Holy cow my party has 3 strikers in it

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I know. It's going to be awesome.

I'm planning on running the duregar as smart. The players are going to have to work hard if they want to take everything on one encounter at a time - I'm planning on running encounters together should anyone do anything stupid.

I also run Thunderspire, but just with 4 PCs, but they are 2-3 levels about the suggested level now (since they went through all KotS encounters mostly unmodified, and also Thunderspire.)
Some fights were a little ... too easy for my taste, but there were enough situations where the enemy had time to reorganize or it just made sense that reinforcements would be alerted. Combining 2 encounters makes for very challenging, but also very exciting and rewarding encounters. Of course, it leads to the 15 minute adventuring day if you do that all the time, so I try to do it not too often. But the players also say that these are the best and most memorable fights for them, so...

 

[Blackbrrd]

I fixed that for you.

I'm surprised I actually got support on this point. =P

On the invoker, are you talking about Divine Bolts? How the HECK does Divine Bolts deal more damage than a striker? That's absurd. Level 5...2d6 + 14 is still less than 2d10 + 4 + 1d8 or 1d4 + 2d8 + 10...and the striker can still put it all on one target. If anything, I'd say the Invoker is an example of what the wizard shoulda coulda woulda.

If you're not talking about Divine Bolts, I think I misread the class or something...they still suffer the same limitations as the wizard with "you wind up hitting your own guys a lot". Wizards have a feat tax to get around stuff the Cleric gets around for free, with twinkies.
...

2d6+14 = average 21
2d10+4+1d8 = 19.5
1d4+2d8+10 = 21.5

So, the Invoker is in front of the ranger and just behind the rogue who must have combat advantage to deal the damage. And this is the worst the invoker will "ever" get in damage.

The invoker has powers that only hit enemies:
Level 1 Encounter: Astral Terror 7x7 squares 1d6+7+#enemies* damage VS Will
Level 3 Encounter: Sun Hammer 3x3 squares, 1d10+7+#enemies* damage VS Fort, +2 extra damage if you have a bloodied ally in the area.
Level 1 Daily: Angelic Echeolon 7x7 squares 1d6+7+#enemies* +5 damage if they attack, vs Will

Etc...

The damage might not look spectacular, but on a Human invoker having Action Surge and using an Action point it hits really hard. At level 1 he regularly hit all my mobs with his daily (+8 to hit VS will), doing 1d6+5+7 and the mobs took 5 more damage if they wanted to do something, so 20 damage x5 = 100 damage, and then he followed up with Astral Terror for 1d6+5+5 = 13.5 damage to 5 enemies (2 were minions that are now dead), so another 67.5 damage, for a total of 167.5 damage in one round.

He can offcourse not do this every encounter, he usually only hits 2-3 mobs at a time doing about the same damage as a striker (more if he can hit 3 mobs). When he novas it is spectacular.

The only time he does less damage than a striker is if he can only hit one mob. Usually, that is NOT a problem, because that usually means all the other mobs are dead. It happens maybe every 10 encounters (solo mob).

*Class Feature: Covenant of Wrath -> Covenant of Manifestation.

 

[jayphonic]

Also, do not underestimate throwing encounters at the party that occur in waves. Having minions, a soldier or two and artillery in the first wave, followed by minions, lurker and/or striker in the second wave can be effective.

Usually by the time the second wave rolls in, your party will have used up most of their AOE and encounter powers. (especially an over confident group that may try and size up the encounter based on the initial wave)

And again, taking a longer view of a series of encounters whittling down party resources can make for some very challenging and exciting combats towards the end of the "day".

Afte all the hobby is about having fun and having memorable tales to spread.

 

[Deverash]

Absolutley... Strikers can deal metric -loads of damage, but they still have trouble hitting more than one target at a time. A horde of appropriate level minions backed up by some artillery can overwhelm a group of strikers pretty quickly.

I've got a striker heavy group I'm running for as well, with 1.5 defenders, .5 leader and 4 strikers. I've found that even worse than minions is monsters 2-3 levels lower than the party. They still go down fast(2 hits, generally), but do better damage when they hit. Minions seem to drop too fast to be a viable threat.

 

[Trevelyan]

I'm playing in a party of four consisting of two defenders (fighter and swordmage), a cleric and a wizard. We have no strikers. According to Old Gumphrey, that's just about the least optimal party imaginable and we should be slogging slowly through fights and stretching our resources to breaking point trying to soak up the damage that we suffer when we can't dispatch monsters quickly enough.

Funnily enough, we find the exact opposite to be the case. Fights tend to be brief and brutal as the party works together to split up the enemy, press them into position and hit them hard. The fighter can pin down one or two monsters, or even just lure them in before stepping aside for the wizard to hit multiple foes with an AoE attack, the swordmage is everywhere at once, forcing enemy artillary into melee, making them pay if they chose to attack the rest of the party and frequently making use of the grouped monsters around the fighter for his own AoE attacks, and the cleric distributes bonuses to hit, bonuses to defenses and healing when needed. We often finish encounters with encounter powers unused simply because we didn't need them, ditto for daily pwoers when we settle down for a long rest.

Having played with a few different groups, I'm tempted to suggest that the defining feature of strikers is not just the damage but the fact that they are frequently loners (some more than others - the rogue likes a flanking buddy). A group of people who enjoy playing strikers probably doesn't take the time to appreciate the teamwork aspects of a mixed party and see how they can enhance the performance of the group. A classic example being the apparent difficulty in hitting multiple monsters with AoE attacks - if everyone is out for themselves then it's hard to manage, especially wihtout hitting allies, but if the party works together, as ours does, then they wizard can be hitting three targets with relative ease, at which point the damage really does stack up, in addition to whatever status effects the wizard is applying.

 

[eriktheguy]

I would argue that a fighter is a more effective addition to an all-striker party than another striker. The fighter can deal some serious damage with a good to-hit value, and is alongside (just ahead of) the strikers in terms of defense/hp. Moreover, the fighter's mark/OAs make him an excellent striker in certain situations. Enemies that attempt to escape from a striker would have difficulty doing so against a fighter, who can prevent movement with OAs and smack anyone that tries to get away. Fighters were made to be hard to get past, but they are also very hard to get away from. Working as a defender is more of an option for fighters than a requirement, and I find that they tend to have more damage output than anyone else other than fighters.

Controllers are IMO the worst class. Every class can take area attacks if necessary. Minions really just exist to add flavor, you don't need a party roll dedicated to taking them out.

Defenders, as mentioned by OP, are useless unless they can do something else. I would recommend paladins or fighters. Paladins are only useful if your party has no healing, otherwise they are basically weak fighters.

Leaders can be OK if your party really needs the healing. Again, if they don't deal some decent damage, they are pretty useless. Your party may as well just carry potions. I prefer the warlord. It can heal and also deal damage like a fighter. Finally, the warlord is great for moving allies and enemies so that the strikers can deal their damage. My warlord often gives combat advantage to the rogue that otherwise wouldn't have it.

I think my optimum party would be fighter, warlord, 3 strikers. I prefer melee strikers, so probably 2 rogues and a ranger. Maybe replace 1 rogue by avenger. By making a few of the characters dragonborn, and by picking powers carefully, there should be no problems from minions.

 

[Pbartender]

Controllers are IMO the worst class. Every class can take area attacks if necessary. Minions really just exist to add flavor, you don't need a party roll dedicated to taking them out.

That's a pretty simplistic view of Controllers, though. While minion-killing area attacks are one major aspect of Controllers, the other is... well... controlling the enemies... Hindering them and limiting their options through conditions, zones, and other sustained effects.

 

[eriktheguy]

That's a pretty simplistic view of Controllers, though. While minion-killing area attacks are one major aspect of Controllers, the other is... well... controlling the enemies... Hindering them and limiting their options through conditions, zones, and other sustained effects.

I just prefer to 'control' them with strikers using such conditions as 'dead', 'stabbed', 'on fire', and (may favorite) 'on fire and dead'.

 

[Sadrik]

I just prefer to 'control' them with strikers using such conditions as 'dead', 'stabbed', 'on fire', and (may favorite) 'on fire and dead'.

I prefer the dead condition over all others, my vote is for *all* striker groups being most efficient.

Although I reserve the caveat of all strikers and one leader (preferably cleric) to make the adventuring day last longer.

As I have espoused the same line of thought as OG, I think controllers and defenders are there purely for nostalgia's sake. In previous editions all classes fell into buffer or striker rolls with the best doing both (CoDzilla).

It really is sad that my favorite archetype is so weak in this edition. My wizard was absolutely creamed by a rogue in one-on-one combat. Controllers are apparently designed to not exist outside of the party anymore. They are more like a 3e bard now, rather than sit back and drizzle on a party bonus, they sit back and drizzle on a little damage. Weak sauce, my wizard died, good riddance those mechanics - hello avenger...

 

[Old Gumphrey]

That's a pretty simplistic view of Controllers, though. While minion-killing area attacks are one major aspect of Controllers, the other is... well... controlling the enemies... Hindering them and limiting their options through conditions, zones, and other sustained effects.

All strikers hinder enemies and inflict conditions. They don't use zones, but they don't need to. Wizard zones are crap, anyway. They hurt your party. While you can time the AoE areas and bursts, the zones just make big areas for your party to avoid and *possibly* push bad guys into. It's 10x more efficient to just play a different class and deal 3x more damage to a single target, take him out more quickly, thus obviating the need for the controller to even be present in the first place.