When the 4e PHB launched, we held a roundtable discussion of the different classes in the book. Well, now that PHB2 is about to be released tomorrow, we wanted to take a look at those classes in a similar format. To accomplish this, I contacted several of my fellow bloggers who had received early preview copies (and have had plenty of chance to pour over it) in order to see how they felt about the classes.
Joining myself at this virtual roundtable, we have:
- ChattyDM
- Graham of Critical Ankle Bites
- Dante of StupidRanger
- Jonathan of CoreMechanic
AVENGER
Dante: I love the re-treatment of a badass war-cleric. Several times when reading through this class description, I found myself saying “Damn, that’s sweet.” I don’t think you’re ever going to forget that you can Abjure Undead now: that’s a crapload of damage.
ChattyDM: I feel this is quite possibly the first Lonewolf-friendly class out there. Some of the features and powers of this class say to the rest of the party “Leave him to ME!” The Psycodramatist-Instigator in me wants to play one. The mechanics of the class are elegant and really fits with the fluff built around it. The Turn-Undead like power is just great and makes me want to drop cheesy lines like ‘Come over here and let me kill you again!” And the Oath of Enmity power, which only recharge if you drop your target is sweet. This is quite possibly my favorite class of all the ones available in official 4e products yet.
Graham: So very awesome. Even the character sheet scans had me liking this class, and the book does nothing to dissuade me. Is it bad, though, that during the Penny Arcade podcasts, I keep screaming to myself “Dammit Wil Wheaton! Add your weapon proficiency bonus and roll twice with your Oath, and you won’t keep missing!”… Yeah… yeah, that’s probably bad…
Jonathan: This guy screams “holy **** ninjas!!!” I really like the class and its a welcomed option players looking for a holy-warrior other than the paladin. Anime freaks will also see this class as being their new favorite.
Dave: I think you know what I think of these guys.
Dave: 
ChattyDM: Graham: Dante: Jonathan:
Verdict:
BARBARIAN
Jonathan: RAWR!!! Very happy to see this class back in action, although I would have like more feats that play off the Barbarian’s rage abilities. Nonetheless, the class was updated from previous editions to be a bit more balanced — which may not be a good thing. I mean… it’s a BARBARIAN, they are supposed to be broken, right?
Graham: Rage, charge, charge, slam. Booyah. It works, and it works pretty well. The concern about multiclass feats and the at-wills doing more damage by default is unfounded, as the multiclass feat doesn’t grant an at-will power. Good class, overall, with good reasons to use bigass weapons and light armour. The Rampage ability (on a crit, attack again!) is sweet.
Dante: Perhaps our group is just extra dense, but the way they wrote up the rules on how to enter rage and what it could do for you was utterly confusing to us. I think the abilities look really cool though, and I was happy to see the Barbarian return to this edition.
Dave: That was a common problem during the playtests too, which they tried to address by rewriting some of the abilities. Interesting that it didn’t entirely do the trick. It leads me to agree with another assessment that I read that the PHB2 classes are more complex than the PHB1 classes, and require more overall turn by turn tracking.
Jonathan: The PHB2 classes do indeed seem to be a bit more complex; but this complexity goes a long way. I mean, one of the common complaints I remember hearing with the PHB1 was that many of the classes were sorta similar to each other in some ways, i.e. they were all part mixes of each other. Maybe the capabilities of the powers were more limited because the designers were trying to keep the first PHB on a short rope. Now that the game has matured a bit, its nice to see some more complex powers come to light – for instance, many of the Bard power do things that simply are not present in any form in the PHB1.
Dave: Graham: Dante: 
Jonathan:
Verdict:
BARD
Graham: I. Love. Bards! And this version actually makes them fun to play, too. I was in love with this class as soon as I read the at-will powers, and the rest does not disappoint.
Dante: Finally, Stupid Ranger can be happy again. They really did an excellent job of beefing up the Bard so they can hold their own and fill a Leader role at the same time. The new rules for their implements are great, and there’s a lot to be excited about in there.
Jonathan: OK, the Bard is hands down my favorite class from the PHB2, only slightly ahead of the Invoker. The best part? Versatile Multiclassing. Finally the Bard can be a real jack of all trades, master of none and STILL be useful to the party.
ChattyDM: While I’m also happy to see a balanced Bard that would be truly enjoyable in combat, I’m a bit annoyed that this class deals psychic damage all the time. Mechanistically speaking it makes me feel it’s more of a Psion or other type of psionic class than an actual minstrel. Then again, I’ve never been all that Bard friendly and I’ve had a hard time reading it’s description.
Dave: It seems you’re alone here in your concern, sir. Were you expecting some “Play Music” type story abilities?
ChattyDM: None whatsoever, I guess I just really never liked the Bard then.
Jonathan: Yes. I was, especially since there’s a whole section on Backgrounds in the book, which I really was happy to find. I was surprised there was still a limited amount of so-called non-combat abilities for the Bard and other classes.
Dave: ChattyDM: Graham: Dante: Jonathan:
Verdict:
DRUID
Dave: An interesting take on the controller, and an unexpected way to handle shape-shifting in a balanced way. I’ve talked to a lot of players who are excited about this, but overall, I’m going to have to see it in action to really figure out how it works.
Graham: I reviewed this one in more detail on my site. It seems a lot like the Ranger, in that you have two different routes to take, but will probably just stick to one, for fear of being stuck holding the wrong weapon/being in the wrong form when you want to use a power. Other than that, looks to be a great controller.
Dante: I really appreciate the effort made to balance the wild shape and give two different styles of Druid to choose from. I’ve never been grabbed by Druid, but I recognize a lot of the same style abilities from the 3.5 edition which is encouraging.
Jonathan: At my game table there’s a player who is a frothing at the bit Druid fan. I don’t know if she would play a furry (read: Shifter), but when I told her that I had the PHB2 weeks ahead of schedule she immediately made plans to come by and make a Druid. The class has its fans, and after looking at the 4E version — I’m now one of them. Gone are the somewhat broken strings of entangle spells, but what players gain is the ability to shape-shift at first level. Yes. At Level 1 – as in.. on day one of your campaign your Druid can be the pet of another player. Very cool.
Dave: Graham: Dante: Jonathan:
Verdict:
INVOKER
Jonathan: I have tons to say about this. Heck, I even wrote an in-depth review about it at The Core Mechanic. This class kicks ass! They make so-called “laser clerics” look like preschool. If I were to play one, all my fellow players would hear would be “Burn Heretics! Burn!” Love this class.
Dante: The Invoker seems like someone took the style of cleric that loved Flame Strike and turned them up to 11. These guys seems very combat oriented and do a surprising amount of damage at low levels, however I am left to wonder how many people will make “Tim the Enchanter” style Invokers.
Dave: The angel-summoning flame-blasting Invoker has an awesome feel of power around him. I just don’t know if the rules bear that out, and if I played one, I’d probably have my character shout everything he says in a booming voice.
ChattyDM: I think you don’t particularly like controller classes, Dave. While not initially impressed, upon re-reading the class I found the Invoker to be the priestly machine-gun I expected it to be. I find it offers different control options than the Wizard and makes it an equivalent choice. In a game where the DM set up combat encounters with fire pits and other bad terrain effects, the Invoker would have a blast (pun intended) pushing creatures all over the place.
Dave: I’m playing a Wizard in Bartoneus’s campaign currently, so I have to like it somewhat. I think they don’t always stand out as much as other classes, with the designers admitting it took some extra time to figure them out. Still, I was hoping for more actual Flame Strikes, Blade Barriers, and other classic cleric spells remade into Invoker control effects, and less of powers that just seemed generic to me (with the exception of the summons, which I like.)
Jonathan: Invokers pwn Wizards. Or didn’t you know?
Dave: ChattyDM: Graham: Dante: Jonathan:
Verdict:
SHAMAN
Dave: The fact that you either get a panther or a bear (and no other animals) seems downright bizarre to me, and I’m not sure I dig it as a Leader. Warlord, Bard, Cleric all make easy sense as a Leader. Healing bears? Just doesn’t track as well.
Graham: While you do only get the option of Bear/Panther, there is at least a sidebar on Custom Spirit Companions, talking about how those two are just the common animals to represent each path (and about using another creature instead). And since the spirit companions don’t actually have any abilities of their own, it would be difficult to justify including many in the writeup. That said, they could have easily done it as a list of possible options instead, similar to the Druid’s Wild Shape. Other than that, this class is a lot like the Invoker to me. It has some interesting mechanics, and adds a new sort of tactics to the game, but just has trouble inspiring me.
Dante: This one pretty much downright made me mad. The class abilities don’t make sense as a Leader, I completely agree with Dave that a Healing Bear doesn’t make sense, and this entire class feels like it was lazily crapped out by someone that enjoys World of Warcraft.
Jonathan: OK, I agree with Dante — this class was annoying. It’s like a Ranger meets Cleric meets Druid meets Warlord class. Confused, I honestly didn’t finish looking at all the powers up to level 30. Summon a bear that heals! What? Shouldn’t a bear eat people?
Dave: 
Graham: Dante: Jonathan:
Verdict:
SORCERER
Graham: Fuck yeah! Go Wild Mage! This class probably has me more excited than any other in the book (though Bard is a close second). So random, so fun! Oh, and dragon stuff too, I guess.
Dante: I really enjoy the Sorcerer treatment, as I mentioned in my preview post. The Dragon and Wild Magic options evoke a very stroke portrait of the type of Sorcerer that you can be, and the adjustments made to this class has graduated the Sorcerer from the back line of defense to the front line with many Close Burst and Ranged basic attack spells. I am glad they made Dragonborn a natural fit, and maintained the air of draconic bloodline feeling that the Sorcerer had in previous editions.
Dave: Possibly the best case we’ve seen so far of the two builds in a class making it feel like two distinct classes while still using the same mechanics. I’m chomping at the bit to play a Wild Sorcerer, and I know a lot of people who love the idea of the Dragon Sorcerer. Plus, Area Burst d4.
Dave: Graham: Dante:
Verdict:
WARDEN
ChattyDM: The Warden‘s Marking abilities are cool and their “form of” daily abilities, while seemingly weakish, are useful enough never to feel like wasted even if the attack they allow are missed. I currently prefer it to the fighter but I’ll need to see it in play to confirm my gut feeling.
Graham: This one is… difficult. They are an excellent defender class, potentially as good as the Fighter, and maybe even better at times. The low-level Warden looks like a lot of fun! But at higher levels… well, it seems to lose it’s charm a bit. The Form powers are uninspiring, if fairly effective. The feel is exactly the same as at level 1, which is good, I suppose. It just doesn’t really feel to me like my epic Warden would be much more powerful than my level 1 Warden, which is a loss in my books.
Dave: Not sure about him either (as with the rest of the primal classes, it seems). The Fighter and the Swordmage make an awfully high bar for defenders. Wardens seem flexible, but I think I’d still rather have a Fighter on my team. However, extra saving throw at the beginning of your turn is very hot.
Dante: Another confusing addition, I feel that the Warden is a strange mix between a Fighter and Druid, mixing extra attacks with transformational forms. I appreciate the flavor they were going for with this class, but SO MANY of the abilities feel like they were ripped out of World of Warcraft and refit for the 4e rules. Capping this off for me was the Verdant Lord paragon path, which lets you control the forest and eventually turn into an ent-style character yourself. I’m sure I’ve seen these guys running around Dalaran in WoW. Yawn.
Dave: ChattyDM: Graham: Dante:
Verdict:
There you have it: five hits, two mehs, and a miss. Tune in tomorrow to see what our panel thought of the races, and other features of the book.
I played an 8th level test Barbarian from the character builder in a Devle adventure and didn’t like it at all. The durability of the Barbarian for a striker is nice, but the overall damage output and utility when compared to some Fighter and Rogue options (especially from the Martials book) seem vastly underpowered. If you want a durable striker, you have the artful dodger route and also the tempest fighter route of the fighter. And when you do it with the fighter, you get the ability to mark and combat challenge as a huge plus.
I just felt like the Rage mechanic wasn’t all that useful. Maybe it has changed, but on the character builder, you basically had to burn 2 daily’s (I only have 2 at 8th level) to make a 4[W] attack? Uh… no thanks.
@Tonester –
That’s only if you’re using Rage Strike, though. The dailies are good on their own.
Rage Strike is for those situations where you want to blow three dailies on one fight, but don’t want to switch rages. It’s not meant to be your main source of damage, or even to be used every day.
As for differences from the playtest… I’d have to look up the playtest and see again.
Graham´s last post: The PHB2 Druid – Nature’s Schizophrenic
Yeah, Rage Strike doesn’t cost 2 at-wills, you still use one of them as normal, and the other gets converted to damage.
Obviously I haven’t seen the book so I can’t comment directly but I do want to say that there are a lot of Bear-healing connections in mythology, specifically in the American Indian traditions. So, it’s probably coming from there. I don’t follow it, nor am I Native American and I was rather confused at no one seeming to have heard of that before…
I’d have liked there to me either more animals to choose from (though most classes only seem to have two paths at base), but I don’t /really/ have an issue with that. I’m retaining judgment till I get the book in my hands and can really look at the powers. Shaman, to me, sounds like a perfect fit for a leader class at least in concept if not in application.
And I like the idea of an Ent kicking ass 😛
justaguy´s last post: What a long strange trip it’s been…
No arguments from this reviewer, justaguy. Personally, it just failed to catch my eye either mechanically or flavour-wise.
But hey, whatever floats your boat, eh?
Just wanting to make a nod to Justaguy’s comment, he literally took the words out of my mouth (being someone who hasn’t read it and only has heard what was stated in this discussion). Even in other RPG’s, Shadowrun for instance the Bear was a healing totem for Shamans.
Rev. Lazaro´s last post: Reconsidering 4e…….
I think everyone hates the primal classes because they’re flag waving neocons.
Ha!
Do remember that two of us are Canadians, for one thing. So it isn’t your stripey flag we’d be waving. 😛
Graham´s last post: The PHB2 Druid – Nature’s Schizophrenic
Maple Leafs or Stars and Stripes… its very clear that you hate the environment!
Very interested to get my copy and compare my opinions to what was written here.
Well, our national animal is the beaver. Clearly we are fully in favour of logging and deforestation.
Graham´s last post: The PHB2 Druid – Nature’s Schizophrenic
Seriously? World of Warcraft is the standard for originality now? I guess I’m the only one who remembers a time before WoW, when rangers could turn into trees and druids could turn oaks into treants. 😛
Sorry, that’s just one of my buttons. World of Warcraft was a great game while I played it, but in terms of the fantasy genre,
it’sthe Warcraft universe is completely derivative of what came before it, including D&D and especially Warhammer.Matthew´s last post: Sin-Eaters & Running games
I thought you’d mis-posted, but I think it’s just that you have a typo in the intro: now that PHB2 is about to be released tomorrow, we wanted to take a look at those races in a similar format.
Which raises the question, this was a really interesting format for seeing a variety of opinions in one structured space, so will you be doing a similar “Roundtable: Races”?
Yep. It should be up this evening. Races, plus a couple extra sections.
Sweet, I’ll watch my feed!
justaguy beat me to it… I was surprised the bear + healing connection was lost on you guys 😛
Having a slight contrarian streak, I’m going to give the Shaman a second read-through and see how I feel about it. I initially skipped it because I wasn’t all that taken by the first few paragraphs of it.
The Chatty DM´s last post: Chatty’s Mailbox: Helping out a New DM
Is the Panther + Healing also a strong connection? I had more of a problem with the healing spirit concept in general than the fact it was specifically a bear.
Plus, everyone knows that bears prevent forest fires.
@Matthew: Verdant Lord predates WoW. It cropped up in third edition. It requirements were quasi druidic (although with the right spheres a cleric could take it) and it gave the best BAB and Caster Level Progression. So, this is an instance of WoW ripping D&D off but WoW having done it in the interim and being foremost in many gamers collective consciousness.
Great review. But do we really need all these new classes. Many of them seem similar to the classes that already exist except they’ve gone from defender to striker, or leader to defender, etc. What ever happened to using role-playing to define your class and not just adding 8 new classes. Just my 2 cents.
Ameron´s last post: How Many Classes Are Too Many?
@Ameron: New classes have been a staple of D&D since its creation in 1974. I’m happy that there are more such options in our game and the cool thing here is that by having 2 PHBs, people who don’t want the new classes just don’t have to pay for a thicker PHB with 16 classes. The PHB2 remains an option and that’s it. There’s really no fundamentally needed things in it.
The Chatty DM´s last post: Chatty’s Mailbox: Helping out a New DM
On one hand, yes RP is a very important way to distinguish your character… however I’ve found that personally (and in my group experience) people like to be able to differentiate themselves more than by just personality. They like being able to do different things. Different classes filling the same roles allows that to happen on a wider scale, IMO. Now… you could advocate for a more generic power structure. “These are defender powers, here’s 20… pick two” or what not, but that becomes a balancing nightmare.
@ Dave
And as for the panther thing… not generally healing. It’s more of a hunter/protector symbol. Umm, can be courage or associated with the sun.
But to follow up, what do you mean “I had more of a problem with the healing spirit concept”? Obviously it might be hard for you to specify without detailing the power (though, isn’t today the drop date for the books?) but I’m not sure what you re getting at.
justaguy´s last post: What a long strange trip it’s been…
As has been said, great review! I want to thank you all for sharing your thoughts on this. Now I really have to go down to my FLGS on Saturday!
A lot of the classes seem like they are either old D&D staples, re-tuned for 4e, or they are logical extensions of ideas that previously existed in D&D. But the races all seem like a bit of a stretch.
So… having the book in hand I set out to read about Shaman, seeing as that seemed to be the point of greatest disappointment on behalf of the round-tablers, so here’s my thoughts.
Firstly, I think they would have been better if they’d kept the Protector and Stalker titles instead of switching to Bear Shaman and Panther Shaman as titles for the paths. It gives a false weight to the name, and I think it’s causing some of the hook ups you guys seem to have here. So in my mind “Bear Shaman” are really “Protector Shaman, often associated with animals such as bears, turtles, elk etc.”, and “Panther Shaman” are really “Stalker Shaman often associated with animals such as the great cats, eagles, wolves etc.”.
Secondly, the call spirit companion power is… interesting. I both like and dislike the idea of having what amounts to a spirit familiar you need to have around to channel many (if not all) of your powers through. I’d really have to see one in play to get a feel for this.
Lastly, I reiterate my consternation that people seem caught up on comparing this to WoW. Shaman existed long before WoW did, it’s not like they conjured the term out of thin air. The class powers focus on calling spirits to your aid, and that pretty much fits my picture of shaman… of course they have aspects of warlord and cleric in them, they are a leader class so it doesn’t seem surprising to me. I’m not sure where the ranger thing comes in, aside from their begin outdoorsy, or druid, except that they are primal. I feel as if I got something entirely different out of my read through of the class.
justaguy´s last post: What a long strange trip it’s been…
@OriginalSultan –
re: races
What do you mean? Gnome, Half-Orc, and Deva (Aasimar) have all been around for multiple editions of the game.
Shifter and Goliath are both from 3.5e, but I suppose had a suitably Primal flavour for the book.
There were actually no real new races in the book.
Graham´s last post: The PHB2 Druid – Nature’s Schizophrenic
Holy crap, it seems that no one has really gone back to the etymology of the word “Shaman” : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaman
They are traditionally the human link between the material world and the spirit world, and have almost always been associated with curing disease, sickness, and other forms of healing. Shaman were typically looked at as the real leaders of tribes, and as such I didn’t even blink at them being put into the leader role. I think the hang-up on “Bears don’t heal, they hurt things!” is really a disservice to the concept and the class in this roundtable considering all of the other non-sensical things that happen in D&D which we love and accept. 😀
Besides it’s a SPIRIT animal, it does whatever the hell it wants. Now, if the bear is wielding nunchakus…then you know it’s not there to heal but to rain down the PAIN!
All of that said, I take the results of this roundtable with the Shaman as a Miss really to mean that in any collection of classes you’ve got to have some good ones and some that aren’t so good, so I’m confident the Shaman will end up being a cool class but it does appear to be the most ‘out-of-sorts’ class in the PHB2.
I can certainly see the link between Shamans and leaders, but the mechanics of the D&D class just don’t carry that through. “I have to get my bear next to you to do extra healing” is just funky. And their powers don’t carry it through for me either (especially since many of the powers have the spirit do something). Whereas all the other leaders- including the Artificer- use their mechanics to carry through their concept quite well.
@ Graham
Firstly, I was unaware that Deva and Half-Orcs had been around for multiple editions of the game. So I stand corrected if that is the case. But aside from the gnome, I don’t think any of the others could be described as ‘core’ races, which is kind of what I was referring to.
Some of the classes, on the other hand, were either ‘core’ classes that were omitted in PHB 1 or were logical extensions of existing core classes.
I should have qualified my statement of the races with a: “except for the gnome”. (I just don’t buy the half-orc as a core race, despite its popularity amongst many other D&Ders).
Oh, no worries, man. The Deva underwent a name/flavour change anyways, and the Half-Orc sometime was in core, and sometimes wasn’t. It was core in 3e, at least.
I agree completely on the classes. I just wasn’t sure what you meant by the races being a stretch. Now I know. 😛
Graham´s last post: The PHB2 Druid – Nature’s Schizophrenic
Okay – having spent the last 4 days going through the PHB2 page by page (several times over), I can’t really express just how awesome I think it is.
I actually think the Shaman is cool. I didn’t get hung up too much on what animal is what (I mean, just change them if you want), but I love the mechanics.
My favorite classes? Avenger, Barbarian, Druid, and Warden.
However, being the min/max’er that I am, I can already a couple of huge balance loopholes that DMs should probably be aware of.
1) Avengers multi-classing into Daggermasters. 18-20 Crits and getting to roll twice? I haven’t done the math, but this is pretty absurd.
2) Half-Elf getting an At-Will from another class… especially if you use this with #1. Again, I haven’t done the math, but the first thing that sticks out to me is a Half-Elf Avenger multi’d into a Dagger Master and going with Twin Strike from the Ranger class and getting several Two-Weapon feats, AP feats, etc. I would wager a build like this makes absolutely no sense at all from a RP sense, but from a pure damage sense, it might be the best/most unbalanced build ever.
3) Or, you could go the other way and do a Rogue multi’d into the Zealous Assassin Avenger. Artful Dodger (with their ridiculous OA defense) and being able to essentially have combat challenge every time you charge… and untouchable in the process? Ugh.
Barbarian:
Despite my previous sentiments for the class, after looking at all of their options, this class is amazing. The preview definitely didn’t have enough choices for rages. The PHB2 has TONS of rage choices. This is a class that seems to really be a semi-late bloomer, but when they do… they look to be pretty devastating. Match this up with their relatively good durability compared to other strikers, and this looks to be a winner.
All in all – I like it. I’ve never been much into magic users so I haven’t spent too much time Min/Max’ing the Bard, Sorc, or Invoker.
From a RP view, I really enjoy the Druid. The Elf makes a perfect Druid, and I really like the idea of being a familiar for a party member…. hardly ever being caught in humanoid form… maybe trying to RP it as never changing to humanoid form unless alone – perhaps some sort of psychic connection to owner and just speaking through them all the time. Being this stalking cat-like beast, high perception and insight (sniffing out liars and ambushes), being shunned from entering establishments, etc – I like it!
Combat-wise, they are really appealing to me. Very versatile strikers with quite a few controller abilities and a couple of leader abilities thrown in for good measure. I love charging in combat and having At-Wills designed specifically for this pretty much sealed the deal for me I think. I’ll let everyone know how it goes. To be honest, I just love the idea of having 2 minis for my character – a badass cat beast being one of them! Raaawwwrrr!
@Tonester –
1) While this is, indeed, awesome, the Avenger is built around a big two-handed weapon. So while the 3x chance for a crit is nice, it only gives 4 damage from the weapon. Greatsword average damage is 4.5, so doing this is actually a net loss in damage output. Except for with crit bonus damage. Ah well, it’s probably still not much better on average, and is costs a feat to do. That feat could be better spent on fullblade proficiency.
2) See above, for the most part. The most broken half-elf grab is probably a barbarian attack. These just do more damage, period.
3) I haven’t read that Paragon Path much, so no opinion yet.
Graham´s last post: 32 hours of D&D gaming party!
@Graham/Tonester: Part of the reason why crits are so… critical… is that magic item bonus die rolls. I spent some time tinkering with the Avenger/Rogue Daggermaster notion previously and came to the same conclusion Graham did, that the feat wasn’t worth it. You can just as easily take an Executioner’s Axe with that feat and get a brutal: 2/ d12 damage weapon. Secondly, rolling to hit twice doesn’t increase the probability of critical hits as much as I thought… instead of the usual daggermaster 15% i think its like about 17.5% (correct me if i’m wrong). As for the Zealous Assassain paragon path, its got some cool stuff in it, but for a rogue I still think Shadow Assassain and Dagger Master (where you may be using a dagger anyway to get a to hit bonus) are really hard to beat.
@Tonester: I have to agree with Graham & The Main Event, while that’s certainly an interesting build and I think it’d be fun, you’re trading down to d4 damage which is what keeps it from being “absurd”.
What I’ve found that gets a bit ridiculous is when you have a barbarian with Howling Strike geared up with a Vanguard Execution Axe, Horned Helm, and several other charge boosting items. The charge ends up doing 1d12+d8+d6+Str damage, if you combine that with weapon focus and something like dwarven weapon training, you can really start to get a Barbarian who rocks things pretty quickly. Combine all of that with a Cape of the Montebank: charge, take damage – teleport away, charge again!
I have yet to find any one particular build or power that I would consider broken or absurd, just a lot of interesting options and opportunities!
It looks like several people have already pursued this. And yes, it is quite broken, imo. I think its the Bloodiron daggers that really break it. None of the damage comes from the weapons themselves – its all crit damage stacking and being multiplied.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1164849
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1161670
106 – 300 damage per round (on average) for an At-Will attack is just stupid 🙂
*EDIT*
By the way, I absolutely sucked at Stats, but…
1st Roll
Chance to Crit = 3/20 = 0.15
Chance to NoCrit: = 1 – Chance to Crit = 0.85
2nd Roll
Chance to Crit = .15 * NoCrit from 1st roll = .1275
Total Chance to Crit for 1 Attack | 1 Weapon | 2 Rolls = .2775
Twin Strike gets a 2nd attack with a 2nd weapon and 2 more rolls for it.
The chance to crit is pretty high, over 40% I’m sure.
*EDIT*
The guy in the post has calculated it to be:
Chance of at least one critical hit 0.47799375
Seems right to me.
@Tonester: I’m still not convinced it’s THAT broken, I’d really have to look at what a level 30 Ranger would be able to do with the same equipment to determine that but my gut feeling is it’s not as broken as it first appears.
Some things to consider:
– The +6 daggers used are in the high 20’s levels, so this really needs to be compared to other class capabilities in the Epic Levels
– While the daggermaster might do extra crit damage on 18-20, a result of 18 or 19 does not automatically hit like a natural 20 does.
– These calcs are factoring in power attack bonus dmg, which on top of the previous point I’m not entirely confident in the 69% hit percentage.
It’s extremely impressive, but I’ll have to look into some more epic level things to really determine how broken it is.
@Tonester: That damage output is one of the tops, for sure. However, unless you’re starting Epic you have to endure a lot of levels of kinda crummy play where you have lower than need be stats to prep for your ultimate epic combos. I’d want to have a cool character levels 1-30, i think, but thats just my preference.
Just to tack on a quick note, I was looking at the numbers last night and it looks like you could have an epic level Dwarven Barbarian who puts out not QUITE as much damage as this build but a close enough amount to make me think the Avenger/Daggermaster is not as broken as people think.
With the epic level axe feat, the barbarian can get a 19-20 crit range and using howling strike as the at-will he gets at LEAST 2W+3d6+Str, if you factor in power attack (w/2h weapon = +9 dmg), dwarven weapon training, devastating crit, weapon focus and expertise, and assume he’s using a Rage that increases his damage. It looks to me like his normal hit damage will be higher than the Av/Daggermaster, but his crit % will be lower.
I should have some more solid numbers sometime soon, but suffice to say I don’t think this is SUPER broken especially considering how limited it is and the amount of feats and specific power needed for it. Besides, if there’s another enemy adjacent to you the whole thing is bust anyway! 🙂
Played a Dwarf Protector Shaman (8th level) today in a 4-man delve… without a defender.
1 Warlock
1 Rogue
1 Wizard
We kicked ass 😉 The shaman is an incredibly effective (and fun) healer to play. All the temp health points, AE heals, etc – was cool.
@Bartoneus
I totally agree, man. I’ve been putting together all sorts of theoretical builds into the CB. Between martial powers, adventurer’s vault, and now PHB2 – things just kick more butt it seems.
Tacking on something else, I’ve noticed in all of the Avenger/Daggermaster calculations they are factoring in a +8 Str modifier. The problem with this is that Twin Strike only does W dmg and does not add your Str modifier to it.
At this point, I may just do a whole post about the topic!