Rogues and Melee Basic Attacks

[ghearus]

The problem that i have with what you two are offering cadfan and Ghearus is that why should this type of feat be only usable for Rogues?

Because my feat is positioned around Combat Advantage, and Sneak attack penalties This design is intended to force the Rogue to make a choice between high-precision and high damage. (also note that I have edited the original feat).

Why not allow a Archer Ranger, or a Dex based fighter enjoy the benefits that a high Dex would offer?

Dex-based fighters are inherently nerfed as all of their powers key off of Strength. Archer Rangers *should* be disadvantaged in Melee combat; they are not built as front-line combatants, they are artillery.

Rogues, on the other hand, frequently need to be in the thick of things in order to be able to gain flanking so they can get Sneak Attacks. Allowing a Rogue to sacrifice some Sneak Attack damage for a higher precision attack, in my mind, seems like a very reasonable balance.

I think that my suggestion better allows for that. If you wish to use a short sword and have it hit with dex instead of Str, that's great, just prevent the damage associated with the feat and you have a well balanced feat.

I very strongly disagree; your feat is powerfully *unbalanced*, especially because it affects any Str-based power. For a few points of damage, all of your Strength-based powers can become more accurate, and you can potentially treat Strength as a dump stat. This is even more-so the case when you come to status-inflicting attacks where the status is more desirable than damage, and therefore accuracy is more desirable.

This is, based on my understanding, the reason why similar feats only affect a small subset of attacks, and only in certain situations.

Cheers,
Ghearus

 

[sdt]

For whatever it's worth - this is a bad idea. The Swordmage example does not apply because Swordmages are Defenders (at least partially) and Rogues are strikers. Rogues are already good at dealing damage, they don't need to be Defenders as well.

 

[Talon378]

Ghearus, I can accept what you are saying, and allowing this feat that we are discussing to apply to all strength based powers would be over the top. I do beleive, however, that my idea of making this sort of a change a feat open to all the Characters and not just Rogues is the right way to go. I also like the tradeoff of less damage for an increase in the ability to strike.

As for the Swashbuckler being a Paragon path for the Rogue class; that is certainly a viable idea, but I personally see him as a variation of a Defender more myself. He uses his ability with his blade to parry and dodge damage more than surviving it, but I definitely see him in that role more than I see him as a variation of a Striker. However, that is nothing more than a personal opinion, and it is possible that the character could be made to into both roles equally well.

 

[cmbarona]

For whatever it's worth - this is a bad idea. The Swordmage example does not apply because Swordmages are Defenders (at least partially) and Rogues are strikers. Rogues are already good at dealing damage, they don't need to be Defenders as well.

I'm not sure how increasing MBA damage makes one defenderish. 2-blade rangers, for example, have excellent MBAs. If we gave Rogues an ability that allowed them to mark targets (and there's already the Rakish Swashbuckler PP in MP, for example, that allows that), then that makes them defenderish.

My argument is essentially that front-line fighters (Rogues, 2-blade Rangers, Fighters, Paladins, Swordmages, etc.) should be able to make effective MBAs. Perhaps I'm coming from the position of a Warlord granting those attacks, but I rather like the idea of those attacks hitting and doing decent damage. Otherwise, my class (Warlord) is gimped by another class's MAD.

 

[Cadfan]

My argument is essentially that front-line fighters (Rogues, 2-blade Rangers, Fighters, Paladins, Swordmages, etc.) should be able to make effective MBAs. Perhaps I'm coming from the position of a Warlord granting those attacks, but I rather like the idea of those attacks hitting and doing decent damage. Otherwise, my class (Warlord) is gimped by another class's MAD.

You really aren't. Rogue melee basic attacks are just fine unless you intentionally choose to build a rogue who is terrible at them. If you know that you're building a rogue to be compatible with a warlord, then don't do that.

They're not full powered, but they're still ok.

That's why I prefer the small fix- a feat that helps dex/cha rogues improve melee basic attacks to the point where they match dex/str rogues. Otherwise it feels like giving the benefit of the str rogue to the cha rogue too cheaply.

 

[peliaos]

Okay, I know this thread hasn't had anything posted in it, but I'm going to put something I'm noticing as a problem with your "solutions" anyways. You've posted for Rogues and Monks, who do have strength as an optional secondary score, but what about the Avenger, who has the primary traits of Wis, Dex, and Int, but is still supposed to be a melee focused class?

 

[CapnZapp]

Since you are resurrecting an 8 year old thread, the main question is: are you still discussing 4th edition, Peliaos?

 

[jhingelshod]

I don't have the rules to hand, but I'm pretty sure that, in the years following this thread, WotC added feats allowing stats other than strength to be used for MBA's. You still had to use strength the damage bonus from RAW, although many DM's relaxed this in practice.

 

[peliaos]

are you still discussing 4th edition

4E, PHB2, page 32. Avenger. Divine. Striker.
Key abilities: Wis, Dex, Int.
Proficient with cloth armor, simple melee, military melee, and simple range.
Holy symbol implements.
+1 to Fort, Reflex, and Will.
HP at lvl1=14+Con.

Rather than type up what their fluff is, here's the basic idea in the form of a character from other media: Father Alexander "Bayonet Priest" Andersen of the Vatican's section XIII the Iscariot Organization from the manga/anime Hellsing

Has class features
Armor of Faith:+3AC when not wearing Heavy armor (you can burn feats if you want to use any other armor, just not heavy).
Avenger's Censure: divine aid in pursuing a single target via 1 of 3 effects chosen at lvl1 (Pursuit=tier+2+dex to damage till end of your next turn if they try to move away from you. Retribution=int x #"of times your target hits you" to damage till end of your next turn. Unity=tier x #of allies adjacent to your target).
Channel Divinity.
Oath of Enmity (close burst 10 encounter power that let's you target a single enemy. As long as that's the only enemy you're adjacent to, you effectively have 5e style advantage on attack rolls towards them. If they die before the encounter is over, you regain the power)

In the case of a Pursuing Avenger especially is why I bring it up, given that the +tier+2+dex to damage would also be applied to the OA from when they first move away from you.

 

[Nibelung]

Okay, I know this thread hasn't had anything posted in it, but I'm going to put something I'm noticing as a problem with your "solutions" anyways. You've posted for Rogues and Monks, who do have strength as an optional secondary score, but what about the Avenger, who has the primary traits of Wis, Dex, and Int, but is still supposed to be a melee focused class?

I'll bite and assume this was an honest question.

PH2 also have a feat called Melee Training, that allow you to use any stat for your melee basic attack. Later errata changed the damage bonus on this feat to only half modifier or your str modifier, whatever is higher (to prevent cheese with the Slayer class). Many DMs I know simply ignore this errata.