Philosophy behind Intelligent Blademaster feat

[aurance]

No, you are hitting significantly less often, if that 18 str paladin also takes the feat.

Yes, I am aware of that. But my point is for the heroic tier, the Cha paladin can hover around a decent 60-70% hit rate with OAs, which is about the same as their regular attack hit rate. Yes, Str paladins can get even better with it, or take a different feat, but that's not the same as saying Cha paladin OAs are weak.

 

[Drakhar]

I notice alot of people mentioning that one of the Swordmages marks lets them make a BMA, while true, it is important to remember that that build is the Int + Str build for Swordmages, and thus Intelligent Blademaster, while a useful feat, is clearly more directed towards the Int + Con build, letting you forgo Str completely, except for feats.

As for the Martial classes, all the melee ones except Rogues use strength, and rogues get such a high to hit bonus anyways that they make up for it without needing a feat for it, that's why there is no equivalent feat in MP for them, I do how ever think we'll see a Charisma based version for Paladins in Divine power.

 

[Hejdun]

I think it was necessary for the Swordmage because otherwise a swordmage class feature is basically worthless (the offensive mark). The paladin doesn't rely on basic melee attacks any more than any other class, as their class features don't rely on it. For instance, if a Fighter's main stat was Constitution, then they would probably have a similar feat or ability available, since a large portion of their class features are related to taking basic melee attacks.

 

[DracoSuave]

I notice alot of people mentioning that one of the Swordmages marks lets them make a BMA, while true, it is important to remember that that build is the Int + Str build for Swordmages

But Strength isn't going to be equal to Intellegence even for an Assault Swami. A dedicated Swami will have the powers that let him substitute for his Aegis BMA, so he'll mostly be using Int to attack anyways. Intellegent Blademaster is an extension of that trend, whereas the Con build doesn't tend to do a lot of BMAs.

 

[Leatherhead]

Swami

What?

 

[DracoSuave]

Swordmage -> SWM -> Swami

 

[fba827]

Between the two types of swordmages, the Assult swordmage is the one that gets to make the most basic melee attacks. For these assult swordmages, Strength is already an important secondary stat. So basically it is allowing to trade an already important secondary stat for the primary one. In the builds I have seen or toyed with on paper, this usually just means bumping up a net benefit of +1 or +2, or maybe +3 for the cost of a feat.

I am currently playing the "other" type of swordmage so my Str is tertiary for me (and Int is primary) and I would get my basic melee attack up a net increase of +3 for the cost of the feat. However, being this other type of swordmage, I make so few basic melee attacks I wouldn't consider the feat even worth it.

Conversly, such a feat to exist would be overpowered a wizard (as an example), switching from Str (a non-used stat and arguably a dump stat for typical member of this class) for Int (primary stat) since that would be a much larger bump (net change +5 or +6 for the cost of a feat).

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Out of curiosity, which classes would you say are MAD?

Fighters, clerics, warlord, melee rangers, paladins. Now they can sacrafice here and thier and not truly be MAD, but in comparison, Ranged Ragers and Wizards only need one primary stat and one secondary stat.

 

[DracoSuave]

Swordmages only require two stats anyways, if you build them right. You have three options, Int/Str, Int/Con, and Int/someing else.

Intellegent Blademaster allows Int/Str and Int/something else builds (Assault Swordmage) to use their Aegis well. An Int/Str will want it because even tho the bump isn't as large, they'll be using basic attacks so often it's a) easier on their calculations) and b) Even if the boost is +1/+1 it's worth it.

Assaults are constantly charging as well, and so Intellegent Blademaster allows them to continue doing so after they've eaten up their encounter powers. But what Intellegent Blademaster does -not- do is reduce the importance of Strength in their build, for they still need it to fuel their powers.

Int/Con doesn't care about BMAs or charges so they'll get less value in it over all. They might still -want- it, but that doesn't mean they'll find it as valuable. The feat takes less of a priority for them as they focus on other aspects of Defending.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The purpose if IB is to give a class with a primary stat other than STR or DEX an effective basic attack. In the PH, the Wizard and Warlock both were given the ability to make an effective ranged basic attack in spite of not having much incentive to invest in STR or DEX. The mechanism used there was designating an at-will power as a basic attack. Monsters work that way - if they have more than one at-will, one is designated as thier basic attack. There's no reason that same mechanism couldn't have been used with the Swordmage. Just write up a slightly sub-par swordmage at-will and add the special "this power can be used as a melee basic attack." Simple, elegant, consistent, and makes the only way of poaching the INT-based basic melee attack /paragon multiclassing/ (a generally sub-optimal option).

For some unknowable reason (probably a mild mental block of some sort on the part of whoever was assigned the task of writing up an arcane defender), instead of that, the swordmage - and thus, anyone willing to spend one feat on Blade Initiate - got a feat that changed the stat his MBA worked with.

That sets a dangerous precedent for classes or builds (like the 'artful dodger' rogue) who aren't /supposed/ to have particularly good MBAs, and opens up a way for other INT-heavy classes (Wizard, Warlocks, even Tactical Warlords) to get a better MBA than they should have.

Whether that's devestating to game balance, or just mildly inelligant is a matter of opinion.