At-Will for Fighters -- Please critique

[Lizard]

OK, this grew out of an idea I had -- why not "spell books" for martial characters? That is, in Ye Olden Dayse of D&D, one of the greatest treasures a wizard could find would be the unique spellbook of some long dead mage, containing special and rare spells no one else had. It occured to me, then, that one of the cooler things about 4e is that you could do this for martial characters. Many martial arts movies revolve around finding scrolls containing assorted secret arts and techniques, the swordfighters of Europe shrouded their tricks in terms like "Boar's Tooth Guard" (I guess "White Raven Assault" isn't as lame as it sounds...), and so on. So, anyway, it seemed to me that a book/scroll/holocron of new Exploits would be a very cool form of treasure -- it wouldn't increase the number of powers known, but it would expand the range you could pick from. As a start, I decided to develop a few techniques around the idea that a dwarf fighter, wielding a two-handed axe, decided to learn to use the body and haft of the blade defensively, creating a unique style with some cool, but specialized, manuevers. These Exploits are intended to balance against existing powers, with the *slight* caveat that since they work with a more limited range of weapons (only two-handed axes), and will probably also require a feat to 'open' them (in addition to finding the book), they might be *a bit* more powerful, but not too much.

So I'm starting with the core technique of the style, an at-will power that trades damage for defense. Feedback, please?


Center The Blade Fighter Attack 1
After each swing, you position your axe to ward off a counterstrike.
At-Will * Martial, Weapon
Standard Action Melee Weapon
Requirement: You must be wielding a two-handed axe.
Target: One Creature
Attack: Str vs. AC
Hit: 1[W]+Con modifier; Increase damage to 2[W]+Con at 21st level
Hit: Gain +2 AC against the target until the end of your next turn
Miss: Gain +1 AC against the target until the end of your next turn

EDIT: Added "Attack" line, increased damage to [W]+Con

Note: One thing to consider is that [W] with this power will presumably be a D12 High Crit weapon, i.e, a Greataxe, at least until some other 2-handed axe comes out in future supplements....

 

[Alex319]

The standard for at-will powers is a basic attack (1[W]+Str) plus a small benefit. The benefit you gave (the +1 or +2 to AC) seems reasonably balanced. So if you increase the damage to 1[W]+Str it will be a reasonable power.

(Note: Compare your power above to Sure Strike (1[W] damage, +2 to attack) which is almost universally considered one of the weakest at-will powers in the game.)

 

[keterys]

I think [W]+Con would be fine. If you compare to Priest's Shield, even [W]+Str is fine.

You're missing a 'Str' attack line, for ref. I'm assuming it's vs AC, if it's vs something else, then... no, it's overpowered

 

[Lizard]

I think [W]+Con would be fine. If you compare to Priest's Shield, even [W]+Str is fine.

You're missing a 'Str' attack line, for ref. I'm assuming it's vs AC, if it's vs something else, then... no, it's overpowered

Thanks, you're right. It's Str vs. AC, I will edit it.

The theme I plan to develop through this power set is Con based, reflecting the idea of toughness and durability. Would [W]+Con be too weak, since, for most fighters, Con is a secondary stat?

 

[Nifft]

Doesn't this defeat half the purpose of Marking, if it makes you just as hard to hit as everyone else?

Seems more like a Striker power.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Lizard]

Doesn't this defeat half the purpose of Marking, if it makes you just as hard to hit as everyone else?

Seems more like a Striker power.

Cheers, -- N

Interesting thought. But the same argument could be made about using a shield -- it makes you harder to hit. Besides, you still get to whack them if they shift or attack anyone else. Also, no (current) striker would likely be using a 2-handed axe.

I do not see Defenders as *wanting* to be hit; I see them as wanting people to attack them, or suffer if they attack someone else. Obviously, this is a situational power. If the squishy mage is adjacent to both you and the target, then, yeah, you don't want to use this, unless you're at 1 hit point and there's no healing mojo in range. If, however, you're up on the front lines, face-to-face with a brute/soldier type and going mano-a-mano with him, I see this as very useful. As with a lot of my design work, I start with a mental image, in this case, a lone dwarf standing fast, guarding a passage against the onrushing horde, fixed and resolute, his mighty axe both sword and shield. Every round he can survive is a round those he protects can flee, or that his allies can bring defenses to bear. That concept will inform the development of future exploits, but I wanted to start with the (presumably) simplest one first. After all, the more often you can use something, the more balanced it needs to be. It has to be good enough that you'll choose it sometimes, but not so good you'll choose it always.

EDIT: Also, this is only +2 AC. A marked target is -2 to hit anyone but you with attacks targeting any defense, so he still has a reason to attack you if he has powers which target other defenses.

 

[Nifft]

Interesting thought. But the same argument could be made about using a shield -- it makes you harder to hit. Besides, you still get to whack them if they shift or attack anyone else. Also, no (current) striker would likely be using a 2-handed axe.

I do not see Defenders as *wanting* to be hit; I see them as wanting people to attack them, or suffer if they attack someone else.

True, true. My point is that this +2 AC is an "in your face" penalty to attacks. It's at the same "attention level" as being Marked, while a shield may be ignored.

Maybe if you did something like Priest's Shield and gave a +1 AC bonus to both yourself and an ally, there would be less "conflict of interest", since the monster would have no additional incentive to attack anyone other than you.

Cheers, -- N

 

[WhatGravitas]

True, true. My point is that this +2 AC is an "in your face" penalty to attacks. It's at the same "attention level" as being Marked, while a shield may be ignored.

On the other hand, the -2 penalty due to marking is in most cases only the extra gravy on top of the much more significant abilites that trigger off the marking.

Cheers, LT.