So, any consensus on PHB2 powerhouses?

[Klaus]

What about 16, 16, 12, 12, 10, 8?

A DB dragon sorcerer would have 18's in Str and Cha in that method.

That's more rounded out than minmaxed. With 18, 14, 11, 10, 10, 8 a dragonborn sorceror can have Cha 20 and Str 16. OTOH, his Con would likely get that 11, meaning he gets no benefit from his racial feature that adds Con mod to surge value, and gets no bonus to Dragon Breath damage.

 

[Stalker0]

So far, in a group with an infernal warlock and a chaos sorcerer, they seem pretty well-balanced against each other. The dazzling ray daily is comparable in damage to flames of Phologestus [sic], for instance.

To me, I think this is the biggest mismatch caused by the PHBII. The sorcerer seems like he gets everything that the warlock does (as far as a striker/controller) but better.

The warlock has to spend actions and can only apply his curse one per round for 3.5 average damage. A sorc with 16 dex is always doing +3, and often to multiple creatures. The sorc powers are pretty strong as well, I just don't think the warlock stands up.

 

[Felon]

In the game I'm playing an Avenger in, there are three other strikers:

1 warlock made by an experienced 4e player
1 warlock made by a 3e "grognard" (lol at the thought) who's never played 4e before
1 barbarian made by me using the playtest rules before PHB2 came out, and adopted by a new player because it was convenient
1 avenger, made by and played by me

The warlocks really don't seem to be doing much damage. The barbarian does a pretty good amount, though he's not completely optimized for it (he's a kobold, so using a craghammer...)

My avenger really does seem to do way more damage than the locks and a good amount more damage than the barb.

Yeah, I'm confused about the Dazzling Ray hubbub, too. That's equal to a 3W from a heavy-weapon wielder, like the fighter's Brute Strike. You know, the underpowered one?

Heck, the Barb can do 6d6, with the double-stacked attributes to boot, as a level 1 encounter! Of course, using that power too freely is not recommended...

Well, you guys are both touching upon the [W] damage discrepancy that unfortunately seems to be here to stay. For some reason, the designers got it in their heads that implement-based damage should be markedly inferior to weapon-based damage. Why or how they arrived at that conclusion is something they're keeping to themselves, and frankly there are surprisingly few people asking for answers. Those who've figured it out opt to steer clear of implement-users, and those who haven't think the discrepency has to do with particular classes rather than the unilaterally inferior nature of implement attacks. I'd send in an email for the podcast guys to answer, but it's been a while since they've done a mailbag episode.

So, end result: you wind up with warlords and fighters outdamaging warlocks.

 

[WarlockLord]

My guess: The devs hate the magic users. Before you attack me as a wizard whiner, I'd like to point out that Mike Mearls did state he liked playing martial characters better.

However, the conditions, orbs, etc, I think are supposed to make up for this.

EDIT: Not to diss anyone with "the devs hat the magic users" comment. I'd guess some of it is a fear of the OMG casters of bygone days.

 

[cdrcjsn]

The main reason that [W] powers are outstripping implement powers is that you can spend multiple feats to make your weapon powers better (i.e. you can spend feats to get superior weapons) and there are weapon powers that allow you to attack the same target multiple times, allowing you to stack your static damage bonuses.

The developers are aware of the issue I think.

For one thing, I see several feats in Arcane Power that will allow implement users to spend extra feats to increase their damage like weapon powers users can currently do.

The wizard is still a class that I would venture to say is stronger than other classes, especially at pargon/epic levels. People might not be seeing it at very low levels, but it really is a class that can totally change the pace and difficulty of a fight if played properly.

 

[yesnomu]

Oh yeah, I don't think anyone is denying that Wizards are game-changers at this point. The issue is Arcane Strikers, the Warlock in particular, and whether their damage is/can be up to par for a Striker.

When I've seen Warlocks in combat, they seem to do decent damage, but I pretty much trampled over it as a Barbarian. They do seem to have problems, like being required to take the worst at-will ever, Eldritch Blast. (Seriously, it's not like Rangers have to take "Longbow Shot" for one of their two...though they might as well, I guess.)

 

[Tarrl]

Could someone please explain to me how the Swordmage is broken?
Thanks

 

[Kinneus]

Could someone please explain to me how the Swordmage is broken?
Thanks

I second this. Really haven't seen it; played two Assault Swordmages and a Shielding Swordmage. Shielding Swordmage seems to compliment the Fighter nicely, but doesn't really outshine him. The Assault Swordmages are, to be frank, rather lousy Defenders, and instead feel like weak Striker/Controller combos.
How are they better than Wardens or Fighters? Or even, say, a well-built Paladin?

 

[DeusExMachina]

The warlock has to spend actions and can only apply his curse one per round for 3.5 average damage. A sorc with 16 dex is always doing +3, and often to multiple creatures. The sorc powers are pretty strong as well, I just don't think the warlock stands up.

On the other hand after level 11 the warlock gets to deal +3.5 extra damage, while the sorc gets +2. So while the sorcerer bonus damage starts out better, it will not go up as much as the warlocks bonus damage, unless you pump all your ability increases into it. Also the curse does give extra bonuses through the pacts, so I don't mind spending a minor action on applying it.

The sorcerer is better at dealing quite a lot of damage to multiple enemies, but I'd say the warlocks till has its own advantages in being more sneaky, more focused on taking out one guy...

 

[Victim]

On the other hand after level 11 the warlock gets to deal +3.5 extra damage, while the sorc gets +2. So while the sorcerer bonus damage starts out better, it will not go up as much as the warlocks bonus damage, unless you pump all your ability increases into it. Also the curse does give extra bonuses through the pacts, so I don't mind spending a minor action on applying it.

The sorcerer is better at dealing quite a lot of damage to multiple enemies, but I'd say the warlocks till has its own advantages in being more sneaky, more focused on taking out one guy...

Well, I'd probably expect attribute bonuses to be going to the sorcerer's secondary stat. It is bonus damage, AC, and secondary effects on powers after all. And in that case, the sorcerer basically does gain back about that 1.5 per tier, for the same damage as the warlock.

Our infernal lock would have loved to get Curse damage per target on her Howl of Doom and Fiery Bolt. It would even add an interesting element, in that waiting to use the power means that you can curse more guys, but you might miss an ideal arrangement of baddies.

Swordmages seemed great at low level, with nice at wills and early powers. And then it's like most of the powers don't get better...