Comparisions between classes

[Obsidian Razor]

Hi!

My group and I are going to start a 4E game soon, using the Keep on the Shadowfell module, but creating characters from scratch (no pregens).

While talking with one of my buddies, we noticed that ON PAPER, some classes designed to serve the same roles look better than others.

For example:

Fighter vs Paladin

The Fighters marking ability is inferior to the paladin's one, both give a -2 to hit to the marked targer, but the paladin's one ALSO damages the target if he doesn't attack the pally.

Paladin's have better pasive bonuses to defense than fighters, they have plate armor and more healing surges (for example)

Rogue vs Ranger

Sneak attack vs Hunters Quarry

Hunter's Quarry is apparently the winner, since you choose wich enemy you want to damage more, while you have to move a lot to get one turn of sneak attack.


This are just examples, and like I say at the begining of the post, that's how it looks ON PAPER.

Can anybody comment on this? What is your experience in the matter?

 

[Gladius Legis]

Fighter vs Paladin

The Fighters marking ability is inferior to the paladin's one, both give a -2 to hit to the marked targer, but the paladin's one ALSO damages the target if he doesn't attack the pally.

Disagree. They're actually about even for the most part, although they both have different strengths and weaknesses. You're definitely not giving the Fighter enough credit. Fighters are MUCH better at controlling the squares adjacent to them by marking everything they attack, and once per round they get an immediate interrupt attack on an adjacent enemy for shifting or not including them in an attack.

Also, while this isn't related to marking, you can't beat Combat Superiority's WIS bonus to Opportunity Attacks.

Paladins are better at locking down enemies that can attack and stay away from melee range.

Both defenders have to spend a one-per-round action to punish their mark: Fighters their immediate, Paladins their minor to mark in the first place.

Paladin's have better pasive bonuses to defense than fighters, they have plate armor and more healing surges (for example)

Scale ain't that much worse to begin with, and in Paragon Tier can be better thanks to Scale Specialization which removes the speed penalty.

As for healing surges, that 1 extra surge for the Paladin typically compensates for the fact that Fighters are more likely to boost their CON.

Rogue vs Ranger

Sneak attack vs Hunters Quarry

Hunter's Quarry is apparently the winner, since you choose wich enemy you want to damage more, while you have to move a lot to get one turn of sneak attack.

Uh, Hunter's Quarry has the limitation where you can only target the enemy closest to you. Want to shoot that artillery in the back? You either have to do it without the Quarry or move into a better position.

 

[Victim]

The fighter has seemed much at marking and controling opponents that she attacks. The paladin mark doesn't interfere with movement or attack modes.

 

[Obsidian Razor]

Now that you mention that the Fighter probably has a better CON bonus, that reminds me that, once again, ON PAPER, the fighter specialiced on swords looks worse than the one specialiced on axes or hammers...

Oh, and thanks, by the way.

Any more comments?

 

[BarkingDeathSquirrel]

Fighter vs Paladin

The Fighters marking ability is inferior to the paladin's one, both give a -2 to hit to the marked targer, but the paladin's one ALSO damages the target if he doesn't attack the pally.

The Fighter's Mark lets you attack them if they don't attack you, and you also attack them if they try to shift too. You can also mark a LOT of enemies if you have access to some kind of area or close attack (Dragon Breath...).

The Paladin's Mark is automatic damage, but you cannot use it on multiple creatures. The two are more or less equal, imho.

Paladin's have better pasive bonuses to defense than fighters, they have plate armor and more healing surges (for example)

Plate armor is only +1 AC over Scale for a -2 check penalty, and a -1 speed penalty if you plan on picking up Armor Specialization. And most paladins will likely end up using that extra surge per day for Lay On Hands.

In play, it's much harder to get away from a Fighter safely once he's engaged with you. Stopping movement on OA's is a powerful ability.

Rogue vs Ranger

Remember that Hunter's Quarry (and Warlock's Curse) marks the nearest enemy. If you don't care about who you attack, yeah, Hunter's Quarry is easier to use than Sneak Attack, but only barely. But the Striker role is all about picking prime or hard to reach targets and taking them out with high damage attacks. You're going to have do just about as much movement to take full advantage of Hunter's Quarry as you would for Sneak Attack.

There are a quite lot of ways to gain Combat Advantage on a foe, especially during later levels, and that extra d6 of damage for Sneak Attack easily makes up for any trouble you have to go through.

Now that you mention that the Fighter probably has a better CON bonus, that reminds me that, once again, ON PAPER, the fighter specialiced on swords looks worse than the one specialiced on axes or hammers...

Most Heavy/Light Blades have a +3 Proficiency bonus, while other weapons have a +2 bonus. To-hit bonuses are fairly rare in 4e, so every +1 counts...

Plus, a fighter using Axes/Hammers loses defense efficiency, since only the higher of Str/Con applies to Fort defense. A Heavy/Light Blade Fighter would pump Dexterity, allowing him to have a fairly decent Reflex Defense, and maybe even use Light Armor instead of Heavy, depending on your ability score generation method/luck/race.

 

[Gladius Legis]

Yeah, hammers are typically the way to go for Fighters. The biggest draw behind heavy blades is Heavy Blade Opportunity, but Fighter at-wills don't make the best use of that. Paladin at-wills, on the other hand...

 

[Minigiant]

I think the difference between paladin and fighter, ranger and rogue; the type and number of targets.

Paladins and ranger favor single dangerous enemies. Their powers are more focued on one target. They are tougher and choose their foes.

Fighter and rogues favor many scary enemies. Their powers work on anyone at almost anytime. They can switch targets and easily spread the pain.

 

[ac_noj]

Fighter vs. Paladin
Fighters are better at tanking groups, Paladins are better at tanking single targets

Rogue vs. Ranger
Rogues and Rangers are pretty even to start with, but the Rangers focus on multiple attacks per round puts them further and further in front as the level up. Eventually Rangers become the highest single target damager in the game in both sustained and burst damage (depending on the build).

 

[loisel]

OK this kind of thread, you're going to get lots of armchair experts debating the merits of many, many things that really don't affect you or your characters. I think that the correct way of answering this question is to decide what your objective is, then break out a spreadsheet and see what's what.

The most obvious objective is DPR against a single foe. That's already been looked into (although I'm sure it could be improved), and here are two threads:
DPR per AC: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=234620
DPR per level: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?p=4399004

So, if you want to see how bulletproof your defenders are, you make a spreadsheet that counts how long you last against various attacks. If you want to see how nuking your AoE wizard is, you make a spreadsheet that counts DPR for crowds of monsters. I was gonna do that last one, but I never got around to it. If you want to know how good you are at stunning foes, you count the expected number of stunned rounds you can inflict, per day, or per four encounters, etc...

So in partial answer to your question, for DPR against a single foe, play a TWF ranger that shoots arrows from levels 1-10, then switch to twin scimitars at level 11 when you become a Stormwarden. Rogues also have high DPR against single foes, but only specialized builds get somewhat close to rangers (dagger rogue, paragon multiclass into ranger for TS is a good choice).

I don't know which are the best defenders, AoE guys, stunners, etc...

 

[Baumi]

I think that they are quite balanced:

Defenders:
Fighter: Great at controlling enemies that surround him or want to get past him.
Paladin: Toughest Defender (Armor, Lay on Hands) and good at defending against single enemies.
Swordmage: Mook Killer (many blasts) and Tricks. Good defender against single enemies.

Leaders:
Cleric: Master of Healing, many Blasts.
Warlord: extremely strong buffs, good Weapon/Armor selection.
Artificer: good at Controlling enemies.

Controllers:
Wizard: best and only Controller

Strikers:
Rogue: great but situational damage
Ranger: very good damage and Hunters Quarry is easy to get, but not many options (nearest enemy, nearly always AC)
Warlock: weakest damage of the strikers but inflict many conditions and has many tricks