, and that is even *more* of a one-trick pony.
What is the current build for your avenger?
>>47400200
Pixie avenger, all the charging shit you mentioned plus that racial charging feat. GM let me take a size medium bird mount which moves with my shifts/ teleports (homebrew item), so I use a lance. Pursuit avenger.
>>47400200
Why do you need a shift-extender to make overwhelming strike work with rushing cleats? Couldn't you just shift an enemy 2 squares then move one?
>>47400236
A mount with presumably unrestricted flight is a major boon for a pixie, although I would wonder why it is Medium-sized and not Small-sized.
A Vanguard Lance should work well for a charge-based build (particularly with Spear Expertise), and Streak of Light is an excellent feat for any charger. You should be well on your way to constructing a competent charger if you can also pick up a Horned Helm, a Badge of the Berserker, and Boots of Adept Charging. If you can afford to multiclass into fighter, Surprising Charge and, at paragon, Deft Spear should both serve you well.
You will definitely want to be an Ardent Champion; it is the single best paragon path for any Censure of Pursuit avenger.
>>47400598
>You shift 1 square and slide the target 1 square into the space you occupied.
It seems I was mistaken. You could, in fact, simply shift 1 square and then circuitously slide an enemy X squares so long as they wind up in the space you just occupied, even with a reach weapon.
That would indeed make Polearm Momentum more appealing for an avenger, and I would perhaps consider a greatspear avenger for that. Adding Rushing Cleats and Polearm Momentum to a charger build's shopping list may be somewhat onerous, however.
I've been tinkering with a Pal/Lock, but it seems like my action economy will be utterly crippled, and overall doesn't seem like it's worth it. How do I make this concept work well?
>>47401662
A paladin|warlock indeed suffers from considerable minor action economy issues, between Warlock's Curse and Divine Challenge, and even their immediate actions are consumed by their Divine Challenge damage.
It helps to have Quickcurse Rods and Rods of Corruption to ease the need for spreading your Warlock's Curse around, but this can be costly until high heroic. What level are you starting at?
You would do well to be a tiefling. Avoid Crimson Fire and Crimson Legionnaire, but *do* take Warlock's Wrath, as it unconditionally upgrades your curse damage to d8s and trades in your Infernal Wrath for an incredibly potent defensive ability. Yes, it does add to your minor action economy crisis, but when combined with Call of Challenge, it can seriously hamstring the options of many enemies around you.
>>47397501
Only the 5th level Hunger of Hadar has that restriction and it still does 2d10 on entering/starting your turn with a secondary 1d6+con attack when you sustain. Seems alright to me especially when you get weapon damage on top of that every round.
Unfortunately good area powers start to peter out late paragon but I think some of them are good enough to hang on to. Hybridising might fix that, I haven't explored that option.
Can svirfneblin make decent str/wis fighters? Or is being a small race with 5 base movement an insurmountable obstacle for them?
>>47403167
I see your point regarding the effectiveness of such a sliding combo if you can rely on using such zones in key encounters.
Going through the list of warlock daily attack powers, Hunger of Hadar at level 5, Feast of Souls at level 9, and Rain of Frogs/Visage of Zhudun at 15 are the only damaging zones actually worth building towards (they involve actual damage rolls and they can be easily triggered by forced movement).
The problem is that Hunger of Hadar and Feast of Souls are both Constitution-based while Rain of Frogs/Visage of Zhudun are Charisma-based, so unless you build yourself as a Constitution/Charisma warlock (the worst kind of warlock), you are going to have trouble with having enough zones throughout a given adventuring day.
Depending on your starting level, it may be better to be a hybrid assassin (executioner)|warlock if you intend on spamming Eldritch Strike anyway, since that would increase your Eldritch Strike damage, though this will cost you a zone each day.
What is your starting level, then?
>>47403354
Strength 4 is deeply crippling and will severely hamstring a non-charger melee character. It is imperative that you find a way to increase your speed.
>>47401062
I already have all of these save the boots, and am speccing into a more crit-based come paragon (including ardent champion.) I guess I have this down pat.
Size medium was just to mimic the size categories of the other party members, more a bookkeeping thing really.
>>47404730
There is little on a charging avenger's "shopping list" for critical hit optimization by the paragon tier. Aside from the Ardent Champion paragon path and either Godsworn Fatalist, Godsworn Mentalist, and Godsworn Radiant as a feat, I am not sure there is much to invest in for improving your critical hits.
If you were using a gouge, you could qualify for Deadly Axe, but you are using a lance.
>>47405080
Avenging resolution is quite nice for upping the damage on all those dice you are rolling from your item package. Beyond that, painful oath, and impaling spear I'd just be grabbing my (late) defensive feats.
>>47404441
Visage of Zhudun doesn't actually require a charisma roll to do most of its damage, so that's still a powerful option even if the secondary attack is inaccurate, at least it targets will.
My plan would be to take Hunger of Hadar, Feast of Souls and Visage of Zhudun. Then, should the campaign get that far, endure the dry-spell until Forbiddance of the Ninth at 29. Damage stays about the same or less for other daily options but I'd lose a lot of control. Hybridizing wizard could solve this as they've got some very nasty area dailies at 19 and 25, but whether I want to plan for that far in the future I don't know.
I would be starting at level 1 with a free expertise feat, war wizard's seems useful as it allows me to take area spells without worrying about friendly fire as much. No source restrictions either.
>>47405397
Visage of Zhudun still is not particularly spectacular by level 15 daily standards if you lack the Charisma modifier for it.
Level 1 is going to be an *extremely* rough start for you, because your build will only truly come online at level 5. Even then, that will function only once per day with Hunger of Hadar.
I would not recommend a hybrid with a level 1 start either.
Sadly, it seems you will have to be content with playing a "regular" Constitution/Intelligence-based Sorcerer-King Pact warlock with Mindbite Scorn from levels 1 to 4.
>>47406574
Yes the more I think about it the more difficult it seems to be to pull off. I just like the idea of creating zones and batting enemies back into them when they try to leave.
How would you normally build a melee warlock? Or is it a meaningless endeavour outshined by other melee strikers?
>>47408100
>How would you normally build a melee warlock?
A. Pixie assassin (executioner)|warlock. Spam Eldritch Strike with a rapier while availing of Attack Finesse, Warlock's Curse, and pixie charge optimization.
B. Gloom Pact warlock (hexblade). Take Flail Expertise and spam Flesh Rend to knock enemies prone.
C. Aegis of Assault swordmage|warlock. Avail of Eldritch Strike and thus Warlock's Curse damage whenever your mark is violated. Minor action economy crisis.
Take your pick.
Out of these, A or B would be the most effective at the low heroic tier.
>>47368780
PHB3 non-psionics got no love. Literally the only options for runepriests outside of the core book come from a single issue of DM, and some of those are incomparable with the core powers.
Utility powers seem flavored to give the character additional non-combat utility, but compete with combat powers, which kinda negates that as other people have said.
The fact that certain base stat combinations are hard to get without chooseing out-there races (Int+wis appears on none of the core races, and chat+str is only on dragonborn iirc)
The grapple rules, while not the mess that 3.5 had, can lead to some situations that make no fucking sense.
>>47408820
>chat+str is only on dragonborn iirc
Vrylokas can have +2 Strength and +2 Charisma, but they are a poor race overall due to minimal support, mediocre racial abilities, and an arbitrary and unnecessary healing surge downgrade.
Best slayer chassis?
Half-orc with spear and charging?
Dwarf with Great axe?
Something else?
>>47410054
Half orc with gouge and cross training for rain of blows?
>>47410054
Wait, actually, I think bugbear with the increased weapon size and perfectly fitting stats could be good. Not as much support tho.
So what is the difference between 4e and Essentials? Is Essentials like 4.5e? Are Essentials and Base compatible with each other?
>>47410163
A shift in design paradigm. Most Essentials classes have less freedom in their choices, and are just simply easier to build, while also often breaking the AEDU stuff.
Essentials classes are compatible with the "normal" classes, but they are a bit weaker and less flexible (and many just plain badly designed), and have different pacing because of lacking dailies.
It was also most likely Mearls' inside job to force an edition change, but that's going into conspiracy theories.
>>47410163
I've always played in groups combining phb and essentials classes. They worked similarly and I didn't notice a big power difference.
Warpriests were basically clerics that used their weapons as implements. Knights were solid defenders if not quite as good at epic tier as an optimized fighter. Slayers are what a simple to run single target damage dealer should be. Thieves were rogues with tricks instead of the fiddling phb rogues had. Mages were often considered to be the top controller since they could use all wizard power without a lot of the B's. Sentinels were a healer druid with a pet. Cavaliers were Straladins who were simplified and given decent mounts. Scouts were simplified two blade rangers, and hunters were a rare martial controller. The warlocks were OK for melee locks.
They weren't as optimized or optimizable, but they were an easier on ramp for new players, and were WOTC's first real attempt to placate the grognards.
>>47410054
A. Half-orc or thri-kreen charger with gouge.
B. Bugbear charger with a Large-sized gouge.
C. Half-orc or thri-kreen warlord partner with a fullblade.
D. Bugbear warlord partner with a gouge.
E. Revenant pixie charger with a gouge and Melee Training.
F. At the paragon tier, revenant half-elf Twin Striker with a superior crossbow.
Take your pick.
>>47410163
>>47410239
>>47413045
The assessments in >>47413045 are reasonably accurate for a group that does not work with much optimization. If we are speaking under the context of mid-to-mid/high level, here is my assessment on individual Essentials classes. One cannot issue a blanket statement on Essentials classes, as they work under different paradigms.
• Cleric (warpriest): An AEDU class with proper scaling. Somewhat on the weaker side if the GM rules that the encounter attack powers cannot be retrained, but if the GM allows such (as the RAW PHB1 retraining rules and the online character builder both allow), then it becomes quite capable. Unfortunately, even with such retraining, this class is obsoleted by a PHB1 cleric with Battle Cleric's Lore taking Wisdom/Constitution-based powers.
Unlike what >>47413045 says, "clerics that used their weapons as implements" is wholly inaccurate for a warpriest, as they have no weapliment capacities short of specific magic items.
• Druid (sentinel): Awful. Unsalvageable. This has virtually no support at all, its encounter attack power progression is gutted, the animal companion is barely useful, and its leader capacities leave much to be desired. Everything you could want out of this is better accomplished through a hybrid (druid sentinel), or, if all you want is an animal companion, the Fey Beast Tamer theme.
>>47413557
• Fighter (knight), fighter (slayer), ranger (scout), rogue (thief): Actually quite good from levels 1-2 and arguably even *better* than the regular versions of the classes in many respects, most notably when comparing the scout and the thief to a PHB1 ranger or a PHB1 rogue. Gradually obsoleted from level 3-10 due to a lack of good encounter and daily attack powersunless you cheese out one-trick-pony charging. Briefly vindicated from levels 11-12 due to paragon-tier feats such as Deft Blade and Impaling Spear, then back to a gradual slide into obsolescence from level 13-30and even charging slowly loses value compared to what encounter and daily attack powers can start to do.
• Paladin (cavalier): A proper AEDU class that scales reasonably throughout all levels (a cavalier can even have Valorous Smite at level 1, Call of Challenge at level 2, and Strength from Valor at level 3), and is arguably the most competent mounted combatant in the game by level 4. It suffers from one less daily attack until level 15, and gaining no benefit from Honored Foe, Champion of Order, or Hospitaler greatly hurts it from level 11+. By paragon, you will have wanted to be a PHB1 paladin. Besides, a hybrid paladin (cavalier) offers all the best of the class with virtually nothing lost.
• Ranger (hunter): I have not the faintest idea why one would play this. It lacks a noteworthy niche, and it cannot perform its role as well as other controllers. Ignore this and never turn back. This is also the only class in the entire system that has a completely dead level (with nothing gained except for hit points), at level 19.
>>47413643
• Warlock (hexblade): Almost strictly worse a striker than the conventional optimized PHB1 warlock (Mindbite Scorn at level 1, Twofold Pact at level 11, Cursed Spells at level 21), and even then, such a PHB1 warlock is obsoleted by its hybrid version. The hexblade has no niche to speak of, its encounter attack powers are shabby, and being forced into taking Summon Warlock's Ally at certain levels is insulting. The only build here I could see being worthwhile is a Gloom Pact hexblade with Flail Expertise, which should create a very strong at-will attack power with Flesh Rend, and even then, that is a single trick that gets outclassed by proper encounter and daily attack powers.
• Wizard (mage): Unlike most other Essentials classes, this is *weaker* than its PHB1 counterpart up until level 10, at which point the full benefits of School of Magic activate and place it on par with the PHB1 wizard. From there, the two are roughly equal, but at the epic tier, the wizard (mage) pulls ahead due to receiving the Master of Lore and Master of Spells class features out of nowhere. No other class in the whole system receives benefits at levels 21 and 24.
I have no idea what >>47413045 is talking about with regards to "could use all wizard power without a lot of the B's."
How well an Essentials class will fit into a party depends on the specific Essentials class, the level range the DM will be running for, and the composition of the rest of the party. For example, in a party with a warlord, an Wisdom/Intelligence shaman, or a ranged bard (all of which can grant basic attacks at-will), a fighter (slayer) or a rogue (thief) suddenly becomes an invaluable member of the party who only grows better and better as the levels progress, even without charge optimization.
