To Mike Mearls: Melee training and the Battlemind

[Garthanos]

When we talked about the change to Melee Training, we also talked about feats, powers, and other options for classes that like basic attacks but don't use Strengths. It's something that is on our to do list.

I'll make sure we look at the shaman AC issue while I'm at it and approach it from a similar angle.

So Gandalf gets his charges nerfed because he isnt a member of a melee class I see... sorry Melee Training in pre-essentials space worked fine to open up the design and modelling space it basically back to 1e only fighters get to be even basically competant with swords bit... and it sucks.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Gandalf was a fighter in his youth, no?

Plus, he was who-knows-how high level and adventuring with inexperienced hobbits. He could kick goblin tail better than them with his 1/2 level bonus, alone.


Though, I get what you're saying. It's just, if a concept calls for being good at melee, a little investment in STR isn't inapropariate or impossible. You just have to be willing to put the resources towards it. Even in the absence of Melee Training, you could have a wizard competent to make a basic attack. He'd just be a light on his Implement Mastery's secondary stat from investing in STR.

 

[Squizzle]

The "NP-complete" version of the intuitive (to me) fix is "anything you rely upon for role fulfillment should work off of your primary stat". I'm not sure that there is a simple "P" version of that; I think you just need to brute force go on a class-by-class (or build-by-build) basis. Battleminds need usable OAs, so their OAs (not general MBAs) should work off of Constitution. I'd propose a new class feature that granted an at-will power that was just a Con-based basic attack, usable as an opportunity action. Assault swordmages rely on a specific type of basic attack for their enforcement; that attack should be Int-based. Avengers are supposed to be able to isolate a single enemy, and so should get a good Wisdom-based OA to help alter the tactical cost of moving away from the avenger. Etc., etc.

 

[igniz13]

So Gandalf gets his charges nerfed because he isnt a member of a melee class I see... sorry Melee Training in pre-essentials space worked fine to open up the design and modelling space it basically back to 1e only fighters get to be even basically competant with swords bit... and it sucks.

Mike didn't say anything like that at all, he said they're looking at other options for people who like MBA's but don't use Str.

Gandalf is loosing a few points of damage on a charge, he can still charge if he needs to. Not that charging is a prime concern for wizards in the first place.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Gandalf was a fighter in his youth, no?

Plus, he was who-knows-how high level and adventuring with inexperienced hobbits. He could kick goblin tail better than them with his 1/2 level bonus, alone.


Though, I get what you're saying. It's just, if a concept calls for being good at melee, a little investment in STR isn't inapropariate or impossible. You just have to be willing to put the resources towards it. Even in the absence of Melee Training, you could have a wizard competent to make a basic attack. He'd just be a light on his Implement Mastery's secondary stat from investing in STR.

Except in order to make your MBA worth anything you'd need a 16 STR. Good luck getting a 16 in an otherwise useless non-secondary ability score. AND you have to keep pumping it up. This is simply not a viable option. It isn't even "not quite optimum" it is actually making your character terribly unoptimized. The need for stat bumps in order to stay relevant at higher levels insures that the costs of doing things like this are large and grow larger at higher levels.

Personally I think stat bumps were a bad idea to start with. They create a really large number of extra constraints on characters for no really measurable overall benefit to the system. That's really getting pretty far OT though.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So Gandalf gets his charges nerfed because he isnt a member of a melee class I see... sorry Melee Training in pre-essentials space worked fine to open up the design and modelling space it basically back to 1e only fighters get to be even basically competant with swords bit... and it sucks.

I think yes, the wizards charge should be weaker than the warriors charge... Not everyone should be equal...

Also the wizards paragon path ability, which allow an int attack vs AC (now fixed i guess) is meaningful again, as a solid hit with a melee training staff is not wqually good anymore...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Except in order to make your MBA worth anything you'd need a 16 STR. Good luck getting a 16 in an otherwise useless non-secondary ability score. AND you have to keep pumping it up. This is simply not a viable option. It isn't even "not quite optimum" it is actually making your character terribly unoptimized. The need for stat bumps in order to stay relevant at higher levels insures that the costs of doing things like this are large and grow larger at higher levels.

Personally I think stat bumps were a bad idea to start with. They create a really large number of extra constraints on characters for no really measurable overall benefit to the system. That's really getting pretty far OT though.

With a 14 in your stat, your melee opportunity attacks are ok... the main problem is falling behind when you don´t raise it, as you state it.

And I agree, stat bumps are a design problem in 4e. And I think it is not too OT. We had no discussion about melee training, if your 14 in strength would be as good at level 30 as it is on level 1. (where it is good enough)

 

[Garthanos]

I think yes, the wizards charge should be weaker than the warriors charge... Not everyone should be equal...

If the wizard didnt spend resources to change that then fine... the fighter can spend that feat making his charges even nicer if he wants. The wizard has to commit to quite a chain of feats... he has to get weapon proficiency and get the equipment to support it etc.... he has to really find some / pull some fancy tricks so he doesnt stay in melee etc.

Basically Gandalf becomes stupid because he doesnt use a lightning bolt instead... its already a flavor choice nerfing it further is just insult to injury.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It is still an ok choice to take melee training... I just don´t get why it is so terrible...

Maybe the solution is easy:

Tensers Transformation
Wizard Utility
daily
Transmutation

until the end of the encounter, you use your int modifier for basic melee attacks. On a hit, you deal an extra 1d6 damage and push the target con modifier squares and deal con damage to an enemy adjacent to the target.

you cannot only use at-will powers until you end this power as a minor action.

something like that...


I have te feeling that melee training is either too good, or not good enough. If you are a wizard, wven if you trained melee training, it is still not good enough as a regular attack. As an opportunity attack or charge attack or granted attack by a power, it is so strong, that not to take melee training is a mistake.

So nerfing this feat is the right decision, but maybe we need a reconstruction of MBAs

Actually I would have been fine if MBA and RBA was:

attack: highes attribute vs AC
damage 1[w] + str (melee) / dex (ranged)

So you can take melee training if your strength is too low. But with mediocre strength you can live without the feat. Maybe different classes could get a feat that allows other effects on MBAs other than added damage (like a mage getting a push effect on a hit)

 

[ak1287]

If the wizard didnt spend resources to change that then fine... the fighter can spend that feat making his charges even nicer if he wants. The wizard has to commit to quite a chain of feats... he has to get weapon proficiency and get the equipment to support it etc.... he has to really find some / pull some fancy tricks so he doesnt stay in melee etc.

Basically Gandalf becomes stupid because he doesnt use a lightning bolt instead... its already a flavor choice nerfing it further is just insult to injury.

Isn't that what a wizard is, generally? I'm not saying there can't be a tough wizard, but come on. Robert Heinlein quote notwithstanding, not all classes are as well suited to all tasks.