The Most Underpowered Class?

A quick question to those experienced with Starlocks (none of my players have ever gone in that direction).

Do the Dragon Magazine Annual enhancements in Wish Upon A Star (p47-56) help fix the Starlock problems at all?

-doug

I had a long post, but the forums ate it. Instead of typing it all out again, I'll simply say Sacrifice to Caiphon is the second (or third) most important Star Lock feat IMHO. Student of Caiphon is a great paragon path as well.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Helen Keller with a Mordenkrad for the win! :D

Helen Keller with a Mordenkrad would make mincemeat out of my Feylock since mobility via teleport is my big schtick and my two best encounter attacks, Cursebite and Cursegrind, require having cursed (which means SEE) the opponents.
 



Its a common issue in 4e that some builds are just much, much better than others.
Feature, not bug. All things can't be equal or they would be just the same.

I had a long post, but the forums ate it. Instead of typing it all out again, I'll simply say Sacrifice to Caiphon is the second (or third) most important Star Lock feat IMHO. Student of Caiphon is a great paragon path as well.
Slightly abusable. Perhaps too much for certain classes (hello sorcerers!)
 


The Staff of Ruin makes up for Iron Armbands / Bracers of Archery.
The staff of Ruin is not necessary to meet or exceed the damage bonus of a weapon user who has IAoP.
So, what "makes up" for the benefits the weapon-user is getting out of his weapon while the implement-user is using the Staff of Ruin to play catch-up with Iron Armbands and Bracers of Archery?

So a weapon user with bracers will get bonus damage and a variety of special abilities (high crit damage, etc.), depending on the weapon. But a staff of ruin user only gets some bonus damage.
Seems like the inescapable gravity of logic here.

The staff of Ruin is not necessary to meet or exceed the damage bonus of a weapon user who has IAoP.
Is this response to the logical fallacy presented to you as vague and equivocal as it sounds?
 
Last edited:

So, what "makes up" for the benefits the weapon-user is getting out of his weapon while the implement-user is using the Staff of Ruin to play catch-up with Iron Armbands and Bracers of Archery?

Is this response to the logical fallacy presented to you as vague and equivocal as it sounds?
I'm going to use a couple of 12 level characters I have made as examples and will only be comparing At-Wills.

12th lvl Human Wizard
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 11, Con 14, Dex 14, Int 22, Wis 16, Cha 9.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 10, Con 12, Dex 13, Int 17, Wis 14, Cha 8.

Phantom Bolt: 1D8 +15: (+6INT, +3Enh, +3DIS, +3SoR) Remove SoR and it's 12.

12th lvl Dwarven Barbarian
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 20, Con 19, Dex 13, Int 9, Wis 13, Cha 13.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 17, Con 15, Dex 11, Int 8, Wis 10, Cha 12.

Howling Strike: 1D12 +2D6 +12 (+5STR, +3Enh, +2DWT, +2IAoP)

12th lvl Dragonborn Sorcerer
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 18, Con 12, Dex 13, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 22.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 14, Con 11, Dex 12, Int 11, Wis 9, Cha 17.

Burning Spray: 1D8 +20 (+6CHA, +3Enh, +3DIS, +6DP, +2WF[light Blade])

12th lvl Drow Warlock
FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 9, Con 14, Dex 13, Int 18, Wis 11, Cha 22.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 8, Con 13, Dex 10, Int 15, Wis 10, Cha 17.

Eldritch Blast: 1D10 +2D6(Curse) +14 (+6CHA, +3Enh, +3DIS, +2XWT)

So there we have 2 out of 3 Arcane spell casters that have a higher static bonus to damage then a melee striker without the use of a Staff of Ruin.
 

So, what "makes up" for the benefits the weapon-user is getting out of his weapon while the implement-user is using the Staff of Ruin to play catch-up with Iron Armbands and Bracers of Archery?
Dual Implement Spellcaster, as mentioned back on page 2.
 

Remove ads

Top