D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
The main argument I keep seeing from the pro-striker camp is damage output. So, let's look at the roles and their contribution to damage output.
Being from the "pro-striker camp" I think what you have posted here is an idealized version of what really happens. This is more a this is how it should/ought to be kind of idealization that is a little more than misleading from how the game actually plays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiornys
Strikers
Strikers have the highest average single target damage output. They also have abilities that enhance their ability to direct that damage at any target. That makes them the most efficient single character at bringing down a given target. Striker proponents have argued that these facts make a party of strikers the most efficient party at bringing down an enemy party.
Other than minions, most monsters have a lot of HP. When I mean a lot I mean that it is difficult often for even a striker to one-shot a monster. This is a very big change from 3e, where damage was higher and monster HP where lower. When trying to kill a monster with 191 HP and you average hit is doing 20 but a striker is doing 30 or 40 you take that from 10 hit monster to a 5-7 hit monster. Shaving those precious rounds is what it is about. The quicker you drop the first monster the quicker you can move on to the next.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiornys
Defenders
Defenders have the second highest average single target damage output. Some defenders are capable of damage output that rivals that of the best strikers (and clearly outclasses the lower damage strikers). However, they lack the mobility options of the Striker. Defenders also indirectly enhance the damage output of the party by making it less likely that a party member is disabled.
I will agree that you can devise a defender to deal striker like damage (especially the fighter). In this case the defender is actually useful. If you can maximize the damage output to equal to a striker then you will have a character regardless of roll who can actually pull his weight. Any other defender build is not viable from my estimation, in fact they actually hurt the party in combat rather than help it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiornys
Leaders
Leaders have the second lowest average single target damage output. However, they indirectly contribute to party damage output in two ways. First, they have tools that help disabled party members recover. More importantly, Leaders grant force multipliers in the form of attack bonuses, damage bonuses, and extra attacks, causing the other party members to deal extra damage.
I still think the payoff of a leader is pretty useful, the healing alone is difficult to pass up. Besides clerics do striker like damage against undead. I would never ever have more than one though and it is an entirely optional thing. If you have three or less players I would say go all strikers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiornys
Controllers
Controllers have the lowest average single target damage output. However, they are capable of the highest overall damage output through large area of effect attacks. They compensate for the general weakness of multi-target damage as compared with focused damage through effects, which can both hinder the enemy's ability to deal damage and enhance the party's damage output.
Controllers are the 4e bard. Sure they do a little bit of damage to a lot of opponents (even if you can hit a lot of opponents without hitting or hindering your allies) But this is little more than a slight scratch on the 4e monsters. The only place it shines is against minions and well that sucks. Not to mention that minions can be dealt with by the striker *own* AoE powers, twin shots, feats, race, multi-class powers and magic items equally as well if not better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tiornys
So, here's the thing. Even though Strikers have the best individual single target damage, they don't necessarily contribute the most damage to a party. Leaders and Controllers are easily capable of contributing more to overall damage output, and while Defenders will usually cause a slight drop in party damage per round, the extra resources they add to the party are more beneficial in adverse situations.
t~
Leaders and controllers require a well oiled machine to make them work properly and then they arguably don't even contribute like a striker could have in the first place.
A level of detail and a conscious "lets all huddle and squeeze out as many points out of every character as possible" is required. Many DMs and players don't like playing with the "tactician" who has "the" overarching plan for the party and parades the best way is... or we ought to... style of gaming. Not to mention the real time drag it has on the game.
If you are lucky enough to have a group of all tactician style players sitting at your table and you think you can squeeze the most out of a non-damage optimized defender and a goofy controller then I say go for it. Otherwise don't bother.
PS...why does everyone think only a balanced party can use teamwork and strategy? Why can't strikers do this, too?
Striker can optimize their tactics too but it is not a requirement. Other roles are dependent on the other party members more. For instance I can see a striker taking out a monster by himself, other roles not so much (especially the controller)...
Being from the "pro-striker camp" I think what you have posted here is an idealized version of what really happens. This is more a this is how it should/ought to be kind of idealization that is a little more than misleading from how the game actually plays.
What levels have you played at? For how many sessions? With what mixes of roles? With how many different DM's?
I ask because your experience differs widely from mine, and I want to get a baseline on what's informing that experience.
For the record, I've played 18 levels in a balanced 5-6 person party, 2 levels in random groups running LFR modules, 3 levels in a party with 2 Leaders, 3 Strikers, and a Defender, DM'ed over 3 levels for a group running 3 Strikers, 1 Defender, and 1 Leader, played 3 levels in paragon tier with a varying mix of roles, 2 or 3 sessions of pick-up epic play, some sessions of pick-up high heroic and low paragon play, some sessions where we messed around with gestalt-esque characters, PHB2 gameday, and MM gameday. I've also sat in on and watched several sessions being played.
I have a lot of experience with the PHB classes, but only some with the PHB2 classes. I don't think I've seen a (non-gestalt) Swordmage, and I haven't seen a Druid or Shaman.
Striker can optimize their tactics too but it is not a requirement. Other roles are dependent on the other party members more. For instance I can see a striker taking out a monster by himself, other roles not so much (especially the controller)...
Depends on the situation, I suppose. Sure, a Striker is going to have his damage mount higher and faster, but getting stun-locked or Thunder Waved into a pit a few times will ruin your whole day.
I find that when playing with a house rule that lowers monster HP and EXP (many house rules designed to reduce grind take this road) strikers become less valuable to the party and other classes become more necessary.
For example when your reduced HP elite encounter gains an extra monster (due to the reduced EXP) strikers do not benefit from this change (they only attack one target at a time). Meanwhile controllers have more targets, defenders have another enemy to worry about, and leaders have more healing to do (the enemies now have one extra attack on the table at full damage).
These house rules are recommended for high level campaigns, and in using them, you might find that strikers are no longer imbalanced.
Controllers are the 4e bard. Sure they do a little bit of damage to a lot of opponents (even if you can hit a lot of opponents without hitting or hindering your allies) But this is little more than a slight scratch on the 4e monsters. The only place it shines is against minions and well that sucks.
Eh? Have you played a controller, because that's pretty much not the case. Real life example with one of my current groups:
Fighter does d10+6 at-will (av 12) and has an encounter power inflicting 2d10+10 (av 21) both against single targets.
Wizard does d6+6 at-will (av 10, burst 1 - minimum 2 targets) or d6+4 at-will (av 8, burst 2 - minimum 3 targets), or d8+6 (av 11) against single targets and has an encounter power which does d8+6/4 plus ongoing 5 (av 16/14 or 21/19 if first save fails, close burst 3/4 - minimum 3 targets).
When you factor in the additional likelihood that a wizard targeting multiple enemie is more likely to hit at least some o them you tend to find that the wizard is a pretty potent damage dealer.
I haven't included daily powers because the wizard's tendancy to use sustainable daily effects blows every other class out of the water over the course of an encounter.
Edit: I just remebered that the fighter has a +2 hammer while the wizard only has a +1 staff (of ruin). Give the wizard a +2 weapon and he'll be popping an extra 2 damage per attack.
Quote:
Not to mention that minions can be dealt with by the striker *own* AoE powers, twin shots, feats, race, multi-class powers and magic items equally as well if not better.
Seriously? You are claiming that the striker ability to use occasional racial or encounter powers makes them at least as good, if not better than controllers with at-will AoE powers at hitting bunches of minions?
Last edited by Trevelyan; 5th June 2009 at 05:18 PM..
I find that when playing with a house rule that lowers monster HP and EXP (many house rules designed to reduce grind take this road) strikers become less valuable to the party and other classes become more necessary.
Actually, the very opposite is true when the number of combatants remains constant, especially where ranged strikers are involved. One of the things about many melee elites/solos/etc. is you hit them with everything you have at range and they're still ticking along when they close to melee. Unless you adjust their defenses up, it's a distinct advantage to the ranged strikers because the BBEG will get far fewer attacks when they close because a much higher percentage of their HP pool has been diminished.
What levels have you played at? For how many sessions? With what mixes of roles? With how many different DM's?
...
For the record, I've played 18 levels in a balanced 5-6 person party...
I'm also curious; I'm the wizard in the 18th-level party Tiornys mentioned. Here are some things I have noticed. I haven't played as a non-wizard controller, but unless they are especially different they probably see similar issues.
At low levels, wizards' control is mainly expressed in their daily powers and their superiority at killing minions. The conditions they impose are weak, their range is short, and the number of enemies they can hit with each attack is small, so they aren't that great at locking down non-minions.
At high levels, wizards vary a lot from battle to battle. Some battles I feel like I am contributing almost nothing; some battles I'm the MVP. Here are the most common things that negatively affect my ability to contribute; have you noticed the controllers you have seen suffering from these? Low Initiative: If the Wizard goes first, he can hit enemies without hitting his allies, and his ability to lock them down is much more meaningful (especially slow/immobilize powers). Open Battlefields: Indoors, the wizard can lock down foes more easily; outdoors the enemy can spread out more, and can just walk around his zones. Even in-doors, as rooms and corridors grow wider the wizard grows weaker. Boring Terrain: If the wizard has some hindering or damaging terrain to push enemies into, or beneficial terrain to push them out of, he gets more millage out of his powers. Also, hindering and damaging terrain can make a battle act more like an in-doors battle (see above). Few Foes: The fewer enemies, the less total damage a wizard does. Minions: While other roles can kill minions, high-level Wizards often kill minions for free as a side-effect of locking down non-minions.
Wizards are also much better at control with access to Arcane Power.
Last edited by Abisashi; 5th June 2009 at 11:17 PM..
Reason: editaholic!
Being from the "pro-striker camp" I think what you have posted here is an idealized version of what really happens. This is more a this is how it should/ought to be kind of idealization that is a little more than misleading from how the game actually plays.
This is as hilarious as it is maddening. "Idealized version of what really happens" is the exact phrase I would use to describe the all-striker argument, which consists of nothing but heavy extrapolation and theory atop a thin layer of anecdotal evidence. Do you have statistical evidence of an all-striker party going through 100 encounters, and then a balanced party run by equally skilled players going through the same 100 encounters, with an encounter-by-encounter comparison of how each party performed? No? Then you do not have any more concrete data than anybody else.
Everybody's argument in this thread is based on personal experience and hypothetical analysis. That's fine. But claiming what you're claiming is just irrational and condescending.
Strikers only feel like they contribute almost nothing when they go on a terribad rolling streak.
Controllers: Occasionally awesome, usually mediocre, sometimes awful
Strikers: Often awesome, sometimes great, rarely mediocre
In my experience, Strikers also feel like they contribute almost nothing when they drop within the first two rounds of combat, and then spend the rest of the combat trying to get back up and getting smacked back down every time they do.
And, if we're defining Awesome as "completely alter the course of the battle", which is the appropriate definition for the Controller's awesomeness, then it's more like:
Controllers: Sometimes awesome, sometimes great, sometimes mediocre, sometimes awful
Strikers: Rarely awesome, often great, sometimes mediocre, rarely awful
This is as hilarious as it is maddening. "Idealized version of what really happens" is the exact phrase I would use to describe the all-striker argument, which consists of nothing but heavy extrapolation and theory atop a thin layer of anecdotal evidence.
Isn't that a funny thing, I noticed up thread that we (posters) were using the exact same language to describe our diametrically opposed views.
If you are looking for evidence, then please peruse the other thread and contribute there. Answers will be found, that is the point of that thread.
So here is my thoughts on the 4 roles, the most pertinent role is the striker of course.
Strikers
The absolute awesomeness, the classes that put all others to shame. Dispatching 10 hit monsters in half the time (not to mention many of them have a higher chance of hitting too - Avenger, Ranger and Rogue). Amazing game board maneuverability and often stealth, are keys to the classes ability to get past the front lines and deal with bosses and artillery. Especially excellent against solos they have problems against very few encounter types. Encounters that do overwhelm them they have the ability to escape through their ability to hide, maneuver better than other roles. Grade: A
Leaders
The next best thing, whether their ability to let the strikers make additional attacks, do striker like damage against undead or give a myriad of mini-tactical bonuses that help the strikers out I would say one of them is warranted in a group of four or more. They also help in conserving healing surges between encounters and can extend the parties workday. Leaders do not excel in most combat situations and too many leaders will cause the game to stagnate and draw combat out, but with their healing powers they should be able to survive the ensuing drawn out battle. If overwhelmed they will not survive as they have nearly no powers of egress. Grade: C
Defenders
They simply tie up a few creatures waiting for the strikers to kill them off. They require a leader to spend more resources on them. Defenders that specialize in defense are contrary to good for the group. They actually serve to lengthen fights and make battles drag on. They are tough and stuff, debuff those they mark and have defenses that are around as good as the strikers if not a point or two better. Defenders have a choice they can be built worse than controllers or built nearly as good as strikers. The defender that focuses on damage output that is comparable to a striker is just a striker with the defender tag. This type of defender is acceptable and wanted. A defensive build defender is anti-fun for the group as a whole, because it does not pull its own weight. Grade: D for defensive/B for offensive
Controllers
Controllers are the ultimate in anti-fun for the group. They are the 4e equivalent of the bard. They can apply small damage to multiple opponents, stick zones in play, use summons, apply 1 round duration status effects and best of all have the worst defense, HP and Healing surges in the game. They cannot stand up against any other role in 1 on 1 combat. They are the only role that truly cannot work without a group (similar to the bard). Without the other players there to protect them they will fold up shop. Solos will slay them, in fact everything but minions will slay them. Another controller game play feature is that the party has to actually maneuver around to defend the controller from death. This is often very difficult for the party to do. The controller also hurts the party with their zones and AoE spells, the party has to try and maneuver around the spells and the zones cut into their own maneuverability. Grade: F
By the way, regarding wizards, Arcane Power has the Dual Implement Spellcaster feat, so they can two held implements to damage...can you say OUCH!?
I am personally peeved that so many wizard AOE's hit allies, grr!! A few don't though.
Some feats can stop allies being hurt by the way:
War Wizardry (paragon), from Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide 4th ed, reduces damage and attack vs allies, it's damn good, IMHO.
Spell Accuracy (epic) feat lets you omit 1 square per Wis modifier in the PHB, so many wizards are control wizards and use that stat...so that's a good one.
I was using the character builder, to test stuff, Eladrin wizard, with Eladrin Sword Wizardy (heroic) lets you use a sword as a wand...now that could be interesting!
At lvl 30, he does 2d6+19 damage with Thunderwave, with push 5
Epic Resurgance (regain encounter power on a crit), since he uses a lot of area powers, lot of chances to crit.
Wizard Implement Expertize (epic) crits on 19-20
Destructive Wizardy (paragon), he does +4 bonus damage to every one struck when he hits 2 or more targets at lvl 21+, less at heroic and paragon levels (so that will apply a lot)
Burning Blizzard feat (heroic) bonus damage on acid or cold powers
Arcane Admixture onto his other at will power to add fire, Chilling Cloud, which does 22hp damage every hit.,.area burst
Arcane Fire feat , target gains vulnerable 5 fire with 1st arcane attack you use against the target before end of next turn. So Chilling Cloud does 27 hp
[b]Wintertouched[/] feat, gain combat advantage creature that is vulnerable to cold...see Chilling Cloud!
Alertness and Imporved initiative, so he gets that crucial first-strike chance! +22 initiative at lvl 30
Dual Implement Spell Caster for more damage, he uses an orb and sword
War Wizardry to reduce any chance of hurting allies.
Second Implement (so he has wand and orb mastery)
Improved Orb of Imposition, paragon, so when you use Orb of Imposition power, each time enemy fails it's save it takes a total of 10 damage and takes -2 saves anyway from Spell Accuracy.
Explosive Spellcasting, epic, implment extra damage crit can be aplied ot any single creature.
Arcane Wayfarer paragon path, crit hit = teleport the target 4 spaces.
as a lvl 30 Magister epic destiny, he gets bonuses to the defence type he last attacked and twice per day can perform rituals as standard actions (now is that useful or what?!)
Soooooo....this guy can do control pretty nice, nearly all his spells have control effects, but he can also dish out damage good style.
What's not to like?
question though: since he can use a longsword as an implement, does that mean he can use the Tyrant longsword's ability that on any crit it knocks the target prone? if so, hubba hubba!!
Eladrin Whizzbanger wizard
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&DI Character Builder ======
level 30
Eladrin, Wizard, Arcane Wayfarer, Magister
Build: Control Wizard
Arcane Implement Mastery: Wand of Accuracy
Magister's Knack: Magister's Knack Intelligence
Second Implement: Orb of Imposition
Arcane Admixture: Arcane Admixture Fire
Arcane Admixture: Chilling Cloud
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 14, Con 16, Dex 16, Int 26, Wis 20, Cha 12.
STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 11, Con 13, Dex 10, Int 16, Wis 16, Cha 8.
ITEMS
Spellbook, Orb of Weakness Intensified +6, Dawn Warrior Cloth Armor (Basic Clothing) +6, Medallion of Death Deferred +6, Cloth Armor (Basic Clothing), Adventurer's Kit, Implement, Orb, Tyrant's Longsword +5
====== Created Using Wizards of the Coast D&DI Character Builder ======
Last edited by Silverblade The Ench; 6th June 2009 at 08:28 PM..
I love how people assume strikers are glass cannons because that's what makes sense, but they are actually NOT the glass cannons. Controllers are glass, but they are not cannons. They're just glass. But it's clear people are just not going to listen to anything I say about this subject, and will instead recite what they believe should be the case, but actually is not.
I mean look at your players' character sheets...you'll notice that the wizard has the lowest HP, the lowest defenses, the least amount of surges, and, by and large, the worst damage output of the group (except for these apparent wizard geniuses who can ALWAYS target 3+ enemies with their powers, even though 95% of the time your friends are in the way, because if they're not in your way, they're probably not doing their jobs).
So the only thing "going down in 2 rounds" is a wizard. And if we're talking about ruthless focus fire, you can put any class into the dirt fairly quickly (because, as we're trying to tell you, defenders don't have that much more HP and defenses than an EQUALLY OPTIMIZED striker).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverblade The Ench
At lvl 30, he does 2d6+19 damage with Thunderwave, with push 5
Meanwhile, my ranger does 4d12 + 3d8 + 18, with Twin Strike, and doesn't even have to try very hard to get those numbers. I don't need to push 5, because I have a pet standing in front of my target and I'm shooting it from 25 squares away with no penalties. Thunderwave isn't damage, it's a panic button to clear stuff away from your gimpy, wimpy wizard (PS the ranger has like 7 panic buttons to interrupt attacks, get away from melee attackers, and improve their defenses, all with more damage output and better defenses, HP, and surges).
When 4e first came out, we played a test mini-campaign of about 3-4 sessions with a "balanced group": Paladin, rogue, cleric, and wizard. For the first few sessions, I recorded everyone's damage dealt, taken, healed, etc. I've unfortunately since lost the sheet I wrote it all down on (sadly), but there were a few things I remember:
In the duration of the game, the wizard only went bloodied in one fight and was never dropped (paladin dropped once, rogue three times, cleric never). In many of the fights(at least a third, maybe as many as 2/3) he didn't take any damage.
In one session, the wizard did more damage than anyone else by double digits. In one fight he did double the damage of the next highest character.
He had no non-AoE powers but never once did he have to blast an ally. Everyone else was constantly thinking about how to get as many enemies grouped so he could blast them while staying out of his way themselves and we somehow managed to do so without reducing our own effectiveness.
True this was our first game, only level 1-2, and we weren't optimized, but it is some personal experience...
__________________ Robots, assassins, hobgoblins, the Ashen Tower, polite beholders, land pirates, gnome genocide, the Corpse Ramp, artifacts, exploding zombie dragons, flying islands, dying heroes, blood feuds, vanished races, the Black City: Rise of Felskein.
Why does the wizard have the lowest defenses again? In my experience, wizards tend to have pretty good defenses - their primary stat adds to AC, they can easily get armor upgrades, the most commonly picked secondary stats add to different defenses, and they have strong defensive powers in staves, Shield, etc. They certainly seem better defended than rogues - rangers are more unpredictable since their Immediate movement can just result in the monster pursuing them anyway, or have it attack someone else instead (not necessarily a net benefit for the party).
In my experience, wizards have been very effective even in online play with strangers which generally interferes with the coordination some claim is for their effectiveness. Pushing several people into walls generally resulted in more damage than the strikers combined, and timely movement lockdown powers kept the party from being overwhelmed. In an Epic game, we ended up with my Blood Mage/Archmage and TWO Artful Rogues with Tornado Throw (since one player basically copied someone else's character with some minor modifications) - huge synergy for each of us.
I can link to those old PbP threads if you really want.
Thunderwave isn't damage until you use the push several enemies into wall so they take damage for entering AND starting their turns in it.
__________________ "I'd like to shake the hand of the genius who invented that - just the hand, after it's been cut off from the now screaming man."
I love how people assume strikers are glass cannons because that's what makes sense, but they are actually NOT the glass cannons. Controllers are glass, but they are not cannons. They're just glass. But it's clear people are just not going to listen to anything I say about this subject, and will instead recite what they believe should be the case, but actually is not.....
.
Some of us KNOW they're glass cannons from dropping them or seeing them dropped repeatedly. Your comparison to the controller is weak because in this thread we're talking all strikers vs. said controller WITH the defender and leader with him. The one-on-one comparison is not applicable.
Some of us KNOW they're glass cannons from dropping them or seeing them dropped repeatedly. Your comparison to the controller is weak because in this thread we're talking all strikers vs. said controller WITH the defender and leader with him. The one-on-one comparison is not applicable.
My experience is vastly different than yours, then.
In one of my games, the group is currently composed of 3 strikers, 1 leader, 1 defender, 1 controller, consisting of a fighter, a ranger, a rogue, a warlock, a warlord, and a wizard. I joined about 2 sessions in, and apparently no-one before then had really gone down. My initial character was a rogue, opening fight I got in somewhat over my head, mainly due to some stupidity/lack of adjustment from 3.x and good rolls on the DM's part, but I stayed up, granted I was worst off in the group, second only to the warlord (he was out of in-combat healing and down to single digits), and I'd been taking the brunt of the opposition - what damage I wasn't taking was due to the fact that there were only so many melee opponents that could hit me - I was back against a wall. That was the first fight where anyone had come close to going down. I realized that I liked rangers better and prepped to swap out.
Soon after (out of game), we run into a massive (40+ opponents, about 3/4ths minions) war party - the DM says he's trying to find our limits - and aren't optimally positioned to start with, possibly exacerbating things is the fact that we experimented with a hex grid for this battle (Note: 4th ed doesn't play nice with hexes). The DM's dice were hot, and ours weren't doing so well; the party looses initiative, the rogue gets gang-flanked by 3 non-minions and a minion, with one non-flanking minion, the fighter is completely surrounded by a mix of minions and non-minions (with horrendous to-hit dice), the wizard gets only partly swarmed by minions with a couple non-minions, the warlord is swarmed by minions, the warlock got minions in his face early on but quickly got out of the mass of opposition away from the enemy artillery, and my (then still) rogue had only minions but fey stepped out to solo the enemy artillery along with their attendant minions and non-minion defenders. By the end of the combat, the wizard was dead (second wind used), the fighter was in single digits and had gone down twice (second wind used), the warlord was out of healing abilities and bloodied (second wind remaining), the warlock was nearly full-up and had some temp HP (second wind remaining), the other rogue had gone down twice, and only by a couple HP both times, but was still alive, and my rogue had been hit once (second wind remaining). I believe that we all expected the other rogue to die - the DM even tried to have one of the last remaining enemies break away and kill her, but failed. We got the wizard raised.
Those are the only times in that campaign that one of the strikers has come close to going down. And, for the record, while the ranger I switched to can handle ranged combat just fine, it's primarily a twf-melee build.
The wizard, the warlord, and the fighter each have gone down/come closer to going down, more times than each of the strikers, and possibly more times than all of the strikers combined.
__________________ Wait, he did what?!
Yes, he burned down the reinforced adamantine gates, sir. We don't know how, but all indicators seem to support that claim.
[No fortification is safe from a psychopath with pet hellfire engines - the PC's know of at least 3]
I love how people assume strikers are glass cannons because that's what makes sense, but they are actually NOT the glass cannons. Controllers are glass, but they are not cannons.
Speak for yourself. My wizard is a cannon, and typically takes less damage than everyone else in a fight.
Quote:
I mean look at your players' character sheets...you'll notice that the wizard has the lowest HP, the lowest defenses, the least amount of surges,
Hardly. Looking at the sheets for my group the wizard has the same AC as the shield using cleric with maxed Int swordmage adn the full plate + large shield using fighter coming in first and second. The wizard, currently without a neck slot item, has the same NADs or higher as the fighter, approoximately the same as the swordmage and significantly better than the cleric. Oh, and as a staff wizard with good Con the wizard has as many surges as the cleric and uses far fewer of them in a fight.
Quote:
and, by and large, the worst damage output of the group (except for these apparent wizard geniuses who can ALWAYS target 3+ enemies with their powers, even though 95% of the time your friends are in the way, because if they're not in your way, they're probably not doing their jobs).
And that's where you are wrong. Because if they are in the way then the rest of the party isn't doing their jobs. It's pretty easy, if you have defenders to lock down targets, or just a few bodies to form a shield wall, to put up a defensive line with the monsters stuck on the far side of it just begging to be hit with an AoE attack. And for the occasions when this isn't possible, or something breaks through the line, then you have a few single target spells with frequent riders to push them back into place.
Quote:
So the only thing "going down in 2 rounds" is a wizard.
Actually, so far the only thing to go through several encounters unscathed, in spite of the DM trying to hit it, is the wizard.
Quote:
Meanwhile, my ranger does 4d12 + 3d8 + 18, with Twin Strike, and doesn't even have to try very hard to get those numbers.
A +6 Great bow with weapon focus and assuming that both attacks hit? Average of around 58 damage, which isn't bad. Of course my warlock (in my other group) would be doing 7d6 + 34 with Hellish Rebuke and a basic +6 rod for an average of 59 damage and I'm told that warlock damage is pretty low.
More significantly my wizard, using a staff of ruin and dual wielding it will be doing 2d6 + 29 damage with Scorching Burst, for an average of 36 damage each to 2 targets for total damage of 72, assuming both attacks hit (which you did with your ranger example). If I manage to hit a third target (say by enlarging the speel for slightly reduced damage) then I could still be putting out in excess of 90 damage per turn with an at-will power. By any reasonable assessment, that has to be useful.
Quote:
I don't need to push 5, because I have a pet standing in front of my target and I'm shooting it from 25 squares away with no penalties. Thunderwave isn't damage, it's a panic button to clear stuff away from your gimpy, wimpy wizard
It really isn't. Thunderwave is an offensive positioning power. As a defense it fails because simply pushing an enemy 5 sqaures doesn't remove the threat at any level, and the wizard has many better panic buttons than that (immediate interrupt teleports and turn long defence enhancers, for a start). that you consider Thunderwave a poor defense and nothing else just illustrates how little you know about playing wizards.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
