Runepriest in Action?

[Dr_Ruminahui]

It will also affect what classes make effective hybrid/multiclass characters with Runepriest... whether or not that matters is another issue, but it might.

It also affects what races make the most effective rune priests - that said, you may well like (for example) the fact that dwarves now have a boost to both the primary and a secondary and that warforged no longer do.

Finally, it may change what feats are attractive to a rune priest character.

Now, some of these may actually come out in favour of you house ruling a swap, and some may speak against it, but they are worth looking into if only to give you a better idea of the effects of the swap.

Perhaps the biggest issue in my mind (other than making the con secondary build more attractive due to no longer boosting the same defence) is that simploy swapping strength for wisdom (ie - all powers that had will based boosters now are boosted by strength instead) may no longer match the "feel" of the power - for example, for some it may feel strange if this means that str mostly boosts protection powers rather than destruction powers (admittedly, I haven't looked to see if this is the case).

 

[Victim]

It makes it harder for Runepriests, who use weapons, to take weapon based feats.

 

[DracoSuave]

It makes it harder for Runepriests, who use weapons, to take weapon based feats.

This.

Wrathful Hammer, which has as a feature 'Give El Wray the hammers, give him all the hammers' and Str/Con which is 'Have all the hammer feats' suddenly loses a LOT of its upside.

 

[Marshall]

RunePriests are NOT leaders. WotC did a bang-up job of finally creating a Melee Controller tho.

I've been playing a Runepriest thru Encounters and a little LFR up to third level. Healing from the class isnt much more than incedental, there are a LOT of 'fiddly' bits and NOTHING about the class says "Divine".
Its a playable class...tanks like a Defender, Hits like a Striker(Wrathful Hammer + Maul), heals/buffs like a Leader, debuffs like a Controller...its just, not really 'Weak', but below par in all of them.

..and if they are gonna call it 'Divine' it needs some sort of CD feature, a healing buff would make sense if they really think its a 'Leader'

 

[TarionzCousin]

Healing from the class isnt much more than incedental....

But is it enough healing? Two per encounter would be sufficient for our group.

 

[Mengu]

Ability to spend a healing surge twice per encounter is usually enough healing (depending on the size and composition of the group).

It's always a good idea for someone else in the group to grab an emergency healing option.

If you are looking for it, there is more healing available for the Runepriest. Even at first level, I was able to heal 3 party members in one turn for reasonable amount of healing, with Rune of Endless Fire, Action point, Flames of Purity (to heal 7 HP on two targets, which happened to be both their healing surge values), and minor action to heal another character for healing surge+4 with Rune of Mending (and gave +1 all defenses, and a resist all 2 for the avenger next to me). Oh and, I also happened to bloody one of the enemies and take out a minion while doing all that.

And the flexibility of the Runepriest is such that with Flames of Purity, in most normal encounters (that we're not getting blasted away by some super artillery), I can dole out the damage bonuses.

Along with the Warlord, the Runepriest is currently one of my top two favorite leader classes.

 

[Marshall]

You needed to spend a daily to get up to what a cleric does with at-wills. I think thats weak.

Having a Runepriest as the partys only Healer doesnt work well, IME. However, a Runepriest is the best fifth-wheel class in the game, able to passably stand in for most classes temporarily.

 

[keterys]

They lose 1d6 healing to give out close burst 5 (you + allies) either +1 defenses or +2 damage. That's a solid trade. 3 hp is very rarely the difference between success and failure, especially not if you compare it to possibly being missed (defenses) or killing an enemy a round earlier (damage).

 

[Mengu]

You needed to spend a daily to get up to what a cleric does with at-wills. I think thats weak.

Any healer compared to the cleric is weak, and you're comparing the worst healer with the best healer. All I was saying is that in a pinch, they can do what's necessary to keep a few people up. Fortunately, you're not always in a pinch. I just feel the Runepriest does so much more than just heal, and has so much more flexibility. And after having tried out a few parties without leaders, I think Runepriest as the only leader in a party is perfectly fine.

I play a Warlord as the only leader in a party of 6, and would *gladly* give up a d6 of healing from my inspiring word to grant a +2/4/6 damage bonus in a close burst 5/10/15.

 

[Marshall]

Any healer compared to the cleric is weak, and you're comparing the worst healer with the best healer. All I was saying is that in a pinch, they can do what's necessary to keep a few people up. Fortunately, you're not always in a pinch. I just feel the Runepriest does so much more than just heal, and has so much more flexibility.

EXACTLY!
As long as you consider a Runepriest a Melee Controller instead of a Leader you will be fine.

And after having tried out a few parties without leaders, I think Runepriest as the only leader in a party is perfectly fine.

If you are getting by in a party(ies?) without a leader than an RP is an improvement over nothing, just like a Paladins healing is.

I play a Warlord as the only leader in a party of 6, and would *gladly* give up a d6 of healing from my inspiring word to grant a +2/4/6 damage bonus in a close burst 5/10/15.

The difference here is that the Warlord gets to choose between buffing and healing. The Runepriest has to spend his healing incidentally to giving out his best buffs.