Race Character Optimisation: Just Choose Dwarf

[AbdulAlhazred]

It's a good build. But plenty of good builds already exist in the game. Deva's make great Swordmages. Elves make great archers. If they haven't ruined the game, I doubt good dwarven fighters will, either.

The point of all of this is WHY was this change made? The most sub-optimal builds are now a bit less common, but when they exist they are relatively even MORE sub-optimal than they were before since the baseline of character performance has just shifted by the average of a +2 in a primary or secondary stat (worst case you can at least shift your bonus to a stat that will probably contribute to your defense). At the top end you now have builds that were top caliber before that are (even if very slightly) better now. How is this anything but power creep?

Seriously, what did this add to the game? I simply utterly fail to see even the slightest benefit to 4e of making this change. At most all it did was reshuffle the deck as far as what are the best builds. Of course people can and will build characters regardless of any optimization considerations, but THEY WERE GOING TO DO THAT ANYWAY, and are no more likely now to end up with their particular concept being optimal or sub-optimal than they were before!!!!!! This whole thing is choice without purpose. It just boggles my mind how anyone could consider it an improvement to the game. If 3 years ago this option had been in the PHB it would be no big deal, it isn't that it is necessarily bad (though the reactions of my players so far have all been "that makes race even more meaningless"). The point is WHY CHANGE IT NOW when the existing system works fine? There simply wasn't a problem in need of a solution, but more like just some random urge to change things for the sake of fiddling.

 

[mneme]

2.) If you can't shrug off status effects as a defender, you built your character wrong. Course if you're a human Fighter you also built it wrong, so.

Is the contradiction intentional, Aulirophile? If you want to be immune to (save ends) status effects (not to mention automatically pop up in a round or two after being knocked out), you're a human warden.

 

[Aulirophile]

Not... really.

Circlet of Arkhosia+Second Wind as an Immediate Interrupt (/gasp, a Dwarf only feat)+Dwarf Only feat that gives +5 to all saves after SWing, and.. oh, hell, let us say a Nullifying Ring and assume an Epic character). Now any time you are hit with a status effect that deals damage, you have the equivalent of a Wizard's Shield because your Second Wind can interrupt the hit (tack on a Defensive Weapon, so +8 to all defenses). At epic you can easily Second Wind 2-3 times per encounter (or up to 5 with a certain Dwarf Only PP). But let us assume it still hits. You have +8 to all saves, can save at the beginning of your turn vs Stun/Daze/Dominate (which are the three worst Defender conditions) and unless you roll a 1, you pass. Or you can be trained in Endurance, sacrifice one of your 19 Healing Surges (you do have 19 Healing Surges, right? Because Str/Con Dwarves tend to) and roll a save against every effect on you that a save can end.

Gee that'd be useful on a Defender. Let us try it out on, say, an Earthstrength Warden. +2 (SW)+6(Defensive)+8(Con) to all defenses, as an Immediate Interrupt, 3-5 times per encounter. A Cincture of Vivacity and the Dwarf feat (gasp!) that adds 2 surges and con to HS value will make the "overheal" issue basically irrelevant.

So, again, Str/Con Warden > Dwarf. Battlerager > Dwarf. This one is kind of the most irritating, since before there was a really good reason to go Dragonborn with Draconic Arrogance, but being a Dwarf is just too good now. If you plan on upgrading to Plate Mail ever > Dwarf (Plate Spec at epic without sacrificing your secondary). So that would be... uh, all Str/Wis and Str/Con Fighters. So Str/Dex Fighters are the only Fighter that isn't best as a Dwarf now.

It doesn't matter how "small" people think the difference is, though the difference was small before this change. The difference is not small now. Any class that can use both Str and Con is going, by default, to be best as a Dwarf. There really isn't any reason to pick another race, because Dwarves have the best feat support of any race barring maybe Eladrin. Forced movement sucks for Defender, Dwarves can defend against it. Prone sucks for melee. Dwarves get a saving throw. The speed difference is irrelevant for half the people that go Str/Con, because they wear heavy armor anyway (only really even bothers Wardens.. and Wardens are happy to charge if it comes up).

 

[MrMyth]

Dwarves have the best feat support of any race barring maybe Eladrin. Forced movement sucks for Defender, Dwarves can defend against it. Prone sucks for melee. Dwarves get a saving throw.

1) Other races get better feat support. Dwarves are near the top in terms of defensive bonuses, but others get either stronger offense feats, or unique options and and abilities that remain competitive with what dwarves get.

2) If all of these other powers are what makes Dwarves so good, then gaining +Str doesn't matter at all, right? Or even if it does, you seem to be saying the issue is with the things you can do with Second Wind, specifically for high-level Wardens. That sounds like a pretty specific niche, and one where the thing that needs to fixed isn't dwarf Stat-bumps, but several other things entirely.

As it is, you've got an interesting, adequate build there that basically pre-emptively shrugs off damage and effects by paying healing surges in advance, instead of afterwards.

It's also a level of optimization that is so far outside of the domain of 95% of the people playing the game. Now, I'm not saying optimization doesn't need to be considered when planning out game powers. But I am saying that giving an already optimized character +1 to hit and damage... isn't a big deal. If the character is doing these crazy tricks already, they can still do so.

If they are an average character being made by your regular player? The dwarf fighter and the dragonborn fighter and the human fighter all remain good options. The halfling fighter and elven fighter and tiefling fight can all be built, and be effective. Being a dwarf isn't going to be 'too good' for anyone who doesn't already feel like playing it. No better or worse than many other standard choices already out there, and certainly nothing gamebreaking or overwhelming.

At least... nothing originating from the dwarven bonus to Strength. If some other element - some combination of items, feats, paragon path, etc - is too strong, that's another issue entirely, and not one particularly relevant to this change itself.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

1.) That is hugely relevant, especially in LFR and modules.

2.) If you can't shrug off status effects as a defender, you built your character wrong. Course if you're a human Fighter you also built it wrong, so.

3.) Tell that to Wardens.

Sorry that I reply that late...

Hahahahhaha built wrong hahahaha...

I am glad we never play in the same game...

edit: just to clear it up: there is no possibility to build a character wrong. Ineffective ok. Wrong, no. Especially not if you just use a different race.

 

[Aulirophile]

1) Other races get better feat support. Dwarves are near the top in terms of defensive bonuses, but others get either stronger offense feats, or unique options and and abilities that remain competitive with what dwarves get.

2) If all of these other powers are what makes Dwarves so good, then gaining +Str doesn't matter at all, right? Or even if it does, you seem to be saying the issue is with the things you can do with Second Wind, specifically for high-level Wardens. That sounds like a pretty specific niche, and one where the thing that needs to fixed isn't dwarf Stat-bumps, but several other things entirely.

As it is, you've got an interesting, adequate build there that basically pre-emptively shrugs off damage and effects by paying healing surges in advance, instead of afterwards.

It's also a level of optimization that is so far outside of the domain of 95% of the people playing the game. Now, I'm not saying optimization doesn't need to be considered when planning out game powers. But I am saying that giving an already optimized character +1 to hit and damage... isn't a big deal. If the character is doing these crazy tricks already, they can still do so.

If they are an average character being made by your regular player? The dwarf fighter and the dragonborn fighter and the human fighter all remain good options. The halfling fighter and elven fighter and tiefling fight can all be built, and be effective. Being a dwarf isn't going to be 'too good' for anyone who doesn't already feel like playing it. No better or worse than many other standard choices already out there, and certainly nothing gamebreaking or overwhelming.

At least... nothing originating from the dwarven bonus to Strength. If some other element - some combination of items, feats, paragon path, etc - is too strong, that's another issue entirely, and not one particularly relevant to this change itself.

It is relevant, because accuracy is a big deal. the -1 to hit was a balancing factor. Now it isn't. That's bad.

And all the above options work for Fighters just as well.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It is relevant, because accuracy is a big deal. the -1 to hit was a balancing factor. Now it isn't. That's bad.

And all the above options work for Fighters just as well.

Oh yes, really big deal, when you lose +1 to hit on opportunity attacks and devoted challenge attacks since you just lowered your wisdom...

the effect is +0 to hit when doing defender duties...

edit: and you could build an 18 strength dwarf before with

18/13/13/10/10/8 array, which was well enough for fighters...

 

[mneme]

Myth: I think the issue Auro is bringing up isn't exactly that the dwarf defender is "too good" (though they're very good), but that they're an unequivocal "best" where previously, they weren't. Having something be very good is fine; having it be the "best" is bad--because first, it makes character optomization less interesting ("must have" choices aren't choices) and second, people who make charop handbooks have only a limited supply of gold, and if they run out, the charop economy will crash.

Wardens are the real issue here, as wardens get a huge bonus for second winding, enough so that dwarves are a fantastic choice for wardens pre Essentials despite not getting a bonus to Str. Giving them a bonus to Str too makes them easily the -best- choice (though there are still other good choices...at least if you're building for epic play, due, as I mentioned above, to humans having as good synergy with Font of Life as dwarves have with the second wind feature, in a fashion that works with encounters of any length, rather than just ones that last 4-5 rounds. Across the levels, though, Str/Con dwarven wardens are scary strong, though).

Apropos of nothing aside from the mention of FoL/human save bonuses, I got to pull off a Silly Deva Trick for the first time playing Spec2-2 at Gencon. We were in a Bad Place in the first combat encounter, (playing with a controller, 3 strikers and a defender, with the only "leader" being the fact that two of the party were dwarves, I was multiclass artificer, and we had to fantastic heal checks in the party) and I'd gotten knocked down, with, IIRC, 3 party members unconcous and only one of the rangers and the controller awake. I rolled an 18 on my first death save...so my Deva used her racial encoutner power and "remembered" how to stand up when the chips are down (must have been a dwarf in a previous life, or maybe a human).


Back on topic...if the issue is with dwarven feats (rather than simply the dwarven class racial being overpowered with wardens, or in general), that's repareable by making other races equivalently awesome feats. I'd argue that humans, in particular, are pretty close; with the new power they get massive bonuses to hit in every encoutner they need them (multiple times, if one assumes that combat's close to every other encounter like it is in LFR), they autopass saves and are impossible to kill without running them out of surges or bringing them to -bloodied before they get a turn, and they get the best defenses of any race (particularly, again, at high levels where +1 to every NAD is better than +1 to AC, though comparing a human Str/Wis character to a Str/Con dwarf, you're actually talking around +5 to nads at 1st level, total, and it gets worse as you level).

Actually, that is a significant penalty to the dwarf that may make them less than -completely- optimal -- doubling str and con is a big hit; they get the lovely Str out of it, but get hit a lot more often. You need a great bonus for the Str/Con dwarf, even post change to be better than the Str/Wis dwarf with con as a tertiary.

 

[Aulirophile]

Oh yes, really big deal, when you lose +1 to hit on opportunity attacks and devoted challenge attacks since you just lowered your wisdom...

the effect is +0 to hit when doing defender duties...

edit: and you could build an 18 strength dwarf before with

18/13/13/10/10/8 array, which was well enough for fighters...

-1 to hit on everything because your str was behind. And getting an 18 str before was a retarded decision, it barred you from tons of feat quals.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Really? Actually there are enough feats out there that you can easily afford with 18 Strength and 15 Wisdom and 15 Constitution...

But obviously you are not interested in a civil discussion... you just call out badwrongfun and retarded and don´t even reply in a cohesive way...

-1 from strength +1 from wisdom on devoted challenge = +0 on combat challenge attacks. So you are objectively wrong when you say that dwarves now get +1 to everything.