PHB 2 power creep

[Piratecat]

"Busybody"? On a public forum?

He won't be answering you for a few days. I'm really, really tired of rudeness.

 

[yesnomu]

Avenger v. Ranger

Not only that, but the one thing that could bump up the Avenger-the Censures-are hard to get. A Retributive Avenger has to make sure his AC isn't too high for monsters to hit, and a Pursuit one has to work to get monsters to a place they don't want to be--otherwise they'll end up blissfully ignoring him. Not only that, but he has to make sure he doesn't get flanked or mobbed, which makes everything even harder.

I do think CO boards underrate the Avenger, since he's very hard to plot. But it's difficult for him to get up to the damage level of the Ranger, or even the Barbarian or Rogue. He needs some tweaks, not just RRoT-spam.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I won't say that the phb 2 classes are necessarily better, but I think they introduce new mechanics that are better...and will hopefully come back to the original classes with their respective splats.

Aftereffects: To me, this is the future of "save ends" type dailies. Currently I find "save ends" dailies to be last too little to compare against the sustain dailies that last the whole fight. However, with an aftereffect, you can now have dailies that last another round or two, and that's significant.

Technically speaking it was introduced in PHB1 - Disintegrate has it in all but name (5d10, ongoing 10 save ends; if the target saves it takes ongoing 5 damage, save ends).

But I agree, it should have been in more.

Another thing which I see in PHB2 which should have been used much more in PHB1 IMO is dailies which do half ongoing damage on a miss. Most of the pHB1 dailies which do ongoing damage do none on a miss. I figure that they probably ought to do half their ongoing damage, if only so that the poor PC using the power feels they got some value out of it!

Cheers

 

[Piratecat]

Agreed. Either that, or dailies which are reliable (you don't lose them if you miss.)

 

[hong]

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.

Critical hits can make a big difference for the avenger, though. They have roughly double the chance of critting, or better with a jagged weapon or various PP abilities. Stacking extra on-crit damage can go a long way to closing the gap.

 

[Victim]

Critical hits can make a big difference for the avenger, though. They have roughly double the chance of critting, or better with a jagged weapon or various PP abilities. Stacking extra on-crit damage can go a long way to closing the gap.

Sure, compared to most characters, the Avenger's ability to make an attack with two attack rolls really improves his chances of critting. But the ranger also has that benefit via just making two attacks. This is somewhat weaker in the sense that the ranger generally has two smaller attacks, so the crit isn't maxing as many Ws. OTOH, the avenger is limited to getting just one crit, while the ranger can rarely crit with both of his attacks.

Similarly, the melee ranger can use Jagged or Bloodiron (although that's more daggermaster...) weapons.

Our ranger would crit all the time, especially with Biting Volley and Elven Accuracy.

 

[DracoSuave]

I do agree with the point that a ranger using Encounters or Dailies will outdo the damage of an Avenger using Melee Basic Attack.

Of course, this is a strawman argument and should be disregarded immediately.

My point was that a Ranger using Twin Strike was doing damage -only a little higher- than an Avenger using Melee Basic Attack, with the difference actually being quite small.

So, yes, a Ranger using a broken at-will does more damage than an Avenger using nothing. But if we start breaking out Encounters, Dailies, and even Avenger at-wills, the situation changes. After all, Rangers don't have dailies or encounter powers that have -guaranteed- damage. The Avenger does.

The problem is that an Avenger -can't- be compared on a spreadsheet, because the Avenger is tactically-dependant. Player-skill has a direct effect on his damage, unlike a Ranger.

 

[Mengu]

The problem is that an Avenger -can't- be compared on a spreadsheet, because the Avenger is tactically-dependant. Player-skill has a direct effect on his damage, unlike a Ranger.

So, what kind of skill do you use, to make the DM attack you with other monsters to gain Censure of Retribution damage? And what kind of skill do you use to make the DM move the target willingly away from you so you can get Censure of Pursuit damage? Bluff DM?

It's very difficult to benefit from the Censures, compared to any other striker bonus damage class feature, and they rarely come into play. I agree there is player skill involved to try and make the best of it, but so does playing a rogue or warlock (ranger is kind of the brainless striker, though with some brains you can also help the rest of the party while you're dishing out your damage).

The odd thing is, the Pursuing Avenger is better against backline artillery and controllers, since they would be the ones most likely to willingly move away from the Avenger, but this also means they will be drawing crazy amounts of fire from multiple enemy back liners, and could really use Censure of Retribution.

Another oddity is that some powers like Avenging Echo, that would really make a Pursuing Avenger's target want to get away from him, have riders that are more beneficial to the Isolating Avenger.

I consider myself a fairly tactical player, but I'm being challenged figuring out ways of how I might be able to benefit from Censures.

Group tactics can definitely help. A Bard/Retribution Avenger team can have some fun with Misdirected Mark on anything that's not the Avenger's Oath target. This puts the target in a place where it either has to take a -2 attack, or potentially give the avenger bonus damage if it hits (using Bond of Retribution makes it better). This sort of synergy is not unlike the synergy between a warlord and a rogue for granting flanks with wolfpack tactics, and giving the rogue extra attacks when he misses.

I'm pondering if the reason why the Avenger doesn't have the explosive damage of rogues and rangers is because he has a little too much of the non-striker roles in him. An Avenger can achieve defender-like AC, has defender-like hit points, and a Pursuing Avenger can be sticky in essense by punishing an oath target that ignores him. Despite what the book says, I think the Pursuing Avenger's secondary role is defender.

Also Divine Guidance gives every Avenger a leader-like encounter ability to help their allies finish off their oath target. Turning the Barbarian's Avalanche Strike from a miss to a potential hit is a pretty phenomenal leader power (this is another place where party tactics come into play, oath targets are good targets for encounter and daily powers).

I any case, I think the Avenger is less of a striker than other strikers, because he does other stuff too. I definitely wouldn't want the Avenger to be the only striker in a party (some unique party compositions with lots of secondary striker roles excepted).

 

[James McMurray]

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.

I didn't send it as a PM because I welcome any and all replies to my public post.

 

[Jhaelen]

I didn't notice any power creep as far as races, classes, rituals, or items are concerned.
There's arguably a few feats in PHB2 that represent power creep, but they've already been discussed in expansive detail:

1) Weapon Expertise
2) Epic Fortitude/Reflexes/Will

What I dislike most about the former is that it scales so well. A heroic-level feat that grants +3 to hit at epic levels? Sign me up!

What I find odd about the latter three feats is that they grant an untyped bonus. If it was a feat bonus, I'd say they're fine and label them as 'pre-planned' power creep. As they are I'm not sure I like them.

Actually, I think it's highly likely they planned to include feats similar to these right from the beginning, they just decided not to put them right into PHB1. Similar to their decision to not include metallic dragons and frost giants in MM1.