Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MwaO" data-source="post: 6928015" data-attributes="member: 12749">The problem is that's not how combat really works, even for martials. Someone tries to repeatedly to trip you; it doesn't matter how inept you are at combat, it isn't going to work as well as the first time. Good combatants mix up their options - 4e just chooses to give the player narrative control over what they try to do and when and represent success with a hit.The outcome of making spammable options is that everyone ends up spamming the same options repeatedly. You can see this in 5e, where the -5/+10 damage feats really up the effectiveness of Advantage or a +Superiority Die to hit.Slayer has two issues:The Stances for the most part are junk. They add a non-worthwhile choice that's mostly about whether or not you do extra damage or move. That's complexity for the sake of complexity. Just give them a choice of extra damage or move before they make their attack roll.The damage they do is not sufficient in Paragon+ in a semi-optimized game and too much in a Heroic non-optimized game. The advantage of having 2 attacks and no other options is that the class is campaign-independent - you want to play one in a non-optimized game and you don't understand optimization? You'll do exactly the right kind of damage without much fuss. You want to play one in an optimized game and you do understand optimization? Again, right kind of damage, no fuss.And of course, rolling two attacks is fun. You'll usually hit at least once per round, so you get to do some damage every round. It is exactly what that kind of player wants to do - be useful, do a bunch of damage on a good round.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MwaO, post: 6928015, member: 12749"] The problem is that's not how combat really works, even for martials. Someone tries to repeatedly to trip you; it doesn't matter how inept you are at combat, it isn't going to work as well as the first time. Good combatants mix up their options - 4e just chooses to give the player narrative control over what they try to do and when and represent success with a hit. The outcome of making spammable options is that everyone ends up spamming the same options repeatedly. You can see this in 5e, where the -5/+10 damage feats really up the effectiveness of Advantage or a +Superiority Die to hit. Slayer has two issues: The Stances for the most part are junk. They add a non-worthwhile choice that's mostly about whether or not you do extra damage or move. That's complexity for the sake of complexity. Just give them a choice of extra damage or move before they make their attack roll. The damage they do is not sufficient in Paragon+ in a semi-optimized game and too much in a Heroic non-optimized game. The advantage of having 2 attacks and no other options is that the class is campaign-independent - you want to play one in a non-optimized game and you don't understand optimization? You'll do exactly the right kind of damage without much fuss. You want to play one in an optimized game and you do understand optimization? Again, right kind of damage, no fuss. And of course, rolling two attacks is fun. You'll usually hit at least once per round, so you get to do some damage every round. It is exactly what that kind of player wants to do - be useful, do a bunch of damage on a good round. [/QUOTE]

Verification