+ Log in or register to post
Results 21 to 30 of 31
Thread: Garrote Questions
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 02:12 AM #21
+7 isn't bad at all for an attack against ref at first level. Pick up wrestler's gloves (+1) or grizzly gauntlets (+3) for extra bonuses.
- EN World
- has no influence
- on advertisings
- that are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 07:32 AM #22
I don't think this adds sneak attack damage, a grab isn't a rogue attack power, or even an attack... But I'm no expert on Rogue's, nor on how Sneak Attack works, so I'd have to look it up to say with any certainty...
1d4+3 for a full rounds standard action is kinda lacking... it's not the to-hit that is the main ingredient in the weak sauce, it's the damage.
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 10:58 AM #23
Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Cincinnati, OH
ø Ignore H.M.Gimlord
CaBaNa: The garrote training feat allows you to use your at-will powers during the grab and grants you combat advantage for the duration of the grab. As long as you can keep your enemy from escaping your grab, you can inflict at-will and sneak attack damage (1d4+3+2d6=max19 points) every round, in addition to the enemy's restrained condition. It's actually very powerful considering a flank is usually the way a rogue gains CA. With a garrote, he can do it alone.
LEB Character: Arkavas - Deva Artivicer 5
L4W Character: Mikara Li Mesadh - Elf Ranger 7
L4W Character: Eithal Lemindt Arehei - Goliath Warden 10
L4W Character: Ixenvalignat - Dragonborn Warlord 3
"Taking one's chances is like taking a bath, because sometimes, you end up feeling comfortable and warm, and sometimes, there is something terrible lurking around that you cannot see until it is too late, and you can do nothing else but scream and cling to a plastic duck." -Lemony Snicket The Slippery Slope
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 03:36 PM #24
But it took two standard actions,
1d4+3 on the first and grabbed
1d4+3+2d6 on the second
total of 26 max, so max damage per standard action is 13...
Add in a third standard action, and it jumps up to 45, or 15 max damage per standard action.
weak for a striker, even assuming max damage was rolled.
Last edited by CaBaNa; Monday, 30th November, 2009 at 03:41 PM.
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 04:11 PM #25
Gallant (Lvl 3)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
ø Ignore Theroc
You're also 'Controlling' the victim, unlike a 'standard' striker. You're sacrificing damage for constant combat advantage and hindering your victim. At least, that's how it seems.
Characters in Living Worlds
Source Materials I am able to access:
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 06:23 PM #26
PHB pg 117 "Sneak Attack: Once per round, when you have combat advantage against an enemy and are using a weapon from the light blade, the crossbow, or the sling weapon group, an attack you make against that enemy deals extra damage if the attack hits.
So grabbing is a strength attack, the garrote gives the attack damage, and garrote training makes it a light blade attack. You now have all the requirements for sneak attack.
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 07:21 PM #27
Damage is exactly the same as if you'd used a dagger, except the dagger didn't cost a feat...
The control part of a garrote does NOT give the restrained condition, it only gives the immobilized condition, and only to one target. This still allows them to attack, and take their full turn.
The auto-CA is nice, but is it worth the low damage and feat cost?
I see where someone would enjoy the Garrote and use it, but I wouldn't...
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 11:03 PM #28
I think you are missing what immobilized does to a ranged/caster when it happens next to a melee foe that has a good Basic Melee attack (like the brutal rogue would). You make them attack in melee, which sucks for them, or attack normally and you get a free attack from provoking. SO you limit their attack greatly or you do 2d4 + dex + dex. Also it's auto-CA, high crit AND immobilization for low damage and feat. Sounds pretty good IMO, but to each their own.
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 11:30 PM #29
The Garrote could be useful, you've proven that much, it's just not for me.
Monday, 30th November, 2009, 11:43 PM #30