D&D 4E 4e Ranger: New God of Damage? Armor Splinter + Blade Cascade + High Wisdom Ranger

[silentounce]

Fighter 12 Encounter, Chains of Sorrow is even better because it only requires one hit to apply an AC penalty, and it's Dex based. It does 3[W] and if you use a flail it applies your Dex mod to the opponents AC.

Anyway, all of this crap is assuming that you can get right next to Orcus to begin with. That post on the other boards points out something about winning initiative automatically. Something tells me that when you start an encounter with Orcus, you're not going to start within easy range to melee attack, even accounting for one turn's movement. Granted, you could use this ability against other solos as well. But I really don't see a problem with it because for you to get to the only miss on a 1 range I bet that you're using more than just the ranger's own encounter power, AP, and daily power. You're probably using other characters powers as well. If you're burning that many powers, then you should be able to take out the bad guy. And, again, you have to hit the opponent twice to get the full effect out of Armor Splinter.

Btw, if you really want to put a stop to this. Just have the party face a party of enemy 15th level rangers that employ this tactic. They don't need action points, they can take turns. After that, they'll probably be begging for a cap themselves, if it's truly broken.

 

[Njall]

Well, looking at level 15 attack powers for the other strikers, Blade Cascade does seem to be the prime damage dealing ability, maybe. Thirsting Maw (Warlock (Infernal) Attack 15) could potentially deal infinite damage, but stacking penalties onto a monster's saving throw is going to be a bit trickier (admittedly, I haven't looked for any ability that does that yet, so it could be easier or even impossible). Fireswarm (Warlock (Infernal) Attack 15) could also deal infinite damage, and that allows an attack roll vs. Fort defense. Edit: Forgot to mention, both these abilities require multiple rounds, so Blade Cascade has them beat there easily.

The only rogue power at level 15 that competes is Slaying Strike, which (with proper feat selection and a bloodied target granting combat advantage) can deal 8d8+Dex mod+Str mod in a single attack. Because this requires a bloodied target (only 6d8+Dex mod normally) it isn't going to be a one-shotter.

If we're pushing it all the way to level 30, I think Assassin's Point is a pretty strong contender to match. Properly set up, AP can do 17d8+Dex mod damage (and potentially 12d12 more on a crit). Not quite the 40d10+ possiblity out of Blade Cascade, but easier to reach the optimized point (only requires a couple of feats).

The problem I'm seeing with Blade Cascade is not the 40[W] per se, it's the modifiers that come with each attack.
Every +1 damage you gain increases your total damage by 40.
However, those +1s are relatively easy to get, since the game was supposed to have done away with multipliers ( due to Uberchargers, Frenzied Berserkers and Leap Attacks ), so they're balanced around the assumption that they'll only be worth +1 damage/round and probably cost accordingly in terms of feats/abilities.
Blade Cascade, however, brought said multipliers back in the game.
So you can "purchase" those cheaps +1 and turn them into a +40 with a single power and some preparation.

 

[Duelpersonality]

The problem I'm seeing with Blade Cascade is not the 40[W] per se, it's the modifiers that come with each attack.
Every +1 damage you gain increases your total damage by 40.
However, those +1s are relatively easy to get, since the game was supposed to have done away with multipliers ( due to Uberchargers, Frenzied Berserkers and Leap Attacks ), so they're balanced around the assumption that they'll only be worth +1 damage/round and probably cost accordingly in terms of feats/abilities.
Blade Cascade, however, brought said multipliers back in the game.
So you can "purchase" those cheaps +1 and turn them into a +40 with a single power and some preparation.

True, but in the overall scheme of the power as presented, +40 isn't that much damage. Still, it does add that particular wrinkle back in.

Having seen some hard number crunching on Blade Cascade, I'd like to see the full optimization treatment given to rogues with Slaying Strike or Assassin's Point to see how they stack up (admittedly I'm not expecting either to match what I've seen of BC, but the comparison might show us how broken it is at the high end).

 

[Mirtek]

Anyway, all of this crap is assuming that you can get right next to Orcus to begin with. That post on the other boards points out something about winning initiative automatically. Something tells me that when you start an encounter with Orcus, you're not going to start within easy range to melee attack, even accounting for one turn's movement.

The tactic doesn't need to be done in the first round, they can be done in any round you get into melee range. Doing it in the first round is just especially brutal to the poor DM losing his solo encounter before it could do anything to the party, but this can be done in any succeeding rounds.

The only requirement is getting into melee and this should be possible even against Orcus. After all, he certainly eventually wants to hit you with his wand and from there it's just getting though his reach (don't think he has more than 2-3).

There may be some encounters when noone can get into melee, but these just suck if you're a melee class (fighter, rogue, melee cleric, warlord, TWF ranger) and I thought 4e is doing away with these situations where certain classes are all but useless

Summary: Nice if it can be done in the first round, still nice if it can't be done until the 6th round

 

[Njall]

True, but in the overall scheme of the power as presented, +40 isn't that much damage. Still, it does add that particular wrinkle back in.

Having seen some hard number crunching on Blade Cascade, I'd like to see the full optimization treatment given to rogues with Slaying Strike or Assassin's Point to see how they stack up (admittedly I'm not expecting either to match what I've seen of BC, but the comparison might show us how broken it is at the high end).

Well, 40d10s are, on average, 220 damage.
With Blade Cascade we're oneshotting Orcus, who is said to have more than 1000 HP ( I don't know exactly how many, I don't have the books yet).
So, if we're dealing 1000 damage with Blade Cascade, 78% of that damage comes from those little +1s (feats, paragon paths features, ability score bonuses and so on )
I'd say that's quite a bit.

Just to make my point clearer, if the power dealt 1 base damage (+ modifiers) per attack instead of 2[W] (+ mod), it would be unbalanced ( or "broken", if you prefer ) anyway.

 

[Duelpersonality]

Well, 40d10s are, on average, 220 damage.
With Blade Cascade we're oneshotting Orcus, who is said to have more than 1000 HP ( I don't know exactly how many, I don't have the books yet).
So, if we're dealing 1000 damage with Blade Cascade, 78% of that damage comes from those little +1s (feats, paragon paths powers, ability score bonuses and so on )
I'd say that's quite a bit.

Well, I was working off of the math done at the CharOp board on Gleemax, which has an average damage listed of 3097.29. Feats only add 5-6 extra damage on average damage of 35-36, so while it does add up it's nowhere near the bulk of the damage, and that's using d4s for weapon dice.

 

[Njall]

Well, I was working off of the math done at the CharOp board on Gleemax, which has an average damage listed of 3097.29. Feats only add 5-6 extra damage on average damage of 35-36, so while it does add up it's nowhere near the bulk of the damage, and that's using d4s for weapon dice.

Yes, I'm not saying that feats are the only source of static damage: your ability scores, your paragon path's features ( on the charopt boards they use the pitfighter paragon path, that adds your wisdom modifier to damage, and what, half your level to your damage rolls when you spend an action point? ).
However, those abilities are balanced around the idea that they'll only deal what? +4 damage/round the former, and +30 damage/round the latter.
Even though they have no listed cost ( they're not feats, they come with your PP ), your character is still "paying" for them ( they "cost" you your 11th level paragon path class feature ).
Now, an 11th level class feature that gives the PC a +4 damage/round is fine in my book.
But with blade cascade, that +4 damage suddenly becomes +160 damage.
That's the problem with Blade Cascade: everytime the game assumes that you gain a +1 damage, you're actually gaining a +40.

 

[JohnSnow]

Sorry, I just don't buy it.

I would propose that the stats needed to make this "only miss on a natural 1" are unachievable unless you deliberately make yourself so weak in other areas that you'd never survive the adventure that got you to this point.

You're just not going to be able to drop in on an unprepared enemy with no cohorts and one-shot him.

If you miss on a 2, instead of just "only on a 1," the statistics are against you getting past 7 hits (48%). That means, on average, you'd do 7x ([w] + bonus) damage.

What I want to know is, if this is so über, then why didn't the CharOp playtesters catch it? We know several of them were involved. Specifically, we were given the following names just a week ago: Andrew Kim, Benjamin Pierce, Brian Dupuis, Edward Kim, Jim Raviolos, Joshua Crowe, Max Gorinevsky, Michel Fiallo-Perez, Nathan Lee, and Megan "WizO Autumn" McGinley.

So did they somehow miss it? Or did they perhaps leave it in on purpose? Hmmm?

 

[Njall]

Sorry, I just don't buy it.

I would propose that the stats needed to make this "only miss on a natural 1" are unachievable unless you deliberately make yourself so weak in other areas that you'd never survive the adventure that got you to this point.

You're just not going to be able to drop in on an unprepared enemy with no cohorts and one-shot him.

If you miss on a 2, instead of just "only on a 1," the statistics are against you getting past 7 hits (48%). That means, on average, you'd do 7x ([w] + bonus) damage.

What I want to know is, if this is so über, then why didn't the CharOp playtesters catch it? We know several of them were involved. Specifically, we were given the following names just a week ago: Andrew Kim, Benjamin Pierce, Brian Dupuis, Edward Kim, Jim Raviolos, Joshua Crowe, Max Gorinevsky, Michel Fiallo-Perez, Nathan Lee, and Megan "WizO Autumn" McGinley.

So did they somehow miss it? Or did they perhaps leave it in on purpose? Hmmm?

The charopt weren't given the full rules, just a few criticals area so that they could review the game, IIRC.
Anyway, the numbers are on the 4e charopt board; you can check the maths if you wish

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

It seems like the simplest solution is to put a hard cap on the power, say 5 hits. Even if you optimize for it, at 30th level is 5*(2[W] + bonuses) so worthless?