Shield Feint

[Fifth Element]

However, Shield Feint has a subtle trap if it is overused.

By trap, you mean tradeoff, apparently.

 

[KarinsDad]

By trap, you mean tradeoff, apparently.

No. The tradeoff is already there.

Instead of the 1/2 damage of a miss of Reaping Strike, Shield Feint gains +3 on the next attack against the same foe which may or may not help. 85% of the time, it will not change the outcome. And, it may or may not even occur, i.e. the foe is dead or the PC is incapacitated or the foe moves far away. This advantage will often not even materialize. It only helps some fraction of 15% of the time. The additional advantage or effect of most other At Will powers (over just the damage) are immediate and typically guaranteed once the Hit occurs.

Instead of the extra damage on a second target of Cleave, Shield Feint gains +3 on the next attack.

Instead of the grab of Grappling Strike, Shield Feint gains +3 on the next attack.

Ditto for many other At Will powers. That's a tradeoff. You don't have some other At Will that might be helpful in the situation and you don't get the immediate gain of other At Will powers.


But the trap is different. The trap is an unintended consequence of using the power that the player might not be aware of. In this case, deluding oneself into using Shield Feint often and early, and thinking that it is making the Fighter more effective when it is often making the Fighter less effective.

Bullocks. He's a Sword and Board fighter (read: controller secondary), so his contribution to -damage- isn't as important as his ability to defend.

Encounter powers are typically superior to At Will powers for every role, so using them later in an encounter is typically less effective and efficient. Sorry you don't get that.

Who said anything about just damage. I was talking about often using Encounter powers later in an encounter because of the lure of +3 to hit and hence, often being less effective earlier in the encounter. Not everyone sees that right away (and some people apparently never see it, shrug). I won't try to convince you of the truth of this. I'm just trying to give some friendly advice to the OP and help him out. Not quite sure what you're trying to do besides argue.

As a result, many of his encounter powers aren't -useful- on turn 1, depending on their role.

Maybe in your campaign. In our campaign, the Fighter often runs up and uses some Encounter power in round one to set the stage for defending. Come and Get It against multiple foes. Anvil of Doom against a tougher foe, whatever.

Many of the players in the four 4E games I'm playing in use an Encounter power in round one. Not always, but often. DMs do it too for the NPCs.

It's Tactics 101. Hinder the foes early before they can hinder you.

There are always going to be situations in which that is not the best tactic, but it often is the best tactic. And setting up an Encounter power with Shield Feint will sometimes be the best tactic, even early in an encounter. But, relying on it nearly every single encounter as a power to use every other round is not going to be the best tactic. Many players won't see this right away. It's all about action economy.

It's no different than using a Daily power early in a real tough fight. That's typically better than waiting until round six as a general rule. Using Encounter powers early in a normal fight is typically better than waiting as well.

 

[Mengu]

I'm not a big fan. I see it as a good power with specific combos. For instance if you want to follow it up with an action point Villain's Menace or Anvil of Doom, I can see the appeal. But as a bonus to attack the target next turn, I'm not that impressed. Stuff you hit will typically be dead by the time your next 4-5 allies go. In a party that's good at focusing fire, the bonus could frequently go unused.

I like attack bonuses as much as the next person, but having seen the various sorcerer feats in action that give bonuses for next turn against a specific target such as Arcane Spellfury, I'm rather leery of such bonuses. I want a bonus now, not 10-12 turns from now, when I'm maybe pushed and knocked prone 3 squares away from my target and being eaten by a swarm, or when the target has already been blown to smithereens by the rest of my party.

I'd stick with Brash Strike if you want a tool that gives you a higher hit chance.

 

[Fifth Element]

No. The tradeoff is already there.

My point is that you're assuming the +3 is offset perfectly by what you're giving up in another power. But if what you're giving up is only 'worth' a +2, then the 'extra' +1 could be to compensate for the issue you noted.

 

[KarinsDad]

My point is that you're assuming the +3 is offset perfectly by what you're giving up in another power. But if what you're giving up is only 'worth' a +2, then the 'extra' +1 could be to compensate for the issue you noted.

Yes, I am making the general assumption that At Will powers are more or less balanced (obviously, some are better than others) based on the power in a vacuum because WotC really cannot analyze them outside of a vacuum. As one example, Reaping Strike for a 50% chance to hit = 50% x damage plus 50% 1/2x damage = 75% x damage. That's equivalent to +5 to hit. But, it is a damage only power. Do I consider the equivalent of a +5 to hit that will definitely happen in this round about the same as +3 to hit that may or may not happen in the next round (typically without an action point) on a stronger and/or more useful power? Yup. Pretty much. From an action economy POV, it's almost always better to be damaging foes earlier in an encounter as quickly and as hard as the party can manage.


I think that the "Encounter powers being used later in the encounter" issue I noted was never even thought of by the designers. I think the thought never crossed the designer's minds. Look at Draco. He opines that the issue I brought up doesn't even happen.


How is +3 against the same foe next round for this power any different than +3 against the same foe for Righteous Brand?

Righteous Brand is actually slightly better in some ways because the Cleric can (delay and) act shortly before the Fighter (i.e. can have less of a wait than waiting 8 or 10 or more turns before the Fighter can act again), before a foe or other allies (by killing the foe) can try to prevent the bonus.

The 'extra' +1 that you specify could be an actual compensation as you theorize, but this seems extremely unlikely. More like wishful thinking. What seems more likely is that WotC tried to balance Shield Feint against powers like Righteous Brand which does not typically have the "used early in an encounter" issue.

Righteous Brand is a "often use in early rounds" power because it gives a bonus for other PC's Encounter powers. Cleric Encounter powers are more often useful later in an encounter when other PCs are harmed and/or hindered.

 

[renau1g]

Another thing to consider is that it's a power bonus... that's a very common bonus so it won't stack with a lot of leader powers out there.

 

[DracoSuave]

Another thing to consider is that it's a power bonus... that's a very common bonus so it won't stack with a lot of leader powers out there.

True, but it can be used to set up some powerful turns.

Bear in mind that this is a human build.

So-- Shield Feint, it works, action point +6 to hit with that power, then -next- turn, you're +3 to hit with the next power.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

True, but it can be used to set up some powerful turns.

Bear in mind that this is a human build.

So-- Shield Feint, it works, action point +6 to hit with that power, then -next- turn, you're +3 to hit with the next power.

yes, for a human it is definitively a good power to chose, even if it is only used once every second fight.

but note that noone mentioned cleave which cannot be taken and which is a very strong power for a one handed weapon fighter.

@using encounter powers as early as possible...

no, i don´t use my close burst power before i am surrounded by at least 3 foes. (even if they are minions)

@brash strike
very much overrated:
alternating between shield feint and brash strike is a terrible idea.

edit for easier understanding: using only shield feint is better for the fighter to fullfill his role!

 

[DracoSuave]

Plus, even if you unload all your encounter powers first, shield feint is still amazing.

It's +3 to hit every turn that you hit with it, which is a lot easier to do, because you're constantly getting +3 to hit.

Brash strike is +2 to hit every turn, but penalizes you with combat advantage.

If you have the bonus damage to constitution, then that starts getting fair, but look at how many monsters do so much more damage with combat advantage.

Your main job as a defender is to get attacked more, but hit less, and for less damage.

Brash Strike, in exchange for +2 to hit, makes you worse at your job. You get hit more, and hit harder. Why are you even bothering defending then? Your higher armor and higher hit points are no longer your advantage, so why are you bothering being a defender at this point?

If a striker had a power that was +2 to hit, but didn't allow you your extra dice to damage, would you take it?

If a leader or controller had a power that was +2 to hit, but you couldn't use powers to heal or buff or debuff for a turn, would you take it?

The answer is 'There'd better be some damn good upside.' +Con to damage is good upside. +0 to damage is not.

 

[renau1g]

If your AC is say 4 points higher or more than the non-defenders you make a better target with CA. If you're a battlerager you want to use your THP's. If say the melee ranger has 16 AC (level 1 chain) or 15 without (hide + 14 Dex) & the fighter has 19 AC (scale + heavy shield) then even with a -2 to hit, the monster still has an incentive to hit the ranger (mr. DPR). Sure there's the mark trigger, but if the monster can put down the enemy that is doing more damage then focus on the fighter it seems a better solution. Now the best ones using the Brash Strike are greatwaepon fighters and they're certainly more striker-y than defender-y so it fits their schtick. I don't know anywhere where the defender schtick is to get hit for less damage? How can you manage that? Not granting CA is ok, but it's super easy for monsters to get CA by flanking and most skirmishers (the ones with the bonus damage for CA) have lots of movement to get into the position so many times its not even a "cost"