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.
Unhappy with my fighter build. Please tell me where I am wrong.
So I'm playing a fighter (human) for the first time and it's my 2nd attempt at a 4e character. I've convinced myself that for what I'm trying to do my build is all wrong and I'm a little frustrated with the rules.
I had decided that I wanted to build a guy who would jump in the middle of combat and not be too concerned if he gets surrounded. I gave him an 18 CON to provide hp and just a 16 STR. I made him the traditional longsword & shield fighter.
So after playing him a while, I realize that with Brash Strike, he could be doing 4 more points of damage per hit not to mention that an axe does 1d10 vs the 1d8 a longsword does. Of course, brash strike grants combat advantage to my opponents, but I'm getting flanked all the time anyway, so that's not much disadvantage to me IMO.
Now it seems to me that, for what I'm wanting to do, it's foolish to take longsword instead of battle axe. I'm expecting the rules to provide multiple viable options, but longsword seems like a poor choice despite the fact that it's the fantasy staple.
Can someone tell me if there's a reason I'm missing to stick with the longsword?
The extra proficiency bonus that helps you hit your foes and apply more special effects based on hits with encounter or daily powers especially.
That your character is better with an axe than with a longsword is based on your build, yes. The fantasy staple might be longsword, but the fantasy staple is also that people can be good with all kinds of weapons - and your fighter is one of those good with an axe.
The Fighter is basically the class where weapon choice matters the most. If you want to play a Longsword fighter, you will build him differently then one wielding a Guisarme or an Axe. If you check page 77 of the PHB, you will notice a table on the upper left describing the associations between ability score and weapon group. Axes are linked to Constitution, Heavy Blades to Dexterity. The power Brash Strike is a power that reflects this association.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
If all you are concerned about is the d10 damage you could be doing from the Axe then you can get the same effect by spending one feat on Bastard Sword. It does a d10 and has the +3 proficiency bonus.
As a defender you should not be giving out +2 to hit you for free to your opponents. I don't have books here at work so cannot read the exact wording of Brash Strike, but if you grant combat advantage to all opponents I'd be leery that the DM might decide that all the ranged attackers are going to attack you this round for the +2 as well as all the abilities that key off combat advantage such as sneak attack damage for Rogues. Monsters have these kinds of abilities too so be sure you are considering that when you make your decision.
You only grant combat advantage to the enemy you attack with the power. It's not a terrible trade off unless they have sneak attack.
Fighters with a high con are better with hammers and axes. You'd probably be best served by switching to one of them. Check out the adventurers vault for a superior versatile axe, and hammer. The axe does 1d12 and the hammer is 1d10 brutal if I'm not mistaken.
Swords are often considered an excellent choice because of their increased chance to hit.
A fighter is also not a primary, single-target damage dealer, he's a secondary.
Personally, for what you describe I'd get the 18 in strength and 16 in Con. The extra 2 HP aren't as good as the +1 to hit and damage (or more). Long Sword is fine, but you can feat Plate Armor, Heavy Shield and Weapon Expertise at second level (or toughness at some point too, if you want).
I might even go 17 Strength (to 19), 15 Con, 13 Wis and feat Heavy Shield (Plate is only one step up in armor where the shield gives you the bonus to REF and AC), Weapon Expertise and Toughness at second level. At 4th level your STR hits 20 and CON to 16, at 8th you can boost those two again and let your WIS boost at paragon or boost STR/WIS at level 8.
You say you get or go for being surrounded a lot, then Brash Strike is bad. Cleave and Footwork Lure will be more useful. Cleave lets you damage another adjacent baddie (hello free minion kill, ie: one less swing you take and one less flanker) and Footwork Lure can get you OUT of Combat Advantage even if you're dazed at times because you save at the end of your turn.
I'd go with Hammer or Axe, and a Battle Rage Vigor build (with the errata). Pick up Brash Strike and Crushing Surge, Bell Ringer, and Knee Breaker.
Now, with three of your four powers, you get temporary hit points regardless of whether or not you hit (and you get MORE if you hit). This will allow you to take on a lot more foes.
Consider taking the Plate Armor feat, and carrying a shield. Now that you no longer need to be hit to trigger your battle rage vigor, it's more important that you keep your AC higher (even though you lose the minor damage bonus from chain armor).
Now it seems to me that, for what I'm wanting to do, it's foolish to take longsword instead of battle axe. I'm expecting the rules to provide multiple viable options, but longsword seems like a poor choice despite the fact that it's the fantasy staple.
The longsword is a poor choice for a high-CON character. The feats that enhance Heavy Blades generally require modestly good DEX (13 at heroic, up to 17 at Epic). Axes are a better choice if you're prioritizing CON over DEX. The longsword is certainly a viable choice - it's damage is lower, but it's proficiency bonus is +3, and there are plenty of good Heavy Blade feats. If you want the damage, you can go with a Broadsword (AV) or Bastard Sword. But, for your stats, Axes & Hammers would be generally better, since you'd easily qualify for the feats that improve them.
This isn't exactly what you asked, but one of the paladin at-wills, Valourous Strike, gives +1 to hit for every adjacent enemy to you. Great for your concept.
Really, though, the difference between a D8 and a D10 for damage is pretty inconsequential, and as others have said, if you care so much, get a bastard sword proficiency. Of course, if you do that you'll just start drooling over the waraxe (D12 damage).
As others have said, an axe is the way to go with that build. I would also recommend Melee Training: CON so that your basic attacks play off your best attribute. That makes you tougher to ignore in a fight.
There are a lot of ways to build a fighter. As you've noticed, high Con + longsword isn't such a great one.
A few fighter builds I find interesting:
1) Polearm fighter. With Footwork Lure and Polearm Momentum (MP feat), you can act as a bit of a controller, sliding enemies and knocking them prone with your at-will. This build also fits the requirements for Rain of Blows (if you use a greatspear), which was a big deal before the nerf. At paragon tier, you can go with Polearm Gamble for even more control. With any +2 Str race, you can start with 18 Str and 15/14 for Dex/Wis, which lets you meet the prerequisites for Polearm Momentum at level 4. Eladrin can also work, and they have the very nice Eladrin Soldier feat (for greatspear).
2) Battlerage fighter. This is pretty straightforward. With high Str and high Con, Brash Strike is a great offensive at-will (striker-level damage), and Crushing Surge is a great defensive at-will. You'll be tougher because of the temporary hps, but your attack bonus will be lower (no weapon talent, and a +2 proficiency weapon). Even for this build, which makes the most use of Con, I wouldn't put Con higher than Str. Multiclassing to barbarian is also attractive for this build.
3) Sticky fighter. If you want to really focus on being a defender and keeping attacks away from the rest of the party, a dwarf fighter with Devoted Challenge (MP) is great. The version I like is 18 Str, 15 Con, 15 Wis (pumping Str and Wis), with Dwarven Weapon Training, a waraxe/craghammer, and a heavy shield. Brash strike is still a strong offensive at-will, and Footwork Lure helps pull enemies off of your allies. Your combat challenge and opportunity attacks are a big threat, and you can add Distracting Shield and eventually the Warpriest paragon path to make yourself even stickier.
If what you want is to wade into combat and lay waste to the piles of enemies that throw themselves upon you, you might also consider going with a barbarian rather than a fighter.
Personally, for what you describe I'd get the 18 in strength and 16 in Con. The extra 2 HP aren't as good as the +1 to hit and damage (or more).
An extra 2 points in Con doesn't just give you 2 more hp (33 vs. 31), it also gives you an extra healing surge per day (13 vs. 12), and your healing surge value is one point higher as well (8 vs. 7). That works out to a maximum of 137 hp per day, compared to 115. Hit points cannot be looked at in isolation from healing surges.
Switching to an axe or hammer does seem like a very good idea, though.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
An extra 2 points in Con doesn't just give you 2 more hp (33 vs. 31), it also gives you an extra healing surge per day (13 vs. 12), and your healing surge value is one point higher as well (8 vs. 7). That works out to a maximum of 137 hp per day, compared to 115. Hit points cannot be looked at in isolation from healing surges.
Switching to an axe or hammer does seem like a very good idea, though.
Granted, and it plays more at higher levels, but the better accuracy and somewhat defenses (by being more able to not be flanked and take out flanking minions while still hitting bigger threats) seems to be a better fit. At least from my interpretation of what he says he wants.
Granted, and it plays more at higher levels, but the better accuracy and somewhat defenses (by being more able to not be flanked and take out flanking minions while still hitting bigger threats) seems to be a better fit. At least from my interpretation of what he says he wants.
Fair enough, but one of the stated goals was to be able to withstand being surrounded by enemies, and thus the high Con. Just wanted to point out that the 2 points of Con gives more than just 2 hp.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
So I'm playing a fighter (human) for the first time and it's my 2nd attempt at a 4e character. I've convinced myself that for what I'm trying to do my build is all wrong and I'm a little frustrated with the rules.
I had decided that I wanted to build a guy who would jump in the middle of combat and not be too concerned if he gets surrounded. I gave him an 18 CON to provide hp and just a 16 STR. I made him the traditional longsword & shield fighter.
So after playing him a while, I realize that with Brash Strike, he could be doing 4 more points of damage per hit not to mention that an axe does 1d10 vs the 1d8 a longsword does. Of course, brash strike grants combat advantage to my opponents, but I'm getting flanked all the time anyway, so that's not much disadvantage to me IMO.
Now it seems to me that, for what I'm wanting to do, it's foolish to take longsword instead of battle axe. I'm expecting the rules to provide multiple viable options, but longsword seems like a poor choice despite the fact that it's the fantasy staple.
Can someone tell me if there's a reason I'm missing to stick with the longsword?
You may stick with longsword, but you should use the 1 hand style , with some dexterity and or wisdom.
But if you really wanna be reckless like you said, and with high constinution the most efficient way is going full battlerager (even with a sword).
Something like 18 str and 16 like many people said.
Would be helpfull if you share with us exactly why you are unhappy with the 4ed rules.
Would be helpfull if you share with us exactly why you are unhappy with the 4ed rules.
I'm not unhappy with the rules per se, it's just in this one particular case (a fighter with a really high CON) it seems that to not take an axe and use Brash Strike seems foolish, or, rather, to use a longsword instead of the axe seems foolish. In a game with so many viable choices it just causes a disconnect with me. I was hoping that someone with a better grasp of all the powers and weapons and their interactions could point out to me why longsword could still be viable. To put it another way, it would be clear that a fighter like this using a dagger as a primary weapon would be a bad choice. I just didn't realize that there would be so much difference in using a longsword vs. a battle axe.
As I understand it, granting the combat advantage with Brash Strike is going to cause me to take 10% more damage because I'll be hit 10% more often (not subtracting for the fact that my opponent would sometimes naturally have combat advantage over me). In exchange I'll be doing a little more than 4 extra hit points damage to my foe, although I'll be hitting 5% less often due to the difference in Proficiency bonuses for axe vs. longsword. So, I'll definitely be taking more damage, but my instinct tells me that, with the extra damage, I'll probably take out my foe a round earlier that with the longsword.
As for changing stats, I don't think retraining allows that. I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong, tho.
I'm not unhappy with the rules per se, it's just in this one particular case (a fighter with a really high CON) it seems that to not take an axe and use Brash Strike seems foolish, or, rather, to use a longsword instead of the axe seems foolish. In a game with so many viable choices it just causes a disconnect with me. I was hoping that someone with a better grasp of all the powers and weapons and their interactions could point out to me why longsword could still be viable. To put it another way, it would be clear that a fighter like this using a dagger as a primary weapon would be a bad choice. I just didn't realize that there would be so much difference in using a longsword vs. a battle axe.
As I understand it, granting the combat advantage with Brash Strike is going to cause me to take 10% more damage because I'll be hit 10% more often (not subtracting for the fact that my opponent would sometimes naturally have combat advantage over me). In exchange I'll be doing a little more than 4 extra hit points damage to my foe, although I'll be hitting 5% less often due to the difference in Proficiency bonuses for axe vs. longsword. So, I'll definitely be taking more damage, but my instinct tells me that, with the extra damage, I'll probably take out my foe a round earlier that with the longsword.
As for changing stats, I don't think retraining allows that. I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong, tho.
Thanks everyone for your input.
What you have to understand is that most of us in this forum are either min/maxers (people who work hard to make sure their character is as powerful as possible ) or DMs who work with them.
Having a high con fighter who uses a longsword is viable. But it is not maximized. Basically you con is less important because you are not using an axe, mace or hammer, and your dex is more important due to your using a sword. It's not apples to oranges, its not rotten apples to good appples. Its more like a little bit underripe apples to apples, there is a clear winner, but wth its all edible and fairly good.
I think it's a feature of the system that not all weapons are equal. A longsword requires more precision, hence the additional effects based on Dexterity, whereas an axe requires brute force, with additional effects based on Constitution. You're building a "brickhouse" character (Str 16/Con 18) and that's just how he is.
If you want a longsword build, you could choose:
- Single-Handed Weapon Talent + Shield Fighter (Str/Dex/Wis as main stats)
- Two Longsword Ranger (Str/Wis/Dex as main stats)
- Eladrin + Longsword Finesse Rogue (Dex as main stat)
I'm not unhappy with the rules per se, it's just in this one particular case (a fighter with a really high CON) it seems that to not take an axe and use Brash Strike seems foolish, or, rather, to use a longsword instead of the axe seems foolish. In a game with so many viable choices it just causes a disconnect with me. I was hoping that someone with a better grasp of all the powers and weapons and their interactions could point out to me why longsword could still be viable. To put it another way, it would be clear that a fighter like this using a dagger as a primary weapon would be a bad choice. I just didn't realize that there would be so much difference in using a longsword vs. a battle axe.
That's kinda funny, because I feel the exact opposite. It all depends on your playstyle (or, rather, what kind of a fighter you're making), but to me, it seems foolish to take an axe instead of a longsword. The longsword has a higher permanent attack bonus (which is one of the hardest things to come by in 4e), at the cost of 1 point of average damage. True, the feats later on have to be considered as well, but is 1 point of damage worth a +1 to all attack rolls?
Also, a fighter is not a striker. In my opinion (and, once again, you may play a completely different fighter than me) it's foolish to gear a fighter towards dealing damage, since you'll never be as good as a striker. As a fighter, you should (again, in my opinion) be focusing on controlling the battlefield- your powers should focus on moving enemies or yourself (like Tide of Iron or Footwork Lure). Yet again, you may have a different playstyle than me, but do you see now how just because you may not like a certain choice doesn't mean that it's foolish?
__________________ "Inanimate objects, do you have a soul
That ties to our soul and the force to love?"
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
