Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
How is the 4e essentials Slayer??
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6907116" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>The converse problem was that with even fairly reasonable optimizing, and CERTAINLY with significant optimizing, classic 4e strikers put out FAR FAR more than those numbers. To the degree that you could expect a really top-notch optimized striker to put out easily enough damage once per fight to take down 2 standard monsters (IE one elite). Bloodying a solo on round one was certainly well within reach. This was FAR beyond what WotC had envisaged. Indeed the Slayer, seen in that light, is pretty close to being spot on the design curve. It can pump out enough damage on a routine basis to mostly chew through standards at the expected rates, and if you emit an alpha strike you can probably burn down a standard in one round, or so. </p><p></p><p>Yes, if you play up into the upper half of the level range you'll have to fish hard and use classic 4e 'stuff' to keep to that performance, which arguably may not have been fully intended. OTOH the laughable ease with which decently optimized, heck even just kinda haphazard, epic PCs can dispatch the earlier grades of epic monsters tells me that maybe it IS what they intended. </p><p></p><p>Its not that I disagree with you on the judgement that a Slayer is boring and feels underpowered at high levels, they do, but presumably what WotC would say about that is that, had they continued with Essentials as a product, that they'd have mapped out monsters, items, and other elements that would have redeemed that. I mean what else COULD they say? We don't really know what that might have looked like, though I don't really think WotC had anything in mind either at the time. </p><p></p><p>Anyway, frankly what I found the Slayer to be excellent for was to be a 'guest character'. We kept the character sheet around and leveled him up now and then so when people showed up and wanted to jump in and play they could just run the Slayer. It worked fine for the several people that played it at various times, though I don't think anyone considered it a very interesting option. Still, it was not too bad for someone that wasn't really up on the intricacies of 4e and needed to hack on stuff. Of course a bow ranger would have worked pretty much as well, modulo needing to be aware of when to fire off your various off-turn attacks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6907116, member: 82106"] The converse problem was that with even fairly reasonable optimizing, and CERTAINLY with significant optimizing, classic 4e strikers put out FAR FAR more than those numbers. To the degree that you could expect a really top-notch optimized striker to put out easily enough damage once per fight to take down 2 standard monsters (IE one elite). Bloodying a solo on round one was certainly well within reach. This was FAR beyond what WotC had envisaged. Indeed the Slayer, seen in that light, is pretty close to being spot on the design curve. It can pump out enough damage on a routine basis to mostly chew through standards at the expected rates, and if you emit an alpha strike you can probably burn down a standard in one round, or so. Yes, if you play up into the upper half of the level range you'll have to fish hard and use classic 4e 'stuff' to keep to that performance, which arguably may not have been fully intended. OTOH the laughable ease with which decently optimized, heck even just kinda haphazard, epic PCs can dispatch the earlier grades of epic monsters tells me that maybe it IS what they intended. Its not that I disagree with you on the judgement that a Slayer is boring and feels underpowered at high levels, they do, but presumably what WotC would say about that is that, had they continued with Essentials as a product, that they'd have mapped out monsters, items, and other elements that would have redeemed that. I mean what else COULD they say? We don't really know what that might have looked like, though I don't really think WotC had anything in mind either at the time. Anyway, frankly what I found the Slayer to be excellent for was to be a 'guest character'. We kept the character sheet around and leveled him up now and then so when people showed up and wanted to jump in and play they could just run the Slayer. It worked fine for the several people that played it at various times, though I don't think anyone considered it a very interesting option. Still, it was not too bad for someone that wasn't really up on the intricacies of 4e and needed to hack on stuff. Of course a bow ranger would have worked pretty much as well, modulo needing to be aware of when to fire off your various off-turn attacks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
How is the 4e essentials Slayer??
Top