WotC's Nightmare wrote: I saw the same pattern in the WWGD scenarios. Either the math is wrong on the exp end, and they have to have "challenging" encounters to level at a decent pace or something else is out of whack. Many people seem to confirm a trend towards excruciatingly long and repetitive combats in 4E do the overly high hit points and high defences on the opponents side. I've seen a few people make that claim, but I haven't seen too much actual support for it - even in the high level games I've run thus far, the average length might be 8-9 rounds, with each round being pretty dynamic and active. Solo encounters can end up a bit more repetitive, I admit, but they've generally been 50/50 (in my experience) between exciting and repetitive - and even the repetitive ones haven't run on too long.
hmarcbower wrote: Matthew Koelbl wrote:
It is true that you can't have your character sheet state you are a Fighter/Cleric/Rogue/Wizard anymore. But you can play a character in full-plate who unleashes devestating blows in melee, but can also heal their allies or unleash arcane powers upon their foes, while dodging incoming fireballs and darting into the shadows or disabling traps between combats.
That build is entirely doable - I can think of 3 or 4 different ways to do it just off the top of my head. What more do you need?
I don't *need* it, but could you share a few of those builds? :) I don't know the 4e rules thoroughly, but I think an example like this would definitely help illustrate some of the things that you're saying can be done. Sure, here are the ones that come to mind:
Paladin / Warlock: This character can actually focus their stats pretty well, with a heavy emphasis on Charisma, and the rest of the stats split between Dexterity, some Wisdom, and their choice of Strength or Constitution. The Paladin covers both the melee and the healing expertise pretty well, with the Warlock adding in arcane explosiveness. Take Skill Training in Stealth and Thievery, and feats like Evasion and Uncanny Dodge, and you have things pretty well covered. Main issue of this build: No great warlock Paragon Paths for multiclassers, and only a few multitarget powers. I built this as a fully Charisma based character, but building with a bit more focus on Con would let the character pick up more area effect powers from the Warlock side.
Snapshot, Level 14: Rufus o' Blackwood, Knight of the Moon
Halfling Paladin / Hospitaler
Str: 11, Con: 12, Dex: 18, Int: 9, Wis: 18, Cha: 22
Hp: 105, AC: 29, Fort: 22, Ref: 26, Will: 27
Feats: Skill Training (Acrobatics), Skill Training (Stealth), Evasion, Uncanny Dodge, Pact Initiate (Fey, Thievery), Weapon Proficiency (Rapier), Novice Power, Acolyte Power, Adept Power
Skills: Acrobatics +16, Religion +11, Diplomacy +18, Heal +16, History +11, Stealth +14, Thievery +16
Equipment: Pact Blade +3 Rapier, Stormwalker's Cloak +3, Black Iron Plate +3, Light Bashing Shield (Heroic), Acrobat Boots, Holy Symbol +3
At Will Powers: Bolstering Strike, Enfeebling Strike
Encounter Powers: Eyebite, Warding Blow, Renewing Smite, Benign Transposition, Eldritch Rain
Daily Powers: Thief of Five Fates, Hallowed Circle, Radiant Delirium
Utility Powers: Healing Font, Cleansing Spirit, Wrath of the Gods, Ethereal Stride
Cleric / Wizard: Strength and Int are our big stats, with Dex for skills and some Wisdom for general cleric purposes. The cleric makes a good melee combatant and healer, and once in the paragon levels, Warpriest can nearly make them a fighter. Wizard provides the big explosions, and if the cleric already feels competent in melee, has a very good selection of paragon paths. And, like with the last build, use feats to fill in 'thief' elements. The downside of this build is reliance on being somewhat stat heavy, though not overwhelmingly so. A Warlord / Wizard build is also a very easy choice with similar guidelines.
Snapshot, Level 14: Angus the Stormbreaker
Eladrin Cleric / Spellstorm Mage
Str: 20, Con: 11, Dex: 16, Int: 20, Wis: 12, Cha: 9
Hp: 88, AC: 28, Fort: 25, Ref: 25, Will: 24
Feats: Skill Training (Acrobatics), Skill Training (Stealth), Evasion, Arcane Initiate, Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword), Novice Power, Acolyte Power, Arcane Reach, Resounding Thunder
Skills: Arcana +19, Acrobatics +14, Religion +17, Diplomacy +11, Heal +13, History +19, Stealth +17, Thievery +14
Equipment: Lifedrinker Bastard Sword +3, Bloodcut Hide Armor +3, Elven Cloak +3, Wand of Lightning Bolt +3
At Will Powers: Priest's Shield, Righteous Brand
Encounter Powers: Thunderwave, Storm Cage, Thunderlance, Awe Strike, Split the Sky
Daily Powers: Divine Power, Weapon of the Gods, Avenging Flame
Utility Powers: Sudden Storm, Mass Cure Light Wounds, Cure Serious Wounds, Shield
Other builds: With the Swordmage on the way, one can certainly make a number of builds from that - Swordmage/Cleric probably being the easiest one to put together. Warlord/Wizard or Warlord/Warlock is also a pretty straightforward build that combines melee power, healing ability, and arcane spells.
Now, one thing that is obvious here is that in order to get 'rogue' elements in the build, skills and feats have mainly been used (mainly because rogue is easier to simulate with such things than any of the other elements of this hybrid.) Still, if a character can sneak, disarm traps, and tumble across the ground while dodging fireballs, that seems to cover the concept well enough for me!
Note that all of these builds will generally be a little behind any character focused in one specific element. But -1 to hit and damage in return for the sheer versatility of being able to heal, melee, throw spells from afar or at a group of enemies... seems a pretty good trade. And these are by no means perfect builds - I'm sure someone looking at this long term could put together a more focused version in the end.
Matthew Koelbl wrote: ... neat combos ... And how do you get to be a Paladin/Warlock or Cleric/Wizard? As I said I'm not familiar with the rules... how does it work that you would take two of those classes?
It makes perfect sense to simulate the "thiefy" abilities by skills (and I see feats that are rogue class abilities?).
Edit: Oh, is that "second class" the paragon path thingy?
hmarcbower wrote: Matthew Koelbl wrote: ... neat combos ... And how do you get to be a Paladin/Warlock or Cleric/Wizard? As I said I'm not familiar with the rules... how does it work that you would take two of those classes?
It makes perfect sense to simulate the "thiefy" abilities by skills (and I see feats that are rogue class abilities?).
Edit: Oh, is that "second class" the paragon path thingy? Sorry, I'll go into a bit more detail, since I imagine most of that sounded like gibberish without being familiar with the rules. ^_^
Anyway, the way multiclassing in 4E works is pretty much entirely based around feats. The class you choose at the start of the game is your class throughout - however, you can pick up abilities from another class through a series of feats.
Each class has a specific multiclassing feat that gives, typically, some basic class feature or power, plus training in one class skill. For the Cleric/Wizard above, the feat in question is Arcane Initiate, which lets him choose a basic wizard At Will power that he can use as an Encounter power, as well as gives him training in Arcana.
(A quick explanation of powers - you have At Will Powers, which you can use as often as you want; Encounter Powers, which you can basically use once per fight; and Daily Powers, which are once per day. Powers are really what define what you can do, whether it is using special manuevers to garrote an enemy, or hurling spells across the field, or calling forth healing for allies.)
So, Angus - our Cleric - takes Arcane Initiate at first level. He is at this point mainly a swordsman who can heal his allies, but he is now also knowledgeable about Arcane matters, and can cast a spell once per combat - let's choose Thunderwave, which lets him hurl a blast of thunder to damage nearby foes. He has some normal skills from being a Cleric - he knows about Religion and History, and is good at Diplomacy and Healing. As an Eladrin, he can also choose another free skill, so let's choose Thievery, to start him down that path.
At level 4, he is able to take the first power swap feat, Novice Power - this lets him swap a Cleric Encounter Power for a Wizard Encounter Power. He just got a new Encounter Power at level 3, so he'll swap that - now, he is capable of the following:
-In addition to being able to make basic attacks with his sword, he has two special melee attacks he can do at will, one of which can boost an ally's attack bonus, the other which can boost AC.
-Twice per encounter, he can heal a nearby ally with a quick prayer.
-Once per encounter, he can use his level 1 Cleric Encounter Power - let's say he took Healing Strike, a powerful melee attack that can distract an enemy and also grant healing to an ally.
-Twice per encounter, he can cast spells - Thunderwave, mentioned before, and a new level 3 Wizard Encounter Power, such as Color Spray.
-Once per day, he can use his level 1 Cleric Daily Power, which is likely Avenging Flame - a powerful melee attack that can unleash holy fire upon the enemy.
-Once per day, he can use his level 2 Cleric Utility Power, such as Cure Light Wounds, which heals allies with a touch. (Some of the other choices for Utility Powers could be used once per fight, instead, but he chose a more powerful one that could be used less often.)
He also, by this point, has had the chance to pick up the feat Skill Training (Stealth), so is now good at both Stealth and Thievery. At this point he is starting to manifest as a full hybrid, able to fight in melee, heal allies, hurl spells, and sneak around as he likes.
Over the next ten levels, he will pick up more feats to help with this, including Acolyte Power, which lets him swap a Cleric Utility Power for a Wizard Utility Power. (He passes on Adept Power, the feat for swapping a Daily, cause his Cleric Daily Powers are really good.) He also picks up Evasion once he reaches level 11, along with some other feats to enhance his spells.
(As you noticed, some abilities that were previously class features are now feats - anyone that meets the requirement can take them. In this case, Evasion requires Dex 15, and is a Paragon Feat, so you must be level 11 to take it.)
At level 11, he also gets to choose a Paragon Path - and since he has the wizard multiclass feat, he can choose a Wizard Paragon Path, such as Spellstorm Mage. This gives him some nice features - including the ability to regain a spell he cast earlier in the day by 'reaching into the Spellstorm.' It also gives him some spells specific to the Paragon Path, which rounds out his collection of arcane power.
He can now do the following:
-At Will, use either of his two Cleric Melee powers (Righteous Brand and Priest's Shield) that let him swing his sword and buff allies when his attack lands.
-Twice per encounter, heal a nearby ally with a quick prayer. (Holy Word, a cleric class feature.)
-Twice per encounter, use Cleric Encounter Powers, such as Awe Strike and Split the Sky - both powers that call forth divine energy as he strikes with his sword, doing things like freezing the enemy in place with fear, or hurling the enemy back and knocking them to the ground with a crack of thunder.
-Three times per encounter, cast spells, such as Thunderwave (mentioned before); plus a more powerful spell, Thunderlance, which deals damage to a large group of enemies and hurls them twenty feet backwards; and Storm Cage (learned from his Paragon Path) which is essentially a fireball formed of lightning that also creates a wall of lightning around the area it hits for a round.
-Three times per day, use Cleric Daily Powers, such as Avenging Flame (mentioned before), Weapon of the Gods (which imbues his weapon with holy power for a fight), and Divine Power (a powerful attack filled with divine energy that strikes his opponent while granting him enhanced combat ability).
-Twice per day, call upon his Cleric Utility Powers, such as Cure Serious Wounds and Mass Cure Light Wounds, excellent healing spells.
-Twice per day, call upon his Wizard Utility Powers, such as Shield (which lets him form a magical barrier to ward off blows) and Sudden Storm (gained from his Paragon path, which lets him fill an area of the battlefield with wind and rain.)
So he is now a skilled swordsman who can heal his allies, call forth powerful spells throughout a fight, and sneak and tumble about, dodging fireballs, while picking locks and disabling traps!
Awesome. Thanks Matthew for the guided tour of character progression. :) It seems like they almost wanted to go classless, but made a compromise that you have to take a class but then can pick away at what used to be only accessible if you took full levels of another class (or classes). A neat way to do things. I certainly wouldn't have called it multiclassing, but thanks to the way they've structured feats, etc, you can actually "sample" classes other than your base which makes it seem like you're multiclassing.... Slightly confusing, but thanks to your example I understand what people mean now.
Matthew,
The problem with your sample character is that if he gets the attributes to support everything you've presented he's going to suck. In particular Intelligence is a very poor attribute for a cleric to invest in by and large because it does so little in comparison with Intelligence....and Dexterity and Strength of decent levels will be required for many of your listed feats.
Basically, yes you can get SOME of what multiclassed characters used to be able to do....if you want to suck.
-Polaris
Edit PS: Strength is a very poor stat to base your primary Cleric (and then wizard) around since most wizard powers (sorry spells) will draw opportunity attacks making them of suspect usefulness in melee. If you have to pick a prime stat for a cleric (and they have two of course), wisdom is far and away the better choice...especially if you are going to boost Int (a generally poor choice btw compared with Dex) because of AC issues.
Matthew,
You said:
Note that all of these builds will generally be a little behind any character focused in one specific element. But -1 to hit and damage in return for the sheer versatility of being able to heal, melee, throw spells from afar or at a group of enemies... seems a pretty good trade. And these are by no means perfect builds - I'm sure someone looking at this long term could put together a more focused version in the end.
Actually -1 stinks in 4E because it's a -1 (or -5%) that you will never get back because the monsters scale equally up with the characters (in fact they scale faster). [Btw, Padded Sumo is a real issue in practical 4E play...so much so that at GenCon various groups were experimenting with cutting monster hit points in half because combat was taking too long.]
What's worse, the effective penalty is going to be worse than that. Some classes are instrictically "MAD" (Cleric, Paladin, Warlock to name three). In these classes, in order to both quality and use off-class powers effectively reduces your selection and power from your primary class. Even worse, most classes do not share implements which puts you even further behind the power curve with your off-class powers. Even WORSE, every off-class power you take burns a feat that another character would still have without getting another power. Thus you have powers that don't hit as well, aren't support as well (by items), and you have few feats to boot. Blech!
Mind you, the trick of using just the first "initiate" feat to qualify for an off-class paragon path is often extremely good, but that's a seperate issue.
-Polaris
Yeah, I have noticed MAD being pretty bad in 4E. Practically every class requires 3-4 good scores. Throw multiclassing feats into the mix, and that's at least one more score that you probably need to be high. A lot of builds using multiclassing require really good abilitiy scores to work very well.
Ok, Polaris, I'm going to go through your post one bit at a time since you make a lot of claims without any real support for them - or, rather, you vastly exaggerate the impact of the elements you analyze.
Polaris wrote: The problem with your sample character is that if he gets the attributes to support everything you've presented he's going to suck. As you can see above, he ends up having perfectly fine Str and Int for his main attack powers, and a good enough Dex for his skills and to qualify for the feats he wants.
Polaris wrote: In particular Intelligence is a very poor attribute for a cleric to invest in by and large because it does so little in comparison with Intelligence.... I'm assuming you meant 'Dexterity' instead of 'Intelligence' at the end there. And, let's be clear - the big difference between the two is that Dex adds to Initiative. Now, winning Initiative is nice - but since 4E no longer features 1 round combats, Init is no longer the be-all and end-all. Who originally went first becomes less relevant by rounds 3-5. Claiming it is a 'very poor' choice to lose a few points of Initiative... well, I said it before, and I'll say it again: I fell your outlook, that characters must be as optimized as possible or they are terrible, is a bad viewpoint in general, and especially one that has no place in 4E.
The other trades between Dex and Int are skills (of which the character has skills requiring both) and feats (and, note, the character does have high enough Dex for the feats they care about.)
Polaris wrote: and Dexterity and Strength of decent levels will be required for many of your listed feats. And, fortunately, I have enough of those stats for the feats I want.
Polaris wrote: Strength is a very poor stat to base your primary Cleric (and then wizard) around since most wizard powers (sorry spells) will draw opportunity attacks making them of suspect usefulness in melee. Well, as you might note, several of his wizard powers are close blasts - which are perfectly usable in melee. Those that provoke are Storm Cage and the Lightning Bolt in his wand. I am confident that, in the fullness of a battle, there will be many opportunities to use these - either at the start of battle, or at any point where he can shift to an open spot and unleash them. I would even feel that he could have several more such spells and still be plenty able to bring them into play throughout the average fight.
Polaris wrote: If you have to pick a prime stat for a cleric (and they have two of course), wisdom is far and away the better choice...especially if you are going to boost Int (a generally poor choice btw compared with Dex) because of AC issues. I like Wisdom clerics. I like Strength clerics. I don't see any vast difference between them - the Wisdom cleric is generally a better healer, from range, while the melee cleric is a better buffer, and in melee but doing a bit more damage. Late game, the Wisdom cleric probably has the edge in better powers to choose from, but that doesn't render the Strength powers bad.
And, even supposing Wisdom is the better choice - once again, I don't feel your mindset, that "the best choice is the only choice" is valid. Non-optimized characters are perfectly effective in 4E, and only a small bit behind completely optimized characters. Tactics on the field have far more of an impact than whether I have an extra "+1" here or there.
Polaris wrote: Actually -1 stinks in 4E because it's a -1 (or -5%) that you will never get back because the monsters scale equally up with the characters (in fact they scale faster). Well, yes. The fully optimized character will always be better than the non-optimized character. This isn't a surprise, nor is it really relevant. The question is, is the non-optimized character still capable of fighting the monsters they face and defeating them? The answer is yes - a party of super-optimized, game-breaking characters is not required to 'win 4E', and I'm not sure why you keep implying that it is!
Polaris wrote: [Btw, Padded Sumo is a real issue in practical 4E play...so much so that at GenCon various groups were experimenting with cutting monster hit points in half because combat was taking too long.] I have not felt the effects of Padded Sumo in the games I have run and played, which have been an ongoing campaign at levels 1-5, as well as shorter adventures at levels 12-13, 16, and 24-25. Or, rather, I have not felt those effects truly having an impact - at level 1, combats take 5-6 rounds, while at level 24, they took 8-9 rounds. In any combats that ran slow, unfamiliarity with the system seemed a far larger culprit than actual difficulty in taking enemies down - I saw several big Elite opponents with a lot of hitpoints (well over a thousand in one case), taken down very easily, with some of them barely getting a chance to act.
Given that I recall your post on the WotC boards where you tried to 'prove' the existence of "Padded Sumo" by using math that assumed an encounter had equal odds of featuring: 5 normal monsters, or 5 elite monsters, or 5 solo monsters, but never minions... I hesitate to take your word for any clams of proof involving the topic, given the lengths you've gone to previously to try and prove your point.
Polaris wrote: What's worse, the effective penalty is going to be worse than that. Some classes are instrictically "MAD" (Cleric, Paladin, Warlock to name three). Paladins are really the worst off as far as being MAD... but Clerics and Warlocks are definitely not that MAD, no more than anyone is in 4E.
Polaris wrote: In these classes, in order to both quality and use off-class powers effectively reduces your selection and power from your primary class. I'm not sure how your selection is reduced by focusing on two primary attributes. Power wise, you are somewhat true - but since the 4E stat boost system encourages having two primary stats, the power loss is pretty minimal. The "-1" I mentioned earlier, on average. Yes, it makes a difference. No, that difference doesn't render this character useless.
Polaris wrote: Even worse, most classes do not share implements which puts you even further behind the power curve with your off-class powers. This is true, but again, the loss is slight. If you are using two seperate items for two seperate classes, at most levels, you can still have them 'at par' for your level. Occasionally, one will be slightly behind the curve (or, more likely, you might take a -1 hit to AC or Defenses to keep it up to par.) Now, to be fair, that is based off the method of generating starting loot for higher level characters - in a normal game, I'm not sure how it would play out. But given the ability to create and buy items up to your level, I suspect you would be able to, again, stay pretty close to par with two items.
Polaris wrote: Even WORSE, every off-class power you take burns a feat that another character would still have without getting another power. Thus you have powers that don't hit as well, aren't support as well (by items), and you have few feats to boot. Blech! I admit, I do feel strapped for feats with this build. But I also feel I had enough feats to cover everything I really wanted, and stating I should be able to freely gain the versatility without any actual cost of doing so... strikes me as asking for a bit too much.
Polaris wrote: Basically, yes you can get SOME of what multiclassed characters used to be able to do....if you want to suck. Again, your claim of sucking is just... wildly thrown about.
Is the character going to break the game? Of course not. I do wish I had been able to boost his Wisdom higher and I would have liked to fit in a few more feats. He is competent in melee, no worse damage output than most clerics, but certainly not able to compare with a striker.
But how does this make him suck? He is competent in melee, and his melee attacks are very effective at enhancing his allies and crippling his foes. His spells are pretty potent, and great for damaging groups of enemies. And he does all this while still having a decent amount of healing for his allies.
He isn't going to replace anyone at the table - he isn't a better healer than the pure healing cleric, or a better blaster than the pure wizard. But he holds his own, is effective against enemies, and brings a versatility to the table that is pretty hard to find.
You mention "what characters used to be able to do." Tell me, how would you have built a character like this in 3.5? Pretty much no matter what, they are going to be well behind others for the first 4 or 5 levels, and won't come into their own until mid-levels. Now, I didn't build this character because the Rogue/Fighter/Wizard/Cleric was an especially common choice in 3.5, but just to show that the system was still versatile enough to build a character with a diverse range of abilities - and, honestly, probably one more balanced than the same character in 3.5.
Angus, here, is actually effective with his multiclassing powers - he might be a bit more limited at early levels, but the 3.5 version took 4 levels to get going as well, and wasn't especially good at anything by then, with his +1 BAB and completely absurd MAD. Now, maybe that character was awesome when, at level 20, he's walking around with Persistent Divine Power/Divine Favor/Wraithstrike, and hurling 8th level spells and Arcane Striking/Power Attacking his foes... but trading 10 levels of being worse than everyone else for 10 levels of being better than everyone else really isn't my view of balance.
In 3.5, multiclassing could synergize too well, or let you cherry pick key abilities with one level, or resulted in various specific combos that made you a bit too effective... or it would often be worthless. A level 8 fighter is inspired by his friend the boom mage, and takes a level of wizard... and 1st level Wizard spells aren't really effective at blowing people up at 9th level. Sure, more and more things came out to help with this (Practiced Spellcaster, various prestige classes, etc)... but if you are claiming a build sucks because it is at -1 or -2 to hit compared to an optimized character, I hesitate to ask what was your view of many 3.5 characters, who could be at -10 or -15 or more compared to someone truly min/maxed!
WotC's Nightmare wrote: Yeah, I have noticed MAD being pretty bad in 4E. Practically every class requires 3-4 good scores. Throw multiclassing feats into the mix, and that's at least one more score that you probably need to be high. A lot of builds using multiclassing require really good abilitiy scores to work very well. Outside of the classes themselves, 4E has two elements that result in characters needing to focus on multiple ability scores. One of those elements I feel is genius, the other I'm not so impressed with.
The first is the fact that there are three pairs of abilities (Str/Con, Dex/Int, Wis/Cha) that add to Defenses. Thus, this very much encourages you to focus on one score for each Defense - I rather like this, as it discourages a complete focus on a single ability score, but gives you a wide range of options.
It isn't quite perfect, since some scores are weighted differently than others - namely, the physical scores. The only real difference between the mental scores is which skills they help, while Str affects encumbrace (and melee basic attacks), Dex boosts Initiative (and ranged basic attacks), and Con affects hitpoints and healing surges.
Now, it helps that none of those elements are as vital as they used to be - in 3.5, encumbrance could be pretty punishing, Init could determine who won a battle, and dumping Con was essentially suicide. In 4E, you can get away without worrying about any of these... but it still is a slight imbalance in the system.
So, with the assumption that focusing on 3 ability scores is good (and focusing on one primary and two secondary is even better, given the way stat boosts work), let's look at the classes:
Cleric: Slightly MAD. As a normal cleric, Str and Wis are both primary choices, which is fine. Cha, however, affects a number of the Wisdom-based powers. If you go as a pure Str cleric, you are doing pretty good - Str/Dex/Wis is a good setup, with maybe a bit of Con. But if you are trying to use Wisdom, you also need some focus on Cha.
Fighter: Almost Perfect. One primary stat: Str. Two good secondary choices: Wis and Dex... but as a tank, Con is also good, and might be even more needed depending on what weapon he uses.
Paladin: Very MAD. Same situation as the Cleric, essentially - Str and Cha are fine as primary abilities, but you not only have several powers tying into Wisdom, but also need it for Lay on Hands. (And even if you fully focus on Str-based powers, dumping Charisma hurts your Divine Challenge... and some levels leave you with poor choices for new powers.) Add in the fact that, as a Defender, you like Con as well, and the Paladin is in a pretty pickle.
Ranger: Perfect/Slightly MAD. Archer Rangers are about as close to perfectly balanced as you get. Dex as a primary, with Wis and Con as secondary stats, and they are set for life. Dual-wielding Rangers are a bit worse off - they now focus on Str, but still need good Dex for AC, and still want some focus on Con since they are somewhat naturally fragile.
Rogue: Perfect/Slightly MAD. Dex as a single primary is great. Artful Dodgers can focus on Dex/Con/Cha, and they are set. Brutal Scoundrels add in Str... but, again, as somewhat fragile melee guys, still might want a little bit of focus on Con, so are slightly MAD.
Warlock: Perfect/Slightly MAD. Infernal Warlocks are golden: Con as a primary, plus Int and their choice of Wis or Cha for secondary stats. Star Warlocks can be as focused, but are more likely to have both Con and Cha as primary stats, with Int as a secondary. Fey have Cha as their primary, and likely Con and Int as their secondary. All builds miss out on Dex, but that isn't too big a deal.
Warlord: Slightly MAD. Str as a primary. Secondary stats of Int and Cha, though he can drop either of them and pick up their counterpart instead - most builds are only going to be using one of those secondary stats. But, as a somewhat fragile guy in melee, he may also want a bit of Con.
Wizard: Almost Perfect/Slightly MAD. Int as a primary is nice. The Wizard then has three secondary stats to choose from in one of his class features, Dex, Con and Wis. From a purely numbers standpoint, Con and Wis would be the clear choices. The one mark against him, however, is that Dex is very good for the Wizard - of all the roles out there, the one who really most cares about winning Init is a controller, who wants to hit the enemy while they are grouped up and where slowing/immobilizing/dazing them really makes a difference.
So, from all this, it looks like only the Paladin really has too many abilities to focus on. Except, as I mentioned before, 4E has two elements that encourage multiple ability use... and the second one isn't so kind.
Feats.
Many feats have stat requirements. And often, those requirements aren't ones that a class will end up with naturally. (They wouldn't really be effective as requirements if they did.) And this means that a character focusing entirely on the stats that naturally seem good to them... might miss out on some cool feats.
Casters are especially hurt by this, due to the feats that boost energy damage and several cool paragon tier feats. Melee guys only need to worry about the epic feats for increasing the crit range of their weapons - but those can have pretty intense requirements.
What really bugs me about this is that, outside of this, you can pretty much never worry about 'planning out' your character path. Each level you guy make decisions independantly. Except for these feats, where you need to very precisely calculate ability scores for maximum benefit from level 1.
It is, I admit, somewhat frustrating and inelegant.
I am hopeful that it will become less and less of a problem as time goes on. Part of why it is so big a deal right now is that there are only so many useful feats in the PHB for each character, and missing out on certain ones is a big deal. As more and more feats become available in new books, it will become less and less important.
Eventually, I suspect, we'll end up with what they intended the state of things to be: Each character, with a different array of stats, will have their own suite of cool options. Two characters will both have a collection of effective feats, but they will also be very distinct. I like that idea... but it will take some time for things to get there.
hmarcbower wrote: Awesome. Thanks Matthew for the guided tour of character progression. :) It seems like they almost wanted to go classless, but made a compromise that you have to take a class but then can pick away at what used to be only accessible if you took full levels of another class (or classes). A neat way to do things. I certainly wouldn't have called it multiclassing, but thanks to the way they've structured feats, etc, you can actually "sample" classes other than your base which makes it seem like you're multiclassing.... Slightly confusing, but thanks to your example I understand what people mean now. It is a pretty strange setup. You are stuck with your starting class throughout your career, but can add elements of other classes via feats - and end up just as capable of casting spells/stabbing people/chanting prayers.
You do miss out, somewhat, on class abilities. Warlocks are a good example. Warlock's make 'pacts' - they have three they can choose from. The Infernal Pact (made with various ancient devil creatures), the Star Pact (made with Far Realms entities beyond the stars), and the Fey Pact (made with Faerie spirits from the Feywild). Additionally, they can Curse enemies in combat - against a cursed enemy, they do bonus damage, and gain a special benefit based on their pact whenever a Cursed enemy dies.
As a non-warlock, there is currently no way to get these abilities. The Warlock multiclass feat gives you a special attack based on the pact you choose - but you don't get the pact itself or the ability to Curse enemies. You can learn Warlock Powers (via the power-swap feats), you can even one day hurl your enemies into the depths of hell itself... but you'll never quite get the full flavor of the Warlock class.
It isn't an issue for most classes - Rogues, for example, get 4 class abilities:
1) Sneak Attack, which the Rogue Multiclass feat gives you 1/encounter.
2) First Strike, which grants you a bonus against enemies who have not yet acted - a feat exists (Seize the Moment) that does something almost the same.
3) Rogue Weapon Mastery, which gives them +1 to hit with daggers and lets them hit harder with shurikens - simple numerical elements you don't really need to copy.
4) Rogue Tactics, which lets them either hit harder with Sneak Attack or dodge Opportunity Attacks better. Again, simple numbers, with feats able to give similar bonuses.
So some classes are a bit more accessible than others - and I suspect, as more feats and other elements are released, it will become easier and easier to customize your character to be what you want it to be.
hmarcbower wrote: Benimoto wrote: As far as published adventures, Paizo themselves is famous for making "difficult" encounter the norm. Page counts leave too little room for a truly appropriate number of encounters, so often published adventures pump up the XP in each encounter. Totally unrelated to the current thread, but hell yes. I'm actually starting to become very frustrated with the Paizo AP because of this. For example, our level 12 party just met up with the AC 39 Huge White Dragon (which, if it's like many of the other Paizo monsters will also have lots of immunities and an unrealistic SR as well) that does fly-by breath weapons doing 8d6 with a save of I think 26 or 29 for half.... my only solution to avoid TPK until we could prep a bit was Rope Trick and re-memorize some spells, get our fighting classes ready, etc. We don't tend to min-max or cruise the charop boards to make our characters, so it makes it extra hard for us. Plus we have crap for magic (though the DM tells us he's given us everything the modules have provided, plus a few extra things rolled randomly).
Sorry.... back to the discussion at hand. :) RotRLs?
Are you using your money to buy magic? Certianly Paizo adventures assume easy access to magic shops. If you don't have that then things get a hell of a lot tougher.
Matthew Koelbl wrote: Paladin: Very MAD. Same situation as the Cleric, essentially - Str and Cha are fine as primary abilities, but you not only have several powers tying into Wisdom, but also need it for Lay on Hands. (And even if you fully focus on Str-based powers, dumping Charisma hurts your Divine Challenge... and some levels leave you with poor choices for new powers.) Add in the fact that, as a Defender, you like Con as well, and the Paladin is in a pretty pickle. Dump Strength and avoid powers that need strength. Thats what our Paladin player is doing anyway. I guess we will see how it works.
My group likes MAD. For us, a collection of ultra-specialized virtual-supermen walking around stretches believability (arguably silly in a game with zombies and fireballs). Characters that have to balance multiple scores are more like real people. We like that.
And since the paladin came up earlier, I think that class has always suffered from this problem, ever since the 1970s.
Our opinion -- to each their own :)
Tatterdemalion wrote: My group likes MAD. For us, a collection of ultra-specialized virtual-supermen walking around stretches believability (arguably silly in a game with zombies and fireballs). Characters that have to balance multiple scores are more like real people. We like that.
And since the paladin came up earlier, I think that class has always suffered from this problem, ever since the 1970s.
Our opinion -- to each their own :)
No no no...your doing it wrong.
If your character does not have an 18 in every stat that impacts the character then its unplayable.
Tatterdemalion wrote: My group likes MAD. For us, a collection of ultra-specialized virtual-supermen walking around stretches believability (arguably silly in a game with zombies and fireballs). Characters that have to balance multiple scores are more like real people. We like that.
And since the paladin came up earlier, I think that class has always suffered from this problem, ever since the 1970s.
Our opinion -- to each their own :)
And of course, this really depends on personal player style.
Case in point: I did up my 4E Eladrin Paladin to the Raven Queen, and took powers I felt were flavorful and supported the character well.
Then I discovered the "Character Optimization" thread at the Wizards forum and discovered my build was pretty much the most uneffective build - I think I took every power/feat/race at level 1 that the writer for the Pally Uber-dom recommended against. AND - heresy of heresies - I haven't planned him out to level 30.
I'm sorry, but I'm not here for optimization, I'm here for role-play. I'm not even beginning to intimate that the optimization style of gaming is wrong, because it IS NOT. It is, however, NOT how I play. Shoot, I never even heard of a Heavy Blade or Rhythm Paladin until that article.
Benimoto wrote: As far as published adventures, Paizo themselves is famous for making "difficult" encounter the norm. Page counts leave too little room for a truly appropriate number of encounters, so often published adventures pump up the XP in each encounter. hmarcbower wrote: Totally unrelated to the current thread, but hell yes. I'm actually starting to become very frustrated with the Paizo AP because of this. For example, our level 12 party just met up with the AC 39 Huge White Dragon (which, if it's like many of the other Paizo monsters will also have lots of immunities and an unrealistic SR as well) that does fly-by breath weapons doing 8d6 with a save of I think 26 or 29 for half.... my only solution to avoid TPK until we could prep a bit was Rope Trick and re-memorize some spells, get our fighting classes ready, etc. We don't tend to min-max or cruise the charop boards to make our characters, so it makes it extra hard for us. Plus we have crap for magic (though the DM tells us he's given us everything the modules have provided, plus a few extra things rolled randomly).
Sorry.... back to the discussion at hand. :)
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote: RotRLs?
Are you using your money to buy magic? Certianly Paizo adventures assume easy access to magic shops. If you don't have that then things get a hell of a lot tougher.
Yah, that's the problem. We do have some money (lots, actually), but the DM isn't all that fond of us going and buying magic items. As many times as I explain to him that this is a basic assumption of the game, he is stubborn. I think it's going to come to that, though, maybe at our next session. Once the Rope Trick ends, I think I'm taking us all back to Magnimar (gotta love teleport) and we're going shopping. :)
TigerDave wrote:
And of course, this really depends on personal player style.
Case in point: I did up my 4E Eladrin Paladin to the Raven Queen, and took powers I felt were flavorful and supported the character well.
Then I discovered the "Character Optimization" thread at the Wizards forum and discovered my build was pretty much the most uneffective build - I think I took every power/feat/race at level 1 that the writer for the Pally Uber-dom recommended against. AND - heresy of heresies - I haven't planned him out to level 30.
I'm sorry, but I'm not here for optimization, I'm here for role-play. I'm not even beginning to intimate that the optimization style of gaming is wrong, because it IS NOT. It is, however, NOT how I play. Shoot, I never even heard of a Heavy Blade or Rhythm Paladin until that article.
Raven Queen must have a lot of converts. Every single player in our party worships her ('cause the Dungeon AP is not very good for back ground so we made a bit of our own).
Interestingly enough the Paladin in our Group also choose Raven Queens Blessing as a feat.
In any case I'm in the same boat as you. I did not want to be either a blaster cleric or a front line combat cleric. I wanted to be a bit of both. It means I'm not quote as likely to hit with either but I do have versatility and thats worth something as well. I'm finding the character players perfectly well and really feel this endless concentration on 'optimization' is completely overrated. I mean if you keen to optimize your character - fine, knock yourself out, but the idea that a character that is not optimized through the wazoo is unplayable is unfounded in my opinion. I've been very happy with how my cleric has played so far.
Oh - yeah and I agree with you in not planning the character out to level 30 as well. I like to make my choices in light of the experiences my character has actually had - not based on some metagame knowledge of whats required in order to make a great character 10 levels down the road.
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote: TigerDave wrote:
And of course, this really depends on personal player style.
Case in point: I did up my 4E Eladrin Paladin to the Raven Queen, and took powers I felt were flavorful and supported the character well.
Then I discovered the "Character Optimization" thread at the Wizards forum and discovered my build was pretty much the most uneffective build - I think I took every power/feat/race at level 1 that the writer for the Pally Uber-dom recommended against. AND - heresy of heresies - I haven't planned him out to level 30.
I'm sorry, but I'm not here for optimization, I'm here for role-play. I'm not even beginning to intimate that the optimization style of gaming is wrong, because it IS NOT. It is, however, NOT how I play. Shoot, I never even heard of a Heavy Blade or Rhythm Paladin until that article.
Raven Queen must have a lot of converts. Every single player in our party worships her ('cause the Dungeon AP is not very good for back ground so we made a bit of our own).
Interestingly enough the Paladin in our Group also choose Raven Queens Blessing as a feat.
In any case I'm in the same boat as you. I did not want to be either a blaster cleric or a front line combat cleric. I wanted to be a bit of both. It means I'm not quote as likely to hit with either but I do have versatility and thats worth something as well. I'm finding the character players perfectly well and really feel this endless concentration on 'optimization' is completely overrated. I mean if you keen to optimize your character - fine, knock yourself out, but the idea that a character that is not optimized through the wazoo is unplayable is unfounded in my opinion. I've been very happy with how my cleric has played so far.
Oh - yeah and I agree with you in not planning the character out to level 30 as well. I like to make my choices in light of the experiences my character has actually had - not based on some metagame knowledge of whats required in order to make a great character 10 levels down... I thoroughly agree with the 'I don't pre-plan my character', some of the best PC's I've seen were badly planned and underpowered but I customize my game to fit with the PC's abilities to keep it challenging but not overpowering and I generally award good roleplayers and not power gamers.
I rarely pre-plan my character and often if I do any pre-planning it falls to pieces as the character experiences lead him\her a different route anyhow. I also get rather annoyed with people who give tweak suggestions to power characters up.
I have been playing with some lapsed dnders (and one newbie) since 4e came out about twice a month. They are now level 3 and the combats are a bit faster mostly since the PCs are juuuust starting to figure their characters out.
In a recent game the newbie had her paladin down for the count with an ongoing acid thing and several other party members also incapacitated. Her husband noted that if she died she could always roll up another one and she said 'But I really like Louise, I don't want her to die'. To me that's half the battle, getting into the game enough to care about your character.
Personally I don't give a flip about the whole 3.5/4 thing, it's like arguing about any sequel, even the biggest flop piece of junk does not change a hair on the head of it's predecessor. Well except for Star Wars, but he had to work REALLY hard to accomplish that.
But I will say that for some people who had not played since the early 90s it made it easier to get into the game again. And we have fun, which is nice.
I wasn't asking for an optimized character, just a demonstration of how various abilities could be worked into a single character in 4e. I'm not a fan of optimization (not that it isn't a perfectly good way to build characters, of course). That has, of course, caused problems when we play prefab modules, since the designers assume that you are playing an absolutely optimized, maximized character of whatever class they write for (ie. RotRL traps... I don't think we've come across one that could actually have been disabled by a rogue unless he was a one-class max-skill rogue, and even then he's got a 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 chance to do it - though fortunately, since we don't have a rogue in our party, there haven't been a lot of traps).
Rather than telling Matthew that his build is not optimal and wouldn't be the best at everything, just say thanks for his effort to show how specific abilities from different classes could be combined in one character (what 4e calls multiclassing). I know I appreciated it, and I don't have an intention of actually playing 4e 4 the 4seeable 4ture (ok, 4ture was a bit of a stretch ;).
Anyhow, no point arguing about optimization here... I'm sure the wizards boards already have a 4e optimization forum.
Grimsh wrote: I find in 4e that our group may get through 2-3 encounters, and maybe a skill challenge or 2 through a session. This is slightly less than I found in 3.5. The battle seem to be taking a long time, and we are all used to the rules.
Is it a fun game to play? You bet. Is it easier to DM? oh yes, which is great for a guy like me. Does it take away from the roleplaying? Not that I have seen in the slightest, although I do miss my profession sailor:(
I think it is a good system, although I cannot say anything about high level as my group is all level 4 and close to 5. I haven't actually played more than one session as a PC.
Thats just my quick 2cp
I had a few goes at 4E at GENCON UK and found the following. The enemy Hobgoblins we faced had ridiculously high AC defence and HP's. The combat took a long time just to take out 2 hobgoblins and a goblin. A large amount of this lost time was lack of knowledge of the Powers of the classes. As the day went on I saw combat rounds in subsequent games running very quickly especially when the characters used their powers to compiliment each others 'the cleric gives me a +2 against my foe and I use my most damaging attack' etc. Once over this knowledge failing the PC's can role play the powers more by adding 'I call a prayer of battle which brings a glowing shield on my ally as I strike my enemy'.
If the combats are taking too long, then lower the HP of the enemy to match the flow of combat. IE the smegs are taking too long to dispatch then drop some of their HPs so the PC's can feel like the heroes they're supposed to be(similar to minions but not 1 hit wonders). The other option I've used is a quick random roll to determine if the enemy goes down(D6 roll and they drop on a 5 or six), if the PC hits the guy again he goes down etc.
I've been instituting this method for years in 3rd edition when it became evident that the entire session was lost when a 14th level party spent hours going through two combats.
One 3rd ed 17th level game the whole evening was spent in a SINGLE COMBAT!!!!! Now that's slow.
Matthew Koelbl wrote: What specific builds do you feel 4E can't handle? Well the ones it seems it can't handle by design are the ones that are bad at combat.
The "face" character who avoids fighting in case he gets a disfiguring wound.
The stealthy character who considers combat a failure and avoids it as much as possible. (Though the one I have played was actually a bard.)
Now you do need a reasonably large party for these types of characters to work, but in large parties it is also difficult to find your own niche if you stick to combat.
pjackson wrote: Matthew Koelbl wrote: What specific builds do you feel 4E can't handle? Well the ones it seems it can't handle by design are the ones that are bad at combat.
The "face" character who avoids fighting in case he gets a disfiguring wound.
The stealthy character who considers combat a failure and avoids it as much as possible. (Though the one I have played was actually a bard.)
Now you do need a reasonably large party for these types of characters to work, but in large parties it is also difficult to find your own niche if you stick to combat.
Not a bard but you could probably do something akin to this sort of thing. Dump your feats into diplomacy and bluff and you'll have a pretty good face character. Just not sure what to do with the character beyond this - most characters following this design path would be descent combatant + face character, your example is face character + ?
The sneaky fellow is similar - they have pretty hefty rules for using the sneak skill so if you pump feats into it and have a high dex you should be pretty sneaky. Again its what to do with the character beyond being sneaky thats harder to come up with. 4E assumes you've made a choice of being sneaky but are also pretty good in combat. Were you run into problems is when you try and make a character that is terrible at combat because all resources are being put into non-combat aspects of the characters. 4E does not really allow you to allocate your resources in that manner - everyone is pretty good at combat and then can have some side schticks going on.
pjackson wrote: Matthew Koelbl wrote: What specific builds do you feel 4E can't handle? Well the ones it seems it can't handle by design are the ones that are bad at combat.
The "face" character who avoids fighting in case he gets a disfiguring wound.
The stealthy character who considers combat a failure and avoids it as much as possible. (Though the one I have played was actually a bard.)
Now you do need a reasonably large party for these types of characters to work, but in large parties it is also difficult to find your own niche if you stick to combat.
Really, those are campaign issues more than anything else. You can put together a character who is amazing at social skills or a character designed around stealth. They will probably still be decent in combat by default, but if you don't want them to fight - or want to intentionally cripple their combat ability - you can certainly do so.
But whether that will work in a party or a campaign will depend on the players and the GM. Having a character who doesn't contribute to combat is generally a downside in any edition of the game, unless the DM compensates accordingly. In 4E, it is extremely simple for the DM to simply reduce the encounter xp budget to reflect having a player who is a noncombatant. I can't imagine it will be entertaining spending the combat hiding in another room, but it is doable.
The stealth character is in a similar state. For them, unless the entire party is stealthy, you are likely to have the character's goals constantly spoiled by other PCs. If you do have an entirely stealth party, the DM can certainly run a campaign based around infiltration and espionage, focusing on the use of skills, hit and run tactics, and so forth.
The concepts are viable but, by their very nature, ones that require a bit of DM assistance to fully accomodate without hindering the party - just like they would in just about any edition.
pjackson wrote: Matthew Koelbl wrote: What specific builds do you feel 4E can't handle? Well the ones it seems it can't handle by design are the ones that are bad at combat.
The "face" character who avoids fighting in case he gets a disfiguring wound.
The stealthy character who considers combat a failure and avoids it as much as possible. (Though the one I have played was actually a bard.)
Now you do need a reasonably large party for these types of characters to work, but in large parties it is also difficult to find your own niche if you stick to combat.
I think one problem you might encounter (and that was touched on briefly above) is that the stealthy character who avoids combat at all costs was never a good idea in any D&D edition. Not only does it mean that the character won't participate in combat by choice even if the rest of the party is doing it (sidelining a player for a half hour), but in order for that character to have any sort of strong interaction with the campaign it has to be completely separate from the rest of the party. So while you get sidelined during combat, the rest of the party gets sidelined while you sneak around everywhere playing 1-man D&D. I've been in more than one game where a player decided he'd enjoy playing a "loner" character - whether it be the sneaky rogue or reclusive ranger - and was more or less infuriating to play with because in order for him to get the most out of the character he designed he had to go off and do things on his own. This deprived the rest of the party of the DM's attention for lengthy periods and left everyone wondering when they were going to get to play D&D.
In short: don't play a loner character in a group game. Just don't. You're hurting yourself, and you're annoying your friends. Make a character that can contribute meaningfully to activities the whole party can participate in. If that doesn't seem like something you'd enjoy, you may want to consider a game that doesn't involve other people.
Recent threads in 4th Edition
|
