D&D 4E Look Very Carefully: The Shroud Assassin's Handbook (by erachima)

Originally posted by erachima:

Reserved for sample builds.
 
Camelot Driveby: Goliath Charger Assassin
Note: This is an extremely boring High Score build. I wouldn't suggest playing it outside of a oneshot, and that as something of a joke.

Build Premise
[sblock]Race: Goliath
Guild: Night Stalker
Theme: Ironwrought
Multiclass: N/A
Paragon Path: N/A
Weapon: Vanguard Lance
 
Gimmick: The feat Hungry Sky Shadows allows a Goliath Assassin to add STR extra damage to their shroud-invoking hits. The charge kit adds extra dice of damage all over the place. Let's add them to the shroud roll and watch things explode while completely ignoring our Assassin powers, subtlety, and the need to wear armor.

[/sblock]
Level 1 Snapshot
[sblock]
Goliath, Assassin
Build: Night Stalker Assassin
Guild Training: Night StalkerAssassin's Form: Black Flame Form
Theme: Ironwrought
Gritty Sergeant Benefit: Lance
Background: Gritty Sergeant (Gritty Sergeant Benefit)
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 20, Con 12, Dex 11, Int 8, Wis 10, Cha 14.
STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 18, Con 10, Dex 11, Int 8, Wis 10, Cha 14.
AC: 10 Fort: 16 Reflex: 10 Will: 14
HP: 22 Surges: 7 Surge Value: 5
FEATS
Level 1: Hungry Sky Shadows
POWERS
Melee Basic Attack
Inevitable Strike
ITEMS
Riding Horse, Lance

[/sblock]
Level 1 DPR Kings breakdown (1.07 KPR)
[sblock]Melee Basic Attack Accuracy: +5 STR, +2 Proficiency, +1 Charging = LVL+7 = 30% Miss, 65% Hit, 5% Crit
Melee Basic Attack Damage: 1d10+5 STR+1 Versatile+2 Night Stalker+1d10 Mounted+5 Hungry Sky Shadows  and 1d6+1d10 Mounted+5 Hungry Sky Shadows = 3d10+1d6+18 = 38 Hit, 54 Crit
Melee Basic Attack Average Damage: .65*38+.05*54 = 27.4
Damage = 85.63% SMHP
Inevitable Strike MBA Accuracy: 9% Miss/Miss, 39% Hit/Miss, 56.75% Hit/Hit, 3% Crit/Miss, 6.5% Crit/Hit, .25% Crit/Crit
Inevitable Strike MBA Damage: 10 Miss/Miss, 41.5 Hit/Miss, 50.5 Hit/Hit, 60 Crit/Miss, 76 Crit/Hit, 76 Crit/Crit
Inevitable Strike MBA Average Damage: .09*10+.39*41.5+.5675*50.5+.03*60+.065*76+.0025*76 = 52.67 Damage = 164.61% SMHP
 
KP2R: 52.67+27.4 = 80.07 Damage = 2.50 Kills in Two Rounds
KP5R: 52.67+27.4*4 = 162.27 Damage = 5.07 Kills in Five Rounds
KP10R: 52.67+27.4*9 = 299.27 Damage = 9.35 Kills in Ten Rounds
Normalized KPR: (2.5/2+5.07/5+9.35/10)/3 = 1.07 Arbitrary High Score Units

[/sblock] 

Level 6 Snapshot
[sblock]
Goliath, Assassin
Build: Night Stalker Assassin
Guild Training: Night StalkerAssassin's Form: Black Flame Form
Theme: Ironwrought
Gritty Sergeant Benefit: Lance
Background: Gritty Sergeant (Gritty Sergeant Benefit)
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 20, Con 12, Dex 11, Int 8, Wis 10, Cha 14.
STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 18, Con 10, Dex 11, Int 8, Wis 10, Cha 14.
AC: 17 Fort: 20 Reflex: 15 Will: 19
HP: 42 Surges: 7 Surge Value: 10
FEATS
Level 1: Hungry Sky Shadows
Level 2: Spear Expertise
Level 4: Cruel Shadow
Level 6: Disciple of Destruction
POWERS
Melee Basic Attack
Inevitable Strike
ITEMS
+1 Magic Leather Armor (Level 1), +1 Amulet of Protection (Level 1), Bracers of Mighty Striking (Level 2), Death Shroud Ki Focus (Level 4), Obsidian Steed (Level 5), Horned Helm (Level 6), +2 Vanguard Lance (Level 8)

[/sblock]As Cold as Death: Long Night Scion Assassin
Race: Revenant Eladrin
Guild: Night Stalker
Theme: Sarifel Feywarden
Multiclass: Warlock
Paragon Path: Long Night Scion
Weapon: Frost Rapier (or Frost Blade of Winter's Mourning, if available)
By God's Command: Morninglord Assassin
Race: Wood Elf
Guild: Night Stalker
Theme: Sohei
Multiclass: Avenger
Paragon Path: Morninglord
Weapon: Radiant Quarterstaff
Claw Down the Sky: Soaring Blade Assassin
Race: Revenant Tiefling
Guild: Bleak Disciple
Theme: Werewolf
Multiclass: Monk
Paragon Path: Soaring Blade
Weapon: Firewind Longsword (or Firewind Starshadow Blade, if available)

Shroud isn't a separate instance of damage. The description in the power itself says:
"...and is in addition to the attack’s damage,...", which is a literal description of extra damage.
Probably, the reason why it doesn't say "extra damage" because you need to hit target to do extra damage, in this case your shrouds can do damage even on a miss.

And i found another post in this forum where it says that Mike Mearls himself clarified that assassin's shroud works as an extra damage.
Any thoughts on this?

oFFoy said:

Shroud isn't a separate instance of damage. The description in the power itself says:
"...and is in addition to the attack’s damage,...", which is a literal description of extra damage.
Probably, the reason why it doesn't say "extra damage" because you need to hit target to do extra damage, in this case your shrouds can do damage even on a miss.

Click to expand...

Basically, if an article in 4e says it was done by Mearls when 5e was in the works, he didn't spend enough time on it...there are a number of straightforward ways to make the Assassin by using common 4e references, such as Extra Damage. He chose not to do so...

This whole Assassin's handbook assumes that you're going to be literal about the Assassin. Because basically, if you don't, it really isn't a worthwhile class.

Hey, guys. Tinkering around with the Assassin (trying to make him great again, haha), and was wondering if a combination of Darting Shadow + Enshrouding Candle + Drawn Shadows would effectively make moving while Hidden essentially permanent, excluding attacks, of course?

Thanks

Is there a guide for the Executioner somewhere? Is it more or even less worthwhile than this one? I didn't turn up any results via googling, and I have a player deadset on "assassin" being on the sheet (coming from 3.5, so unused to the idea of rampant refluffing).

MwaO said:

Basically, if an article in 4e says it was done by Mearls when 5e was in the works, he didn't spend enough time on it...there are a number of straightforward ways to make the Assassin by using common 4e references, such as Extra Damage. He chose not to do so...

This whole Assassin's handbook assumes that you're going to be literal about the Assassin. Because basically, if you don't, it really isn't a worthwhile class.

Click to expand...

I'll add the meta-RAI argument that the author of the Assassin says they intended to write a class that was a Striker and could kill enemies effectively, therefore the ruling that makes the class able to do that must be the intended one.

Nemesis Destiny said:

Is there a guide for the Executioner somewhere? Is it more or even less worthwhile than this one? I didn't turn up any results via googling, and I have a player deadset on "assassin" being on the sheet (coming from 3.5, so unused to the idea of rampant refluffing).

Click to expand...

Even less, unfortunately. The simplification of the class meant there were fewer opportunities for them to write things that were good-by-accident, and they didn't crunch out the math past heroic tier.

The standard CharOp Executioner build was to Hybrid Warlock, take Eldritch Strike, combine the Executioner's hybrid damage feature, which still works on non-Assassin powers if they're MBAs, with the Warlock's Curse support to make a character that throws a whole handful of dice on their charges.

The plain Executioner has very few choices to make, and is basically nonfunctional at high levels because its sole encounter power does not scale up to an appropriate level of nova damage past heroic. (If it did, it would have to do something like 30[W] and you'd only get to play it with virtual dice.)

erachima said:

Even less, unfortunately. The simplification of the class meant there were fewer opportunities for them to write things that were good-by-accident, and they didn't crunch out the math past heroic tier.

Click to expand...

That's what I expected.

The standard CharOp Executioner build was to Hybrid Warlock, take Eldritch Strike, combine the Executioner's hybrid damage feature, which still works on non-Assassin powers if they're MBAs, with the Warlock's Curse support to make a character that throws a whole handful of dice on their charges.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I figured that one out while I was browsing through the rules looking for ways to make it good.

The plain Executioner has very few choices to make, and is basically nonfunctional at high levels because its sole encounter power does not scale up to an appropriate level of nova damage past heroic. (If it did, it would have to do something like 30[W] and you'd only get to play it with virtual dice.)

Click to expand...

Yeah, I mean it works well enough in high heroic to low paragon, but I've never been further than that, either as player or DM, so I can't comment with any veracity. Good to know though.

Nemesis Destiny said:

Yeah, I mean it works well enough in high heroic to low paragon, but I've never been further than that, either as player or DM, so I can't comment with any veracity. Good to know though.

Click to expand...

It depends on the game and the school. Ninja has a low-tier twin strike+a triple target attack option. Both of those are kind of interesting when you're stacking the higher level poisons on them+a paragon path with an actual good E11 for a nova. Especially if there's a basic attack granter in the group.

erachima said:

I'll add the meta-RAI argument that the author of the Assassin says they intended to write a class that was a Striker and could kill enemies effectively, therefore the ruling that makes the class able to do that must be the intended one.

Click to expand...

Mearls was the author. He found out just a couple of years ago that 4e heavily used soccer in design and terminology. And he was totally into FIFA video gaming and knew the lead designer loved playing soccer.

(Defender, Striker, Marking, etc...)

Which is to say, claiming Mearls intended anything and wanted it to be in line with typical 4e capabilities implies he understood 4e.

MwaO said:

Mearls was the author. He found out just a couple of years ago that 4e heavily used soccer in design and terminology. And he was totally into FIFA video gaming and knew the lead designer loved playing soccer.

(Defender, Striker, Marking, etc...)

Which is to say, claiming Mearls intended anything and wanted it to be in line with typical 4e capabilities implies he understood 4e.

Click to expand...

Mearls may not have "ruined D&D" as the meme goes, since what he's done has clearly been good for the brand, but I used to defend him, at least until the "yelling arms back on" type stuff began to emerge. I've come to recognize, however, that he ruined my D&D.

I wish that they'd brought more 4e stuff forward, and I now see that wasn't the intent from the start, nor will it ever be, despite talking up adding a "4e-style tactical module" at some point, since 5e is such a runaway success as-is.

I wanted to see more of a 4.5, that may have included some of their ideas, like streamlined feats, further refined math, and powers reorganized by power source, rather than class. Alas, that's not the timeline I live in. :/