Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="amusingsn" data-source="post: 5010028" data-attributes="member: 66766">I think the problem with the DM is that he's an old man who can barely keep track of what day it is, never mind keeping up with a dozen or more dragon magazines in addition to the "official" core rules books.  I know for a fact that since he really likes Saagael's player, he should probably make an exception for the Star Pact stuff from the dragon magazine.But truth be told, the player in question is heads and shoulders above the rest of the group, mechanics-wise, so the character in question performs above average for the party.  That makes it easy for the DM in question.On topic with the main issue of the thread -- It's been suggested the rogues are the weakest class.  I've seen rogues played in all three tiers and I have to say they are pretty consistently balanced.  They have good damage output -- a combination of a high hit bonus (and many weapon attacks that target NADs) and a large strike-class-damage-bonus-dice pool.  The downside, as has been suggested, is their squishiness.  They don't have particularly good defenses, and as a melee striker class, they tend to be tempting targets when the opportunity arises.  It's a give and take.It's been suggested that warlocks are the weakest class.   As strikers go, I have to agree that their damage potential leaves a lot to be desired.  And of course the whole "two-primary-stat" deal with the Star Pact warlocks is a bum deal, to be sure.  I have played an Infernal Pact warlock from level 1 to 28 thus far, so I feel like I can speak with authority when I say that any downside to my damage potential (my at-wills do less damage than the fighter's) is more than made up for my survivability and versatility (we joke at the table that we'll never have a TPK because my character can beat most of the encounters we engage in single-handedly, given enough time).It's been suggested that warlords are the weakest class.  My warlock's party has a level 28 tactical warlord, and I have to say, the amount of bonuses he grants the party is absurd.  A ludicrous +7 bonus to hit whenever we spend an action point for an extra attack, a bonus to hit when *he* spends an action point, for everyone.   I would have to say that, tactical warlords, at least, are not underpowered at any tier of play, and especially not in the epic tier when their bonuses scale off the charts.As for classes that might stand *above* the rest, I'd have to say that Fighters seem to be easy to do very well.  They can dish out good damage, are very survivable, have several abilities to control multiple targets (come and get it, level 7 encounter, omg -- don't train out of this one, folks), and their mark is ludicrously sticky.</blockquote>

Verification