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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RLBURNSIDE" data-source="post: 5352811" data-attributes="member: 94650">strikersshould be doing a lot of damage. Having a 4d8 + mods at-will charge and 1/turn sneak attacks makes heroic rogues better than rangers, IMO. (although I admit, I haven't seen the math yet. in practice it's hard to compute. If a warlord has to decide to Direct the Strike on the rogue with CA, or the ranger who's already applies HQ on his turn...the rogue will get the MBA every time)In actual game play you can do sneak attack 2-3x per round for the duration of most combats, if you have a warlord and use tricks like using your action point to ready an attack one round, and set yourself up for extra SAs.If you're clever, you can also position yourself for SA damage on OAs (smart chess players can pull off the sneak attack trick quite often). Having a party support the rogue getting off a lot of extra sneak attacks is a fun way to put the damage, at least in heroic, way back in favor of the rogues, which is fine.It also depends on how cheesy is your Twin strike min-maxing. Not everyone uses frost cheese, or picks extra damage paragon paths to max out Twin Strike. Anyway, some combats last so long...if you reduced the damage on twin strike you'll have more people start yawning when killing a single solo is taking 2-3 hours to kill. I really have to wonder if people who complain about Twin Strike have actually played the game. Our rogue outdamages me, the party ranger, more often than not, with the at-will 4d8 charge and minor action + readied action sneak attacks going off 2-3x per combat. This might not be the case by mid-paragon, but having Twin Strike allows me to diversify on non-min-maxy options while still helping the party kill stuff fast.</blockquote>

Verification