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.
Ok, one of my players has built his ranger into a level 13 (beastmaster) ranger with paragon multiclassing into Barbarian. And he's devastating the battlefield - to such a degree that nothing of equal level is a challenge to the party anymore.
Wielding an Executioners Axe his frigging At-Will - Devastating Strike -(with power attack) against a Quarry is an amazing 1d12+4d8+16 (+6 from Power Attack, +5 from Strength, +3 from Enhancement, +2 from Iron Armbands).
This is an impossibly high number, he regularly reduces 100+ HP enemies to dust in 1-2 rounds. His average, for the at will is 41 damage. Once he starts whipping out Rages, Dailies and more - I'm weeping and the rest of the crew are mostly relegated to providing the occasional flanking (when his doggy isn't close enough) or healing him.
Now - I've contemplated asking the player to change to a new character (and he seems interested in playing a Druid) - but this seems more of a systematic problem with the Barbarian having his "bonus striker damage" incorporated into his powers instead of as a separate class feature. I can, without a problem, see a Str/Dex Rogue MC into Barbarian and be almost as dangerous (except there won't be as big of a weapon).
__________________ Andreas Rönnqvist Dreamscarred Press
New publishing with a focus on Psionics
Get a FREE download of our Dreamscape release!
Oh they did, but I only made the mistake of handing out the Bloodclaw once and the rogue using it didn't give it up and then the player removed his own character from play, items and all.
IF he could, he would.
__________________ Andreas Rönnqvist Dreamscarred Press
New publishing with a focus on Psionics
Get a FREE download of our Dreamscape release!
This is one of the problems of building the barbarian's striker damage directly into the powers -- multiclassing lets you get at the big damage without any real limitations (unlike Hunter's Quarry or Sneak Attack, which are limited to 1/encounter).
Consider a swarm. Then the wizrd can shine with area attacks, and the ranger barbarian does half damage. The lamia can sustain damage with a minor if he stays in range, and your ranger still has a rangers hp.
Wraiths can also be a humbling encounter.
In an extremely annoying case, try a swarm shifter wraith. ave. 41/half (for insubstantial) =20/half again (for being a swarm)=10/half yet again (for weakening the lout =5 for an at-will. enjoy.
Remember, he's still a ranger, and has that classes defenses, hp, etc. he isn't invincible. And he is a striker. It isn't a crime to be very good in your role.
Power attack hurts this guy though. He's eating a -2 when (with the right gear) he could be doing comparable damage with a charge and have an attack bonus +3 higher. It could be worse.
His AC cannot be very good. Archers that are out of reach ought to put the hurt on him.
__________________ "In Life's name and for Its sake, I advise you I am here on the business of the Powers That Be! Your actions toward me, and through me, toward Them, will determine the continuation or revocation of your present status. Be warned by me and desist!" --Wizards at War, Diane Duane
The fact that barbarian x-class has no limit to the extra damage seems to be an egregious oversight on WotC part. The seem to have put very few limits on the abilities of many of the classes in PHB2.
__________________ Whatever you read in my post, I actually do like 4e
All my questions are for 4e unless otherwise stated.
"A true slacker needs no excuse to slack" - Evan G.
, +5 from Strength, +3 from Enhancement, +2 from Iron Armbands).
This is an impossibly high number, he regularly reduces 100+ HP enemies to dust in 1-2 rounds. His average, for the at will is 41 damage.
I reckon he would probably do more damage using twin strike to be honest. The double roll to get the quarry damage in is the key. At this level I'd probably rate the rangers dailies as better than the barb rages and the encounters about even. I think you may have to start aiming at encounters 2-4 levels above the party. Are the other characters well built too?
Thanks for the heads up...now, how to preent this happening in MY game...what to do, what to do?
New feature of the barbarian :
'Barbarian Menace' : Allows extra damage on certain powers.
Then, go through said powers and make the extra damage contingent on the 'Barbarian Menace' feature. So the powers operate exactly as they do for a barbarian, but a multiclasser doesnt get them. And if they complain, point out that the multiclass barbarian feat already comes with a damage bonus and the extra striker damage is just double dipping.
Just thought of something. If you think your ranger is bad, imagine an Avenger with a Barbarian Paragon. Rediculous armor class with roll twice on each attack AND barbarian striker damage. What a nightmare!
To be honest, I wouldn't do anything. 41 points of damage at this level is pretty standard for an unoptimized straight ranger nevermind a barb multiclass. I like the m/c idea for the flavour. If you made it much weaker it wouldn't be worth doing especially with all the feat investment and the loss of a paragon path
This is an impossibly high number, he regularly reduces 100+ HP enemies to dust in 1-2 rounds. His average, for the at will is 41 damage. Once he starts whipping out Rages, Dailies and more - I'm weeping and the rest of the crew are mostly relegated to providing the occasional flanking (when his doggy isn't close enough) or healing him.
I'm level 6, and my rogue's average damage for an at-will that hits is 20 already. And I hit way more than this guy will.
100hps is LOW for a level 13 non-elite soldier. Strikers are SUPPOSED to kill them in 1-2 rounds. Otherwise an easy fight with 4 equal levelled soldiers would drag on for eons.
Incidentally, soldiers at this level have ~29 ac. That means that your ranger-barbarian needs to roll a 13 to hit them (he's +16 to hit with flank, right? 6 level, 5 str, 3 enhance, 2 weapon, -2 power attack).
A rogue daggermaster would be doing 1d4 + 3d8 + 17 with a +21 to hit reflex (which is 22 on this particular soldier) and an 18-20 crit range. He hits the same foe on a 2+. Guess who does more damage per round?
Incidentally: any party with a melee striker would be well served getting safe flanks for that striker whenever possible.
To be honest, I wouldn't do anything. 41 points of damage at this level is pretty standard for an unoptimized straight ranger nevermind a barb multiclass. I like the m/c idea for the flavour. If you made it much weaker it wouldn't be worth doing especially with all the feat investment and the loss of a paragon path
Agreed, I like the flavor too. Ranger/Barbarian has a nice feel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saeviomagy
I'm level 6, and my rogue's average damage for an at-will that hits is 20 already. And I hit way more than this guy will.
100hps is LOW for a level 13 non-elite soldier. Strikers are SUPPOSED to kill them in 1-2 rounds. Otherwise an easy fight with 4 equal levelled soldiers would drag on for eons.
But the OP was concerned with how this character damage output was making the other players look weak. To compare his damage output against the monsters of the level is kind of specious.
If it is your position that a striker should be downing a creature in 1-2 rounds (I decline to agree or disagree) thats fine, but how is he going against other strikers in the group? If I read the OP right, they arent keeping up because this unique combo is pushing 1 character (1 in a group...its a group game) beyond everyone elses capabilities, what it means is...
1 person has a great old time
Eveyone else is relegated to supporting him (or just getting killed because the monsters have to be tuned against that one character to have any point what-so-ever)
DM is frustrated out of his brain because game design needs to constantly incorporate the fact that one player found an effective rule combination.
Balance is not just player to monster, it is also from player to player. If one player is so far ahead of everyone else (as the OP suggests), not through proper reward for good playing but through rule manipulation, its the GM's job to do something about that so the game stays enjoyable for everyone involved, rather than just the one person.
Sometimes rule combinations will slip through the cracks that end up far too powerful(read the Hybrid test doco....the designers admit this happens), s as a GM, I hold to the belief that it is our responbility to control this.
That is my position, others prefer RAW : more strength to them. Many disagree with what I would consider unbalanced, thats their privelege. But I know that my group is enjoying the game I have put together and thats good enough for us.
Good luck to all who have to tackle the thorny issue of game breaking character builds.
Last edited by BobTheNob; 26th June 2009 at 04:33 AM..
I see the problem, but let's look at a fair comparison. How does this build compare to another strong striker build, like a Daggermaster rogue with the same magic items and perhaps a vicious dagger? Between the dramatically better to-hit chance (+3 weap, weapon talent, nimble blade) and the much better crit range, I bet the DPS is close.
Also, what kind of encounter powers does this guy have since almost all the ranger powers require 2 weapons? Has he sunk all his feats into power swaps? There's a price he's paid for his awesomness and perhaps the apparent brokenness comes from not seeing all the other awesome combinations he's passed up.
The ranger in our group has multiclassed into Rogue and is going for Death dealer. It's going to be really sick when he uses an action point on a 3[W]x2 power and adds 6 striker dice with EACH DAMAGE DIE getting a +2. There's some outrageous damage for you. Oh and by the way, my character is a tactical warlord with all the dressings, so he's deninitely going to hit (+3/+5 on APs)and have some more damage on top of it all.
Perhaps the issue is that the other players in the group could use some help tweaking their characters.
Large numbers of at-level (or even below level) foes, not necessarily minions, should give him a bit of trouble and let the rest of the party join in. If you are trying to challenge him with fewer and bigger monsters, that may be the wrong way to go. Try four L-1 archers fronted by three L-1 skirmishers and anchored by two L+1 soldiers. The soldiers engage your heavy hitter, the skirmishers tie up or delay the party defenders, and the archers focus fire on one character at a time. Not every encounter needs to be like this, but there should definitely be some.
Perhaps the issue is that the other players in the group could use some help tweaking their characters.
Large numbers of at-level (or even below level) foes, not necessarily minions, should give him a bit of trouble and let the rest of the party join in. If you are trying to challenge him with fewer and bigger monsters, that may be the wrong way to go. Try four L-1 archers fronted by three L-1 skirmishers and anchored by two L+1 soldiers. The soldiers engage your heavy hitter, the skirmishers tie up or delay the party defenders, and the archers focus fire on one character at a time. Not every encounter needs to be like this, but there should definitely be some.
This is another approach I would agree with. Help the other players to get up to speed with the guy that is streaking ahead, just make sure your players are all pretty relative. (Mind you, that can be hard to judge as roles factor into this, but I can tell the original OP is at a point where one has streaked ahead already)
Either way, it just has to be that all your players are on a level playing field with each other. Once you can say that is the case, you can sort out the monsters they go up against later.
But the OP was concerned with how this character damage output was making the other players look weak. To compare his damage output against the monsters of the level is kind of specious.
I think other people have pointed out and supported that the problem isn't really the build. No need to houserule it when half-a-dozen other classes could put out the same damage. Something else needs to be done for the group.
by my rough calculations an archer ranger will average more damage than the ranger/barbarian above
1d12+4d8+16 for the barbarain to an average of 40.5 damage on a hit
archer ranger (assuming great bow) with twin strike
d12 + 3d8 + 7 (assume +3 weapon, weapon focus (bow), and bracers of archery) for the first hit of a round average 27
Assume both characters have a 50 % change of hitting on each attack and the barb/ranger averages 20.25 damage/round and the archer ranger averages 20.25 damager/round _ignoring_ the fact that the archer ranger has a 25% of hitting twice in the round (adding another 4 or so to average damage) and that the archer ranger isn't power attacking so should have a better chance to hit.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
