New Errata/Updates at Wotc

[eamon]

The new double weapons don't completely work properly. They stuck the defensive property on the main hand end for some reason, but the definition of defensive requires that it be in the offhand to function. So no AC bonus for anyone using a double weapon, as written.

No, a defensive weapon grants you a +1 bonus to AC while you wield the defensive weapon in one hand and wield another melee weapon in your other hand.

And just to go into over-the-top debunk mode: even if it had said off-hand; the intent would have been crystal clear. Further, note that there's no fixed designation of an "off" hand in 4e in general, so, supposing the rules hadn't said other hand, and then supposing the intent weren't clear, it's not actually clear to me whether main hand vs. off hand is a prescriptive or merely descriptive phrase - so you conceivably could consider a different hand main or off for various purposes (it doesn't actually much matter much for almost anything that I can determine - just so long as the two hands are distinct for any given purpose).

Anyhow, fortunately the defensive property doesn't say off-hand, so we don't need to open any further cans of worms .

 

[Ryujin]

You may want to look at the Ioun Stone of Pefect Languages.

It's an Item Bonus, so it doesn't stack. The Skald's Armour lets me have some schmuck next to me take the hit, instead of me.

 

[eamon]

While I absolutely dislike that these items take up a slot (and the staff of ruin), and was originally vehemently opposed to their use, sadly, now after playing the game for a while, I think they are a required fix. Monsters get more and more hit points at higher levels, and damage output doesn't scale quite as fast. Without these items, combats would take even longer. If I had a way of incorporating a +1 item bonus to damage/5 levels into the system for every character, I would do so, and ditch these items.

But - that basically means you're saying they intentionally made must-have items that occupy a given slot and render all other items in that slot pointless for large groups of PC's? I can hardly imagine that to be true. Much as I hate expertise; that's just a feat amongst many feat slots - this is much worse, since it occupies a unique slot - that slot might as well not exist for any melee weapon or archery combatant then at all...

But as it stands, I don't think it likely that we will see any updates for these items.

Maybe. Frankly, I'd given up hope on double weapons too (that too wasn't actually game breaking, just disturbing), and dual strike before that (probably more problematic), so clearly they're willing to make real changes; who knows?

 

[eamon]

I have an Avenger in my monthly game (this Sat) [sarcasm] and I can hardly wait to tell the player who whines the most at my table that his 20 INT/18 WIS Deva and an AC that's 3 points higher than either of the defenders in my group that he's getting the nerf bat [/sarcasm].

On a plus note I am happy that his AC will no longer be 8 points higher than most of the non-defenders in my group.

(from memory - apologies for any mistakes)

10 Base
+6 (22 INT) - Yes he started with an 18 + racial here.
+4 1/2 Level (8)
+4 Leather (Enhance +2)
+4 Improved Armor of Faith
+1 2-Weapon Defense
+1 Urgrosh (Defensive)
___
30 AC (the same as a 23 AC at first level)
+1 (situational - but most every turn) Those boots that if you shift a square on your turn.

My sense is he's going to lose 3 points of AC. 2 from the lost Leather and 1 from the Urgrosh if an above posters assessment is correct about defensive not applying to the main hand end of a double weapon which incidentally gives him the exact same AC as the Paladin in my group (27).

He'll lose only 2 points; the defensive trick still works. What a disturbing build - what kind of attack bonus does he have? It must be terrible - right? No, wait, how'd he get that high a Wis (rolled stats?).

In any case, it's a great example of why Armor of Faith in leather needed to go - and that's before improved armor of faith (shudder - think of what he would have done with that :-D).

For that matter, the interaction between Hide Armor Expertise and Barbarian Agility is looking more suspicious too - perhaps hide armor expertise should make the armor be considered heavy for the purposes of class features?

 

[the8bitdeity]

Maybe. Frankly, I'd given up hope on double weapons too (that too wasn't actually game breaking, just disturbing), and dual strike before that (probably more problematic), so clearly they're willing to make real changes; who knows?

One of the devs in the char op section said that they've really formalized the update process at this point, and updates should be more frequent but wouldn't go so far as to say monthly.

 

[Markn]

It's an Item Bonus, so it doesn't stack. The Skald's Armour lets me have some schmuck next to me take the hit, instead of me.

The only item I looked at was the armor and only the level 3 version. I didn't realize the bonus increases with the plus on the armor. That's pretty handy. Not a big fan of the power on the armor though. Being daily, the once a day thing isn't all that great, IMHO. I have found the Shadow Warlock Armor to be awesome! a consistent +2 to hit cursed guys is fantastic and some other feats really make this armor even better.

Your armor certainly fits your character concept though, as does mine, since he is MC'd into rogue which also gives me the ability to pop SA at any point I choose as oppose to when circumstances dictate.

 

[Felon]

Their secondary role is either defender or controller so no, it really didn't need 'fixing'.

Ah, the "secondary role" rationale rears its en-vogue head.

I like the avenger class, but it sure seems like the designers didn't know where to go with it in regards to weapons and armor. With weapons, they are steered towards wielding the biggest weapon they can get their hands on by de facto virtue of having no incentive to use anything that isn't at the extreme end of the damage spectrum. That's a big hole in 4e martial classes in general I suppose. If you want to build some cool character like Enzio or Altair from the Assassin's Creed franchise, tricked out with all kinds of finesse weapons, it's pretty much rogue or bust, because everyone else is wielding a fullblade or one of its analogues.

And what's the whole deal with putting avengers in cloth anyway, then giving them a faux set of hide? Now you have some guy running around dressed like a wizard but swinging a barbarian's weapon--makes a pain to find a good minis, if nothing else. Just give them chainmail proficiency and then they are on-par with all of the other non-defender classes.

 

[Diirk]

No, a defensive weapon grants you a +1 bonus to AC while you wield the defensive weapon in one hand and wield another melee weapon in your other hand.

And just to go into over-the-top debunk mode: even if it had said off-hand; the intent would have been crystal clear. Further, note that there's no fixed designation of an "off" hand in 4e in general, so, supposing the rules hadn't said other hand, and then supposing the intent weren't clear, it's not actually clear to me whether main hand vs. off hand is a prescriptive or merely descriptive phrase - so you conceivably could consider a different hand main or off for various purposes (it doesn't actually much matter much for almost anything that I can determine - just so long as the two hands are distinct for any given purpose).

Anyhow, fortunately the defensive property doesn't say off-hand, so we don't need to open any further cans of worms .

I wasn't arguing about intent, I wouldn't have ruled it that way in an actual game regardless. But, yeah you're right it says 'while you wield the defensive weapon in one hand and another melee weapon in your other hand', I guess I misremembered it (that will teach me to post without doublechecking).

 

[Felon]

Any references to the Devoted Paladin/Healing Hands redundancy issue?

 

[Mengu]

But - that basically means you're saying they intentionally made must-have items that occupy a given slot and render all other items in that slot pointless for large groups of PC's?

Oh I certainly agree. That's the part I hate about the items. I just wish there was another way to deal with it, but currently it's the only (RAW) way to add the automatic extra damage.

Perhaps a house rule solution would be to allow iron armbands in addition to another arm slot item for the time being. You do have two arms after all. Doesn't help casters though, especially those who can't get staff implements. Too bad there isn't a way to finagle the character builder to comply with this house rule, like I do with free expertise.