Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4709791" data-attributes="member: 82106">Well, that is the main problem with 'range only' type characters that are supposed to avoid ever getting hit, they cannot take up their share of the damage being done to the party. In previous editions most of the reserve hit points of the party resided in the cleric, and he could dish them out to where they were needed. In 4e that is no longer the case, thus it is really imperative that all the party members take their turns getting in the way of enemy attacks if the party is going to maximize its chances of success. This actually militates AGAINST the wand wizard. The staff wizard at least has a bit more inherent AC, so he's going to be more able to move up and take his medicine. He's also got a weapon naturally to hand if he needs to melee. At worst at least he's capable of delivering an OA, while the wand wizard will need to have a weapon in his off hand to do that, and dagger is inferior to staff.If you actually look at what the best tactics in general are going to be, especially at lower levels, once the wizard has burned his really useful spells he is often going to help the party more by acting as a flanker and "damage absorber" than by the marginal utility of using weak at-will attacks. He can still fire off spells if he really needs to and either take an OA to do it or shift away, etc. The same issue presents itself with warlocks or some laser cleric builds. Though at least the clerics have the available weapon/armor proficiencies to be more credible when they do mix it up.</blockquote>

Verification