PHB 2 power creep

[yesnomu]

Sorcers are now the best striker, and make wizards almost obsolete (especially with Invokers). "Controllers damage multiple targets" - bah...
The only thing the wizard really has left is movable zones of automatic damage. Everything other "controller" thing they can do is done better by one or more of the new classes.

Argh, why do people keep saying this? Damage is nearly irrelevant to a wizard--they're all about the status effects/terrain manipulation. And no class on the books beats the wizard for status effects over large areas. From Thunderwave to Legion's Hold, they do their job very effectively.

I like my Avenger, but the power creep is very evident - add in the "Righteous Rage of Tempus" cheese on top of it and like I said, it's faster than a creep.

And this is what makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. Have you even looked online about them? Avengers honestly need a damage boost--they're pretty low DPR for a Striker at the moment. The Ranger is still top of the charts in damage terms.

(RRoT needs an errata, though, not going to dispute that.)

 

[DracoSuave]

And this is what makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. Have you even looked online about them? Avengers honestly need a damage boost--they're pretty low DPR for a Striker at the moment. The Ranger is still top of the charts in damage terms.

Ranger with twin-strike and two bastard swords and Quarry:

2pd = 2(.5)(1d10+x) + .75(1d6) = 8.125+x DPR where x is item enhancements and feat-based damage boosts.

Avenger with mordenkrad and 18 Wisdom and Oath (but no Censure):
pd + p(1-p)d = 2pd - p^2d =
2(.45)(2d6brutal1+4+x) - (0.2025)(2d6brutal1+4+x)
=0.9(12+x) - 0.2025(12+x)
=0.6975(12+x)
=8.37+0.6975x

The difference between Avenger and Ranger then is:

0.245-0.3025x

Which means that if 0.245 > 0.3025x, then Avenger does more damage.

0.245 > 0.3025x

Of course, that means that if x>1 then the Ranger does more damage.... so long as the Avenger does not Censure.

If you have Censure tho, the difference is a -lot- more signifigant.


That's the thing with Avengers tho. You -can't- spreadsheet them. They're reliant on tactics and factors that simply never show up on a spreadsheet.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I'm not really entirely convinced with this argument about wizard at-will vs invoker at-will personally. At best the difference is VERY slight indeed. Wizard at-wills do NOT suck. Unimaginative wizard players may think so, but that is their problem.

Avenging Light - Very marginal difference from MM. Some will argue the 2x range of MM makes up for this. One thing is for sure, if you NEED a range 20 at-will, then AL is worthless in that situation and invokers have NO range 20 at-wills.

Grasping Shards - attacks fort and is best compared with Scorching Burst. Definitely more controllery, we applaud, but slowed is a conditionally useful effect, damage is ALWAYS useful and SB wins hands down on that.

Sun Strike - Compares favorably with Ray of Frost. 1 slides, the other slows. RoF is a FORT attack, so SS is slightly better in that respect.

Vanguard's Lightening - Very slightly better than SB. The conditional damage isn't a huge factor really. Still a bit nicer.

Divine Bolts - Yup, it is better than either MM, RoF, or SB hands down.

Notice I haven't even compared with the 2 BEST BY FAR wizard at-wills yet, CoD and Thunderwave. Invoker has nothing to compare with Thunderwave. Some love it and some hate it, but in my DMing experience I've seen Thunderwave used to devastating effect a number of times. It certainly adds a dimension to the wizard at-wills that invoker totally lacks. CoD is always a bit of a hard case to judge. Could be compared with Sun Strike or AL, but it does again have its own unique uses.

I just don't see that overall wizard's at-wills are worse than invoker's. Imagine swapping the whole list from one class to the other with the obvious primary stat switched and wizard would not become a more powerful class. It would certainly become more powerful if you could pick and choose between all 10, but then so would invoker. I would venture to say if you had all 10 to choose from any given player would choose from both lists depending on what they wanted to build. The worst you can say is that MM and SB would be relegated to special uses (long range fire and situations where you WANT fire damage specifically).

People seem to WANT there to be a power creep argument. Well, if PHB2 is power creep it is the continental drift of power creep! The new classes and races are interesting and different, but hardly different from the old ones power wise.

 

[Herschel]

...At the beginning of every LFR mod is an entire section suggesting that you change the difficulty of the module to match your players (higher or lower). If they're steamrolling, increase away.

This is a very important note. LFR games are not campaign games, nor are they designed to be. You never know what you'll end up with at the table.

You coould have three Wizards (which happens quite a bit around here, at least in the higher level games), no leader, three leaders, no defender, no striker, new players.........you get the picture. I doubt many people go out to an RPGA event hoping for a TPK (although it has happened a few times here that I've seen) and the adventures have to be able to fit with whatever group you see, even if the highest Charisma is a 12.

If you actually have a fairly optimal group and experienced players they will have a fairly easy time.

Yesterday we ran throup IMPL1-2 with three Wizards, two Swordmages and a Cleric and had the most trouble in the second encounter (two Flaming Spheres did some nice things) and the skill challenge with no Charisma over 12 and nobody trained in Intimidate/one in Diplomacy w/ minimal bonus. The six wizard dailies were really nifty and judicious use made the first and last encounters much easier.

 

[Caliban]

And this is what makes me think you don't know what you're talking about. Have you even looked online about them? Avengers honestly need a damage boost--they're pretty low DPR for a Striker at the moment. The Ranger is still top of the charts in damage terms.

(RRoT needs an errata, though, not going to dispute that.)

And that only shows that you don't know what you are talking about. Avengers average damage is on par with the rangers or a little higher, when you factor in their increased hit chance with all their melee powers, whcih include their attribute bonus to damage unlike twin strike.

 

[Caliban]

If you're replying to a single person and do not welcome input from others, perhaps a private message would be better than a public thread? Otherwise, isn't it kinda the nature of forums that posting in them assumes a willingness for group conversation?

I notice that you didn't send this as a private message. Don't give advice you aren't willing to follow. Just makes you look like a busybody.

 

[hong]

"Busybody"? On a public forum?

 

[CubeKnight]

I notice that you didn't send this as a private message. Don't give advice you aren't willing to follow. Just makes you look like a busybody.

Lessee, the conditions were:
a) If you're replying to a single person
b) do not welcome input from others

So, as long as he either wasn't replying to you OR does welcome input from anyone else, I don't see how he's not following his own advice.

 

[phil500]

That's not it. I'm seeing brand new characters cakewalk mods that were at least somewhat challenging specifically due to options from Martial Powers (which increased the power of martial classes from PHB1) and PHB2.

But maybe your players are getting better at finding the really dirty tricks. the monsters in the modules dont get any better (in terms of builds).

what are the issues you have with martial power?

As to the versatility thing, anyone who plays magic the gathering knows that versatility creep is power creep.

I dont have enough experience, but one thing that jumped out at me from phb2 and martial power is how easy it is to get temp HP.

 

[Victim]

And that only shows that you don't know what you are talking about. Avengers average damage is on par with the rangers or a little higher, when you factor in their increased hit chance with all their melee powers, whcih include their attribute bonus to damage unlike twin strike.

An Avenger gets his attribute bonus to all his melee powers, yes. A ranger will usually be getting his attribute bonus more than once, since ranger encounter and daily powers (ie, basically everything but Twin Strike) generally hit multiple times with full attribute bonuses on each. Attribute and weapon bonuses several times > the same bonuses once.

DracoSuave above goes over Twin Strike versus Avenger attacks, to the ranger's advantage.

Who does more peak damage? The ranger, because of the possibility of double hits. Especially when you start to consider situations not centered around 50% hit chance. Providing a ranger with an attack bonus (Righteous Brand, Warlord's Favor, etc, or debuffs to the target's defenses) can significantly boost his damage. While not exactly maxed out, the Avenger benefits less from those effects. And it's harder to set up bonuses for the Avenger, since the positioning restriction on the Oath can make it more difficult to gain CA. The ranger with buffs will shred things, while the Avenger isn't doing much more than normal. So, even assuming a generous parity in damage between the characters normally, the ranger ought to be pulling ahead if the rest of the group is working. Plus melee rangers have an AC debuffing power of their own, even if they can't get help.

There's a reason that many Avenger builds in CO are all about using Avenger powers as little as possible - they're just not that great. It takes a lot for the Avenger to compare with fairly conventional rangers.