Comparisions between classes

[Mad Hamish]

I think Twin strike is deceptively weak against a single target at first level. Its good against minions, but nimble strike or a basic attack is better.

This is assuming your are an elf and put an 18 in dex which then becomes a 20, and you have weapon focus or the feat that improves hunters quarry.

at that point you have 18 ac and are doing on average 16 points of damage. Using twin strike nets about the same average damage, but you must be able to hit twice. My experience is that the odds do not favor twin strike but at later levels it becomes more attractive.

Depends on chance to hit.

If you've got a 20 dex & a longbow then a [W] + dex with Weapon Focus does
D10 + 6 damage
average 11.5 damage on a hit

Twin strike does
D10 + 1 per hit
Average 6.5 damage/hit

If you have a 50% chance of hitting then the average in a round is
single attack -> 5.75 dmg/round

twin strike
chance of missing both attacks = .25
chance of hitting both attacks = .25
chance of hitting with only 1 attack = .5
so the average damage calculation is
.25 * 0 + .5 * 6.5 + .25 * (2*6.5) = 6.5 damage/round

So you're doing slightly more damage on average with twin strike

That's ignoring Hunter's quarry which makes things better for twin strike because you apply the extra d6 75% of the time compared to the single shot which gets it 50% of the time.

 

[Mad Hamish]

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.

It depends on the situation.
There are benefits and drawbacks to either class as a defender.

In general I think a fighter is a more effective defender than a Paladin.
The fighter
a) gets to attack people who attack somebody other than him (for at least similar damage to the Paladin if he hits)
b) can stop people moving away from him

The Paladin's main advantage is that he can mark and attack people at range to continue the mark and does some automatic damage.

However if a fighter can mark multiple targets just by attacking them (and has a fair few close burst powers even if they aren't a dragonborn)

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

They have 1 more healing surge and +1 to AC if they go plate vs scale.
Against that fighters will have +1 to hit and better chance of stopping people moving past.

The Paladin probably has more ranged options and has some healing abilities...
IMO they're both perfectly playable classes depending upon what you want to do

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.

That depends a lot on whether it's a 2 weapon or archer ranger.
A 2 weapon ranger will probably always be able to make the critter he's attacking his quarry, an archer ranger not so much as they're limited to the closest enemy and often they'll want to attack somebody further away.

A rogue needs combat advantage to sneak attack which either needs flanking or surprise (or other ways that I don't remember)
If a rogue can get combat advantage 50% of the time they'll get as much bonus damage as the ranger does from his quarry if he gets it every round (which is far from assured for a ranger, I've had a couple of sessions as an archer ranger and I'd be lucky to be getting it every 2nd round).

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?

Too little experience to say for sure.
I believe that quite a few people are a bit down on the Warlock as doing less damage than the other strikers but it provides a lot more in the way of applying status issues to targets.

I'm not entirely convinced about the Warlord as the sole Leader in a group but I think they make the best 5th party member of a group that already has a cleric and the other roles covered (especially a largely melee party).

 

[Gladius Legis]

For one, the fighter mark can actually interrupt the target’s attempted action (in the case of a shift). Whereas an enemy marked by a paladin that really wants to shift and attack someone else can just take the damage, or he can shift one and flee and not take any attack or damage, which the fighter mark would stop those shenanigans.

Uh, you DO realize that interrupts do not STOP the action from happening unless you actually kill the enemy, right? Interrupt simply means you resolve the attack before the trigger completes.

Second, the fighter mark is much more powerful against artillery, controller, skirmisher, and any other character that predominately attacks at range. The paladin mark can’t really do anything about the shift one and shoot strategy. The fighter mark can singularly destroy many creatures entire ability to attack by preventing them from shifting to get out of provoking for a ranged attack.

That's if the Fighter can get up close to the ranged attacker, not always a given. The Paladin is better at handling such enemies because he doesn't have to get close, and the damage can occur regardless of distance.

Third, the fighter mark is free. The paladin mark takes a minor action. This may not seem like a big deal but it can be.

The mark is free for the Fighter, yes. The CC attack isn't. It's an immediate action. Moreover, the Fighter has to spend his immediate action every round to make his CC attack every round. The Paladin only has to spend his minor action in that first round, and as long as he can stick to his enemy or attack him he doesn't have to spend another minor action in subsequent rounds.

So the Paladin can actually come out ahead in the economy of actions here.

Fourth, the fighter gets to mark as many guys as he can attack. This can reliably hit everyone adjacent to him and in the case of dragonborne, half-elves, and some multi-classing can consume entire groups. And he gets his free attack against any of them that are adjacent not just one.

He gets to threaten them all with punishment, but he can only actually punish one enemy of his choice per round. Once he uses his CC attack for the round, all the other marked enemies around the Fighter can shift and attack others to their leisure.

Immediate actions, again, you only get one of those per round.

 

[ac_noj]

He gets to threaten them all with punishment, but he can only actually punish one enemy of his choice per round. Once he uses his CC attack for the round, all the other marked enemies around the Fighter can shift and attack others to their leisure.

True but they can't all MOVE and attack other players without all getting attacked. They can't get as far with Shift+Charge so you're still containing them to an extent.

 

[Gladius Legis]

True but they can't all MOVE and attack other players without all getting attacked. They can't get as far with Shift+Charge so you're still containing them to an extent.

Well, yeah, but that's not related to marking. That's related to provoking OAs, so anyone with a good OA can do this. Fighters do have the best OAs thanks to Combat Superiority, no question, but it's not like other classes suck at them. Paragon-tier Paladins with Heavy Blade Opportunity are no slouches, either, especially since their at-wills are all really good.

 

[ac_noj]

Sure but only Fighters prevent movement when their OA's hit.

 

[Maxim Machinery]

Paladins are good for when you roll that awesome stat set. A Pally really needs Str, Con and Cha to be effective.

Depends what you're building it for. A tanky pally needs Cha (primary) and benefits from con (surges, hp), dex (heavy blade feats) and wis (lay on hands and power secondary effects - probably the most useful) as secondaries (thought you'd realistically only pick one of two and play to their strengths).

If you're building a healing / buffing pally, you only really want cha and wis.

As a smite-y pally, you only really need str and dex/con (depending on weapon) though wis could be helpful.

You'd only look at capping out str and cha at the same time if you wanted to run some sort of wierd hybrid pally, but then you'd just ignore secondaries alltogether.

Basically, pallies can benefit significantly from every stat (bar int), but depending on which role you pick, they only really need 2-3 (like most other classes).

 

[J-Dog]

Before I played the game, I couldn’t see what the big deal was about shifting and the like. After playing several times, it becomes clear that a group that works well together can get enough shifts and tactical movement to grant the rogue combat advantage for the majority of the fight. As such, the rogue does a ton of damage, far more than our ranger.

An additional benefit for the rogue is a high AC and Ref because of the tremendous Dex.

I don’t think that any of these classes are superior, but the biggest thing that you will notice once you start playing is that some of the minor details are actually quite important.

Speaking about tactics, the party must work together or they are in trouble. The encounters tend to be balanced for a party working together. Glory hounds and skulkers tend to disrupt the tactics and leave the party vulnerable.

In the end, it will come down to the types of encounters the DM favors. For example, wizards are good at killing minions. The only thing you can’t do without is a cleric or a warlord. This is one of those minor details that didn’t seem obvious ahead of time because you can spend surges out of combat. However, healing in combat is a must. It is a painful, painful lesson if you try to go without a leader.

 

[tombowings]

In the end, it will come down to the types of encounters the DM favors. For example, wizards are good at killing minions. The only thing you can’t do without is a cleric or a warlord. This is one of those minor details that didn’t seem obvious ahead of time because you can spend surges out of combat. However, healing in combat is a must. It is a painful, painful lesson if you try to go without a leader.

I wouldn't quite say that. I've been throwing full on encounters at my party without a leader and they've been handling them just fine. Although the Protecting Paladin does provide some in-combat healing.

The party composition is:

Half-Elf Protecting Paladin
Dragonborn Guardian Fighter (Battleaxe)
Human Great-Weapon Fighter (Greataxe/Halberd)
Elf Two Blade Ranger
Halfling Trickster Rogue
Eladrin Wizard