Painful Oath...was this really necessary?

174 posts / 0 new
Last post
In the new Avenger Essentials artcle:

Painful Oath
Pre req: 11th level, avenger, oath of enmity feature
Benefit: The first time you hit your oath of enmity target each turn, you deal extra radiant and necrotic damage equal to your wisdom modifier.

Seriously? Add your main attack stat as radiant damage to all your attacks (once per turn notwithstanding)?

Did they really think avengers needed this? They just took away +2 AC for a feat because it was overpowered but they thought that a massive damage boost and adding radiant to all your attacks was fine?

Sorry to vent. But this is getting ridiculous.
I also raised my eyebrows at this, but Marked Scourge and especially Called Shot come to mind.
Member of Grognards for 4th Edition
Yes, it was.

Avengers have the accuracy schtick downpat, but for the most part, do the least damage of any striker, even warlocks out DPR them.

This is because nine times out of ten they can't get their striker damage bonus.

Avengers had the highest AC mantle but that got taken away. As a striker class, getting more damage for less AC is an acceptable compromise for me.
This gives us hope for the article for Walocks, this wednesday. ...Innocent
Their mindset to create a new overpowered feat to balance an underpowered class is just idiotic.
And partly, I agree with you.
The feat is too powerful for a paragon feat. Maybe so even for an epic feat.

But then again, avenger is that desparate.
Their mindset to create a new overpowered feat to balance an underpowered class is just idiotic.
And partly, I agree with you.
The feat is too powerful for a paragon feat. Maybe so even for an epic feat.

But then again, avenger is that desparate.



Well, the fighter has almost the exact same feat in Martial Power (just no radiant, and is a marked target instead of Oath), and has a PP that gives it out as a feature (and without a 1/round restriction either) in the PHBI no less. Sure, its not their attack stat, but its also supposed to be a defender class.

Paladin's have Holy Strike, which adds WIS to damage against targets marked by you. For high WIS paladins (like mine), it means if I'm not using encounters or dailies I'm always adding my attack stat twice (since my STR and WIS are equal).
Rogue's have Sly Flourish.
Fighters have Brash Strike and Weapon Master's Strike.

Co-author on AoA 2-3 and 4-1.

In the new Avenger Essentials artcle:

Painful Oath
Pre req: 11th level, avenger, oath of enmity feature
Benefit: The first time you hit your oath of enmity target each turn, you deal extra radiant and necrotic damage equal to your wisdom modifier.

Seriously? Add your main attack stat as radiant damage to all your attacks (once per turn notwithstanding)?

Did they really think avengers needed this? They just took away +2 AC for a feat because it was overpowered but they thought that a massive damage boost and adding radiant to all your attacks was fine?

Sorry to vent. But this is getting ridiculous.


Avenger AC was nerfed because WotC wanted to keep a fluff consistency of holy warriors in cloth. Not only did Avengers lose their defensive advantage (remember ALL avenger, even Isolating, don't want to be attractive targets), but they also lost out on a slew of better enchantments and the ability to play the role of second defender if needed.

At least now Avengers are compensated for it to some extent. Trading off defense for damage is a fair trade. Considering that unless an Avenger was crit fishing they stayed on the low end of striker damage, some sort of damage boosting feat was necessary anyways. Painful Oath comes at the right time for Avengers, in Paragon, where their damage dips the lowest, while other classes are gaining a boost. They were also smart enough to limit the bonus damage to one per round, so it's not as easily abuse-able.

In the end though it's still a feat tax.
I think that people throw around the term "Feat Tax" too eagerly...

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Yes, it was.

Avengers have the accuracy schtick downpat, but for the most part, do the least damage of any striker, even warlocks out DPR them.

This is because nine times out of ten they can't get their striker damage bonus.

Avengers had the highest AC mantle but that got taken away. As a striker class, getting more damage for less AC is an acceptable compromise for me.



This.  I have played a retvenger from level 9 to 11, and I think I've gotten my censure bonus a total of 1 time.  I think during development, the designers thought it would happen a lot more often.  Now that it's been playtested thoroughly, they realized that avengers needed some help in the damage department.  I was pretty happy until 11th. Now, the difference between me and the ranger is becoming larger.  This will help close that gap.  That, and if I can ever roll a 19+.  It's pretty amazing that everyone in my party crits more often than I do when I crit on 19+ rolling 2d20.  Sad.
I think that people throw around the term "Feat Tax" too eagerly...

I'm not a fan of the frequency with which the term is used, but I can't imagine any Avenger not taking this at 11th level. Would your striker like a +5(ish) bonus to damage at 11th level? Who's going to say no?
I think that people throw around the term "Feat Tax" too eagerly...


I agree that people are throwing the term around to easily, but only because Avengers were ALREADY feat taxed with Leather Armor Proficiency.

A feat tax is a feat that is overpowered in direct comparison to other feats of its level, but that isn't overpowered in practice because it directly compensates for something unbalanced in the other direction.  Avenger's once had a feat tax because they couldn't keep up with striker damage (short of degenerate Versatile Master Critfishing), and so the too-good boost to their AC balanced them by letting them serve as off-tanks.  Now, without that benefit, instead that taxed feat goes to a too-good boost to damage; this balances them by letting them keep up with other strikers' damages.

Incidentally, the thing that bothers me most about this feat is the part where it's radiant/necrotic damage.  Notwithstanding the argument as to whether all of their powers have the radiant Keyword, Undead suck enough simply by having a divine character in the party. Was it really necessary to make 100% of the Avenger's attacks trigger radiant  vulnerability?
Check out my blog--now REACTIVATED with DnDnext feedback!
...Avengers were ALREADY feat taxed with Leather Armor Proficiency.

Oh come on, that was never a feat tax. Avengers always had perfectly adequate AC and otherwise functioned perfectly well without armor proficiencies higher than Cloth. That's like saying that Wizards and Sorcerers are feat taxed with Leather or that Warlocks and Sword-Mages are feat taxed with Hide. I could possibly be convinced that this Painful Oath is a "feat tax", but the term is still thrown around much too frequently, and pointing to another occasion when the term was unreasonably thrown around will not help your case.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
I think that people throw around the term "Feat Tax" too eagerly...


I agree that people are throwing the term around to easily, but only because Avengers were ALREADY feat taxed with Leather Armor Proficiency.

A feat tax is a feat that is overpowered in direct comparison to other feats of its level, but that isn't overpowered in practice because it directly compensates for something unbalanced in the other direction.  Avenger's once had a feat tax because they couldn't keep up with striker damage (short of degenerate Versatile Master Critfishing), and so the too-good boost to their AC balanced them by letting them serve as off-tanks.  Now, without that benefit, instead that taxed feat goes to a too-good boost to damage; this balances them by letting them keep up with other strikers' damages.

Incidentally, the thing that bothers me most about this feat is the part where it's radiant/necrotic damage.  Notwithstanding the argument as to whether all of their powers have the radiant Keyword, Undead suck enough simply by having a divine character in the party. Was it really necessary to make 100% of the Avenger's attacks trigger radiant  vulnerability?



One other issue with the 'radiant' keyword is that it makes MC Paragon Paths that grant a larger crit range when using the Radiant or Nec keyword more overpowered.


/whine I'm still looking for a Avenger Paragon Path that's better then MC and taking someone elses class's Paragon path.
I agree that people are throwing the term around to easily, but only because Avengers were ALREADY feat taxed with Leather Armor Proficiency. 

Except it doesn't work any more, so perfect time for any paragon Avenger to retrain Leather Armor for Painful Oath.

Incidentally, the thing that bothers me most about this feat is the part where it's radiant/necrotic damage.  Notwithstanding the argument as to whether all of their powers have the radiant Keyword, Undead suck enough simply by having a divine character in the party. Was it really necessary to make 100% of the Avenger's attacks trigger radiant  vulnerability?

If the only divine striker is not going to trigger undead vulnerability, who would? It would be embarrassing I think if the paladin or cleric were throwing around more damage against undead, than the Avenger (which the cleric already has the upper hand with AoE's).
I find it VERY ironic that some of the people who defended pre-errata Marked Scourge are now turning around and decrying Painful Oath. I recongnize a few names in this thread.

Avengers needed this feat (and Fighters did not need Marked Scourge, in any form). Avenger DPR numbers, time and time again, had fallen well below that of other strikers, to the point that it was embarrassing (in fact, the Paladin had been a better "divine striker" up to this point). Feat tax? Sure. But it's not like Avengers had good feat support before this article, anyway.
Incidentally, the thing that bothers me most about this feat is the part where it's radiant/necrotic damage.  Notwithstanding the argument as to whether all of their powers have the radiant Keyword, Undead suck enough simply by having a divine character in the party. Was it really necessary to make 100% of the Avenger's attacks trigger radiant  vulnerability?

If the only divine striker is not going to trigger undead vulnerability, who would? It would be embarrassing I think if the paladin or cleric were throwing around more damage against undead, than the Avenger (which the cleric already has the upper hand with AoE's).

Agreed.  Most of their powers already have radiant damage, so it's not really adding much.  I'm just glad it's not pure radiant.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.


One other issue with the 'radiant' keyword is that it makes MC Paragon Paths that grant a larger crit range when using the Radiant or Nec keyword more overpowered.



I might be wrong but I don't think adding radiant damage applies the radiant keyword. Gloves of Eldritch Admixture would actually be a good item if it worked that way.

I guess I was in the minority but I didn't think avengers were seen as lackluster on damage. Hitting more often seemed pretty good. Maybe not as insane as a ranger, but what was?

I guess as someone who has been playing a charisma warlock since 4e came out, I just get really angry when the other strikers get stuff like this or iron armbands and we have yet to see either an essentials or class acts article. I am glad to hear one is coming out on wednesday but at this point I don't have much confidence that my class will ever be able to stand up to the other strikers.
I think that people throw around the term "Feat Tax" too eagerly...



I agree with this. Especially where feats like Versatile Master or Leather Armor Prof. are concerned, where they are really good but there are some builds who won't use them.

But this one...yeah. It's mandatory.
That, and if I can ever roll a 19+.  It's pretty amazing that everyone in my party crits more often than I do when I crit on 19+ rolling 2d20.  Sad.


Tell me about it. My avenger got a vicious fullblade (only 2nd-level at the moment) and I've played two whole sessions and about six or seven entire combat encounters without a single crit.

And on top of that, he has elven accuracy which I make sure to use even if I don't have to. 
I think that people throw around the term "Feat Tax" too eagerly...



I agree with this. Especially where feats like Versatile Master or Leather Armor Prof. are concerned, where they are really good but there are some builds who won't use them.

But this one...yeah. It's mandatory.

. . . I don't even know how to respond to this post. I have tried starting this response no less than ten different ways. I just don't understand how this post makes any sense at all. You agree with me that the term is thrown around to lightly, and then you immediately proceed to suggest that... I don't even know, I can't wrap my mind around this post without considering the possibilities either that it's mocking me or that it's hypocritical.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
. . . I don't even know how to respond to this post. I have tried starting this response no less than ten different ways. I just don't understand how this post makes any sense at all. You agree with me that the term is thrown around to lightly, and then you immediately proceed to suggest that... I don't even know, I can't wrap my mind around this post without considering the possibilities either that it's mocking me or that it's hypocritical.



Allright, let me explain it then: I agree that the term 'feat tax' is used too much. I then lay out a couple examples of things that are NOT mandatory but people routinely claim they are. I then, in a fairly ironic flair, assert that this feat IS mandatory.

It is not a feat tax though. A feat tax is a feat that gives characters something they should have gotten for free. It is a patch in feat form. But avengers didn't need this. It is therefor not a feat tax so much as an overpowered feat.

I was not mocking. I wasn't even disagreeing with you unless your previous post asserted that this feat is not mandatory. But mandatory and feat tax are not the same thing.
Ah, all right, I understand now. You're distinguishing between the feat being overpowered and thus "mandatory" and it the feat actually being a necessity and thus a feat tax. I understand now, I apologize for the confusion. The way I had originally read your post, it looked like you were saying "Yeah, 'feat tax' is thrown around too often... But this is totally a feat tax!"

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
Yes. Painful Oath is necessary.

Prior to this feat, many of us had been saying since PHB2's release that Avenger damage issues popped up at Paragon primarily because of a lack of feat support. The secondary issue-- a lack of damage/striker oriented "in class" PPs-- has been addressed somewhat in the Essentials article, as well. With some of the new feats coming out, Avenger PPs gain a degree of appeal because of the option to expand crit range at 21st without needing to pump a tertiary stat or select a PP to get the job done. Taking a PP like Oathsworn or Favored Soul will also be less bleak, because Avengers are no longer relying on PP choice for 90% of their damage increase at Paragon vs Heroic.

I should also point out two things worth mentioning:


1. Painful Oath doesn't catapult the Avenger into contention for top DPR. In fact, they're probably still armwrestling with Warlocks for last place.

2. With the introduction of Painful Oath, Avengers now have... (drumroll)...

ONE strong direct damage feat through Paragon.
If you don't think that this is a feat tax then you never will.

Every single Avenger will take this feat at level 11 or they will not be optimal.  The one possible exception would be some sort of odd Half elf twin strike build with no wis mod. 
If you don't think that this is a feat tax then you never will.

Every single Avenger will take this feat at level 11 or they will not be optimal.  The one possible exception would be some sort of odd Half elf twin strike build with no wis mod. 

To this, I have to respond with what Eric888 already said.

Feat that everybody wants to take =/= Feat tax

Those are not the same thing.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
I'd agree that this isn't a feat tax. It's simply a stellar feat. I think you could say that Painful Oath is to Avengers as the Two Weapon Fighting feat string is to Rangers. Necessary? No. Present in every build you'll ever see forever? Yup.
It's a feat that is required to do your job.

Nobody is going to argue that Paragon+ Avengers are where they should be for damage without this feat, even with it they are probably behind the curve.  The question is if you want to do less damage than your defender or less damage than your controller. 
Yes, it was.

Avengers have the accuracy schtick downpat, but for the most part, do the least damage of any striker, even warlocks out DPR them.

This is because nine times out of ten they can't get their striker damage bonus.

Avengers had the highest AC mantle but that got taken away. As a striker class, getting more damage for less AC is an acceptable compromise for me.



I hardily disagree. Avengers dont have the worst damage by any means. They do as much as any other weapon user out there because they benefit from the same bonuses like weapon focus, iron armbands, etc....

Avengers still tie with barbarians for the highest ac in the game, so getting an overpowered damage feat isnt an "acceptable compromise".  As far as marked scourge and holy strike goes, not every build will use them because they are based on optional secondary stats. Example, my str/dex tempset fighter with a 10 wis will never take marked scourge. But painful oath uses a Primary stat which every avenger will have (save the famous half elf avenger twin striker). 9 times out of 10 avengers dont get their censure bonus? I again disagree unless something odd is going on. Unity avengers will get theirs as long as his party members focus fire and he isnt the only melee. Pursuit avengers will get theirs unless the monster is foolish enough to stand and fight the avenger. When you have a ridiculously(less so than 2-3 weeks ago) high AC, why would any competent monster
stand there and try to ineffectually hit you?  Chances are they will move and fight someone they can hit thereby triggering the censure. Isolating avengers... I will agree that they have it rough....
Also warlocks do not out damage anyone, even with called shot(which if you have read it right will mean you provoke most of the time like my archer does)















It's a feat that is required to do your job.

Nobody is going to argue that Paragon+ Avengers are where they should be for damage without this feat, even with it they are probably behind the curve.  The question is if you want to do less damage than your defender or less damage than your controller. 



Keep in mind that avangers, on average, will hit 50% more often and crit 100% more often than other classes. With that in mind you should look at their damage as if it was 55% higher when comparing it to other strikers.

A level 11 avenger with 20-21 wisdom, a generic +3 fullblade, weapon focus, and +2 iron armbands, deals 1d12+12 with his at-will. Compared to other strikers that is an average (+55%) of 28.675. Which is very comparable and far far surpasses warlocks.

Avengers suffer from a pretty disapointing collection of at-wills and oath seems more restrictive than it should, but their damage was fine. If this article gave them a useful at-will and eased some of the restrictions on oath, I would not be complaining. But this feat went too far. It was not needed.
It's a feat that is required to do your job.

Nobody is going to argue that Paragon+ Avengers are where they should be for damage without this feat, even with it they are probably behind the curve.  The question is if you want to do less damage than your defender or less damage than your controller. 



Keep in mind that avangers, on average, will hit 50% more often and crit 100% more often than other classes. With that in mind you should look at their damage as if it was 55% higher when comparing it to other strikers.

A level 11 avenger with 20-21 wisdom, a generic +3 fullblade, weapon focus, and +2 iron armbands, deals 1d12+12 with his at-will. Compared to other strikers that is an average (+55%) of 28.675. Which is very comparable and far far surpasses warlocks.

Avengers suffer from a pretty disapointing collection of at-wills and oath seems more restrictive than it should, but their damage was fine. If this article gave them a useful at-will and eased some of the restrictions on oath, I would not be complaining. But this feat went too far. It was not needed.



While I don't want to pick on your numbers, these don't really represent what it's like to actually play an Avenger. Combat is fluid thing. Sometimes you're helping out your defender or other melee class, sometimes you're hanging out in the corner with the enemy controller/artillery/lurker keeping them away from your allies, and other times you're running around the fringe of the battle field playing duck-duck-goose.

Yes Avengers deal good damage over the course of the encounter, but their weakness has been getting good damage production in one round. I don't even mean going nova. Just dealing out decent damage in one round on one opponent.

This is where Painful Oath comes in real handy, because it gives a static damage bonus comparable to what every other damn striker is getting once per round (Hunter's Quarry, Sneak Attack, Warlock's Curse, Flurry of Blows, Assassin's Shroud, etc., etc.). Yes Avengers are still super accurate, but they also aren't dealing lots of weapon damage either (Seriously, go look at what Rangers, Barbarians, Fighters, and Paladins can do).

This feat is a fix to a basic math problem with Avenger damage once they hit paragon and other strikers start to pull away. It's a feat tax.
So, first people were complaining that avengers didn't have very many good feats.  Now they get one, and people say (well, that's not right, this feat is good, I have to take it).  

It feels like complaining about not getting food....then recieving food....and complaining that it's good food. 
It's a feat that is required to do your job.

This is just false. Avengers have been doing their job just fine so far, and the existence of this feat doesn't all of a sudden mean that they retroactively weren't doing their job just fine before.

Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TM Speaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
It feels like complaining about not getting food....then recieving food....and complaining that it's good food. 

Not quite. They're complaining about how starved they are, then they're given deep-fried awesome in food form. They complain that they didn't quite need that calibur of food, ergo they reject it.

That seems more appropriate for the circumstance to me.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
This is where Painful Oath comes in real handy, because it gives a static damage bonus comparable to what every other damn striker is getting once per round (Hunter's Quarry, Sneak Attack, Warlock's Curse, Flurry of Blows, Assassin's Shroud, etc., etc.).

If Avengers already do average damage per round on par with other strikers even after they add in their bonus damage mechanisms, it's not a math fix.  All you have to do is attack your oath target 1/round to be on par with any other striker attacking with his special bonus to damage 1/round and it's the exact same thing over the long run.  It's even the same thing once per round ... since your odds of hitting instead of missing on that one round are significantly higher.

(If Avengers don't do the same DPR as other strikers, that's another matter.  Some folks have shown some decent numbers before that show they lag behind Rogues and Rangers in general.)
They do as much as any other weapon user out there because they benefit from the same bonuses like weapon focus, iron armbands, etc....

Yet they don't need to do as much as any other weapon user out there as long as these other weapon users are not strikers. If the avenger can do as much as a paladin or swordmage that doesn't matter because his bar is set by the barbarian/rogue/ranger. While the increased accuracy helped, it did not put them on the level of the other weapon strikers.
Avengers still tie with barbarians for the highest ac in the game,

No, that honor is back with the swordmages.
so getting an overpowered damage feat isnt an "acceptable compromise".

Pre-Errata-PO an avenger had sub-par striker damage offset by having defender-AC. Past-Errata an anvenger had just sub-par striker damage. Past-Errata-PO an avenger just became a striker.
As far as marked scourge and holy strike goes, not every build will use them because they are based on optional secondary stats. Example, my str/dex tempset fighter with a 10 wis will never take marked scourge.

And since the fighter is not a striker his damage output has no bearing here (except for maybe proving that an actual striker needs to be buffed if he's below fighter DPR).
Keep in mind that avangers, on average, will hit 50% more often and crit 100% more often than other classes. With that in mind you should look at their damage as if it was 55% higher when comparing it to other strikers.

These are factored in and still don't push the damage high enough (it's also hitting 25% more often if you roll two dice)A level 11 avenger with 20-21 wisdom, a generic +3 fullblade, weapon focus, and +2 iron armbands, deals 1d12+12 with his at-will. Compared to other strikers that is an average (+55%) of 28.675. Which is very comparable and far far surpasses warlocks.
And I have seen level 9 sorcerer dealing 1d10+16 and rangers get to apply each static-non-stat-mod twice and a good chance of getting an extra die once. Barbarians get an extra dice build into their attacks and to add a second ability mod to most of their attacks. Rogues get to target NADs while having a to-hit bonus and sneak attack damage.

Warlocks are currently SOL; but that's a reason to buff them as well, not to nerf anyone down to their level (or prevent anyone who's sharing their pain from getting help)

















They do as much as any other weapon user out there because they benefit from the same bonuses like weapon focus, iron armbands, etc....

Yet they don't need to do as much as any other weapon user out there as long as these other weapon users are not strikers. If the avenger can do as much as a paladin or swordmage that doesn't matter because his bar is set by the barbarian/rogue/ranger. While the increased accuracy helped, it did not put them on the level of the other weapon strikers.

Well, Avengers still have their own striker class feature. its called censure and it triggers more than people would care to admit like I said in my post. 6 damage at heroic is comparable to sneak attack and is better than quarry/curse damage. Avengers also have defender level hp and surges lest we forget. So they can still defender really well.

Avengers still tie with barbarians for the highest ac in the game,

No, that honor is back with the swordmages.

Uh, really? Can you prove that with some math? Because swordmages are still second when it comes to AC. They themselves are only 1 above a plate and shield defender. While barbarians and avengers are still 1-2 points higher than swordmages.


so getting an overpowered damage feat isnt an "acceptable compromise".

Pre-Errata-PO an avenger had sub-par striker damage offset by having defender-AC. Past-Errata an anvenger had just sub-par striker damage. Past-Errata-PO an avenger just became a striker.

Post errata avengers still have 2[w] encounter and 3[w] dailies that have usually good effects(aspect of might anyone?) just like any of the striker classes. Their at-wills may suffer in the damage department in exchange for utility but still good.


As far as marked scourge and holy strike goes, not every build will use them because they are based on optional secondary stats. Example, my str/dex tempset fighter with a 10 wis will never take marked scourge.

And since the fighter is not a striker his damage output has no bearing here (except for maybe proving that an actual striker needs to be buffed if he's below fighter DPR).

Warlocks are currently SOL; but that's a reason to buff them as well, not to nerf anyone down to their level (or prevent anyone who's sharing their pain from getting help)


My comment was for the people comparing painful oath to marked scourge when they are clearly different cases. Main stat twice to damage > main stat + optional secondary stat.


















Painful Oath still leaves Avengers behind Rangers, Sorcerers (even vs single target), Barbarians, and Rogues in terms of damage output.


I'm surprised to see people actually getting angry about this, considering it's pretty common knowledge that Avengers and Warlocks have been at the bottom of the Striker damage output range for quite some time.
Painful Oath still leaves Avengers behind Rangers, Sorcerers (even vs single target), Barbarians, and Rogues in terms of damage output.

I'm surprised to see people actually getting angry about this, considering it's pretty common knowledge that Avengers and Warlocks have been at the bottom of the Striker damage output range for quite some time.

I was rather surprised as well.

And as to the whole "OMG this is so a feat tax" debate: I'll happily pay some tax to make the game a better experience
Short answer: yes.

Long answer: yes, if the Avenger is supposed to be a Striker class. I'm not really seeing the big deal with this. A ranger with the Lethal Hunter feat will be rolling 2d8s once per round at Paragon tier (9 average damage), compared to 5-6 once per round from Painful Oath.
Warlock is not a fair standard to evaluate the power of avenger, considering the fact that warlock is one of two strikers with the lowest DPR.

And after the introduction of AV2, infernal warlock, at least, can deal respectable damage with shadowrift dagger + Hellish Rebuke.