Unhappy Pally - Righteous Rage + Vicious Weapon

[doggywoggy]

is this supposed to be helpful?

way to throw down the Gauntlet and then run away like.a.little.girl

hehe. cowardly to the max, sir!

insult my 4e "knowledge", fine, I pleaded ignorance from the word Go. That's why Sam created this thread, to get some feedback. I have all the info I need now. I can't really justify waiting another month to finalize my character. It isn't fair to the other members of the group and I just want to get this over with. I'm gonna stick with my decision, for better or worse.

Thanks for your input, those who have actually been trying to help rather than be insulting.

 

[Nail]

I...do I not have a right to wonder whether my investment is worthwhile? So what if I don't like how some of the rules in 4e are built. Since I play a few groups I have a right to compare and constrast. Is that against the rules of this board?

No one is denying your "right to wonder". Post redacted by admin. No jabs, please. ~ PCat

Most of us are here to discuss rules questions (note the title of this forum) and ways to make a PC "better" (more optimized and/or more balanced). If you'd like to do that with us: great!

If, instead, you want to discuss how nifty other editions of D&D - or indeed other games - are, that's also great: It's just done in a different forum. Poke around to find where your comments would fit in. It's worth the "investment".

 

[Piratecat]

Hey, folks.

As always, personal insults aren't even close to okay. It's fine to disagree with someone's opinion, but if you feel the need to tell someone they're playing D&D wrong, don't bother to post.

Likewise, if someone replies to you, don't look for insult where none is intended. It's okay that not everyone agrees with you. If you do think that a post is insulting, please report it to the moderators by clicking the little triangular exclamation mark at the bottom left of every post.

 

[doggywoggy]

If someone insults me, my response is appropriate. Ban me if you want, I didn't go into his thread and tell him he didn't know jack squat, did I?

 

[Obryn]

insult my 4e "knowledge", fine, I pleaded ignorance from the word Go. That's why Sam created this thread, to get some feedback. I have all the info I need now. I can't really justify waiting another month to finalize my character. It isn't fair to the other members of the group and I just want to get this over with. I'm gonna stick with my decision, for better or worse.

Thanks for your input, those who have actually been trying to help rather than be insulting.

I'll tell you what - let's start from the beginning.

Assuming you're ... um ... still able to post ... if you let me know what you'd like your character to do, I can throw something together for you tonight. It won't take a month, it'll take more like 5 hours.

There's a different philosophy to designing characters in the newer WotC releases than the older ones. Specifically, it's a good idea to figure out what you want your character to do, and then start building it mechanically with classes and feats.

As an example, in Star Wars Saga Edition, if you want your character to be a Jedi Consular, dedicated to diplomacy, persuasion, and peaceful use of the Force, you're better off with the Noble class than with the Jedi class. (Though you might add in a few levels of Jedi, too.) If you want to make a starfighter pilot, even if you're a noble career soldier, you're best off taking the Scoundrel class.

In 4e, if you want to make a dual-wielding character, your best options are Rangers and Fighters. I know that's a bit limiting - but that's where multiclassing can help. The thing is, you need to start in the class which has all the stuff you want.

So, yeah, I honestly want to help you out. It sucks to play a game where you hate your character, no matter what system you're in.

Hope that helps, and good luck.

-O

 

[Rel]

If someone insults me, my response is appropriate. Ban me if you want, I didn't go into his thread and tell him he didn't know jack squat, did I?

AND feel free to learn the rules about challenging moderator decisions in threads.

 

[Herschel]

If liking damage is Wrong, I don't want to be Right. Amen.

This is the crux of the problem, right here. Unlike the previous edition or many other games, damage is NOT the biggest factor. If all you want is a damage race, play FPS games. D&D is simply not designed for that mindset.

Example: I play a defender in three different games. I will likely never come close to the mindless damage output some strikers do but if I don't do my job well, they get shredded. Period.

Also, you seem to be under the assumption that melee damage is a result of strength. That is no longer the case. In the case of a Paladin, Charisma builds tend to be more versatile and, quite frankly, better at this point due to the released options. About the only way to do a fairly optimal "balanced" Paladin is to play a Dragonborn and use a 16 in both boosted stats and then whatever points you have left in Wisdom while dumping Dex to 8.

You still aren't going to do striker damage, but that will give you the most options to actually do some with whichever powers you like. Paladins are defenders with leader abilities. Their job isn't to be the main damage dealers, their job is to make sure attacks happen where and when they should and to bail out the strikers when they're in too deep.

This takes a different mindset. The challenge is to be able to adjust to it.

 

[Obryn]

Well, in fairness, you can do some incredible damage as a Fighter. You're still a Defender, but it's got a fair amount of Striker involved...

Paladins (Defender/Leaders), Swordmages (Defender/Controllers), and Wardens (Defender/???s) are behind the curve, damage-wise.

-O

 

[doggywoggy]

Yep, I can post again. I have no idea if PMC-ing into Ranger will yield me 2x the average damage, I just think it's wicked and for all the few levels here and there that undoubtedly will have sub-standard encounter powers and/or daily powers for a str-paladin, that I will take whatever Ranger offers at that level (or lower), thanks to the unlimited swappability and versatility those feats offer. In the long-run, even WITH Divine Power, I think I'll be happier with PMC-ing rather than go into a Paladin Paragon class that just goes deeper into the "you can't hit me, so don't bother"-trap. Having too much AC is useless if it doesn't prevent the Rogues from being targetted.

Also, having too much AC instead of Reflex is also a bad idea, even for plate-wearers. There will be plenty of enemies that target Reflex, for which someone with an 8 dex, was woe-fully weak. A defender in my view should be more balanced in his defenses, and offer some credible threat otherwise the marks will be overshadowed by the exposed-flesh of the squishies in the back.

Admin edit: Paragraph removed. How many times, in how many ways, do I have to say it? Don't discuss moderation in a thread. Email the moderator if you want to talk to them about moderation. There are no exceptions to this, and I even emailed you to give you the opportunity. You can check here for the rules. ~ Piratecat

As for 3e vs 4e vs 2e, I just drove my from an awesome RP-only session in 2e that was setting up some high-level politics that will influence our assault on a vampire-lich's castle, anyway, driving back we were discussing the relative un-realism or broken-ness of the versions, and one guy absolutely hated 3e precisely because it was so easy to make uber-characters that break all balance (he also doesn't like 4e, but for different reasons). I personally find 2e boring to play for any class except wizard I mean, except for the story of course. If my character died (NO!!) in that game, I'm sad to say, I wouldn't go back as another class, and starting at level 1 would be futile in a long-term campagin. Another guy started over as a level 1 cleric which is great for party balance to heal the melees, but man, if I had to play a 2nd ed cleric who HAS to memorize heal or the party will bitch at him---I'd rather slice my eyeballs open with razor-blades or gargle with them than play that. Psionics is cool (we have one..very usefull. a gypsy too, good RP stuff there), but for all the standard fights we had, the only time she got to have a mind-battle was against a demi-deity guardian of the Ways, "The GateKeeper", which is pretty much impossible to kill and made me eat someone thru mind-compulsion. Now I have protection from Evil, but I don't even know if it would do any good against a demi-god anyway. //aside

We're playing 4e on monday and I'm psyched. If it's tactical and video-gamey, fine...I just want to get some striker-ish stuff from Ranger eventually so I'm not completely just a dumb meat-shield in battle with an ineffective mark, and eventually do some damage. In a pavlovian way, twice as many d20s in a round is also twice as rewarding...anyone remember that "Ding" feeling in EQ? Same thing. Rolling more dice is more fun, period. And yes, tactically too, if I drop this guy I can throw my offhand over there, just in time. Lots and lots of interesting possibilities open up on my turn with this simple At-Will, and benefits the use of high-crit Axes (thru a feat) a lot too.

Herschel, I think you have fixed rules about what one can and can't do. If RRot was way too powerful, was it too unbalancing because it made a lot of people WANT to play Paladins as a result, period? I like the Paladin class "concept" if not all the particulars, and am glad it will get some additional oopmh in a couple months. For the time being, I am hedging my bets so that I don't have to settle for an unsatisfactory character. Most fiction out there would find it absurd to equate most damage == weakling who stabs thinks from behind, rather than huge crushing swings from massive guys. There is no logical reason I can't try and take feats and powers to increase my damage. It isn't logical to assume Paladins don't want to do more damage. They are Holy Knights, after all. Bring that Pain, I say. I will never apologize for bring divine retribution through righteous and furious anger upon the foes of Pelor...why should I? I don't have square thoughts that resist circles. Just because something is labelled "defender" doesn't mean I have to play it that way. It's my decision, and I'm sure a lot of other paladins out there are dying to do the exact same thing.

The only rational question to this debate is : is it more damage to take 4 feats that would go to PMC-ranger, which as many have pointed out will make me more of an immediate, attractive target for the mobs than a weak mark ever could, or, to use those feats for some other (likely damage-based) feat selections. As per "flavour", that's entirely subjective, and you already know my preference in that regard.

I'm not just here to be a meat-shield and leave all the glory to the sneakies.

 

[Mephistopheles]

This is the crux of the problem, right here. Unlike the previous edition or many other games, damage is NOT the biggest factor. If all you want is a damage race, play FPS games. D&D is simply not designed for that mindset.

I'm not so sure about that. The feedback I got in a thread on the topic of classes and roles had 54 strikers out of 121 characters (~45%), so it may be safe to say that 40-50% of 4E players are playing strikers.

Well, in fairness, you can do some incredible damage as a Fighter. You're still a Defender, but it's got a fair amount of Striker involved...

In that same thread I mentioned above fighters accounted for 17 out of 30 defenders (~57%), paladins were 8 out of 30 (~27%), swordmages were 3 out of 30 and wardens 1 out of 30. I'd say the ability of fighters to do respectable damage compared to strikers accounts for some of that, not to mention that out of the PH1 defenders fighters are better at the business of defending than paladins.

Paladins (Defender/Leaders), Swordmages (Defender/Controllers), and Wardens (Defender/???s) are behind the curve, damage-wise.

I haven't played a warden yet but I've spent some time on them in the Character Builder. It looks to me like you could build them as secondary strikers with good mobility (I haven't yet looked at their damage to see how it would compare to a striker) or secondary controllers with good battlefield influence (at least on par with the fighter, if not better).

Last week I started playing a strength paladin in one game; it's very underwhelming compared to my axe and shield fighter. I may switch to a warden, mainly because of the paladins inability to exert influence over the battlefield and also because the wizard player is trying to play her character like a striker - I expect to see her swap to sorcerer, just like the two other wizard players I've seen have done - but I'll wait and see what Divine Power brings to the table for paladins.