Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bluewyrm" data-source="post: 4380363" data-attributes="member: 72122">Forked from: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showpost.php?postid=4373906" target="_blank"> Art of the Peel </a>While I don't really care to dive into Carpe DM's argument that Paladins don't defend well enough over Strikers, part of his argument seemed to rely on the idea that Enfeebling Strike is the worst of the Paladin at-will abilities. This sort of "incensed me", as I consider far-and-away the best Paladin at-will, so I figured I'd throw in my two cents.    Here's my rationale:0)  My argument relies heavily on the idea that the Chaladin is the better build option for Paladins, which I think it's class-features and role make more or less self-evident, but the original post implied that it was the worst of all the at-wills, including Bolstering Strike. 1)  Enfeebling Strike can help everyone, as opposed  to just the Paladin.  The basic point of the Paladin is to "defend", that is to ensure  that his allies don't get hit, while at the same time, staying up himself (often  done by ensuring that he also doesn't get hit by wearing heavy armour).  The -2  on all of his attack rolls helps ensure he hits no one, including you, not only  on his own turn, but on all his Opp Atts as well... this means the benefit will apply at  least once, if not multiple times, which is more then Bolstering Strike  can muster, since it always only works the once (provided you even get  attacked... otherwise it does nothing) 2)  The -2 applies until the end of your next  turn.  This means it will penalize the enemy on his own turn, and any opp atts  he will get on your next turn as well.  You use your movement to invoke  an Opp Att, while at the same time getting into a better position, providing a  flank or maybe getting in touch range for a Lay on Hands.  If the opponent takes  the Opp Att, he still gets a -2 to hit.  If you combo this with On Pain of  Death, he will take damage to boot.  3)  Essentially Bolster makes you take less damage  from your next attack, provided they actually attack you.  Enfeebling Strike  gives you a better chance of not being hit at all, which should be about equal  in most cases, and in some cases significantly better. 4)  Bolster gives you Temp HP, which are nice  because they last indefinitely until you get hit.  Problem is they don't stack.   This makes a difference, not only for your own further uses of Bolstering Strike,  but also for the Cleric as well.  One of his better powers, Sacred Flame, gives  Temp HP, and his gives them much better than yours does (Cha + 1/2 level, as  opposed to your own Cha + nothing).  Debuffs like -2 to attack always stack,  regardless of their source.  Meaning if the opponent of Enfeebling Strike, once  marked, suffers a whopping -4 to all his attacks against allies.  Against  certain foes (boss-monsters, so forth), this is like giving every ally +4 to his  AC (while you still get +2).   The few advantages Bolster has over  Enfeebling: 1) Bolster's benefit lasts the whole encounter.   But only sort of.  It's more accurate to say that they only last until you get  hit, at which point the benefits all basically go away... 2) Enfeebling Strike's benefit only works  against a marked opponent.  However, if I remember, Paladins at the very least  need to stay adjacent to an opponent for his marks to stay around anyway, or  attack him, so this isn't that big a deal.     So when would I use Bolster? It's great for attacking minions.  You're going to  kill them anyway, who cares if they have -2 to attacks after they are dead?   This same logic applies to anyone you think you are likely to drop with your  next attack anyway. If you absolutely want to attack a different  opponent then the one you have marked. </blockquote>

Verification