New Essentials Builds!

[MrMyth]

People are talking about tossing fireballs. There really won't be much space for your barbarian/monk/fighter to go and attack stuff without ending their movement in the zone. It restricts where your rogue can go to flank things. It restricts where your warlord can wolfpack tactics an ally to get a flank. The occasional zone is good to have, but throwing around zones all the time, that are not ally friendly can be a big pain. I know I used to want to kill our own wizard nearly every time he used Icy Terrain.

Isn't the zone optional? If not, perhaps you have a point, but if so, it becomes a very useful tool in a wizard's arsenal. Use it in tactical ways where those restrictions don't matter, and all is well.

Sure, you've got fire blasters elsewhere like with the sorcerer, but why shouldn't you be able to build an effective wizard pyromancer?

All in all, I like these new options. They seem reasonable well done, they fit classic archetypes and add something to the game without breaking any real balance issues. That seems the mark of a good article to me.

 

[Mengu]

Isn't the zone optional?

Zone is not optional, and there is no way to end it before the end of your next turn.

All in all, I like these new options. They seem reasonable well done, they fit classic archetypes and add something to the game without breaking any real balance issues. That seems the mark of a good article to me.

What specifically do the staff builds add to the game? I think there *are* balance issues. Say a Human Staff Fighter sinks a 13 into Int, and picks up staff of knowledge. What exactly did that accomplish, or add to the build? A halfling rogue sinks two feats and picks up Stout Handed Staff, and Sneaky Staff, what benefit did he gain with those two valuable resources, other than he wants to use a staff and now he can?

So a staff slayer can do a small amount of damage to a few adjacent enemies if he chooses to use a d8 weapon. How does that compare to a fighter with Sweeping Blow and Come and Get It, who can use up to a 2d6 weapon?

I think this word "balanced" is being used for "worse than existing options" which is safe, but not exactly ideal.

Don't get me wrong, I love the staff, and love fire based casters, so I'm not really complaining about the fluff. Just the approach leaves me wanting more.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

immobilize action point fireball gg

 

[Badwe]

In terms of what these articles portend for quality and promptness of future dragon articles, they are great, and I like how they are presented immensely. In terms of what's offered in them, I feel like they're a little off the mark.


I can see the importance of supporting essentials builds, but the pyromancer is somewhat disappointing in that there's no way for someone, like the wizard in my group, to get to any of these interesting features because they're wholly uncompatible. He would have to scrap his entire character and start over as a mage. Mind you, it hasn't been all doom and gloom for him as he does fire/ice so the freezing burst will be a big boon when next they redo their powers, but a lot of these pyromancer features, in addition to being unattainable for a regular wizard, are unfortunate in that they step on the toes of the pyromancer article that came before (one that asked you to spend an entire feat to ignore only some fire resistance, for example).


Also, not that this wizard is likely to take it, but is it possible for a non-mage wizard to take the paragon paths in essentials?



as for the staff fighter set... it definitely has great flavor but i think the boat was missed here. A lot of the flavor talks about poor or secret combatants learning to wield a staff which doesn't then make sense for a knight in full plate. Same with the slayer, who favors offense. For either of these characters an actual halberd would have made more sense thematically.

 

[Klaus]

...and the staff knight make an interesting choice for a DEX Knight (light armor and all....) with melee training obviously

Reminds me of the staffmaster character in the first Beastmaster movie!

 

[Pickles JG]

What specifically do the staff builds add to the game? I think there *are* balance issues. Say a Human Staff Fighter sinks a 13 into Int, and picks up staff of knowledge. What exactly did that accomplish, or add to the build? A halfling rogue sinks two feats and picks up Stout Handed Staff, and Sneaky Staff, what benefit did he gain with those two valuable resources, other than he wants to use a staff and now he can?

So a staff slayer can do a small amount of damage to a few adjacent enemies if he chooses to use a d8 weapon. How does that compare to a fighter with Sweeping Blow and Come and Get It, who can use up to a 2d6 weapon?

There is room in the game for feats & class features that make sub optimal choices more palatable. These feats can be super efficient as they include a lot of catch up as well as the acutal goodness. 3e paragon paths often tried to do this but they rarely gave enough efficiency to compensate for the inherent badness of whatever they were buffing (sorryo for the waffle I cant remember any specific examples now, 3e is a distant memory for me)

With expertise Staff is a reach weapon so dazing a target with backbreaker is especially good. Not sure its -2 to hit good but still it allows you to be more controllery. It is a good idea that these builds do something other than just catching up on damage, for which you might as well just refluff your fullblade.

Slayers have no multi target attacks (or anything) so the rapid staff is a good twist for them too. Master at Arms means you can more easily use a variety of weapons - inherent bonuses would make this still better.

Anyway I have not seen it all in play but it looks like it might be good. Pyromancer is very dull, it's not even the first wizard fire build we had one a couple of months ago. I would much rather see a conjurer or diviner.

 

[MrMyth]

Zone is not optional, and there is no way to end it before the end of your next turn.

Fair enough. Still, plenty of caster powers can already be issues for party members, as you yourself note. The wizard who invests in this just needs to be careful about his use of his powers.

What specifically do the staff builds add to the game? I think there *are* balance issues. Say a Human Staff Fighter sinks a 13 into Int, and picks up staff of knowledge. What exactly did that accomplish, or add to the build? A halfling rogue sinks two feats and picks up Stout Handed Staff, and Sneaky Staff, what benefit did he gain with those two valuable resources, other than he wants to use a staff and now he can?

I think you are missing part of the goal of the game. It's to have fun, which for many involves playing the character they want to play. There is now a greater ability to play a staff-based character (an archetype many enjoy) without feeling like you have been crippled in effectiveness. Compared to other builds, you may be slightly behind in some areas, but options like these help keep you capable and give some cool options of their own.

I honestly don't want to see options so good that they become game-winners. Ones that are solid and flavorful, help mitigate weaknesses of the weapon, and provide unique abilities and benefits? That sounds perfectly fine for me.

 

[yesnomu]

I hope for a totemic weapon. My dwarf shaman and druid builds depend on the Alfsair item. Would be nice to dodge this issue, with the new item rarity.

With the change to implement proficiency, you can just multiclass to something that gives proficiency with the weapon implement that you like, like a swordmage for blades.

 

[Mengu]

I think you are missing part of the goal of the game. It's to have fun, which for many involves playing the character they want to play. There is now a greater ability to play a staff-based character (an archetype many enjoy) without feeling like you have been crippled in effectiveness. Compared to other builds, you may be slightly behind in some areas, but options like these help keep you capable and give some cool options of their own.

I would love to play a staff fighter who blocks and parries with his staff, trips people up, or pokes them in the eye, and occasionally breaks his staff in half on someone's head and switches to double stick fighting. But that's not what we got here. All we have is a few minor boons that do not (IMO) make up for the deficiencies of using a two handed +2 proficiency 1d8 weapon. Reach does make up for it a bit, but I'm not sure it's enough. I feel that this article written in the style of Dark Sun class builds would have been much better.

I honestly don't want to see options so good that they become game-winners. Ones that are solid and flavorful, help mitigate weaknesses of the weapon, and provide unique abilities and benefits? That sounds perfectly fine for me.

I think we have the same target in mind, but different expectations of what is solid and flavorful.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I've speculated that 4e Fighters & Rogues and Essentials Knights/Slayers & Theives would necessarily require separate support going forward, since the former can't use eachother's attack powers the way Clerics/_____priests or Wizards/Mages can. Aparently, it's quite easy to create support that only helps Mages, but not Wizards, as the Pyromancer illustrates: it's all about Mage class features, no powers for a 4e Wizard to poach.

A bit of a surprise. That aside, the Pyromancer concept is one I've always liked, and which the Sorcerer didn't quite deliver in a form I liked. It's been doable as a Wizard even with just the PH, but it was a build that took quite a while to 'mature,' because of the difficulty of overcoming all-too-common fire resistance. The Pyromancer completely eliminates that issue from 1st level, even more completely than the Dragon Sorcerer.