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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 5574402" data-attributes="member: 48965">See I don't find this true... it is pretty common knowledge that the ranger is objectively a better striker than the warlock thus to play a warlock is to choose to play a sub-optimal striker... now that's not to say one can't have fun playing a warlock or survive with one but it is a sub-optimal choice for doing it's designated role as opposed to a ranger.  Hmmm, I could see a case for this but is this really why the math was made this way or is this an emergent property of the fact that the game was made to have less swinginess and more accurate tools for designing appropriate challenge levels for tactical combat? I would say it's an emergent property because this type of stuff isn't discussed in the core rules for 4e. It's great that this is possible but is this the default expectation for how the game is suppose to be played?  Also, as a side note, I think you are discounting the vast difference in HP's that still exsist as well as healing surges... One good hit on a Striker can mean more than half his HP's are gone and he's bloodied while the same hit doesn't bloody a defender.  But this is still ultimately determined by the DM... not the rules. The DM picks the damage expression, DC, etc. and thus he decides whether the action to perform stunts, the damage from stunts, and conditions (which there aren't really good guidelines for on page 42) are worse, better or equal to encounter powers. I feel that the DM decision mode is further reinforced by the fact that this table isn't mentioned or noted in the PHB.  Well couldn't anyone who finds a way to increase his AC in previous editions do this (and the HP thing works itself out once a level or two are under a character's belt), and again I still think the disparity in hp's and healing surges still place pretty big restrictions on certain classes being able to take these types of out-of-role actions, unless it's theri secondary role and well then it's not so much you're making thematic decisions for your character as much as you are fulfilling the role you were given in the game.  See I tend to find the opposite in the games I've experienced... when a striker goes rushing up to hold the line, even for a moment or two... they often get clobbered... when a Wizard tries to do massive damage... well he usually doesn't have a spell that's going to allow him to do that. And focused fire is the way to go. Now there are exceptions like the godking fighter of 4e who, with the right choices can reach almost optimal striker levels of damage output and have the fortitude and defensive powers of the defender role... In fact I'd say his only weakness is the number of skills he gets... but I think he's the exception in 4e not the rule. <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank">Ok, focused fire was used on the controller on the dinosaur (good tactics and it works!!)... On the other hand the sorcerer (Striker) has to be saved by the paladin because he tries to go head to head with a creature... The fighter is knocked unconscious because he gets isolated...and has to be saved by the paladin... this almost makes me wonder how much better they might be if the Paladin weren't off being a lone wolf.</a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank">But this can be done in any system and I'm still not seeing how 4e as opposed to many other systems facilitates any of this better.</a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5569670-post148.html" target="_blank">I'm not saying this can't be done by a creative DM with 4e (though in turn I would argue that it cold be done in virtually any edition by a creative DM)... what I do think is that it wasn't designed with this specific style of gameplay as it's driver.</a></blockquote>

Verification