Assess the Striker

[Dannyalcatraz]

Here's my spin on it: rogues are among the better strikers in the game and warlocks are somewhere near the middle of the pack...after getting their revisions last year. And as pointed out, there really isnt much of a synergy in their attributes. It's going to be a bit of a mush.

There are ways to make a workable Hybrid out of the mix, though. If the PC has Shadow Walk from his warlock side, the Hidden Sniper feat will be a good boost to his accuracy- essentially a full time +2. And while that won't pump his damage per strike, it WILL boost his strikes per combat.

In addition, there are some hidden synergies: some of the warlock powers reduce the defenses of targets...that some of the rogue powers target.

 

[keterys]

rogue / warlocks can actually work fine... not optimal, but fine. Just be Dex / Cha or Dex / Con and avoid powers that rely on missing riders (ex: Int).

But you really do need to use at least one of the two damage bonuses. Or at least Sly Flourish

 

[Grimmjow]

this may sound bad but when my friend (who had no idea what he was doing) made his swordmage/monk hybrid i just waiting for him to go first. When he was on the top in initiative i knew he was going to do the stupid thing and chargee the orcs the group was fighting. Weeeell that made one orc mad ad he just chanced him around the map until he was able to kill him. Now the kid made a character that is really good and i THINK he is having more fun now that he can do stuff. A good rule to follow is maybe if they don't know much about the game, no hybrids. He was going to replace that character with another hybrid but i set that rule down and probably saved him from hating the game.

That of course is how i feel i may have been in the wrong in doing that but this is his first time playing so i felt that i should limit his options till he learns how the game works

 

[pemerton]

One of the players (who traditionally gimps his characters no matter the system), seems in my estimation to have a weak striker. (There's also a defender who literally never marks opponents - though I know that's a problem with him, and I'm going to talk to him.)

I keep reminding him to mark, and he'll say things like "but I'm prone so I can't mark" or "I want to be able to attack this round." I try to tell him this isn't the case, but he just shrugs and says he just wants to attack.

Are these players deliberately setting out to build and play underperforming PCs? If so, then I don't see that changing the PC builds is necessarily going to help.

Without knowing their motivations for building and playing these characters, it's hard to give advice.

 

[mkill]

Are these players deliberately setting out to build and play underperforming PCs? If so, then I don't see that changing the PC builds is necessarily going to help.

Are the players recent 3E converts? Because that would explain what is happening here. In 3E: multiclassing = good; melee combatant = deal hit point damage. Both expectations can be a trap in 4E.

As for the Battlemind player, he's just in the wrong class. If he just wants to whack things for damage (which is perfectly fine), he should play a melee striker. Slayer is the most obvious choice, but if that's not his style, there is the melee Ranger, the Barbarian, the Berserker and the Hexblade. (There should be a psionic option too, but none exists as far as I know). A good melee Striker beats a Defender who doesn't want to defend.

As for the Warlock / Rogue, I'm not sure what the player was trying to achieve there. Maybe he doesn't know himself? In any case the player should be kept away from the hybrid rules.

 

[Ferghis]

I would never allow just any hybrid character. The books are clear that it is very easy to gimp a hybrid. If you can, kindly tell the striker's player that the character is not working. That he should pick a regular class.

If that doesn't work, tone down the encounter levels, and heed the other suggestions in this thread. They're plenty good.

 

[Unwise]

I would just let nature takes its course. Give them some encounters that should be challenging to the group. Let them get killed. Then have a discussion about what characters to make up next.

It sounds like they are both playing the wrong classes and neither appear to understand the rules, or even their role.

I generally have players submit their characters to me for approval. It helps to be able to point out that they have some powers keyed off the wrong stat and that some feats don't work the way they think they should. On the flipside, for my powergaming friends I ask them for a copy of the character up to level 11+ (which they will have made anyway) just so I can see how they plan to cheese it out and put a stop to silliness before it happens.

 

[pemerton]

I would just let nature takes its course. Give them some encounters that should be challenging to the group. Let them get killed. Then have a discussion about what characters to make up next.

Whether or not this will work seems to depend on what is motivating the players.

On the flipside, for my powergaming friends I ask them for a copy of the character up to level 11+ (which they will have made anyway) just so I can see how they plan to cheese it out and put a stop to silliness before it happens.

This made me laugh! I like your proactiveness as a GM.

 

[pemerton]

Are the players recent 3E converts? Because that would explain what is happening here. In 3E: multiclassing = good; melee combatant = deal hit point damage. Both expectations can be a trap in 4E.

What puzzles me is that - at least as the OP describes it - the building and playing is so obviously suboptimal that it's hard for me to understand what is going on.

Is there deliberate self-sabotage going on?

 

[Kynn]

Are the players recent 3E converts? Because that would explain what is happening here. In 3E: multiclassing = good; melee combatant = deal hit point damage. Both expectations can be a trap in 4E.

I had the exact same problems with converts from 3e, early on; one insisted on playing a ranger/sorcerer and the other was a swordmage and then a kalashtar melee ranger with like 14 Strength.

I tried to explain to them what was going on and how to play 4e more effectively, but they were hung up on how much it wasn't like 3e and how much of a jerk I was being as a DM because of challenging fights ("what LEVEL are these monsters??"). Eventually it led to a TPK and they ragequit my game.