Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Where does your ranger get his d12 from?
Shouldn't a 1st level ranger get
2d10+1d8+Dex
(twin shot, longbow, hunters quarry feat)
4e's [W] damage discrepancy
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
Where does your ranger get his d12 from?
Shouldn't a 1st level ranger get
2d10+1d8+Dex
(twin shot, longbow, hunters quarry feat)
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
An additional problem faced by implements vs weapons comes from races that can use oversized weapons. Minotaurs and bugbears (or any race that can get oversized weapons) can up the damage they do on [W] powers - but nobody can improve the damage done by powers.
Cheers
GoodKingJayIII
First Post
Wish I could give you some practical advice. I'm running my 1st 4e game this weekend, and I've only participated in a few playtests.
I actually brought this issue up about a month before 4e's release, when all the preview stuff was floating around; I was basically shot down immediately. I feel both validated and disappointed that, at least in your case, it's panned out. Hopefully someone can give you some good ideas. All I can say is, I'll be watching this one closely.
And actually, I love Plane Sailing's idea, because I think it's the right direction to go in terms of improving caster damage. I'm not sure if I would add +hit bonuses, but implement-based damage is an excellent fix.
I actually brought this issue up about a month before 4e's release, when all the preview stuff was floating around; I was basically shot down immediately. I feel both validated and disappointed that, at least in your case, it's panned out. Hopefully someone can give you some good ideas. All I can say is, I'll be watching this one closely.
And actually, I love Plane Sailing's idea, because I think it's the right direction to go in terms of improving caster damage. I'm not sure if I would add +hit bonuses, but implement-based damage is an excellent fix.
Last edited:
Prism
Explorer
I think 2d12 + 1d6 (or 1d8) with no dex is probably the optimal assuming twin strike
Also, many of the rangers dailies are better as they include multiple attacks and therefore you get your DEX or STR and magic/feat bonus's multiple times. So attacks on the run does 6d12+1d6+2*DEX. Even better
I would say that with the mutli chance of doing quarry damage, the multiple attacks to apply STR or DEX and other bonus's the ranger is equal to the rogue as far as damage output
However, the warlock seems better at doing decent damage and also providing negative status effects. The rangers powers which provide status effects do far less damage..usually 1 or 2 times weapon
Baumi
Adventurer
Close enough. With 4e's charge rules, monsters can use their move action to line themselves up, and then use what's left over to charge. While a PC's basic attack may be sub-optimal, a monster's basic attack is often their bread-and-butter (their "at-will power"), so they generally are fine with "settling" for a charge.
Of course, usually it's only in outdoor battles that you really have the option to put 10 squares between yourself and an enemy in the first place. In D&D, melee combat is the given.
That's why the Fighter stands in front.
My group hasn't had a problem with the ranged attackers getting stuck in melee. It happens, but rarely. Then again, we have three melee types out of five, so there's a good solid wall up front. And most of our encounters have taken place indoors, where someone who can control 15 feet of room width single handed (Fighter's square, plus one on each side) can have a lot of effect.
My group hasn't had a problem with the ranged attackers getting stuck in melee. It happens, but rarely. Then again, we have three melee types out of five, so there's a good solid wall up front. And most of our encounters have taken place indoors, where someone who can control 15 feet of room width single handed (Fighter's square, plus one on each side) can have a lot of effect.
If it's a 10-foot wide corridor, the front line works great, but otherwise I just illustrated how monsters can circumvent the front line.
And that assumes all monsters are entirely melee, which they aren't. They have their ranged strikers as well.
In general, I'd say range and melee both have their benefits and drawbacks. I don't see ranged attacks as being superior (mainly because once you're hemmed-in, you start provoking oppies).
A lot of this has to do with each DM's style. One may prefer melee monsters (brutes, minions, and soldiers). One may think it's obligatory to always attack the closest target (i.e. the front line). Another might go to lengths to make strikers or leaders into lunchmeat, and designs encounters loaded with artillery, lurkers, and skirmishers.
Last edited:
OK, has anyone actually broken down the rider allotment for strikers? Because people keep saying this over and over, and I really think it's just like the "full moon fever" urban myth. You see a warlock attack. His damage isn't impressive, so the rider effect becomes the item of note. You see a rogue. His damage is so sick that you hardly noticed that he slid or dazed the opponent.
I think you gotta break down riders the way MMO gamers do, into buffs and debuffs. Rangers have lots of buff effects that help them--stuff like the free shifts, extra attacks, and bonus damage. Stuff that wouldn't be called a rider, but they're definitely buffs.
Warlocks have a lot of debuffs, particularly those that take the form of defense penalties and forced movement.
Rogues actually have, IMO, the most delicious mix.
