To Mike Mearls: Melee training and the Battlemind

[Saeviomagy]

Paladins have a melee basic attack available as an at-will power, if you're not Strength inclined.

Rogues that care about opportunity attacks are Strength based... the other types tend to avoid remaining in melee for long enough for it to matter.

No... rogues who care about opportunity attacks are strength based or take melee training. Outside of that, there's no particular reason why a strength-based rogue will get more OAs than the other types. In fact if anything, the strength version of the rogue is the more effective ranged combatant because he lacks the mobility of the other builds and gains a damage bonus that applies to his ranged attacks.

Avengers you have a point with, but they've other means to guarantee stickiness... and if they don't they're built to -encourage- escape so they can persue.

And one of the big mobile attacks is the charge, which is an MBA. Without it you're relying on encounter powers to stop your foes from simply double-moving away.

Bards, Ardents, and Artificers don't care about melee basic attacks. They are the -source- of them for others.

Anyone in melee is going to make use of MBAs.

Monks, unlike many strikers, can't benefit from striker damage outside their turn. Flurry of Blows can't be used except during their turn, so they're not as likely to benefit.

If an Assassin missed with his attack, he's either already expended his shroud, or he's building it up. Neither allow him to really utilize his striker damage off turn.

That's not really relevant: just because their striker mechanic doesn't function doesn't mean that they're not suffering by losing OAs, charges and granted attacks. It's not like they deal zero damage with a normal hit.

That leaves the Battlemind, which as pointed out above, has the ability to make opportunity attacks that don't involve MBA.

2 points of damage aren't exactly killing -any- of these classes.

It's not killing them, but I think the point is that they shouldn't even need to take the feat.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It's not killing them, but I think the point is that they shouldn't even need to take the feat.

I just quoted your important part of the post.

All other (non melee characters) should not have a that easy way to make strength worthless, except for weapon feats...

melee combatants don´t have an equally easy way to get an at-will ranged attack.

 

[Garthanos]

melee combatants don´t have an equally easy way to get an at-will ranged attack.

Yes ranged training ... wonder how common of house rule adding that is? Akin to Warlords heavy bow work and Sehanine perception and discipline based archery.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

I feat should NEVER replace the need to spend your stat build points wisely.

Taking 1 feat to take a -1 or 0 bonus to hit and damage to a +4 or +5 is way to powerful.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes ranged training ... wonder how common of house rule adding that is? Akin to Warlords heavy bow work and Sehanine perception and discipline based archery.

I know we respectfully disagree here.

I believe multiclass feats should be used to get basic attacks that are based on different stats. I am just not sure if we need 10 multiclass feats, one for each stat, or maybe a more simplified approach.

-> Magical ranged attack, aka eldritch missile, prereq int 13, con, int or cha vs ref, you count as wizard or sorcerer or warlock
-> Mundane ranged training, aka ranged training, req dex 13, any physical or wisdom vs AC, you count as ranger or monk or rogue

something like that.

 

[Mengu]

I feat should NEVER replace the need to spend your stat build points wisely.

Taking 1 feat to take a -1 or 0 bonus to hit and damage to a +4 or +5 is way to powerful.

It's about as powerful as being a Strength based character such as a barbarian, and they're not forced to spend extra points on intelligence to have a good basic attack. An Avenger who wants primarily wisdom and intelligence or dexterity, and a little bit of Con since he will be in melee a lot, has no use (or points left over) for strength. Why is it too powerful for him to have a basic attack as good as a barbarian? They both play similar roles, barbarian just happens to have a strength stat as primary.

Basic attack is about the worst attack a character has anyway. That's why it's basic. Your encounter powers, daily powers, and at-will powers will all be better than this. It just gives you a competent attack in certain situations. Why is this too powerful?

As an avenger player with melee training, I'm unhappy with the change. I lose 3 points of damage, and that might not seem like a lot, but it's 20% of my damage on a hit, considering how often I end up having to charge to get to a target, and how often I get granted basic attacks, it's a pretty hefty penalty, and makes strength based strikers such as barbarian or ranger simply more desirable.

It was a tool that allowed non-strength based characters to jump over a hurdle they shouldn't have had to overcome to begin with. Now it's a half-baked tool that leaves me dissatisfied.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Because strength gives you about nothing else in heroic...

 

[DracoSuave]

It's about as powerful as being a Strength based character such as a barbarian, and they're not forced to spend extra points on intelligence to have a good basic attack. An Avenger who wants primarily wisdom and intelligence or dexterity, and a little bit of Con since he will be in melee a lot, has no use (or points left over) for strength. Why is it too powerful for him to have a basic attack as good as a barbarian? They both play similar roles, barbarian just happens to have a strength stat as primary.

Basic attack is about the worst attack a character has anyway. That's why it's basic. Your encounter powers, daily powers, and at-will powers will all be better than this. It just gives you a competent attack in certain situations. Why is this too powerful?

As an avenger player with melee training, I'm unhappy with the change. I lose 3 points of damage, and that might not seem like a lot, but it's 20% of my damage on a hit, considering how often I end up having to charge to get to a target, and how often I get granted basic attacks, it's a pretty hefty penalty, and makes strength based strikers such as barbarian or ranger simply more desirable.

It was a tool that allowed non-strength based characters to jump over a hurdle they shouldn't have had to overcome to begin with. Now it's a half-baked tool that leaves me dissatisfied.

Avengers charge their targets in a game that has Bond of Censure as an available at-will?

I'm having a lot of trouble believing that an Avenger is constantly in positions where enemies are universially 8 squares apart necessitating the Avenger to charge every target they want... and that said avenger hasn't retrained into powers that are better for his situation.

If avengers are having trouble with the closing and doing damage part of their class, Melee Training is NOT the problem... avengers are one class that should -never- have troubles with the 'closing' parts of combat.

Or is this one of those 'I took all the items that benefit charging and am taking Avenger only for Oath of Emnity' builds, in which case, no, 3 damage isn't nerfing you as much as you claim, and no, you really should have gone with a class that benefits charging more, like Acrobatic rogue, a barbarian, or marauding ranger.

 

[DracoSuave]

No... rogues who care about opportunity attacks are strength based or take melee training. Outside of that, there's no particular reason why a strength-based rogue will get more OAs than the other types. In fact if anything, the strength version of the rogue is the more effective ranged combatant because he lacks the mobility of the other builds and gains a damage bonus that applies to his ranged attacks.

Cause the other builds can get combat advantage at range, the strength based ones can't. Thusly, the strength based ones have to resort to flanking more often, putting them in melee, compared to other builds that have more mobility and ability to capitalize on it.

And one of the big mobile attacks is the charge, which is an MBA. Without it you're relying on encounter powers to stop your foes from simply double-moving away.

OAs don't stop anyone from moving away. They penalize a move that is already happening. If an OA has stopped movement, you never took the OA, which means the power is still available. And in the case of the battlemind, you're actually -defending- when you use that OA on them, because they're now less likely to be able to accomplish whatever it is they did.

Compare: Melee Basic Attack, or Attack that makes them unable to hit your friend.

And, the battlemind can use that twice per encounter until level 3... the enemy isn't likely to make the same mistake twice.

And 'double move' isn't compelling enough of a reason to take a feat. Even as a defender. Position better, brah.

Anyone in melee is going to make use of MBAs.

But do they make enough use of them that Melee Training's nerf is going to -signifigantly- affect them?

That's not really relevant: just because their striker mechanic doesn't function doesn't mean that they're not suffering by losing OAs, charges and granted attacks. It's not like they deal zero damage with a normal hit.

It's very relevant. It means that, as it stands, they're the -least- likely to -recieve- granted attacks, because it doesn't do as much damage. Melee training doesn't change that scenario over much.

Honestly, you give your granted attacks to a monk and not, say, a fighter? Really? REALLY? So, the effect of Melee Training in the monk and/or assassin's case is... to benefit charges... is +1 to hit really better than what they have in their powers? Really?

It's not killing them, but I think the point is that they shouldn't even need to take the feat.

Meh. So far it seems the only two compelling reasons there are for Melee Training is 'OAs' and 'Bad Decisions.'

I'll agree with the first for defenders. The second... that's a problem beyond the scope of this or any game.

 

[Garthanos]

Because strength gives you about nothing else in heroic...

Athletics seems like a rather useful skill to me ;p