Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 4670237" data-attributes="member: 82106">I still don't see how it could be ANY more clearly written, lol. The max damage a rogue could do with an SA would be 1[W]+2d6 (it could be more, but this would be the basic case). This damage is maximized. No ifs ands or buts about it, thats what the rule says. If they meant 'maximum damage for the weapon you used' then they would have said that. It says attack because it means attack. You are correct of course when you say that it applies to non-weapon attacks, but they still could have worded it clearly if they meant something else. Of course you can run it however you want, and maybe it will work better for you, but I don't think strikers are overpowered. Strikers have pretty much nothing else they do except dish out damage. That's a pretty basic function in the game, so being good at it IS powerful, but all the other roles can do good damage as well, plus they have other very significant benefits. When I started running 4e last fall I had this feeling that the striker damage of rangers and rogues might start to get out of line if you aggressively maxed your character and piled things on, but after running a whole bunch of encounters over the past 6 months I've changed my mind. The classes are remarkably well balanced as written. I don't think you'll critically nerf anyone by doing a bit less crit damage, but it will likely tend to drag some fights out a bit longer than they need to go.</blockquote>

Verification