Winning Races: Half-Elves

[kaomera]

Sure. Now we've decided that Half-Elves are so OTT powerful that we need to tax Dilettante with THREE feats(AIP,VM,AD) just to align it with what Humans get for free. A stat and implement synergistic at-will. Even that only works for arcane classes with arcane dilettantes.

Half-Elves can take their dilettante power from any other class, but that doesn't make every available choice a good one. If you pick a power that keys off of your primary (or a strong secondary) ability you don't need to worry about Adept Dilettante (unless you just happen to want a MC feat with no ability requirements at all, for some reason...). If you pick a weapon power or an implement power that matches your MC feat, you don't need AIP (although it might still be nice to keep from having to juggle implements). The Star of Corellon can cover arcane powers for a character able to use it (and it frees up a hand, and a Half-Elf worshiping the god of Elves isn't too strange...) Versatile Master is too good to pass up, I agree. It's the price you pay for getting a larger set of powers to choose from than Humans (even after you exclude poor choices you prolly have 2 or more classes worth; Humans get one class, minus the two at-wills that where best for them).

IMHO: In the end, a lot of dilettante options do run afoul of the need to keep the most-powerful combos possible (rogue w/ twin strike, frex) in line. The feats are there to let you get at least some use out of otherwise poor choices, not to make every choice great. I think Dilettante is fine, but unlike Elves or Humans Half-Elves don't really get a particularly sweet secondary benefit like the Human skill bonus or Wild Step.

 

[Marshall]

Half-Elves can take their dilettante power from any other class, but that doesn't make every available choice a good one. If you pick a power that keys off of your primary (or a strong secondary) ability you don't need to worry about Adept Dilettante (unless you just happen to want a MC feat with no ability requirements at all, for some reason...).

True. But you've just eliminated at least 2/3 of the options.(even before you get to powers that require 2 stats)

If you pick a weapon power or an implement power that matches your MC feat, you don't need AIP (although it might still be nice to keep from having to juggle implements). The Star of Corellon can cover arcane powers for a character able to use it (and it frees up a hand, and a Half-Elf worshiping the god of Elves isn't too strange...)

....and you've just reduced the options even more...

Versatile Master is too good to pass up, I agree. It's the price you pay for getting a larger set of powers to choose from than Humans (even after you exclude poor choices you prolly have 2 or more classes worth; Humans get one class, minus the two at-wills that where best for them).

Right. The price is that its reduced to an Encounter power and/or costs a feat to make it at-will. That you have to spend a feat to actually make the power realistically broader than a Humans 3rd class at-will is where this article fails. It looks like WotC realized that and added the MC rider to sweeten the pot a little, then promptly over-reacted and actually made it into a penalty in most cases(If you want this feat you lose all other MC options). I'm just hoping that they realize the mistake and re-fix it.

IMHO: In the end, a lot of dilettante options do run afoul of the need to keep the most-powerful combos possible (rogue w/ twin strike, frex) in line. The feats are there to let you get at least some use out of otherwise poor choices, not to make every choice great. I think Dilettante is fine, but unlike Elves or Humans Half-Elves don't really get a particularly sweet secondary benefit like the Human skill bonus or Wild Step.

Uh, that combo is just as viable now as it was before the article.
I'd also like to see a feat that let a Half-Elf get Elven Accuracy, even trading Dilettante for it.

 

[kaomera]

True. But you've just eliminated at least 2/3 of the options.(even before you get to powers that require 2 stats)

I can see your point - it sucks that some otherwise cool / flavorful options don't really work out that well. But the "eliminated" options aren't gone, they're just not usually going to be a good choice. And the feats you list as taxes will let you use many of these options effectively, if you're willing to take them.

It's been my experience that Half-Elves usually have better options for their Dilettante power than humans have for their third at-will. Humans are picking from a class that they've already grabbed the best two options from, Half-Elves should have a choice from at least 2 or 3 class's lists. I've seen characters that just really don't use their second at-will, let alone a third.

I don't believe the intention behind Adept Dilettante was to give out a second MC to non-bards. Rather I think that it reinforces the fact that Dilettante and MCing (usually) enhance and support each other. You can get around this if you're playing a weapon-user and take a weapon attack with a complementary stat, but I think that's more a result of the way the implement rules are written than Dilettante itself.

An example: if I'm creating an Artful-Dodger Rogue (taking advantage of the Half-Elf Cha bonus) If I grab Fading Strike (or any Dex- or Cha-based weapon attack) I don't need to get anything else, and I'm not locked into any specific MC. If I take Bond of Pursuit (or any other non-Dex / Cha weapon attack) I'm going to want Adept Dilettante to swap the stat out for Cha, and that will in turn lock me into Avenger MCs (at least in this case) - if I've got 13 Str I'll probably pick up Soldier of the Faith, because OoE is rather nice. If I decide I want Burning Spray (or any other implement attack), then I'm pretty much locking myself down MC-wise (by 6th level, at least) because I'm going to need the enhancement bonus; of course I could always grab Arcane Implement Proficiency with the dagger I'm already using (mitigates the need to own or juggle multiple items, only works with arcane classes of course) in which case I could grab any arcane MC (but I'd have to do so before I got AIP, of course). Alternately, I possibly could grab an appropriate divine MC and Star of Corellon. I really wouldn't consider taking an implement power that keyed off of anything but my primary or secondary ability.

I don't have a real problem with any of the above - to me it's just a part of building a 4e character. The options are there, you just need to pick which ones you're going to go after. Trying to do everything doesn't work. The three options I've listed above are three different characters, they're going to take different options and I'll need to work to make the most of the ones I pick.

 

[Prism]

So they went from overpowered to absolute crap, havent they got the brains to find something in the middle.

I mean at-will compared to once per encounter on everything is like, what shall we say, chalk and cheese, super and .

A feat that modifies an encounter power seems about right to me. Having it unintentionally be usable at will due to another feat is a bit too good. There are many other feats that affect second wind, channel divinity, fey step, elven accuracy etc that can only be used once per encounter. Besides, if we are talking about effortless dilettante how many times per encounter does a character typically charge or use a OA

 

[Marshall]

I can see your point - it sucks that some otherwise cool / flavorful options don't really work out that well. But the "eliminated" options aren't gone, they're just not usually going to be a good choice. And the feats you list as taxes will let you use many of these options effectively, if you're willing to take them.

Thats an awfully fine distinction. You've just reduced Dilettante to "the best of a series of bad options."

It's been my experience that Half-Elves usually have better options for their Dilettante power than humans have for their third at-will. Humans are picking from a class that they've already grabbed the best two options from, Half-Elves should have a choice from at least 2 or 3 class's lists. I've seen characters that just really don't use their second at-will, let alone a third.

Sure. There is always the "ranger argument" and for the most part 'weapon' powers are only restricted by the ability scores. However when you look at implement classes you add another level of restriction that reduces your options down to....your starting class.

I don't believe the intention behind Adept Dilettante was to give out a second MC to non-bards. Rather I think that it reinforces the fact that Dilettante and MCing (usually) enhance and support each other.

Nope, Just dont see it. It's be great if it actually worked that way, but there is no incentive to follow it.

You can get around this if you're playing a weapon-user and take a weapon attack with a complementary stat, but I think that's more a result of the way the implement rules are written than Dilettante itself.

Thats what I've been saying! The implement rules gut the utility of Dilettante for implement classes.

snip example

If you need AD to switch a stat in an at-will than you probably dont have the stats to take advantage of the MC class that comes along with it. In your example, the Avenger MC feats require WIS 15. You arent going to have that and now you cant take an MC feat to go with your good DEX/CHA. ie You're penalized for actually getting the use out of your racial ability that it was supposed to have.

I don't have a real problem with any of the above - to me it's just a part of building a 4e character. The options are there, you just need to pick which ones you're going to go after. Trying to do everything doesn't work. The three options I've listed above are three different characters, they're going to take different options and I'll need to work to make the most of the ones I pick.

How many races need to spend a feat to use their racial ability? If you're going to make that decision as a designer...at least make the feats useful.

 

[Nifft]

How many races need to spend a feat to use their racial ability? If you're going to make that decision as a designer...at least make the feats useful.

For a long time, many Humans had literally nothing they could do to make their extra At-Will usable. As of the PHB, Human Clerics, Rangers, Paladins and Cha-based Warlocks were out in the cold.

Adding splatbooks helped Humans immensely, and it's helping Half-Elves immensely too.

Not all races are equally good with any given class and/or primary attack stat.

Cheers, -- N

 

[kaomera]

Thats an awfully fine distinction. You've just reduced Dilettante to "the best of a series of bad options."

I think you have higher expectations of Dilettante than I do. You state that "The implement rules gut the utility of Dilettante for implement classes.", but I don't see that. I see the implement rules restricting a character's access to certain Dilettante powers if the player isn't willing to invest in an MC feat, but that really doesn't ruin Dilettante for me. It's not the best racial ability out there - I can totally see where most players aren't going to be as excited about an extra off-class at-will as they would be about teleporting or breathing fire or re-rolling an attack roll. But Half-Elves don't teleport or breath fire... OK, they could be awesomely accurate, but 4e decided to give that flavor to Elves. Half-Elves are versatile, they pick up all sorts of stuff that the average character wouldn't, and it gives them extra capabilities. Sure, that could include implement use, but it doesn't. I don't think it would break anything if it did include implement use, but I also don't think it really breaks Dilettante that it doesn't.

I don't believe the intention behind Adept Dilettante was to give out a second MC to non-bards. Rather I think that it reinforces the fact that Dilettante and MCing (usually) enhance and support each other.

Nope, Just dont see it. It's be great if it actually worked that way, but there is no incentive to follow it.

I don't really understand what you're saying here. If you really need two multiclasses, there's always the Windrise Ports background.

If you need AD to switch a stat in an at-will than you probably dont have the stats to take advantage of the MC class that comes along with it. In your example, the Avenger MC feats require WIS 15. You arent going to have that and now you cant take an MC feat to go with your good DEX/CHA. ie You're penalized for actually getting the use out of your racial ability that it was supposed to have.

Note that Disciple of Divine Wrath is Wis 13. Adept Dilettante has no ability requirements, and you don't need any other MC feat for a weapon power. You could even take further power-swap feats after taking AD, since it counts as a class-specific multiclass feat.

How many races need to spend a feat to use their racial ability? If you're going to make that decision as a designer...at least make the feats useful.

You don't need any feats to use Dilettante. You need feats to pick certain Dilettante powers, but there are other powers available. And the MC feats are generally pretty good. You only need Adept Dilettante if you want certain powers that normally wouldn't be good options. They wouldn't normally be good options. So, IMO, Adept Dilettante gives you more options. I don't see how that's bad.

 

[Marshall]

I think you have higher expectations of Dilettante than I do. You state that "The implement rules gut the utility of Dilettante for implement classes.", but I don't see that. I see the implement rules restricting a character's access to certain Dilettante powers if the player isn't willing to invest in an MC feat, but that really doesn't ruin Dilettante for me.

What good is the MC feat? You might gain proficiency in some implements, but again, unless you already use those implements you now need to upkeep another implement(and find a slot to hold it) just to use one power....again, Gutted.

It's not the best racial ability out there - I can totally see where most players aren't going to be as excited about an extra off-class at-will as they would be about teleporting or breathing fire or re-rolling an attack roll. But Half-Elves don't teleport or breath fire... OK, they could be awesomely accurate, but 4e decided to give that flavor to Elves. Half-Elves are versatile, they pick up all sorts of stuff that the average character wouldn't, and it gives them extra capabilities. Sure, that could include implement use, but it doesn't. I don't think it would break anything if it did include implement use, but I also don't think it really breaks Dilettante that it doesn't.

It just makes the power useless for implement using classes, the only worse option is the Minotaurs Goring Charge.

I don't really understand what you're saying here. If you really need two multiclasses, there's always the Windrise Ports background.

Dilettante <> Multiclass. They arent connected unless you build the PC around them.
Lets use an example here, take a Half-Elf Bard. This guy should be the master of Multiclassing, but the only implement he can use is the Wand. This restriction undercuts all the supposed freedom the class has. Realistically, if he wants to use his Dilettante power he needs to find a CHA based Wand or Weapon attack. Wand Classes? Artificer, Wizard, Warlock. Only Warlock uses CHA. CHA/Weapon? ...Assassin?, Paladin?
So realistically here the Bard MUST CHOOSE a Warlock power. AIP could open up SOR powers(at the cost of a feat), while AD and CV open other classes but again you are spending a feat just to get viability out of the option you should get for free.

Note that Disciple of Divine Wrath is Wis 13. Adept Dilettante has no ability requirements, and you don't need any other MC feat for a weapon power. You could even take further power-swap feats after taking AD, since it counts as a class-specific multiclass feat.

and now you're stuck with an MC that doesnt align with your ability scores. Unless you're a Bard with CV those power swap feats are even worse options.

You don't need any feats to use Dilettante. You need feats to pick certain Dilettante powers, but there are other powers available. And the MC feats are generally pretty good. You only need Adept Dilettante if you want certain powers that normally wouldn't be good options. They wouldn't normally be good options. So, IMO, Adept Dilettante gives you more options. I don't see how that's bad.

It doesnt. For every choice it gives, it takes away another.

 

[kaomera]

Marshall, I think you're seeing the cup as half-empty, whereas I see it as Half-Elvish.

(OK, sorry, that was bad...)

I'm going to continue this because the discussion interests me, and you've actually making me think, but I don't think either of us are going to change each-other's minds... And that's cool, y'know. I just don't want to come off like I think you're wrong for thinking the way you do about Half-Elves. If they don't work for you and you'd really like them to, I agree that pretty much sucks. As a DM that's the sort of thing that I'd want to sit down and discuss a house-rule for.

Plenty of DMs have houseruled Expertise into their games, this is just a less general issue. Unless the other players object it's not out of bounds to handwave a feat that you don't really want to take, but feel you need to. Do you have any specific examples of a case where you really want a particular at-will (or one of a particular type / set of at-wills) for a specific character concept and it's an undue burden to make that work?

I do personally look at Eldritch Strike as a kind of "default choice" for Dilettante. It works off of either of your racial abilities (so almost certainly a primary or at least secondary), doesn't require an implement, and neither being an Arcane attack or the push are half-bad. But there are always going to be other viable options. The real "pitfall" tends to be the same one that Humans can face: your normal at-wills can be so good that you really never end up using your third. (And, honestly, isn't that the kind of problem that's good to have?) Half-Elves at least have more varied choices, making it easier to grab something "different", even if you only end up using it once in a while. Eldritch Strike, frex, can be pretty damned nice for a ranged character who gets stuck in melee: take one hand off of your bow, minor action to draw a weapon (or use your bare hand at low levels, or use your staff, or etc.), Eldritch Strike to push the enemy out of OA range, and then run! If you aren't getting cornered by Lurkers and such all the time (or, specifically: more than once per encounter), you could probably even skip Versatile Master if you wanted to...

What good is the MC feat?

The class-specific MC feats are one of the first things I grab in 4e, pretty much that or a racial superior weapon feat (Dwarven Weapon Training, Eladrin Soldier, etc.). An MC feat gets you another trained skill (and, IME, the party really wants 5 more trained skills), and another bonus - usually a pretty good one for a feat. And I can find all sorts of neat stuff to grab from MCing, even without any power-swapping. Feats, Paragon Paths... There's some nice options there.

again, Gutted.

OK, I can agree that mixing implements is usually not a great idea. Part of what I've been trying to say is that just because not every option is great, that doesn't make Dilettante useless. And you can get around the issue in some cases (Arcane Implement Proficiency, Star of Corellon), so those still can be viable options. Yes, you have to be willing to take at least an MC feat to support an implement Dilettante power. Look at pretty much any class - there are going to be a number of powers that just don't work for a given build. Cleric, for instance: not every Cleric is going to pump Str and Wis, and that's going to limit the character's options. That doesn't make Cleric a bad class.

Dilettante <> Multiclass. They arent connected unless you build the PC around them.
Lets use an example here, take a Half-Elf Bard. This guy should be the master of Multiclassing, but the only implement he can use is the Wand. This restriction undercuts all the supposed freedom the class has. Realistically, if he wants to use his Dilettante power he needs to find a CHA based Wand or Weapon attack. Wand Classes? Artificer, Wizard, Warlock. Only Warlock uses CHA. CHA/Weapon? ...Assassin?, Paladin?
So realistically here the Bard MUST CHOOSE a Warlock power. AIP could open up SOR powers(at the cost of a feat), while AD and CV open other classes but again you are spending a feat just to get viability out of the option you should get for free.

Bard gets to use Bard implements (ie: a wand) with Bard powers, and that's it. If he Dilettante's a Wizard power, he can't use an implement with it, unless he picks up a Wizard MC feat (which specifically lets him use Wizard implements, including a wand, with Wizard powers). Alternately he can take Arcane Implement Proficiency and pick any implement from any arcane class and use that for all of his arcane implement powers. MC feats make Dilettante implement powers work, that's why I say they're connected. Without them you're limited to weapon powers or AIP or Star of Corellon.

I'm making a Bard right now. I'm going Cunning, because I like turning the party into near-Goblins, so my Dex starts at 16 at 1st level. I'm going mainly melee weapon powers (I have a bow-based build but the way the party seems to be shaping up I think the longsword is a better option). And I want a Divine MC at some point for flavor / paragon path. My short-list of Dilettante powers is: Ardent Strike, Virtuous Strike, Eldritch Strike, Intuitive Strike*, Furious Smash*, Luring Strike, Commander's Strike, Righteous Brand* Demoralizing Strike, and Ire Strike; I could also include: Pressing Strike*, Demon Dance*, Astral Seal*&, Dragon's Tail*&, Thorn Strike*, Eyebite&, Wolf Pack Tactics*, & Winged Horde&, but I think ten is plenty to choose from. Powers marked with a * would want Adept Dilettante, those with & would want some form of implement-correcting.

The only power I really looked closely at but couldn't see making work was Mantle of the Infidel (Swordmage in the party), specifically because Invokers don't use Holy Symbols. If I was going Prescient I might go for it - but Acolyte of Divine Secrets can get it for me once per encounter, anyway. I could take Grasping Shards from the MC feat, but I don't want to load up on too many ranged powers for a mostly-melee character. Then I'd probably AIP into rods so I wouldn't have to juggle a wand.

It doesnt. For every choice it gives, it takes away another.

I don't understand this assertion. How does Adept Dilettante take any options away? Am I just misunderstanding your point here?

 

[Obryn]

As written, the feats were hugely broken.

IMO, "Use your dilettante power as a basic attack 1/encounter" is still about par with most of the rest of the feats in the game. And, in fact, it can still be an outstanding choice for certain Dilettante powers - possibly worth retraining a Heroic feat for. There is no sense in which making a Dilettante better at what they're dabbling in than a full member of the class, and no sense in making said dabbler better at what they're dabbling in than they are at their main job, either.

Adept Dilettante isn't unversally useful anymore, but come on - it's not suddenly useless. For quite a lot of characters - even the lion's share - it's a solid choice, and arguably better than most other feats they could take at Paragon.

-O