PHB2 Classes simply better?

[Majoru Oakheart]

If they can't do striker damage, whats the point of having them in the party? The role of defender is redundant when strikers and controllers can have the same or even better survivability AND end the fight sooner. The defender's role is to mitigate damage and fighters don't do that significantly better than anyone else, even non-defenders, while other defenders can do additional things other than pretend to be a sub-par striker.

It depends what you consider striker damage. My fighter consistently gets near-striker damage while having a much better AC, more healing surges, and the ability to mark and get free attacks in.

I've actually gotten a couple of Rogue players annoyed at me for doing so much damage.

As an example, I use a Greatspear. I chose the +1 to hit. I, at 10th level have +17 to hit(+19 with CA, which I have regularly) for 1d10+11 damage. 1d10+20 damage when I use my Bloodclaw weapon. Which averages out to 16.5 damage or 25.5 damage.

A rogue who uses a Rapier who started with a 17 Dex(what I started with in Str) and also had a +3 Bloodclaw Rapier, Iron Armbands of Power, and the most of the same feats as me would have +16 to hit for 1d6+10 on non-sneak attacks. Which averages out to 13.5 damage. Below my attacks. On sneak attacks, he likely has +18 to hit for 1d6+10+2d8. Which averages out to 22.5 damage(or 28.5 with the Bloodclaw weapon).

It's more damage, that's for sure. But I use my 2[w] attacks more than the Rogues seem to. It could be a lack of good encounter powers or the fact that they don't get much more damage out of them. Either way, on a 2[w] attack, I do an average of 22 damage and they do an average of 26(or 31 vs 32 with Bloodclaw active). Pretty comparable, I'd say. And normally I have +1 more to hit, so it might give me a slight edge.

On the other hand, if he uses a dagger to get the same bonus to hit as me, then the damage is: 1[w]: 21.5, 2[w]: 24, which is even closer to my damage. Up by a couple of points only. And in one corner case(2[w] attacks while using Bloodclaw), I'm a point higher than him.

 

[Victim]

If they can't do striker damage, whats the point of having them in the party? The role of defender is redundant when strikers and controllers can have the same or even better survivability AND end the fight sooner. The defender's role is to mitigate damage and fighters don't do that significantly better than anyone else, even non-defenders, while other defenders can do additional things other than pretend to be a sub-par striker.

If you can't rest all the time, then a character with more and bigger surges is more survivable even if their defenses are equal (or even lower in some situations).

Moreover, even when the party is taking the same total amount of damage, the ability to influence how that damage is distributed is useful because it helps to keep damaged people on their feet, steer attacks towards targets with more surges, etc.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Moreover, even when the party is taking the same total amount of damage, the ability to influence how that damage is distributed is useful because it helps to keep damaged people on their feet, steer attacks towards targets with more surges, etc.

Not to mention making more use of those surges. Keep in mind, when the fighter uses a healing surge, he likely gets more hitpoints back than most other party members. If he gains 25 instead of 20 hitpoints on a healing surge, he heals more total hitpoints with the same number of surges.

Never underestimate the power to get a Cleric heal during a round of combat and be able to take 5 more points of damage than someone else next round.

 

[Regicide]

If you can't rest all the time, then a character with more and bigger surges is more survivable even if their defenses are equal (or even lower in some situations).

If you can't rest when you need it, then it is the DM pushing your characters off a ledge. If the DM wants to kill the characters, there's nothing the players can do to stop it. Anyway, running out of surges is rare.

 

[Flipguarder]

Another benefit of having many surges, as funny and non-theoretical as it sounds, is comfort.

If you have 5 surges left, and you know you have a significant (4 or more battles) left in the day, then you can't rush into battle with as much comfort as someone with 7 surges left. For a defender this is very important. You can say it's not important or doesn't matter, but it will affect gameplay significantly.

Also any DM who looks at the pcs healing surges to determine the number of encounters left in a day is not challenging his party enough imo.

 

[keterys]

If you can't rest when you need it, then it is the DM pushing your characters off a ledge. If the DM wants to kill the characters, there's nothing the players can do to stop it. Anyway, running out of surges is rare.

It's very much not that uncommon for me to see scenarios that require a certain number of combats and skill challenges (that may eat up surges) in one extended rest.

If you want to extended rest, you fail the scenario and can't finish it, losing out on whatever xp and treasure would have been offered. That might be preferable to dying if you're that worried about it, but it does mean that surges are more of an issue.

I also keep meaning to try the 'two milestones before you can extended rest' house rule, since it means that surges become a very notable commodity in that case.

 

[Regicide]

Also any DM who looks at the pcs healing surges to determine the number of encounters left in a day is not challenging his party enough imo.

How is that different than the DM taking the party's level into account when making encounters instead of picking monsters of random levels? The world revolves around the PCs.

It's very much not that uncommon for me to see scenarios that require a certain number of combats and skill challenges (that may eat up surges) in one extended rest.

That may be the case, but how often is it that it requires a defender's number of surges, particularly in LFR or some other 1-session thing? And as for skill challenges... defenders typically are the worst choice for those too.

I also keep meaning to try the 'two milestones before you can extended rest' house rule, since it means that surges become a very notable commodity in that case.

That is not a house rule I'd ever even consider. It is so ridiculously artificial my players would revolt. "Fine, we can't rest, we go back to town and start a bar fight, and then have a skill challenge to pick up a bar maid, done, we get our milestone, now we rest." Try and tell them they can't do that, they'll retire the characters and go play Conan or Champions or something. My players are hardcore gamers, but not hardcore DnDers.

 

[Flipguarder]

Yes but you don't just say the monsters are dead because you guys can't kill them.

The world doesn't revolve around the pcs destroying everything in their path without difficutly. It revolves around the pcs being challenged. To completely take resource management out of the game makes portions of it too easy imo.

 

[keterys]

That may be the case, but how often is it that it requires a defender's number of surges, particularly in LFR or some other 1-session thing? And as for skill challenges... defenders typically are the worst choice for those too.

It's almost always the strikers who are in trouble for surges, and given your assertion that the surges aren't useful over the strikers... it's falling a little flat?

That is not a house rule I'd ever even consider. It is so ridiculously artificial my players would revolt. "Fine, we can't rest, we go back to town and start a bar fight, and then have a skill challenge to pick up a bar maid, done, we get our milestone, now we rest." Try and tell them they can't do that, they'll retire the characters and go play Conan or Champions or something. My players are hardcore gamers, but not hardcore DnDers.

Not every house rule is for everyone - they _can_ rest, however, it just doesn't give them back surges or dailies. And random encounters don't really work for it, either. It's for reaching actual milestones in the story or challenge. Well, unless for some reason the bar fight is truly challenging and picking up the bar maid is an important part of the adventure.

Of course, the other one that was interesting was someone who suggested not giving the extended rest benefits _per adventure_. Pretty similar except you don't have a mid-quest intermission to recoup before the final battle. I imagine that's pretty different.

At any rate, the argument that it's artificial to disallow giving back surges falls flat when you consider that it's artificial to have the surges in the first place. Once you're already on board with surges (and hoo boy am I) then the rate at which you reacquire them is just another facet of gameplay. You could similarly reduce everyone's surge count by 4 and say you get 1 surge per encounter - that'd mix things up quite a bit too, but doesn't do anything I really care about

In some games, the number of surges matters. If they don't matter, it makes you wonder about whether resting for dailies is too easy, too - if you allow the 30 minute workday, why not the 5-minute? Well, clearly because that has a lot of problems. Some people would consider running out of surges a halt the game problem - but if it is, why have the rules for it at all? Just houserule the game to not have a surge limit and change it so the # of surges is a bonus on healing in some fashion (ex: 6 is your baseline, you get a bonus to surge value equal to # more surges you would have normally).

 

[Moonsword]

How is that different than the DM taking the party's level into account when making encounters instead of picking monsters of random levels? The world revolves around the PCs.

Among other things? Because some of us like to make them remember that what they're doing is dangerous. Adventurers are rare for two reasons. First, not many people are crazy enough to do it. Second, of those that are, the life expectancy is not long. Most adventurers, the vast majority, don't die in bed, and they don't die of old age. They die in some godforsaken hole somewhere, or out in the woods, or on some twisted, rather loose approximation of reality that's two steps outside of what the rest of us call the world. The source material makes that clear, and I don't have an issue with enforcing that to a reasonable degree. The players are exceptions in some ways, certainly, and they are the heart of the campaign, but if you think "sitting at the table" is enough to ascend to a supernal destiny walking among the gods or mastering every secret of magic, you clearly aren't playing enough cards. You want to win, you have to risk something, and in D&D, that's your continued existence on this mortal coil... at a minimum.

Will I kill characters? If they're doing something absolutely stupid and mortally dangerous (and they get verbally warned that it's not a good idea before I take the gloves off!), or it's dramatically appropriate, I'll kill them in a heartbeat. The latter can even have player approval when it's handled correctly. I'm not out to rack up a body count, despite my occasionally acting that way for my own amusement, but if you earn being put six feet under, I've got the shovel. Now, I may intervene when the dice have just decided they simply don't like you (although I'm also likely to make you earn that, too - never overlook the chance to allow roleplaying or letting someone shine when opportunity knocks!), and I almost certainly won't let a bunch of scrub goblins wipe the floor with people. But if you earn it, it's time to start filling out a new sheet.

That is not a house rule I'd ever even consider. It is so ridiculously artificial my players would revolt. "Fine, we can't rest, we go back to town and start a bar fight, and then have a skill challenge to pick up a bar maid, done, we get our milestone, now we rest." Try and tell them they can't do that, they'll retire the characters and go play Conan or Champions or something. My players are hardcore gamers, but not hardcore DnDers.

That's not really a milestone, but I see your point there. I don't really like that house rule and wouldn't use it personally. That said, for some groups, it might work.