Sagiro, are you really looking for advice here, or for validation?
A strange question, given that when I posted I hadn't made up my mind,
and that my inclination has shifted somewhat since it started,
and that I still haven't made up my mind. I apologize if I seem argumentative; I'm just trying to provide more possibly-relevant information to those who are kind enough to be giving advice.
It seems to me that you're underplaying Low Slash (which should either serve as a powerful control ability on a melee enemy (not flanking) -- or an attack that is pretty likely to shorten the enemy's life by one turn (flanking), but you're justifying your choices here.
It's entirely possible that I'm under-utilizing Low Slash, as I think I've admitted above. I'm not sure I'd call Slow a "powerful control ability" (I'd reserve that term for dazing, stunning and restraining) but I might be undervaluing it, especially given our collective dearth of control. But remember -- I very seldom miss in combat. That means I'm not likely to get Sneak Attack damage on a Low Slash (unless I use an AP, but I usually save those for the Knockout/Bloodbath combo.)
Despite that, I think you're generally correct -- I tend to think of Low Slash as "my minor attack" and not "my attack that slows and slides enemies." I should realign my thinking.
That you've been playing your character as a pseudo-defender is useful information (although Rogues are far and away the second worst melee class I can think of for pseudo-defender -- the first being shadow Assassins), but keep in mind that a defender is just a controller who gets hit a lot. So it might be worth considering playing your character a bit smarter -- and having him sometimes protect his friends by forcing an enemy to attack -nobody- rather than by forcing them to attack -him-.
Oh, I'm certain that Rogues make rotten Defenders. That wasn't a choice made with any kind of serious optimization in mind.
When it comes time to pick an encounter power to use, my thinking is usually like this: which is more important right now?
A) doing a small amount of extra damage, plus slowing (which will keep the enemy from escaping), plus sliding
B) inflicting daze, which limits the enemy to one action, gives everyone else +2 to hit, and guarantees me a sneak attack next round.
Sometimes the monster isn't planning on fleeing (or even moving much), and sometimes I don't have any better place for the monster right now. In those cases, Low Slash loses some value. In fairness, sometimes the monster only has one action it wants to take, so that part of Daze doesn't matter. And sometimes I'll be able to get sneak attack anyway. Perhaps it's a function of the DM's monsters, which very often take multiple actions in a round.
It seems to me that if Low Slash is consistently underpreforming Dazing Strike, then you're A. Not using LS when you should (because the best condition is -dead-), and B. having combats that go on too long.
Also, it's worth repeating that in the round in which Dazing Strike is currently a killer, Stunning Strike will do exactly the same thing.
This last is an excellent point. Retaining Low Slash certainly gives me more flexibility.
Also, given the group dynamics, you should have the Cunning Stalker Feat ASAP (gain combat advantages on creatures you're the only creature next to). If you do/did, then you could reliably use Low Strike to gain combat advantage by sliding a creature away from tis allies, and then stabbing it.
More info: I think the Avenger might be put out by me sliding enemies away from him. Our group dynamics are a little hard to pin down, and our fights tend to vary. 2.5 of us like to be next to the monster (me, the avenger, and the ranger sometimes.) The other three do not (sorcerer, shaman, wizard). Between the monsters coming to us, and the avenger's tendency for adjacency, I'm almost never the *only* one next my target. Low Slash/Cunning Stalker is a nice combo, though, which I hadn't considered.
Anyway, thanks for giving me more opinions to chew upon!
