|
You may be thinking of all the things that can be done to charop Eldritch Strike. Also, any warlock can easily access a bunch of damage types by wearing Gloves of Eldritch Admixture.
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
I'm looking at the hexblade charop guide which features this line:quote:Eldritch Bolt (Lv. 1) - One of your At-Will powers, which all Hexblades possess. Fortunately, it's not too bad, being a ranged option that should deal solid force damage, which generally isn't resisted. Unfortunately, its not Eldritch Blast, so it doesn't possess any of the feat synergy that goes along with Eldritch Blast. I cannot figure out what they're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Ineffable posted:I know at least one of the players would react pretty badly if I wanted to double up on their class, so I don't want to do that. Splicer fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:I'm looking at the hexblade charop guide which features this line: Off the top of my head there's a pretty good tiefling warlock feat that also turns your eldritch blast into fire damage, there's also another feat that makes it radiant, which Admixture does not allow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
The issue I can maybe see with Warlord is the book selection. IIRC a lot of their ranged enabling powers belong to the archery build, which was added later. I could be wrong though, I've not built many Warlords. It's tough making recommendations with book restrictions because a lot of us have just internalized 4e as a whole. A sword and board or maybe even 2-handed Fighter would still likely be solid. And without Divine Power that potential Paladin is going to be a middling defender. Doesn't really help with skill selection though. The Fighter list is pretty crap unless you have a decent Wis and grab something for it with your background. Invokers are neat, and often have kind of a leader-y bent. Depending on how much hard control the Wizard does you might end up with some boring fights with two controllers in the party though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Thanks for advice Re:Leaders (I'm not completely sold yet, but I'm now strongly considering a Warlord or Bard - I prefer the Bard's skills and flavour, but it's really hard to argue against the Warlord's free attack granting). Splicer posted:What out of combat niches are underrepresented? Would the party face like a wingman/know it all like an understudy? Or would they feel like you were stealing their shtick? We've got pretty much everything covered between us. I suppose the only thing we're missing is a dedicated face (although the rogue has bluff and the cleric has diplomacy, so that's not as much of an issue as it could be). I'd just like to be able to contribute to skill challenges, honestly. ImpactVector posted:It's tough making recommendations with book restrictions because a lot of us have just internalized 4e as a whole. Yeah, the book restrictions are what's giving me the most trouble - there's reams of information out there if everything's available, not much if it's not. ImpactVector posted:A sword and board or maybe even 2-handed Fighter would still likely be solid. And without Divine Power that potential Paladin is going to be a middling defender. Doesn't really help with skill selection though. The Fighter list is pretty crap unless you have a decent Wis and grab something for it with your background. I was wondering about a fighter - I hear good things online, but the poor skills put me off, and my dm advised me against it, as well, since apparently they used to have a fighter who was pretty bad and eventually left the group. Honestly, I've yet to see the Wizard actually use any sort of controlling power - it's mostly just been aoe damage (part of the reason I was interested in controllers!). Invokers seem cool, but like I said before, I'm not sure how they hold up without Divine Power - the consensus seems to be that they live and die by their power selection.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Fighters are a completely kickass defender. If their previous fighter sucked, it is because the player sucked. They're probably the strongest defender in game without getting into hybrids swordlocks and suck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Ineffable posted:We've got pretty much everything covered between us. I suppose the only thing we're missing is a dedicated face (although the rogue has bluff and the cleric has diplomacy, so that's not as much of an issue as it could be). I'd just like to be able to contribute to skill challenges, honestly. Also your in story respec explanation is "My Dragon ancestry asserts itself! SUDDENLY FIRE EVERYWHERE!" Khizan posted:Fighters are a completely kickass defender. If their previous fighter sucked, it is because the player sucked. They're probably the strongest defender in game without getting into hybrids swordlocks and suck. Splicer fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
And Fighters are universally loving terrible at noncombat skills unless those skills are run, jump, drink a lot, and climb. Maaaaybe see stuff. Bard is unmatched as a face, but Sorcerer is also very solid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
He said that the DM advised against it because they had a previous fighter who was pretty bad and left the group. What I am saying is if the previous fighter was pretty bad, that's operator error, because the fighter itself is awesome. Also, his group is: - Wizard - Rogue - Cleric - Warlock - Ranger (might be switched to a Paladin) - Barbarian (me) Since it's been stated it's a Pacifist Cleric and assuming the Ranger is a ranged ranger because he said it's ranged-heavy, the key skillsets they are missing are in the "run, jump, climb rope, pick up heavy things" families. Khizan fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Sorcerer might be up your alley. Charisma primary, if you go Dragon sorcerer you can kind of frontline and having str as a secondary is a reason to pick up athletics, which from the looks of things no-one else will have. I thought about Sorcerer, but I was a little worried I'd outshine the aforementioned blasting-focused Wizard. Can Sorcerer's do any sort of decent controlling on the side, or are they mostly just damage? Since everyone seems to be chiming in saying fighters are great - is there a particular type of fighter which is good with just the PHB/2? I get the impression you're strongly encouraged to go sword and shield, at least at heroic. Edit: Khizan posted:Also, his group is: This is definitely true - at the moment only my Barbarian can actually do that, it's just that I'm finding only being able to do those things is a bit limiting. Ideally I'd like to do those things and also contribute to more social/knowledge based challenges. Ineffable fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Oct 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Sorcs are by and large about damage. They can do some control (almost everyone cant) but they are by and large about making things go boom. Sword and Board or Big Honking Beatstick are the two good variations of fighter in the PHBs IIRC. Use the thingy that adds WIS to OA rolls and stops movement with OAs, not the other one. Can't remember either of the names. Arena Fighter from Dark Sun is also good, Brawler is hella fun but not amazing. Two Weapon Fighter is good but again not amazing, much like the two weapon barb it just fails at being a melee ranger without offering an awful lot in return.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Skillwise: You can background into pretty much any non-class skill pretty easily. Fighters also have a strong Wis secondary which means that there are an awful lot of more general 'thinky' skills you can side into pretty effectively. Insight, Perception, Heal, Nature, Dungeoneering. Most of those are pretty easy to fit into an in-character background, too. The fighter that grew up as a farm kid so he knows how to track and hunt. Grew up in a mining camp, knows caving. Etc. It also just might be a problem with the kind of out-of-combat tasks your DM is giving you that relegate you to a backseat role and it might be a good idea to just say "Hey, I have nothing to do outside of combat, could we think about how I could get more involved?" Maybe they're doing too much stuff in skill checks so that there's not as much room to actually roleplay things out. Maybe they're just not considering how to work you in. This can help a lot. Finally, I'd also like to suggest that sometimes it can be more fun to be bad at things. I've probably had more fun being terrible at diplomacy than I have had being good at it. Don't let the fact that you're awful at something stop you from trying it if you think it could be fun. The objective of the game, after all, isn't to beat the campaign's boss. The objective is just to have fun telling/playing through the story and completely loving up your diplomacy checks can make for a much better story than nailing them. That one is more of a character choice, though, and your group has to be okay with it. I just want to point out that you don't have to be good at a skill to make it a viable action.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
Murdering class skills, giving everyone at least 4 trained skills and letting people pick one or two skills to switch the ability score for does help bridge the lovely skill situation some of the physical classes are in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Khizan posted:Skillwise: Khizan posted:Finally, I'd also like to suggest that sometimes it can be more fun to be bad at things. I've probably had more fun being terrible at diplomacy than I have had being good at it. Don't let the fact that you're awful at something stop you from trying it if you think it could be fun. The objective of the game, after all, isn't to beat the campaign's boss. The objective is just to have fun telling/playing through the story and completely loving up your diplomacy checks can make for a much better story than nailing them.  ) is another matter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Khizan posted:Finally, I'd also like to suggest that sometimes it can be more fun to be bad at things. I've probably had more fun being terrible at diplomacy than I have had being good at it. Don't let the fact that you're awful at something stop you from trying it if you think it could be fun. The objective of the game, after all, isn't to beat the campaign's boss. The objective is just to have fun telling/playing through the story and completely loving up your diplomacy checks can make for a much better story than nailing them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
I mostly DM, but from what I can see if you want tactical play the Defender and Controller role have a lot, as does an attack granting or tactical leader. So I'd suggest torpedoing the guy moving to ranger by playing a defender, second option being maybe play a tactical warlord (strength/int), but a better option might be to ask for the book restrictions to be relaxed for the specific purpose of playing a hybrid. The case I'd make is 'because you have a larger party I want to play a hybrid so I can cover off multiple roles' but this has the side benefit of letting you play something ridiculously complex with tons of options and moving parts. Swordmage/warlock, barbarian/swordmage, paladin/warlock, Ranger/Warlord would all be workable and have lots going on. If you're totally stumped though, here is a fighter build that is mostly PHB stuff, with some stuff from martial power - https://web.archive.org/web/20150916222949/http://community.wizards.com/content/forum-topic/2692911 that you could probably replace. Cthulhu Dreams fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
LightWarden posted:Murdering class skills, giving everyone at least 4 trained skills and letting people pick one or two skills to switch the ability score for does help bridge the lovely skill situation some of the physical classes are in. I wrote up some rules like that, once. P.d0t posted:Primal Classes: You can use your INT modifier in place of your CHA modifier for any CHA checks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
Thanks for all the suggestions! I'm pretty sure I could do something with skills as a fighter (convince my dm to let me use a background, pick up a multiclass feat, etc.) but I'm a little skeptical about how fun they are in combat. They seem, I don't know, straightforward? I guess most of the tactical complexity comes from marking and OAs. How is the Warden? No one's mentioned it yet, but it's the other Defender that's on the table (at the very least, it's got a better skill list). Cthulhu Dreams posted:I mostly DM, but from what I can see if you want tactical play the Defender and Controller role have a lot, as does an attack granting or tactical leader. So I'd suggest torpedoing the guy moving to ranger by playing a defender, second option being maybe play a tactical warlord (strength/int), but a better option might be to ask for the book restrictions to be relaxed for the specific purpose of playing a hybrid. I think it's unlikely I'll be able to play a hybrid. I doubt the other players will be keen on the idea, and it seems a little too complicated for me to be comfortable building one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 09:37
|
|
|
I'm a big warden fan. Generally lacks the stickiness and damage potential of the fighter, but it's tough as hell and has good control options. It multi-marks right out of the gate and its daily power situation will be somewhat familiar to you if you've played a barbarian already. Earthstrength/stormheart wardens are a little pigeonholed by the strength/con focus, and you don't really need a lifespirit given that you have a pacifist cleric, so you're probably looking at a wildblood.LightWarden posted:Murdering class skills, giving everyone at least 4 trained skills and letting people pick one or two skills to switch the ability score for does help bridge the lovely skill situation some of the physical classes are in. The Crotch fucked around with this message at 09:55 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
Wardens are pretty drat great, actually. Even just at the most basic level you've got multi-marking, so there's an automatic tactical element of "where do I go so I can mark the most guys, and is that the best place I can be?" They're also, at least with Earthstrength, drat near unkillable. You can push your AC into the stratosphere, walk right into a group of enemies laughing at OAs, mark them all and watch them squirm trying to work out whether to waste their attack on your buffed AC or become the first target of your mark punishment. And that's before powers enter into it. Warden Dailies are usually Polymorphs that put you into a guardian form for the encounter, giving you increased capabilities in key areas and an extra encounter power. Great to pull out when you're in a tough fight and you know it from the start.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 09:57
|
|
|
I was looking up what was in PHB 1 and 2 and realised I'd completely forgotten the shaman existed. What's it like in play?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:I'm looking at the hexblade charop guide which features this line: There's also that Eladrin specific feat that lets you add +CHA (I think) to eldritch blast.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
I only got to play a (brawler) fighter for a few combats, but my understanding is that the fighter brings a lot more hard battlefield control to a fight than most other defenders. For most defenders, all they have is their one interrupt, and after that anyone can get away from them. Fighters stop movement on opportunity attacks, mark or no, so it's really tough to get very far away from them. And since so much of their deterrence comes from attacks (their interrupt is a basic attack) they're also often built to come with a side of striker. Wardens are more about jumping in the middle of a group and giving a bunch of -hit penalties, and when things look bad their dailies do a really good job of mucking with the battlefield (look at Form of Winter's Herald, it's nuts). But, like barbarians, they're a lot less scary if they're not going Super Primal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:I only got to play a (brawler) fighter for a few combats, but my understanding is that the fighter brings a lot more hard battlefield control to a fight than most other defenders. Properly-built Wardens are, effectively, a black hole from which only teleportation can provide sure escape. Between World Serpent's Grasp and their massive array of other ways to keep things stuck on them, they're a very good "chokehold" unit. They can have issues getting the initial cluster without help, though, since Fighters have tools like Come and Get It built right into their chassis. They're also even tankier than Paladins considering they get the ability to save on effects both at the start of and end of their turns, bonuses to Second Wind, and most of their utility powers are even more toughness. They suffer from lesser damage compared to a Fighter and their punishment mechanics are significantly weaker than a Fighter or Paladin, but if you ever wanted 6 enemies slowed, prone, and immobilized for almost the entire fight, Warden's your man. Plus they have Nature and Dungeoneering built in as class skills (and some of their builds use WIS).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Wardens are super hilarious for the sheer fact that you can force enemies to permanently be prone except on their turn where they go 'Move: stand-Up, Standard:Shift 1'. Then on your turn you hit them with a slowing/Immobilizing attack and knock them on their assets again with world serpent's grasp.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
They also get absolutely massive amounts of healing surges and HP. Ours cracked 100 HP while the paladin was still in the 80s.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Good stuff. I'll cede all points on the warden. I've only seen one hit the table once, and only for two fights: I made one in very first time playing 4e for a KotB game. I dropped out of that game because it was too far to drive every week. But you're all right, it was great being an icy black hole IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Warden sounds pretty good, then, although I wonder if clustering the enemies around you is doable without help (no one seems to be a big fan of positioning effects in my party). I guess I'll probably go with a Defender (either a fighter or a warden, not sure which) or a Leader (most likely a warlord) depending on whether our ranger switches out for a paladin. Thanks for all the help, everyone! No one's really mentioned controllers, which is interesting because they were my first thought when I decided I wanted something more complicated. Are Wizards just that much better than the rest?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
Ineffable posted:Warden sounds pretty good, then, although I wonder if clustering the enemies around you is doable without help (no one seems to be a big fan of positioning effects in my party). I guess I'll probably go with a Defender (either a fighter or a warden, not sure which) or a Leader (most likely a warlord) depending on whether our ranger switches out for a paladin. Thanks for all the help, everyone! Wizards have the most options and can be good at any type of Control without being bad at the other types. Psions are kings of hard control, but they can make the game extremely unfun for the GM. Druids are a bit weak comparatively though they're good at their specialty (slide/prone/slow) and are the only melee Controllers. Invokers are very solid all-around Controllers and hybrid stupidly well with Clerics to the point where the end product is objectively better than the sum of its parts. All in all, they're a neat fifth wheel but you have to be careful to not completely steamroll encounters, which Wizards and Psions can do very easily.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Ineffable posted:Are Wizards just that much better than the rest? They're also probably the most control-y of the controllers unless you deliberately make them blasty, so adding another controller to the party makes you guys much more likely to completely shut down encounters and make everything boring (which, granted, a wizard is capable of all on their own -- think about Visions of Avarice -> AP -> Phantom Chasm). While there are exceptions, in general, looking at the power sources, they all tend to lean their classes toward a particular secondary role regardless of the class's primary one: Martial -> Striker Divine -> Leader Arcane -> Controller Primal -> Defender Shadow -> Garbage So even in a big party, if someone is already has a doubled up primary/secondary role, you should probably be wary of adding a second class of that role (except strikers -- go hog wild there). Plus controllers in particular the easiest to get by without. Generally if a party is going to be missing a role, controller is often the one people recommend skipping on. ImpactVector fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
With only PHB 1 and 2, you might be able to get away with a wizard, but with other books you can easily get a wizard at level 14 that has an at-will with each enemy in this 3x3 area takes 1d6+mods damage, -2 to all attacks, an additional -2 to attacks against you, cannot make opportunity attacks and grant combat advantage to the next strike against them.
berenzen fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Unknown Quantity posted:Wizards have the most options and can be good at any type of Control without being bad at the other types. Psions are kings of hard control, but they can make the game extremely unfun for the GM. Druids are a bit weak comparatively though they're good at their specialty (slide/prone/slow) and are the only melee Controllers. Invokers are very solid all-around Controllers and hybrid stupidly well with Clerics to the point where the end product is objectively better than the sum of its parts. All in all, they're a neat fifth wheel but you have to be careful to not completely steamroll encounters, which Wizards and Psions can do very easily. Controllers kind of have that problem in general: the better they are at their job, the more one-sided and boring the fight becomes. Dishearten psions are commonly called out for it but it's largely the same (just maybe not as straightforward) for all controllers: if you can all but completely neuter the opposition, every fight becomes a boring slog and a foregone conclusion. Aside from multi-attacking for minion popping and whatnot, controllers can largely be safely ignored and your game won't really suffer for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
And other classes encroach on their territory anyway. Warlocks are heavily control focused, bards impose tons of status effects, leaders in general can't decide if their gimmick is buffing allies or debuffing enemies. A better design paradigm would have been to either stick to a strict buff/debuff split between leaders and controllers, or to replace the controller role with a blaster role altogether, maybe keep certain conditions restricted to certain roles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:And other classes encroach on their territory anyway. Warlocks are heavily control focused, bards impose tons of status effects, leaders in general can't decide if their gimmick is buffing allies or debuffing enemies. A better design paradigm would have been to either stick to a strict buff/debuff split between leaders and controllers, or to replace the controller role with a blaster role altogether, maybe keep certain conditions restricted to certain roles. Imposing catch-22s is way more interesting than just shutting things down. One creates decisions, the other removes them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Sort of, yeah. Maybe not as applicable in your situation, but they're by far the most supported controller, if not class, in the game. Wizards do not enjoy the near-total superiority other PHB classes have; Invoker is as strong if not stronger; playing a wizard as a blaster is generally a waste of time compared to classes that are better-designed to do it; wizards have a ponderous number of garbage powers; and their mechanic for changing out dailies is an unnecessary legacy mechanic. Overall Controller was not a huge positive benefit to the 4E design as a role and it is by far the most nebulous of the roles, because it doesn't really have key mechanics attached to it. Some forms of control are near-worthless while others are so amazing that they obviate most fights.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Playing a pure fire-based Wizard is some of the best fun I've had in 4e for what it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Invokers are better at meshing damage and control together and generally have better and more interesting Encounter powers. Wizard at-wills can be ok at control (and are good anti-control) and their encounters are likewise mostly ok, but their dailies are soul-crushing. The main problem I have with fire wizards is that I can never shake the thought of "ok but I'd probably rather be a sorcerer." And I guess artillery style gameplay just isn't really my thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 04:21
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I was looking up what was in PHB 1 and 2 and realised I'd completely forgotten the shaman existed. What's it like in play? They are a weird, "chess board" feeling class, in which you must pay attention to character placement a bit more than usual. As was stated for primal classes, they feel very defendery for a leader, though more in a literal "My spirit blocks the passage of enemies" kind of way. The build I played was the guardian spirit build, and haven't played any others, so I couldn't really say anything about them, but the way it ended up playing was, the spirit blocks paths, and sprinkles tiny bits of surgeless healing around whoever's adjacent. In effect, you can get one solid surge-fueled healing for one dude, then sprinkle a little bit more for another, different character for this kind of strange halfsies style of leader healing for every time you use their healing ability. Usually the spirit is best to tag along with the Defender or Striker, while the Shaman themselves hang back at a distance, but not too far from the spirit; usually around 5-6 squares. They're definitely a class that takes a bit of forethought to make best use out of during combat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 11:32 |
|
|
I've played with a Shaman in the party, and being able to sprinkling the healing around was handy in any sort of non-conventionally structured party. They also can do a bit of MBA granting, though I can't really say how theirs compares to a Warlord; I was playing a Scout at the time, so I appreciated it nonetheless.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 05:05
|
|