D&D 4E What are the generally powerful classes in 4e?

[MortalPlague]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned rogue by now. It's hard to build a poor rogue in this edition!

 

[S'mon]

I agree with your choices. Fighter has gone from the weakest class in 3e to arguably the strongest in 4e, which IMO is as it should be; they are the archetypal hero, the Fighting Man is the wellspring from which all flows.
Wizard in the PHB is a bit on the weak side, but has been given more and more very powerful Powers, especially Dailies, some close to traditional 'I win' buttons, like pre-errata Visions of Avarice.

Overall I'd say the Fighter's strong at-wills, decent encounter powers, and weak dailies make them the strongest if there are lots of fights in the day, while the Wizard is stronger if they can nova, with 1-2 encounters in the day. But the difference is much less than in prior eds.

 

[Stalker0]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned rogue by now. It's hard to build a poor rogue in this edition!

Do you mean the core rogue or the essentials rogue?

We have had two core rogues in games I've played in, both rogues were absolutely terrible. I havne't not been too impressed. Now the essentials thief on the other hand feels very thiefy.

 

[S'mon]

The Knight/Slayer/Theif/Scout/Vampire are sorely lacking in versatility and choice...

I guess, but I loved playing a Thief; attacking at +19 to hit at 4th level (+23 with Heroic Effort) for around 28 average damage with a thrown dagger was awesome; I loved squeezing out every bit of attack bonus & damage from the limited ruleset we were allowed. The Tricks gave one or two options also, but it was really all about never missing and always doing huge damage, while lurking away from the front line and hardly ever being hit.

Funnily, it's with the Fighter that I really appreciate having tons of options; Slayer & Knight are much less attractive to me than the core Fighter/Weaponmaster. Whereas I find the core Rogue over-fiddly, getting CA without being squashed seems too hard, and without CA they seem weak.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Do you mean the core rogue or the essentials rogue?

We have had two core rogues in games I've played in, both rogues were absolutely terrible. I havne't not been too impressed. Now the essentials thief on the other hand feels very thiefy.

The basic artful dodger halfling rogue was terribly effective... and IMHO he didn´t even chose the MOST poweful options...

 

[SSquirrel]

Do you mean the core rogue or the essentials rogue?

We have had two core rogues in games I've played in, both rogues were absolutely terrible. I havne't not been too impressed. Now the essentials thief on the other hand feels very thiefy.

Maybe those players didn't do a good job of building their guy. Our Revenge of the Giants game is on hold due to the DM being in grad school, but my Halfling Artful Dodger Daggermaster does pretty nuts damage. He told me he basically has to make sure to always include some HP boosted enemy or big elite every combat just so it can live thru an onslaught by me

Add in his acrobatics and stealth and such and he certainly covers all the traditional thief angles.

 

[Kzach]

So are you saying you want to add them to the list? Do you the feel the invoker offers the wide range of powerful builds that the others do, or is this a specific optimized combo.

Although the radiant invoker is a particularly powerful build that can do stupid amounts of AOE damage consistently every encounter and almost every turn, and can do even stupider amounts with novas (to the point of making entire parties obsolete), invokers are pretty awesome controllers simply due to their powers being so... well... powerful. They all tend to have good riders with both ally boons and enemy banes on top of being AOE.

Wizards have a nifty speciality in orb-abusers and mages can make very nice pyromancers and enchanters, which both have some cool bennies and loads of flavour, but if we're going for pure range, the invoker is hard to mess up whilst just following the very basics of character creation, ie. primary stat high, secondary stat mid to high, choose a build and powers and feats that compliment each other.

At least IMO. OPMMV.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I guess, but I loved playing a Thief; attacking at +19 to hit at 4th level (+23 with Heroic Effort) for around 28 average damage with a thrown dagger was awesome; I loved squeezing out every bit of attack bonus & damage from the limited ruleset we were allowed. The Tricks gave one or two options also, but it was really all about never missing and always doing huge damage, while lurking away from the front line and hardly ever being hit.

Funnily, it's with the Fighter that I really appreciate having tons of options; Slayer & Knight are much less attractive to me than the core Fighter/Weaponmaster. Whereas I find the core Rogue over-fiddly, getting CA without being squashed seems too hard, and without CA they seem weak.

i get up to +17 with CA... did you include a leader bonus?

 

[S'mon]

i get up to +17 with CA... did you include a leader bonus?

+3 for Backstab, twice per encounter at 3rd level. I'll normally use it vs the higher-AC foes, with base +16 to hit it's a waste to use it on anyone less than about AC 21, there's always Heroic Effort as back-up.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The basic artful dodger halfling rogue was terribly effective... and IMHO he didn´t even chose the MOST poweful options...

Yeah, back in the PHB1 days you had to work at it SOME during heroic tier to make sure you had CA all the time, and you might take some punishment doing it, but nowadays CA is practically guaranteed for a player with a modest amount of savvy on which options to take, at which point you're pumping out some quite substantial damage. You've also got excellent skills and a nice amount of melee/ranged versatility.

Certainly it is a bit easier for your starting player to pick up bow ranger and just do awesome damage without needing to master any tactics, but the BS/AD/CS rogue builds are all right up there with a modicum of tactics.