To Mike Mearls: Melee training and the Battlemind

[Saeviomagy]

Which shows that people, for whatever reason, enjoy having a valid MBA, even if it's only used once every third encounter. So since people like this feat to increase their fun that needs to be nerfed?

How does "used to prop up classes" translate to "is used to have fun"? I'm talking about people saying "oh, doom and gloom, the battlemind is dead!".

Now, I personally don't think that the fix has that effect in the slightest, however the underlying issue is that (supposedly) the feat is required for any battlemind who wishes to be an effective defender. In other words, a single feat is propping up a class that sounds like it has some serious issues.

I'm not arguing that this is the correct nerf to make, or will solve the issues at hand, merely saying that this feat is not the flawless paragon of balance some people are trying to make it out to be.

Also almost every weapon based class takes weapon focus at some point. It should better be nerfed. And toughness is also taken way too often, better half it too.

Now you're just being silly.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Actually, the battlemind seems to be designed in a way, that he augments his attacks ot uses dailies to get a good opportunity attack. With old melee training it is a too cheap way around this drawback.

 

[FireLance]

Gandalf was a fighter in his youth, no?

You might be thinking of Elminster. Gandalf was originally a maia (the Middle-Earth equivalent of an angel or something along those lines).

 

[The Little Raven]

The wizard has to commit to quite a chain of feats...

First off, two feats does not a chain make, especially when the first feat may not even be necessary depending on other factors.

Secondly, losing a couple points of damage on a melee attack is not a huge deal for a class whose focus is specifically NOT melee attacks.

Third, if he wants to be a better melee combatant, maybe he should have picked a better suited class.

So Gandalf gets his charges nerfed because he isnt a member of a melee class I see... sorry Melee Training in pre-essentials space worked fine to open up the design and modelling space it basically back to 1e only fighters get to be even basically competant with swords bit... and it sucks.

...really? A wizard doing a few less points of damage (which is all the change does) with a melee basic attack (far from his area of expertise) than a fighter means that ONLY the fighter is even "basically competent" with swords?

 

[Garthanos]

Secondly, losing a couple points of damage on a melee attack is not a huge deal for a class whose focus is specifically NOT melee attacks. :

Its a bigger deal the less capable they are...
Adds insult to injury he isnt great to start with so you nerf him further cool beans dude... his toughness sucks if he actually wants to do this ... its not just two feats... that was all I happened to mention.

That fighter can do nice stuff in melee left and right a basic attack isnt even a comparison not even un-nerfed.

 

[Garthanos]

Note I do think a Wizard right now without nerfing is still behaving ummm less than brilliant if he fights like Gandalf.... so changing it so roleplaying the archetypal wizard like himself.. should be made worse than it already is? why?

 

[scylis]

Note I do think a Wizard right now without nerfing is still behaving ummm less than brilliant if he fights like Gandalf.... so changing it so roleplaying the archetypal wizard like himself.. should be made worse than it already is? why?

The "archetypical wizard" there also didn't really use many spells beyond maybe a cantrip here or there.

I say Wizards should cast way, way fewer spells and get mostly [w] powers.

 

[The Little Raven]

Its a bigger deal the less capable they are...
Adds insult to injury he isnt great to start with so you nerf him further cool beans dude... his toughness sucks if he actually wants to do this ... its not just two feats... that was all I happened to mention.

That fighter can do nice stuff in melee left and right a basic attack isnt even a comparison not even un-nerfed.

This single feat can swing your attack and damage by 6 points (-1 with Str 8, +5 with another ability score at 20) at first level. Weapon Focus, Weapon Expertise, and Weapon Proficiency can't even do that at level 25.

No single feat should outperform epic-tier scaled version of two other feats and a third feat combined. Period.

Note I do think a Wizard right now without nerfing is still behaving ummm less than brilliant if he fights like Gandalf.... so changing it so roleplaying the archetypal wizard like himself.. should be made worse than it already is? why?

No iteration of the wizard (or mage or magic-user) has resembled Gandalf in magic use, so I fail to see why they should resemble Gandalf in all other aspects.

 

[Garthanos]

The "archetypical wizard" there also didn't really use many spells beyond maybe a cantrip here or there.

I say Wizards should cast way, way fewer spells and get mostly [w] powers.

I am actually supporting somebody elses Gandalf build and it corresponds closest to the stereortype... ie those being appeased by 4EE are most inclined to see that fellow as the wizard.

I built him as an Invoker/Avenger hybrid... works fairly well but guess what he lacked ummmmm damn cantrips.

 

[scylis]

I am actually supporting somebody elses Gandalf build and it corresponds closest to the stereortype... ie those being appeased by 4EE are most inclined to see that fellow as the wizard.

I built him as an Invoker/Avenger hybrid... works fairly well but guess what he lacked ummmmm damn cantrips.

NO LIGHT FOR YOU! #cantripnazi

Put in that light, I'm fairly certain Avengers will be getting some help in the way of a feat or some more MBA at-wills which are able to be chosen by a broader-range of Avengers. I wouldn't be surprised to see both.