Broken things errata'ed, July 2009

[Eldorian]

Twin strike is now exactly what I wanted it to be: a tool to mark two opponents, rather than a damage boost. Perfect. Looks like I may actually play a tempest fighter at some point now.

Not only might I play a tempest fighter at some point, or a battlerager vigor fighter, I won't feel like I'm gimping myself by playing a different defender. Both builds were so much better than other classes and other fighter builds I felt if I made a defender to add to my party I'd be a 5th wheel, trying to compete with the battlerager vigor fighter in terms of defending or damage dealing. I felt like, since our battlerager vigor fighter was so invincible and did so much single target damage, that I didn't need to build a defender for the group. The problem, however, is that the fighter is the guy who is most likely to miss a session, and we don't like to have to play his character when he's not there. So I kinda wanted to play a defender for sessions he misses.

 

[Thundershield]

Looks like RRoT now doesn't actually do anything unless you have a magic weapon or a high crit weapon. I think I'd add a caveat that if you don't get to roll any extra damage on a crit, you can roll 1d6. Other than that, good changes.

Rather like this change. It ties well with Tempus' old love for axe weapons (greataxe, execution axe, and the Deadly Axe feat).

It's true that there's a downside if you don't have a magic weapon or a non-high crit weapon, but that's only for 1-2 levels of play at most, so you can either wait with picking up the feat or go for a high crit weapon from the get-go.

A minor sacrifice for a nice fix.

EDIT: Any particular reason Dual Strike is set up like that? Seems to be it would be simpler to set it up as follows:

Target: One or two creatures
Attack: Str vs. AC; one attack per target (main hand, then off-hand)
Hit: 1[W] damage.

Or is there any particular reason it's a secondary attack? To avoid ambiguity?

EDIT EDIT: I should point out that details aside (like the above wording of Dual Strike), I absolutely love the changes. Good to see stuff like this coming from the Wizards.

 

[Nymrohd]

The new BRV fighter actually gives an incentive to the enemy to hit him so as to drain the hit points and decrease his damage. He now acts as a defender. If he goes with higher AC and looses the damage bonus, then he becomes less of a threat to the enemy and thus easier to ignore.

 

[shadowoflameth]

I wonder if Guileful Switch is any use at all now, I can't think of any.

Should have been a daily IMO.

Mind you I am happy to see all of the class features & powers I consider problematic addressed so I will live with this one (or rather without it due to retraining ).

You couls still use guileful switch to give a particular ally the chance to act before another allies 'until the end of your next turn' effeect ended.

 

[shadowoflameth]

It depends how you read it. I read it as "we are clarifying that the power allows 3 attacks, and it really did allow 3 attacks from the get-go, that was just hard to interpret." That's wrong. Clarification would be if you write something that's hard to underestand and then you go back and revise it so it's easier to understand.

What they're doing here clarifies how the power works in general, but it's not clarifying that the power is 3 attacks. The power was up to 4 attacks. It didn't "appear to say that", it did say that. Changing it to 3 attacks is revision. The pre-errata version said up to 4 attacks.

If you read it as "we've made the wording on this new, changed version of Rain of Blows very clear so everyone will know the new version only grants 3 attacks", then it's fine. I don't think that's a tenable reading, though. The errata claims that they're only updating damage. If that were true, then the original Rain of Blows would have been 2 attacks, or 3 attacks with the conditions met, without having to hit on a primary attack. That's simply not a credible reading of the initial power, my link to a designer saying it was intended as 2-4 attacks aside.

Edit: It's not a big deal, but the explanation given minimizes how overpowered pre-errata Rain of Blows was. That's why I'm pointing this out.

One of the designers came on a prior thread and said very specifically that the intent was for a maximum of four attacks. One fellow even got upset and started arguing with him about what his intent was (believing it impossible for his own opinion to be shown incorrect). The July errata makes a specific change from the originally intended (4) attacks to (3). The even list a reason; that (3) attacks is more in line with a 3rd level encounter power.

 

[Garthanos]

The new BRV fighter actually gives an incentive to the enemy to hit him so as to drain the hit points and decrease his damage. He now acts as a defender. If he goes with higher AC and looses the damage bonus, then he becomes less of a threat to the enemy and thus easier to ignore.

Yup I am digging its new defendery finish.. decided to post a Painrage vigor feat (for non defender classes and my empathic vigor for the brv fighter.) ... http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan...battlerager-vigor-expansions.html#post4851936

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Chain armor for BRV does have a benefit other than the extra damage. A BRV Fighter will have crap for Reflex and Will. A shield gives +2 Reflex, and masterwork Chain armor can give up to +2 Will. Chain armor plus a Heavy Shield gives a BRV the best NADs they will every get.

 

[chitzk0i]

Chain armor for BRV does have a benefit other than the extra damage. A BRV Fighter will have crap for Reflex and Will. A shield gives +2 Reflex, and masterwork Chain armor can give up to +2 Will. Chain armor plus a Heavy Shield gives a BRV the best NADs they will every get.

Yeah, but your AC is still pretty bad and the vast majority of melee attacks are versus AC.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Yeah, but your AC is still pretty bad and the vast majority of melee attacks are versus AC.

I've found that NADs are very important on a Defender, since enemy abilities that immobilize, daze, stun, blind, or otherwise disable are most effective when they are used against the party's primary Defender. A wise DM knows this and acts accordingly.

With the extra durability on the old BRV, I'd personally take Chain+Shield every single time. Losing 1-2 AC was well worth it. With the new BRV, I'm less sure.

 

[Garthanos]

and masterwork Chain armor can give up to +2 Will.

I have to undergo very wierd paradigm switches in my imagination cortex to absorb that effect....