Best of the Best - Strikers.

[Votan]

I am sad that the Fey pact warlock, while fun to play, doesn't seem to really shine as a striker. I do like that a martial character (ranger, rogue) can be a strong option at all levels.

But I voted on fun (warlock) which is one form of best!

 

[Holy Bovine]

Barbarians fragile? My Goliath Rageblood is tougher than most defenders, and certainly tougher than any striker!

He does have low defenses, but tons of HP, surges, temp HP and damage resistance.

Same here. Although our defender has a higher Ac by quite a bit the 2 Rageblood Barbs in the group always outlast him (mainly b/c the DMs dice hate the poor guy! Two 20's in a row last session alone!). The huge amount of mobility RB Barbs can get (Combat Sprint & Swift Charge) make them battlefield monsters. I love mine!

And he'd smash the head clean off the shoulders of any Ranger who got within 20 squares.

 

[Kzach]

Wow, this one has gotten the most votes (although I haven't checked the others recently, but last I saw they only got up to 100ish) and I guessed it right, the ranger has all the votes.

Le sigh.

The masses want what the masses want, I guess.

So with all four threads done, that makes the iconic group the following:

Defender - Guardian Fighter
Leader - Tactical Warlord
Controller - Control Wizard
Striker - Archer/TWF Ranger

Now I have to make a poll to determine the races!

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't get the ranger thing, either. My regular group has two campaigns going. One player in each played a ranger, one archer, one TWF. The former has concluded that '4e sucks,' and the latter has decided to 'focus on his career.' The archer seems particularly boring to play (though perfectly capable of dishing the damage), and the TWF ranger was most notable for missing both his attacks, using his elven re-roll and missing again (Scimitars & 16 STR to start, maybe not the best idea?) - though that one interrupt power that gives the enemy an attack penalty worked well on a number of occassions.

As far as the other strikers we've had a chance to try out go, the Warlock has also been classified as boring, and the Rogue was generally awesome. The rogue does big damage with sneak attack (almost trivially easy for the party to set up), shifts all over, slides enemies around, and hits like crazy (weapon powers vs nACDs w/+3 prof & +1 weapon talent, and Combat Advantage).

 

[Votan]

So with all four threads done, that makes the iconic group the following:

Defender - Guardian Fighter
Leader - Tactical Warlord
Controller - Control Wizard
Striker - Archer/TWF Ranger

Now I have to make a poll to determine the races!

In a strange twist, all 4 are from the PHB1 (goodbye power creep) and three of the four are martial options (who could have imagined that back in the days of third edition).

I find this really cool!

 

[Saeviomagy]

I don't get the ranger thing, either. My regular group has two campaigns going. One player in each played a ranger, one archer, one TWF.

As far as the other strikers we've had a chance to try out go, the Warlock has also been classified as boring, and the Rogue was generally awesome. The rogue does big damage with sneak attack (almost trivially easy for the party to set up), shifts all over, slides enemies around, and hits like crazy (weapon powers vs nACDs w/+3 prof & +1 weapon talent, and Combat Advantage).

I'd have to agree that the ranger seems like the most boring character to play in the entire game, and the archer ranger more so.

Rogues are fun - a rogue in the party will force the party to move tactically all the freaking time. Typically groups don't tend to care a lot about CA, but with a rogue screaming "give me CA!" all the time, that changes.

Warlocks seem fine to me, although really difficult to play effectively. To be competitive with at-wills, you need to be able to force foes to either attack you or move towards you.

 

[Hejdun]

Rangers are probably the most powerful, but they are easily the most boring. All you do in each and every round is roll two dice for your dual strike.

Rogues are interesting because of the tactics they have to figure out. I think they pale in comparison to a Barbarian though.

I haven't really seen Sorcerors in action, but in theory I'd think they are the best. Their area attacks mean they can heap on the bonus damage, and they seem to have quite a few controllery powers.

 

[Kzach]

In a strange twist, all 4 are from the PHB1 (goodbye power creep) and three of the four are martial options (who could have imagined that back in the days of third edition).

Huh, yeah, I didn't realise that until you just pointed it out.

I wonder how much of it is influenced by time? Is the bias towards PHB 1 classes simply because they've been around the longest? Oh well, it's not like this poll is some official WotC marketing decision or anything.

And anyway, popularity works for iconism just as well as 'the best'

I find this really cool!

Me too!

I can honestly say that I have enjoyed reading these threads more than anything else I've read here for quite some time.

 

[Votan]

I wonder how much of it is influenced by time? Is the bias towards PHB 1 classes simply because they've been around the longest? Oh well, it's not like this poll is some official WotC marketing decision or anything.

While I am sure that this is certainly true (more exposure), if the new options in PHB2 were startlingly better than PHB1 then I would have expected to see it in the polls. But seeing strong contenders (like Bard) do well but not overwhelmingly well was interesting to see.

It's also worth notping that the fairly new Warlord beats out the more "classic" cleric as leader.

Thanks for doing these polls.

 

[Jhaelen]

1 pt per minion... Our DM barely uses minions as they really do not contribute anything to the fights... he runs almost like a 3rd edition game, real mobs everytime

A DPR highscore list and mobs? Doesn't even sound like an rpg to me... but to each their own, I guess.