Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gradine" data-source="post: 4718835" data-attributes="member: 57112">Does this mean that the player who plays their character as someone who takes it slow and safe is playing their character wrong? Again, if there are situations where Careful Attack/Sure Strike are better (and I suppose here I mean "feels right to use" and not "mathematically superior"), and there are plenty, why not try to work those in a tad more often than you normally would?Last I checked this isn't WoW PvP. I realize that the game's inching ever closer towards board game and away from role playing, but have we really gotten to the point that a non-optimized build is suddenly invalidated? I don't think it's necessary to take a graphing calculator and/or excel spreadsheet to individual powers or monster manual defenses to build a character. In 3.x I once played a 12-year-old telepath... I can assure you I didn't really optimize this kid for combat, and he was still a lot of fun to play. 4.0 may have (unfortunately, i would say) overemphasized combat, but they have thankfully given you a lot of room to play around with flavor. There's plenty of imbalance in the system- this was inevitable (see, for instance, Lead the Attack versus pretty much any other tactical warlord daily), some of it mathematical, some of it tactical, but if a player's playing the character they want to play, who cares? If your only goal is to do the most damage, take Twin Strike and never look back.I'm not going to argue that these powers aren't underpowered and that Wizards couldn't (or shouldn't) "fix" them, mathematically. You could always house rule it to fix if it that's what matters to you. Or if you have a player that wants a character who's more accurate but doesn't want to feel mathematically gimped. I dunno, maybe I'm the odd man out that always placed the feel of the character above min/maxing.</blockquote>

Verification