Dragon Magazine #365's Character Concepts: Masterful optimization advice by WotC

RyvenCedrylle · Jul 27, 2008

Agreed with Runestar. This is not an optimized build and should probably mention that on the article. WoTC clearly makes their builds for flexibility, not focused effectiveness. What you've got here, RigaMortus, is a decent swordmage facsimile. WoTC has something that's mostly effective in melee and somewhat effective in ranged. It's also a little more versatile with the skills, which is something we're seeing more of - pregens that are meant to be able to not suck completely during any given skill challenge.

Dysmachia · Jul 27, 2008

Protagonist said:
Oh yes, this will really ruin John Doe's experience at Bob's after work d&d campaign.

John Doe pays for and reads Dragon?

AllisterH · Jul 27, 2008

Um, not optimized != Ineffective.

I think a lot of people are getting the two confused.

Basically, can these builds take on a standard monster of their level (+/-1) and have a 50/50 shot of winning?

Then it is an effective build.

Can a group of 5 of them take on a standard adventure?

Then the build is effective.

Ardulac · Jul 27, 2008

RigaMortus2 said:
• Magic Missile selected for the Arcane Initiate power. Come on, you're a friggin' fighter, you want Thunderwave because it lets you mark several enemies at once, and it's a blast so you don't provoke AoOs for using it in melee.

I actually got the impression from both of these write-ups that we are seeing what will soon be Arcane Initiate errata. The first character has the phrase "(wizard at-will originally)" following "The feat comes with training in Arcana and magic missile". In addition, every other choice of powers seems to be accompanied by an explanation for the choice (though sometimes poor), but both of these take magic missile for granted. Plus, it would be very strange for the fighter build to overlook thunderwave as the author does mention the value of close attacks several times.

If this really is being changed, then that is a point in favor of both of these builds. Admittedly, this isn't nearly enough to save the gish, but the teleporter is better than I would have expected from Dragon. Generally their advice is poison.

Runestar · Jul 27, 2008

I actually got the impression from both of these write-ups that we are seeing what will soon be Arcane Initiate errata.

What errata is that? That arcane initiate automatically grants magic missile as an encounter power, rather than a wizard at-will power of your choice?

Assuming it is not an oversight, it could simply be the original playtest version of arcane initiate. Perhaps they felt that magic missile might be too weak a choice (you had javelins if you wanted ranged marking) and then revised it to let you select any at-will you wanted (of which scorching burst or thunderwave make excellent choices for mass-marking).

Ardulac · Jul 27, 2008

Runestar said:
What errata is that? That arcane initiate automatically grants magic missile as an encounter power, rather than a wizard at-will power of your choice?

Assuming it is not an oversight, it could simply be the original playtest version of arcane initiate. Perhaps they felt that magic missile might be too weak a choice (you had javelins if you wanted ranged marking) and then revised it to let you select any at-will you wanted (of which scorching burst or thunderwave make excellent choices for mass-marking).

That's pretty much what I think they would be changing it to, an automatic magic missile. Based on the wording with "wizard at-will originally", I find it unlikely that the article was based on old playtest information. That is, unless, it was like it is now, they changed it to just Magic Missile, and then they changed it back. Which is possible. I get the impression that this is instead an early office version of errata to limit the Arcane Initiate choice. Either way, it seems clear that the article is using such a version due to the other clues.

Danceofmasks · Jul 27, 2008

AllisterH said:
Um, not optimized != Ineffective.

I think a lot of people are getting the two confused.

Basically, can these builds take on a standard monster of their level (+/-1) and have a 50/50 shot of winning?

Then it is an effective build.

Can a group of 5 of them take on a standard adventure?

Then the build is effective.

A party is supposed to take on an EL+2 encounter and almost certainly win.
50/50 shot of winning is pink ninja territory.

AllisterH · Jul 27, 2008

Danceofmasks said:
A party is supposed to take on an EL+2 encounter and almost certainly win.
50/50 shot of winning is pink ninja territory.

"pink ninja"? That's a new one to me.

Still, I believe I myself was in error. From playing so far, here's what I've noticed.

A standard level X party should be able to defeat a standard encounter (defined in the DMG as level X or level X+1) WITHOUT resorting to dailies. A couple of healing surges might be used up but it is a relatively tense battle as nobody wants to unload their dailies. You might even have one or two near death

A level X+2/3 encounter should require the expenditure of dailies from some PCs. Definitely one or two will hit negative pretty much

A level X+4 should require the unloading of all dailies and there's guarantee the PCs will win.

A level X+5 encounter will pretty much result in a beatdown of the PCs unless the dice gods are with them.

wayne62682 · Jul 27, 2008

AllisterH said:
"pink ninja"? That's a new one to me.

Yeah, same here. I guess it means totally ineffective, because a pink ninja is easily spotted.

I don't mind a lot of the advice WotC gives out, because it's always designed for the average gamer, not the optimizer (even some of their build suggestions in the PHB aren't that great. Not "pink ninja", but not good) so I really doubt that the majority of groups will have a problem, even with so-called "sucky" builds. That was always the case in 3.5, despite the CO dwellers arguments.

I have a bigger issue with them getting certain rules wrong or picking a power that they can't use because of the rules. I would at least hope they understand the freaking rules before they write advice articles for players.

Mustrum_Ridcully · Jul 27, 2008

wayne62682 said:
Yeah, same here. I guess it means totally ineffective, because a pink ninja is easily spotted.

I don't mind a lot of the advice WotC gives out, because it's always designed for the average gamer, not the optimizer (even some of their build suggestions in the PHB aren't that great. Not "pink ninja", but not good) so I really doubt that the majority of groups will have a problem, even with so-called "sucky" builds. That was always the case in 3.5, despite the CO dwellers arguments.

I have a bigger issue with them getting certain rules wrong or picking a power that they can't use because of the rules. I would at least hope they understand the freaking rules before they write advice articles for players.

Pink Ninja - this could work, it just has to be a Terra/Nile Empire Ninja with some skill in "Wierd Science" so he builds himself a SEP.

Dragon Magazine #365's Character Concepts: Masterful optimization advice by WotC

RyvenCedrylle

First Post

Dysmachia

First Post

AllisterH

First Post

Ardulac

Explorer

Runestar

First Post

Ardulac

Explorer

Danceofmasks

First Post

AllisterH

First Post

wayne62682

First Post

Mustrum_Ridcully

Hero

Similar Threads