Not enough selection of at-wills in 4e?

[Hejdun]

Agreed, depends on the class. Some classes (fighter, wizard) have a good selection, others (like Paladin, Cleric) have far too few. Every potential build should be able to get a useful 3rd at-will if they were human, at a bare minimum. Ideally, each build should have at least 4 different useful at-will choices available.

I suspect that the PHB is a little lacking because they planned on adding several for each class in the ___ Power books. So eventually there will probably be a good selection for each class.

 

[MerricB]

What is this PHB heroes that seems to provide me all these lovely new at wills?

They are the miniature sets of PC Heroes. Each set of 3 minis comes with 3 new power cards. DDi subscribers get them as part of the compendium.

Cheers!

 

[Pseudonym]

Warlords are a little weird - ours has Opening Shove and Commander's Strike, so he tends to Basic Attack a lot.

Or Heal checks to trigger Second Wind or stabilize. A Warlord at-will to do that at range would be nice.

 

[fireinthedust]

I think what I'd like is more energy types to use for my mages. If I wanted a cold-swordmage or a Lightning-swordmage, or even just different effects with the energy type in question, that would be good. I don't necessarily *always* want to shift an enemy, or just do damage.

And yeah, some control-style effects, or simple buffs, would be good. I think even later-level utility power at-wills would be fun.

Encounter powers aren't bad, though. It's just one encounter, then I get it back. Not too shabby, really.

 

[FireLance]

Paladin: Paladin is the poster boy for needing more at-wills. Chaladins do not have enough powers for a human to be able to select three useful powers. PH Heroes came to the rescue of straladins with challenging strike but it is rather underwhelming. (For that matter, so is valiant strike--basic attack with a small bonus to hit is not sufficient to make a good at-will power).

The text for challenging strike in the actual card is better than the version (still) listed in the Compendium. The actual card states that when you are bloodied, the attack is against the lower of the target's AC or Will defence. This makes challenging strike very accurate when you are bloodied, since you get your weapon proficiency bonus to your attack roll against a non-AC defence. The downside is that you mark the target if you hit, which can be quite risky if you're bloodied. But hey, all in a day's work for a paladin, right?

Valiant strike also trades higher accuracy for higher risk, since you get a +1 attack bonus for each enemy you are adjacent to. So, if you're going toe to toe with four enemies, you are actually attacking at +4 to hit.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Maybe, but I definitely find the lack of vowels in your user name limits its pronunciation.

Heh.

Sorry. Call me Cedric.

cdrcjsn = Cedric Jason which is my first name (without the vowels).

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

The text for challenging strike in the actual card is better than the version (still) listed in the Compendium. The actual card states that when you are bloodied, the attack is against the lower of the target's AC or Will defence. This makes challenging strike very accurate when you are bloodied, since you get your weapon proficiency bonus to your attack roll against a non-AC defence. The downside is that you mark the target if you hit, which can be quite risky if you're bloodied. But hey, all in a day's work for a paladin, right?

Valiant strike also trades higher accuracy for higher risk, since you get a +1 attack bonus for each enemy you are adjacent to. So, if you're going toe to toe with four enemies, you are actually attacking at +4 to hit.

Yeah, I'm actually going off the card text since I'm not on DDI. Still, my general view is that bloodied is a state that you want to avoid whenever possible so I don't rate that part of the power very highly--certainly increased accuracy (and decreased damage vis a vis holy strike) is not worth an at-will slot. The real utility that I see in the power is at-will multimarking for the paladin--divine challenge one foe and remain adjacent while attacking another. Now you have two marks (though only one divine challenge). Or, if you do not have the actions to divine challenge a foe that you want to mark (if, for instance, you gave an ally a save with your minor and had to move) or are dazed and have no divine challenged target, it combines marking and attacking into one action. IMO, that is worth an at-will and the accuracy increase is going to be a seldom-used side benefit.

 

[roguerouge]

Kind of, yeah. Customizability seems to be low right now. We'll see how this edition holds up to 2e and 3e once more supplements come out though.

 

[cdrcjsn]

Well, both Arcane Power and Martial Power are out.

Do people feel that all martial and arcane classes have sufficient at-wills to choose from?

I think fighters, rogues, and wizards are fine.

I think the rest could use a couple more. Or at least racial based feats that modify the existing ones. Or anything that can customize the choices further.

 

[Wycen]

In our games every battle has become epic. As in we are lucky if we get 3 in during an evening. This is something we've talked about, (grind vs. solo/elite/brutes, whatever the arguement is).

My answer of course is that no there aren't enough choices, both in the PHB and with the number you get to choose. Sorry, I'm not purchasing all the book and I'm not a DDI subscriber, so PHB is it. But then that's just half of it. Once the battle goes into grind mode, widdling away with my at-wills is boring.

Most battles, unless we take cinematic actions, and that is something our group tries, are simply boring, at least to me.