Charge! Should I be worried about this druid?

[fba827]

Specifically good against chargers ...
* Monster powers that affect movement (slow/immobilze/daze/stun)
* Terrain features (difficult terrain, impassable terrain, etc)
* getting swarmed by monsters since the charger is usually the first in to the fray getting all the attention
* chargers going after the -other- PCs still grouped near the entrance, this causes a split party situation within the same room where the PCs by the door get occupied with the monsters swarming at them, while the cahrger is left dealing with the swarm he has created on himself at the other side of the room.

Specifically good against melee-range characters ...
* Monsters with ready actions to attack the first enemy that comes within range
* Monsters with auras
* Zone effects or terrain that cause damage or hinder for each square the PC enters which a melee character would have to cross through (or stand in) to get to the monster

This specific druid
* If he has a particular weak defense, he might think twice about charging in to a group of monsters that can attack that defense.



hmmm.. that's all i can think of off the top of my head. others above have mentioned some good ones too.




personally - PCs so focused on one thing bores me after a while; you need two or three 'tricks' to switch between as called by the situation... but to each his own. i also don't like excessive item picking, it generally leads to some cheese that only serves to eventually annoy me.. but, then again, i'm an (*self-censored*)

 

[bganon]

Honestly, I think the character is probably OK. If he really focuses on choosing powers to get the most out of that gear, he's going to give up a lot of "controller-ness", instead taking beast-form powers with forced movement riders, most of which are melee range and only move targets a few squares. He's not going to dominate the shape of the battlefield often that way. He does get striker-level damage, but has dedicated two crucial item slots (implement and neck) to pulling it off, and it comes at the cost of his primary role.

And if I'm working out the math correctly, he's just below the DPS of an archer with bracers (using Twin Strike), and that's without the archer even taking greatbow proficiency and Lethal Hunter. Not to mention that the archer gets that DPS at range 20. A better comparison might be a Brutal Scoundrel Rogue... who can out-DPS both fairly easily, and will have better AC/Ref than the druid.

 

[keterys]

A brutal rogue will have about +15% accuracy (Weapon vs. Ref) and deal about 3d8+10 damage (23.5 avg). On a charge into flank, this guy will do about 1d8+7+2d6+1d10 (24 avg), on just flank but no charge, he's just 1d8+7+1d6+1d10 (20.5 avg).

A twin striking archer will be about 1d12+5 twice, with a +1d8 kicker (27.5 avg), though I'd rate its accuracy slightly lower. Of course, its ability to avoid being attacked is much higher.

Sounds like you get to start off and observe the damage before it's fully optimized and can choose to give or not give any other parts of the items later, and that the player is very accomodating. Sounds ideal.

P.S. If you have the badge of the berserker, it's very very easy to charge every turn. That said, it's not necessarily easy to charge into combat advantage every turn!

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm not seeing where Druids are all that squishy.

They are basically in the same mid-tier as Bards, Clerics, Shamans, Sorcerers, Rangers, Rogues, Warlocks, and Warlords, and typically better than some of these. By 6th level, they can have good defensive powers which some of these classes do not have such as Barkskin and/or Camouflage Cloak if they get surrounded.

The only consistently tougher PCs are Avengers (marginally so), Barbarians, Fighters, Paladins, Swordmages, and Wardens.

And Druids are definitely better than Invokers and Wizards, the other two Controllers.


I think people just view Controllers as squishy. That is generally true for Invokers and Wizards. But, we have a Druid in our group and that PC almost never goes down, even though he is in the thick of things quite often.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Funny though that you mention barbarians, KD, because they're notorious glass cannons.

Maybe squishy isn't quite the right word for it. I think the deal is more that a charger druid IS going to be the thick of it, and while they may have decent defenses and average durability, they aren't fighters. That's the "issue" with barbs too. They do have decent durability and not bad AC, but they just get pounded on. Notice the Avenger has a somewhat similar shtick where he's out in front of the party and his AC is practically off the chart to make it work well (maybe a bit too high really, but still the idea is it needs to be high).

Now, this druid might well pick some feats to help him out there, toughness, shield proficiency, etc. but that would REALLY cast him firmly in this one role.

Its a good character concept and if he RPs it nicely it should be fun and should be quite combat effective, but I don't think he's going to outdamage the main strikers consistently and just getting close to them is going to be a tough row for this fellow to hoe. Plus chargers really are about the easiest build for the DM to work tactics against. Lots of skirmishers, ANY controllers that can stop/slow his movement, archery. Those are all things that will work against him. He's going to kick against ground pounding elites and solos in reasonably open terrain.

My greater concern with characters that focus their builds a whole lot is whether or not I can bring myself to be nice enough to them to let them do their thing very often, lol. This druid can still choose to bend his focus back a bit in the other direction with some of his feat selection possibly, so he should be OK and if he picks some decent control powers he can strike at the best times and debuff the rest of the time.

 

[KarinsDad]

Funny though that you mention barbarians, KD, because they're notorious glass cannons.

Only if poorly designed. Just because the book states Str, Con, Cha does not mean that people should actually do that.


Barbarians should be designed with Con and Dex equal partners for the second ability score boost (or with Dex alone). People focus so much on the Con extra damage and the Con extra temp hit points and forget about AC and Reflex.

In fact, a Barbarian can have one of the highest ACs in the game system if he focuses solely on Dex as his second stat and temporary hit points still give him more hit points than a Fighter.

Rogues too have to get into the thick of things as a Striker, but they are a lot more squishier than Barbarians because they do not get temp hit points and they have 1 hit point per level fewer.

Many Barbarian designs also ignore Shields (something real Viking berserkers did not forsake). A shield is a wonderful tool when surrounded. Since Encounter powers do not require a two handed weapon, it is only later in an encounter when At Wills mostly come into play and there are fewer foes where a Barbarian should drop his shield and use the big two handed At Will attacks (with his one handed weapon used two-handed which page 215 PHB allows, even though some people want to consider that not a rule, or alternatively, have a second weapon).

 

[Nifft]

I wouldn't worry. Looks like a focused, competent build, but I don't see any particular cheese.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I wouldn' worry.. and thats coming from a guy who has played a charging Druid... going to have to pick up them Claw Gloves

My druid, at early paragon, had a one-trick pony focus of targetting prone, bloodied targets... and could be doing 3D8 + 2D6 + 19...
That meant I was willing to break away from a current target to haul ass across the battlefield when a bloodied enemy got knocked prone. It was awesome when I was able to apply this trick... which wasn't really that often.

The cool thing, from the DM's perspective, is that this build spreads the damage around {instead of the PC piling damage onto one monster until its dead} and requires a mobile, manueving combat.
So I say go hog wild.. open up the encounter spaces and let him run about the place chasing his ideal hit.

OH.. but don't expect him to be squishy. Well played, he will always be in a spot to be hit for a very short period of time.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

I wouldn't worry about it. In fact, I'd try to find ways to let him charge at least once a fight. He obviously wants to play that I kind of character, so I say let him have fun. And if he out-damages the ranger, good! We can use it as evidence that the 4e roles are more flexible than what their detractors claim.

As far as barbarians being glass cannons, we once had a goliath barbarian in the party whose player took every regen, thp granting, or healing power he could find. He was *incredibly* hard to put down. And he did a lot of damage, too.

The only time I've felt there might be a problem with a charge-oriented build was with the minotaur barbarian we had in our group a while back. The minotaur had Opportunity Gore, which reads:

"Whenever you make an opportunity attack, instead of making the usual melee basic attack, you can use your goring charge racial power without expending it, even if you have used it this encounter. When you do so, you ignore the power's requirement and action type, and your target is the creature that triggered the opportunity attack."

The requirement for Goring Charge is:

"You must charge and use this power in place of a melee basic attack."

It just felt like he was knocking a lot of people prone a bit too much. But I'll be darned if Opportunity Gore is not a feat for a minotaur fighter to have.

 

[Flipguarder]

I would say I'm about as conservative as they come as for what I would allow for my characters (about half the adv and adv2 is just flat out non-existent in my campaigns.) and I don't have any particular problem with this build, besides the fact that he might find it boring after a while.

I would take a second look at it near level 16 though.