Cadfan said:
Sight unseen, mechanics unseen, which character would you prefer?
Character A: Has two per encounter abilities that let him hit particularly hard. He is at +1 to both of these.
Character B: Has two per encounter abilities that let him avoid damage by maneuvering. He is at +1 to both of these.
Character C: Has one per encounter ability that lets him hit particularly hard, and one per encounter ability that lets him avoid damage by maneuvering. He is at +1 to one of these.
I don't think its an obvious choice. Character A and B receive the boost more often, but Character C has versatility at what seems to be a relatively small cost.
Exactly. Versatility IS potentially a benefit. Even if it's technically "sub-optimal," having that power might be the thing that saves your bacon one day. For example, there are times when the extra damage from torturous strike (even if you don't get the FULL benefit) might be more useful than being able to do normal damage and slide the target 3 squares (as positioning strike would do). Or if you're a brutal scoundrel, there might be times when sliding the target 1 square might be exactly what you want, like say, if he's next to a cliff.
And while the trade-off makes this a hard call for the per-encounter abilities, it's even harder for the at-will ones (if any benefit from those options). As Cadfan said, even when you can only use it once in an encounter, it's far from an "obvious choice." And when it's potentially an option you can have available
every round, it's even harder.
I think optimization by cross-training
outside your "build" will be precisely the sort of thing the min-maxing people go nuts over (in a good way). But if the designers did their jobs right, there will
always be trade-offs involved, and the game will have very few "no-brainer" decisions (barring a few options that I'm sure slipped through - nobody's perfect).
And in fact, I think that's why the rogue gets Thievery and Stealth automatically - they're no-brainer choices, so they're NOT options.