|
Jolyne Cujoh posted:I generally tell my players what a monster's defenses are once they manage to hit them, give them a general idea of how much HP they have (beyond them just being able to see the bars because it's Roll20), and they have a good enough sense about abilities to tell when they're at will or encounter (plus I roll for recharges openly). We're also in Paragon where everyone generally has something to do with their minor and couldn't afford the action to use a knowledge check, but I think that by the time they're in paragon they're such experienced combatants that they should be able to tell these things through the act of fighting anyway. I was under the impression that all knowledge checks were free actions, unless that got errata'd somewhere?
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
They are, and not on-turn either. For us they are always part of the pre-fight admin along with setting up the initiative board and map.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Like when all is said and done, Leaders are cool because they make the whole team feel extra awesome, Strikers are cool because doing a ton of damage is always rad, Defenders CAN be cool when they're defending by leaping in front of the monster who's trying to attack you and pounding it so hard with a hammer they go flying back 50 feet and can barely understand it has hands in the next round, and Controllers...Controllers are there to make everything less cool. They make the fight less dramatic. OK. No. Or rather partly. Controllers who just apply debuffs suck - but they aren't the worst of the four roles. Controllers are there for two reasons - firstly they are the person the defender feels awesome by protecting (this goes double for a self-dazing Malvoker). Secondly it's all about the terrain and movement. A good pyromancer will set the ground on fire, making the defender that much more awesome. Or a good orb wizard will throw monsters into anything already on fire. A good controller either sets people up for others to put away or exploits an existing set up. Needless to say Essentials messed things up with the Enchanter because Mearls Wizard Supremacy. Beguiling Strands is ridiculous overkill as an at will with the Enchanter bonus. (That said, the Pyromancer from Dragon is very cool and the Nethermancer, Evoker, and Illusionist are pretty decent). The sucky role, and the one that makes the fights less dramatic is the Leader. The monster just hit hard. Oh noes! Now we need to use one of their heals and we'll never know who it was. Some panic button is good - but when they go much beyond * Word the whole thing turns into that much more of a grind. The Dishearten-spamming Psion can miss with their attacks - the Pacifist Cleric never does with their heals.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
The best leaders are enablers which either grant their allies bonuses or straight up free attacks. Yeah, pacifist clerics are boring. Now Battle Clerics, Warlords, Bards, and Artificers? They do really cool poo poo that makes other people feel cool too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Lazylord is bestlord.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
I think leaders and controllers both let a party hit higher on the encounter chart than numbers would imply. A good controller and leader probably let a party take on at least one additional on-level monster each than the encounter guidelines suggest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
Poison Mushroom posted:Lazylord is bestlord. Funny way to spell Bravelord. 420 charge all day err'yday. Our party has a Minotaur Bravura Warlord with the gambling charge. Fun watching him run around and knock poo poo over.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
See, I see the opposite of that. Leaders give the fight a good roller coaster feel to it. Without heals being present, the fight turns into ye olde game of rocket tag, where defense is always a losing strategy. Leaders having heals - and more specifically, a limited number of heals - means now you have to consider tactics and triage a lot more heavily. Like, yes, pacifist healers are kinda terrible, but that's one very small subsection of leaders.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
Bravelord bestlord  And it's not just the pacifist clerics. It's the healing builds in general (Laser clerics and Inspiring Warlords in particular - although I have a special hate for Artificers that ruin the strategic "Count the healing surges" game). And when you double up on leaders in the same party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
I played an Inspiring Warlord and I didn't feel that it was boring. Mostly because I had him set up for frontline fighting and off-turn interrupt attacking, freeing up his standard to tell someone else to bash 'em on his turn. Throw on some heavy armor, strap on a heavy shield, and dare a motherfucker to hit you. Oh, and supreme nova round setup from some really sweet utilities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
Bravelords are great because no matter how well or poorly optimized you are, you get to listen in on all of your allies' turns and when they decide to use an AP you get to shout "Hey do you want ~the gamble~" Also, yeah, I hosed up and misremembered what sort of actions monster knowledge checks are, mostly because as I said my groups never use them
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Closest I can think of is shouting "VENGEANCE IS MINE" while you retaliate with the encounter reaction power of the same name. Then you and a buddy make a swing at the fucker who dared to hit you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:The sucky role, and the one that makes the fights less dramatic is the Leader. The monster just hit hard. Oh noes! Now we need to use one of their heals and we'll never know who it was. Some panic button is good - but when they go much beyond * Word the whole thing turns into that much more of a grind. The Dishearten-spamming Psion can miss with their attacks - the Pacifist Cleric never does with their heals. If the leader can just outheal your monsters all the time, you need to do more fights per rest and more damage per fight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
I used a level 6 brute today against my level 3 party, which was fun. I mean, they slaughtered it, two level 4 Orc Grenadiers, a level 5 Gnoll Huntmaster, and four minions of level I can't remember, but I'm pretty sure I knocked like three healing surges off the Paladin and one or two off the Ranger. Plus watching your party's most heavily armored character get slammed two squares and knocked prone makes for a GREAT "oh poo poo" moment. I particularly like higher level brutes because they deal massive amounts of damage but have low enough defenses for the players hit them and bring them down relatively quickly. So, from my experience? More and meaner monsters are great, feel free to push the encounter budgets. Mecha Gojira fucked around with this message at 03:27 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:Closest I can think of is shouting "VENGEANCE IS MINE" while you retaliate with the encounter reaction power of the same name. Then you and a buddy make a swing at the fucker who dared to hit you. This is 100% the reason Warlord is the best class in 4E. That and offering THE DEVIL'S BARGAIN to enemies by offering them a free attack against you, the 'healer', if the Barbarian gets a free attack too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
Mecha Gojira posted:I'm pretty sure I knocked like three healing surges off the Paladin and one or two off the Ranger. Really as long as you can knock healing surges off of your players you're doing your job as the DM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Really as long as you can knock healing surges off of your players you're doing your job as the DM. 4e's monster math is nice, but it only really proscribes making monsters harder by giving them a little bit more of everything (i.e. HP, AC, and damage) and once their defense gets too high and the whiff factor becomes A Thing, it starts to be unfun for the players. Tuning up damage a little and HP a lot is probably the best way to tweak monsters, instead of overlevelling them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
Yeah, it's more engaging when a monster hits hard, and can take a hit, but doesn't have near foregone conclusion hit rolls going on. Than it is "Oh, they need to roll a 5 to hit our defense, and we need to roll a 15 to hit their defense". I mean, I doubt you're taking it that far, but it can happen sometimes if you are playing direct out of modules and you run into a swingy enemy placement for example.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 10:25
|
|
|
I just like triggering monsters' encounter powers, having them do interesting things, and then die when my party cleverly outwits them. Who expects to be out flanked by a massive beam of pure light? Poor ogre couldn't run away fast enough, not to mention the poor minions caught in its seering radiance. That ogre still landed a solid enough blow to knock the paladin off his feet and 10 feet into the bushes. Same encounter also had an orc Grenadier. They drop caltrops which completely mess with the terrain, and they deal auto-damage when they die PLUS a free area attack. After that fight I let them roll skill checks to fortify a frontier outpost - which they did exceptionally well - and having captured a grenadier, used his remaining fire bombs to create fire pit traps because hey it seemed like a good idea at the time and I'm the kind of DM that tries to say yes. Of course, I wonder if I'm enabling them. After all, I let them take a captive, they have a trebuchet, they put two and two together and want to launch the prisoner at the invading forces at the beginning of the battle - presumably while he's on fire. D&D brings out the best in people sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:4e's monster math is nice, but it only really proscribes making monsters harder by giving them a little bit more of everything (i.e. HP, AC, and damage) and once their defense gets too high and the whiff factor becomes A Thing, it starts to be unfun for the players. Tuning up damage a little and HP a lot is probably the best way to tweak monsters, instead of overlevelling them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:This is why over-leveled Brutes are great. Seconding this. Overleveled brutes make amazing challenges. I've been honestly using them as elite monsters for my currently low-level campaign since unfortunately there aren't many elite monsters in the books under level 6. I can't wait for higher levels when I can finally send over leveled elite brutes at them. I'm going to have to since by that point my party just might go full radiant mafia or something equally horrifying like full spam charge coming from our Bravelord and Chaladin. Or both.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Hey folks! I haven't played 4th in a long time despite it being my favorite edition, so I'm looking for some advice. One of my friends is starting a game with a bunch of people who are new to tabletop in general, and I'll be playing a PC and helping out with rules stuff since I'll be the most experienced person there. I'd like suggestions on the best class to play to help the new players out in combat as much as possible without making myself the center of attention. Basically I'm wanting to powergame as hard as I can, but with the goal of protecting and aiding other people while still keeping the spotlight on everyone else as much as possible to ensure that their introduction to the game is fun and makes them feel like the badasses rather than me. I've been thinking warlord or cleric, but I feel like the former is flavored to maybe cue the other players that I'm somehow in charge no matter how I actually roleplay it. Also, all my experience is just with core and close to core classes, so I'm sure some weird poo poo came out after I quit that might fit my purpose a little better. Any suggestions would be super rad, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 07:16
|
|
|
Definitely lazylord (warlord focused on giving other people attacks). Your main method is to let other people do their cool stuff, which also lets you transition easily into explaining things without feeling like you're bossing them around. Though that does rely on at least one of the other players having decent MBAs, so depending on their builds, it might not be ideal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
I would honestly suggest against the lazylord unless they are very ambitious and proactive with regards to learning the rules. Getting the most out of a lazylord requires careful positioning and co-operation, and can easily lead to, 'no no, stand here, so I can have you do this and furthermore...' situations. My suggestions: 1.) Player a Cleric, preferably a melee Cleric. Clerics have great buffs both to AC and attack, enabling your companions do to a lot of the really cool stuff. Strength-based Clerics are totally viable and a blast to play. Be a dwarf, grab a Mordenkrad and give people Combat Advantage. Your heals and AC boosts will help shore up their weaknesses and cover their mistakes. 2.) Player a Paladin. You can get a lot of mileage out of maxed Paladin, but it requires you to do some work (which sounds like something you want!). You aren't playing the Striker or the Controller, here, so it's not like the fight is about you but you have enough clutch buffs, heals, and defender-y stuff to help catapult the team to victory. Probably less flashy than being a Fighter, too, if you're worried about stealing the show. 3.) Play a Warlock. Vanilla Warlocks aren't great Controllers or great Strikers but they can fill either role in a pinch, which lets you be flexible. Just like my opinion, man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Play a Bard Paladin Hybrid with the skald aura feat, heal all the time, attack all the time, be awesome all the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
Definitely Paladin. Paladins can heal a little worse than Clerics/other leaders and Defenderize a little worse than Fighters/other defenders and you're not anywhere near as much a damage machine as anything else so no matter what class someone plays you won't outshine them but you'll always be useful. Additionally, if someone does want to be a purestrain Leader/Defender then you don't have to worry about stepping on their toes since your reach in those roles isn't as great. Finally you have plate/heavy shield/Defender HP to be as tanky as possible so you'll be around as much as possible to help them out ingame; this way you can match gameplay and flavor and maybe be the rugged old veteran guiding the younger crowd to match with what you're doing out of game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Okay, yeah, that's some pretty good points. Change my vote to Paladin, too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Ok, I'll probably go paladin unless someone posts a good alternative. I know I played a warlord reach Goliath who dictated the flow of most combats even after the party got a fighter. That was fine though, since we were mostly experienced players.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 09:14
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:This is why over-leveled Brutes are great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Pharmaskittle posted:Ok, I'll probably go paladin unless someone posts a good alternative. I know I played a warlord reach Goliath who dictated the flow of most combats even after the party got a fighter. That was fine though, since we were mostly experienced players. Here's my counter-argument for paladin. I don't like paladin in that kind of group because I don't really feel like it has sufficient ability to pick up slack. Lay on Hands burns your surges to heal, their damage output is fairly limited, and their control is limited aside from multimark. They can be great in a group that knows what they're doing, but in a group that's not familiar with the game it's a great way to make a fight take forever while you try to hold things together. I would go with Bravelord, party composition allowing. Tough. Lots of heals. Makes other characters feel awesome, but it does it in an aggressive way. Don't worry about lazylord crap like 'I have to position them here so I can...", just charge the gently caress in and make poo poo happen. It's not a defender, but it has a huge advantage in that you can really set the pace of a fight and make plays happen, as opposed to the paladin who's always reacting. When the party is flailing, the warlord can get things in gear where the Paladin runs around trying to just keep poo poo together. Warlord|Cleric is also really good on this, as are Cleric hybrids in general. Fighter|Cleric, for example, can mostly Fighter it up while possessing a fair amount of healing. I'd probably do Bravelord, myself. Fighter|Cleric if I needed a defender. Paladins are good but they need to get pretty char-oppy to really carry a fight and I wouldn't want to roll that kind of thing in a newbie game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 10:08
|
|
|
Plus unless the party is only two people, a single brute is not only not a challenge, it's a cakewalk. Hell, they might be able to take a single solo at level +2 - 3 depending on what level they are and how well optimized they are. Just want to give you a heads up. Also, the secret to Paladin is play as a Half-Orc, pick up the feat that lets you use your strength instead of charisma and optionally the feat that lets you use strength for intimidate checks. Then all but forget about Charisma, make Wisdom your secondary, and con and dex as tertiary. Gets you access to Heavy Blade Opportunity in paragon, and then combine with Champion of Order to get that sweet, sweet at will power opportunity attack to go on top of your Divine Challenge punishment. Don't let the other defenders out there get you down; you can mark and punish an entire battlefield at any time under any Condition while most others rely on immediate actions to enforce theirs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
Oh yeah this would definitely be in addition to a regular encounter XP budget. Actually that might bring it back around to dangerous again, come to think of it. The idea is that there are a few combat encounters, and the win condition is "get to the exit", but in every encounter the big guy shows up after a few rounds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 10:20
|
|
|
Khizan posted:Here's my counter-argument for paladin. If the defender drops 'cause he's got suboptimal AC or HP or just made a bad decision, there's not a lot that a typical Leader can do to fill that hole. And while yeah, you can argue "a heal cleric would keep the defender from dropping in the first place", that doesn't do anything to teach the player that he made a mistake. A party that feels invincible will get themselves into some bad habits, and a new DM (I don't know if the DM is new or not, but w/e) might overcorrect on a party they feel isn't being challenged and accidentally flatten them. Conversely, a Paladin who is opped up but willingly chooses not to dominate the spotlight can serve as a brace point, holding up whatever's weak, while still allowing some consequences through.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
Poison Mushroom posted:Counter-counter-argument: The DM is (or at least should) probably be playing softball anyways, but being able to jump into any spot when someone goes down is really good for keeping that from turning into a TPK with players who don't yet have the system knowledge to keep rolling on their own. counter^3-argument: The jack-of-all-trades paladin can keep a fight going but it doesn't really have a way to notably contribute to that fight's ending. You can heal when the leader bites it, but you suck at it compared to a real healer because you're burning all your surges to do it. You have control, but it's multi-mark with a lackluster early game punishment and no way to cancel an attack. You're almost entirely reactive. You can shore up a losing fight, but you can't carry that losing fight and you can't really set the pace. You're building up a mediocre character for the sole purpose of keeping newbies alive in the most boring prolonged draining fashion. That's the kind of combat that makes people hate 4e, and it's the kind of combat you don't want to encourage them to pick up. Attrition battles suck and you should tailor your newbie helping character around avoiding them instead of enduring them. Warlord and Warlord|Cleric, on the other hand, are tanky bruisers who can get in there, make plays, and set up kills, all while having enough raw healing power to keep people up through a fight. They emphasize tactics that you want your players to pick up. Go Warlord. Not Paladin. If I were introducing new players to the game, I'd rather have them TPK after a handful of fun fast punchy fights than have them survive the campaign but sit through those prolonged attrition fights. Khizan fucked around with this message at 11:00 on Feb 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Warlord|Paladin Max out charisma as hard as you can, wisdom is your secondary. Tiefling is probably best because they can key so many other things to charisma with some really great paladin support (MBA + fantastic alt racial ability, and init with another feat). Hybrid talent yourself some armor, focus on wide-spread marking on your paladin side and lazylord-esque stuff on your warlord side; there's enough lazylord powers that don't require specific placement and the like. You become a very tough defender with a lot of ways to do wide-spread marks alongside decent enough healing options and cool ways to make your allies cooler. ...That said there is no singular "best" option unless we know what the rest of the group is making. EDIT: Like if your party has more then one player with a good MBA you could get real dumb about it and make something like the ol' Flameswitch warlord|shaman and just spend every turn highfiving the rest of the team as you vomit nonstop extra attacks onto them. ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 13:41 on Feb 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
Or you could still do melee cleric. Just sayin. Giant hammer STR cleric is amazing and fun up through level 15-16 and even then it falls back to merely pretty awesome. Also doesn't require bizarre MAD hybriding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
I vote Warlord. If the group is new to D&D your goal isn't to optimize for fights, but to optimize for high-fives. Warlords do that best as long as there's at least one decent MBA in the party. For the roleplaying aspect, the group is probably going to be looking to you for a bit of leadership anyway, so it's not out of line. You could play a grizzled veteran advisor to one of the other players. That would put the spotlight back on them a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Are there any Ki Foci that are good for casting Sorceror Spells through? Almost all of the ones that I've seen only help melee attacks or the such, owing to being a monk and assassin implement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Not really. Sorcs want Staff of Ruin, almost always, except for the ones that require Daggers, unless a much better option exists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 23:29 |
|
|
That's what I figured, though this would be in addition to a staff of Ruin, since I'll have dual implement expertise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 19:30
|
|