Essentials multiclassing playtest?

[keterys]

Gets mighty odd when you're considering what half-elf at-will to take

Or trying to compare an at-will from a striker to a not-striker. Though even if you think of 2d6 + 4 as the warlock's at-will, it looks mighty odd compared to the 2d6+8 from a fighter or paladin, 1d8+2d6+8 from the rogue, or 2d10+1d6 from the ranger. And it only gets worse from there... at least until epic and with some interesting tricks. You can do _very_ good damage with eyebite at epic, with vulnerability psychic on your curse target, and tricked out curse damage.

 

[Ryujin]

At-will as encounter, via Dilettante? If someone can't ignore a class feature, that they don't have, then I can't help 'em.

I may not be a statistician, but it isn't very hard for me to convert 1d6 to 3.5 static, add the numbers up, and compare them. And weren't we talking about low levels, where the alternatives are limited, not Paragon and Epic? Or did things diverge, somewhere along the way? If I've had a stroke, or something and missed it, I'd like to know

 

[keterys]

Yeah... warlock 2d6+4 = 11 < fighter/paladin 15, ranger 14.5 << rogue 19.5

And, eyebite 1d6+4 = 7.5 also less than holy strike, sly flourish, brash strike, or even ye olde ranged basic with a shortbow.

You don't need to include the warlock curse damage when discussing a power. Compare quarry, sneak attack, and sorcerous power on their own if you want. Or not.

 

[Neonchameleon]

If we include striker bonus damage, things look terrible for Eyebite.

Weapon wielders get 1d10 weapons in one hand, 2d6 in two most of the time. Which means that a non-striker with a two handed weapon is doing the damage of Eyebite.

Moving on, we can assume about a 16 in secondary stat for the damaging classes.

Doing lower than 2d6 + primary stat damage are:

Vampire with Dark Beckoning: D6 + 3 + secondary stat. But at +2 to hit.
Sorceror with Blazing Starfall (oh wait, Burst 1 with control) and Ensorcelled Blade.
Rogues with Duelists Flurry? Nope. That's 2d6 + Primary Stat on the nail. With forced movement - very useful. That just leaves rogues without CA - i.e. incompetent rogues. (Preparatory Shot is in the same league for suckitude, admittedly).
Rangers... always do better damage than Eyebite. Even on an At Will RBA with a basic crossbow.
Monks: Lowest flurry is 2+Wis. Lowest damage is d6+stat. And it knocks the target prone and slides it. We're leaving the utility of Eyebite in the dust here.
Barbarians: Pressing Strike? Nope. That's 2d6+stat damage. With some serious mobility thrown in (and most barbarians can do 3d6+stat on an at will without trouble).

Ah! Should have started with the As. Avenger ranged powers and both Executioner's Noose (2d6 + stat including shroud) and Inescapable Blade.

We're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here - some of the worst strikers using their most situational powers.

Hmm... The Blackguard without combat advantage and with Plate Armour and a Heavy Shield. But that's a minimum of d8 + stat - meaning they need only two and a half points of static so you need combat advantage only one turn in two or so. Simple to get that much.

Going back down the other way, an Ardent with a maul and Demoralising Strike is going to kick your ass at DPR from Eyebite straight out of the box. 2d6+stat and -2 to all defences. (And this is realistic as Ardents get no shield proficiency).

But the reason Strikers don't get their class feature there is you'd have to add in the marks and interrupts from the defenders and the healing from the leaders for general utility comparisons. Are you going to spread those class features across the at wills?

 

[Aegeri]

Eyebite does too low damage dice and is actually quite useless in some cases (tremorsensing enemies for example). Unfortunately Wizards gives implement strikers terrible damage dice, then expects them to compete with strikers with 2d6 brutal 1 gouges (not to mention all the implicit charge cheese that will subsequently come with said gouge), or d12 greatbows they can attack with, or a class that is RIDICULOUSLY accurate and gets +2d6 damage on sneak attack etc.

It just doesn't work and it's no wonder Warlocks struggle hard without heavy optimization to keep par with damage.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Having started my 4e "career" with an eyebiting feylock, I was a little confused as to why they even called it a striker at all, and still am, to be honest. The warlock, to me, felt more like a bad single target controller with delusions of competence. I would love to see them be fixed properly.

Eyebite needs more damage, and/or better utility. Dire Radiance needs flexible stats. Eldritch Blast could use a little something. I'm not saying they need to bring warlocks up to ranger or rogue level, but I'm seriously going to houserule the crap out of them if anyone ever wants to bring one to my game (not likely in their current state of suckitude). I'd rather WotC just fix them right in the firstplace though.

Yes, I've emailed them.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'd rather WotC just fix them right in the firstplace though.

Yes, I've emailed them.

You and me both. And this nitty gritty detail of what doesn't work and why is exactly what playtesting should be about.

 

[Xris Robin]

Warlock's can have damage that looks good, if you are a Sorcerer-King Pact with Mind-Bite Scorn and Killing Curse. Hand of Blight can do 4d8 then. However, King Warlocks have the worst pact boon, since all Fell Might does is act as a pseudo power point to augment the single Sorcerer King power they get at each level, usually with a leaderish effect. 2d8 curse damage isn't bad, but it costs two feats and requires a specific pact, compared to a Rogue's sneak attack with what, just Backstabber?

As a sidenote, hybrid King'locks are really screwed over. Hybrids get a Pact, and get riders, but not the Boon. All Sorcerer King riders are just the ability to use Fell Might on those powers, though, which hybrids can't do.

 

[Neverfate]

Here's an odd question:

Practiced Killer (Assassin Multiclass) multis you into Assassin . . . or specifically the Executioner? Or Both?

It specifically limits you to an Executioner skill training, but ends there. There reason I ask is because the Assassin (which hasn't been renamed oddly) is Shadow while the Executioner is Shadow/Martial, which can influence access to feats.

My interpretation is it means you're going to multi into the Assassin over-class (ie the pure shadow/original one) and just thematically disguises itself as Executioner.

 

[twilsemail]

I know the thread's a bit stale, but I can't find the info anywhere else...

Has there been any indication as to when this "playtest" is complete and the actual info is due out?