Can a Runepriest be as effective as an Artificer?

39 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hey all,

I'm rolling a leader for my next game, and I've looked at both of these classes (starting level is 14). The character concepts boil down to a Warforged Artificer and a Longtooth Shifter Runepriest, and I would rather play the Longtooth Shifter Runepriest from an RP point of view. I have some great ideas for him, and I think he would ultimately be a more rich character in a low-technology setting (which is a point against the Warforged in and of itself).

However, I've been really struggling to build a comparable leader to the Artificer, and I'm just totally coming up short. The Artificer's ability to prevent damage, buff and debuff just seems so superior in every respect. I've even paragoned him into Lyrander Wind-Rider, to take advantage of an insane additional amount of damage to his thunder-based abilities and the shifting powers.

My Artificer's at-will is Ranged 5, hits for 1d8+15 damage,  strikes an NAD, shifts the enemy 1 square - oh, and grants a -5 to all damage that monster does AND grants a +5 damage to all allies adjacant to the target as well (via Master Wand). Also, with the White Lotus powers availible to Artificers due to their arcane nature, I have a very, very powerful "anti-mark" that, essnetially deals 7 damage, and lets me attack for a potential 1d8+15 damage if my chosen target has the nerve to try and attack me.

Meanwhile, the best I can do for an At-Will on the Runepriest is 1d12+7 damage, from melee ranged with a Fullblade, strikes AC, and ... grants +4 to damage to all allies. The best I can get from PrCs seems to be +1 damage. No other support seems to be availible.

Considering this is the attack I'll be using 50% of the time, at least... the disparity here just ridiculous. I'm just not seeing any PrCs or combos that grant the "oh wow" factor of the Artificer to the Runepriest.

As for healing potential, my god... the Artificer is a beast. I don't even think I need to get into just how much healing he can do. Forget the dailies that let me used ranged Heal checks on people, the feats that let me clone my preventative damage abilities (yeah, pick a second target - he gets the temporary hps too), and the Shared Valor armor which gives me half the temporary hit points I give others. The only Heroic/Availible Paragon tiered heal Runepriests seem to have is Shield of Sacrifice. Don't get me wrong, it's great, but where's the syngery that makes it ridiculously good? Where's the feat support that take an already great power and make it sheer battle changing? I'm just not seeing these combos.

Can someone help me out here? I've looked over the wikis exhaustively, but I'm hoping I missed something.  Thanks.

Runepriest can be pretty buff (don't underestimate the value of things like a constant +1 to hit on anything standing next to you, or PPs like Master of the Forge, in the right party) but they do tend to be more party-dependent.  Build a party around them, they can be pretty tight, but Artificers I think are more flexible WRT party makeup.

That being said, neither of them will serve you poorly.  Similarly, looking purely at at-wills will limit you fairly significantly.  Runepriests get some solid encounters, where artificers have occasional fairly weak levels.

Not to mention the fact that Runepriests do get some very nice PPs.  I particularly like Hammer of Vengeance for off-striking like nobody's business.

And Runepriests are very role-flexible.  They're off-defenders one moment, off-strikers the next.

Neither is top-tier as a leader though.
Harrying your Prey, the Easy Way: A Hunter's Handbook - the first of what will hopefully be many CharOp efforts on my part. The Blinker - teleport everywhere. An Eladrin Knight/Eldritch Knight. CB != rules source.
Reading your post doesn't seem like anything so much as a cry for support for the Runepriest class. You're with good company in that regard: These boards love the Runepriest class for the most part, and would *drink up* any support they got. 

That said, it's a little unfair to compare your Artificer to your Runepriest. The runepriest doesn't seem to have any PP associated with him, like you obviously have with the Artificer. The artificer you have statted out like a ranged striker, while the Runepriest you have conspicuously left vanilla and blank. This is furthermore alarming, since you seem to be comparing the static damage modifiers of the two classes, when neither one can be said to have much strength in that regard. The artificer strength is in flexibility and healing, the Runepriest strength is in debuffing and enabling. 

The other thing you seem to be omitting is that these two classes perform completely different secondary roles. Runepriests in particular make for amazing frontline secondary defenders and off tanks. The wrathful build is probably the best at manipulating this, with his decent surges, hp, the ability to grab both plate and plate specialization, and the quite powerful Hammer of Vengeance PP. Artificers make strong ranged enablers, summoners, and are especially adept at assisting arcane allies. 

That said, I disagree with your vague inferrence that healing utilities are required for a decent leader. That is simply an untrue statement. The Warlord, unarguably the "best" leader in 4E, has few healing utilities even for all the support they have. They get along fine by burning down the enemies quickly through basic attacks and party buffs. The Runepriest does something similar to this, but with a somewhat stronger tendency towards debuffing enemies through his powers. 

Honestly, if you have to pick between the two, I would base your choice on what you think you'd enjoy more first, then consider the needs of the party second. 

TL;DR: If you have a ton of melee in your group, then consider the Runepriest more thoroughly, maybe stat it out from 1 to 14. If you have fewer melee and some arcane characters in your group, then maybe stick with the Artificer.  
If it helps, refluff the Warforged race and the Artificer class into something more traditionally arcane and less steampunk; iron golems instead of quasi-robots, runecasters instead of enchanters/artisans, things like that.
Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal. But the good name never dies of one who has done well. Cattle die, kindred die, every man is mortal. But I know one thing that never dies: the glory of the great dead. - [i]Hávamál[/i] D&D 4th Edition Bard builds: The Dashing Swordsman, The Master of Sound and Illusions, The Warrior Skald Captain Morality! (No point in not having fun with it. )
I don't mean for this to come off as a "plea for Runepriest buffs" - the truth is, I haven't done much looking at either class before last week.

The combos of the Artificer class are very well detailed, and are unmistakably powerful. It's not that I'm building him as a ranged striker - to do what I did just simply requires 1-2 feats and a Paragon path. I mean, the At-Wills was just one example, but the disrepency between the two is riduclous, unless I'm missing something. In order to off-set it, one would think the Runepriest Encounter/Daily/Utilities would have to be so completely OP vs. an Artificers... but at best, I think we can agree they are at least even.

Is there seriously no specific combos that are sorta wowing for a Runepriest. I don't care if the secondary effect is being a surprisingly good striker/defender/controller... but is there something concrete? With Hide Armor + Int, it seems like I could - if I wanted to - build an artificer to be just as durable in melee... but when ranged is such an option for them, why would I want to?

I'm no expert on the class, nor have I ever seen it played before... which is why I'm asking, not whining.

Not to mention the fact that Runepriests do get some very nice PPs.  I particularly like Hammer of Vengeance for off-striking like nobody's business.



I just took a look at that. Okay, this is what I'm talking about - this is very powerful. Unfortunately, it makes it so I have to gimp my Will NAD (I was going Str/Wis... it's gonna be a -5 hit to that. Ouch.) to get the best out of that come level 16, and I also don't like the Con-based secondary powers as much as the Wis-based secondary.

That being said, that certainly is something though.
personaly I can see arguments as to why word of diminishment is better then magic weapon.

in order for magic weapon to work you have to be in burst one when it is used, something that only really be done with either a all ranged party or at the start of combat, and if you miss you get nothing.

however a runeprist who is next to his word of diminishment target gives everyone +1 hit regardless of hit  or miss, if he hits he inflicts vul 4 all to the target. that is not as much as magic weapon but every can benifit from it. it also stacks with power bonus to damage, unlike magic weapon.

on my wis secondary runepriest with master of the forge PP these are the bonuses I give out each round if I just want to buff damage (at level 12)

first round:
+4 power bonus to all damage (heal)
+4 untyped bonus to weapon damage (actoin point)
+[W] against one target, rangers love this (call of iron)
+1 untyped hit against all adjacent targets (aura)
vul 4 all (word of diminishment)

non weapon attacks = +1 hit,+8 damage
weapon attacks = +1 hit, [W]+12 damage

second round:
+4 power bonus to all damage (heal)
+1 untyped hit against all adjacent targets (aura)
vul 4 all (word of diminishment)

attacks = +1 hit,+8 damage

third round:
+3 power bonus to all damage (flames of purity)
+1 untyped hit against all adjacent targets (aura)
vul 4 all (word of diminishment)

attacks = +1 hit,+7 damage

----

and that is just damage, there are other attacks you can use for survival, the utlity for master of the forge is amazing (minor, melee touch +2 ac if in light armor, +4 if in heavy)

runepriest are amazing versital, whatever the party needs they can do leader wise







Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
A crossbow artificer is much better than any runepriest build, mainly due to Shocking Feedback and other immediate action powers.  The paragon paths like Spell Commander are much better also.  Not to mention Punishing Eye.  Other than lacking any good level 1 encounter power, artificers are kind of beasts at heroic tier.
I think they are about equal, while the runepriest has no immidates, the runepriest has many awsome encounter powers, being able to tell a creatuer that is -5+adjasant allys to hit is huge, and a zone of +2 to all defences or +2 to AC and resist 5 all to area is good as well.

they do not play the same but they can be just as effective leaders
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
The ability, for one feat, to double the effectiveness of proactve healing, tips the scale to Artificer in a big way imo
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
I really like the Rune Shield PP. Which allows Whenever you enter a new rune state, you can enter the rune state of the iron shield instead. While you are in this rune state, each ally gains a +2 bonus to all defenses while adjacent to you. This rune state ends when you move.

And increases to +4 at lvl 16.

This means you can pick the best rider for the power and get into this awesome rune state. Granted you can't move with it on but all that means is swing after you move and you get it back.

This might be a good option if you have a few melee allies. Personally I used it in a lvl 16 VT one shot and it was great. I used a heavy shield and a whip (so I had reach and could whip enemies for another -2 to attack rolls and the reach so I could stay out of the way a bit and give the team room to crowd around me for the +4 def). My damage was terrible but I had a great time and the team loved it.
Yeah, Enhanced Resistive Formula is very very strong.  I don't see any Runepriest power that is as good as Magic Weapon + some artificer immediate.  Runepriest can do its job, but it is the weakest of the oLeaders imo.
ya I think I am going to change to that one at lv16.

and I never said runepriest were good at healing, they are not but leaders do more then healing
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
the problem with artificers is that what they do is too limited, they might have magic weapon but everyone needs to be in burst one somehting that cant be depended on each fight all the fight, same for immidates.

a runepreist can sit next to someone for +1 to hit to everyone, heal to give everyone +4dmg, use other powers that help the entire party, and you have more options then a artificer, you are less of a one trick pony.

in char op articfer may be better because you can assume everyone is hugging each other for magic weapon, and you dont need to radicly change stratagy mid fight articer may be better but in a real game I prefer a runepriest

----edit
in my exsperence you get one good round of magic weapon then you are lucky to get 2 people in it, I dont care where people are on my runepriest.
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
Leaders require party cooperation, news at 11.

Assuming a cooperative party no build of Runepriest will beat an Artificer, but it should work fine. Assuming an uncooperative party play something that isn't a leader or you'll be incredibly frustrated 100% of the time.
true but requireing everyone to remain in burst 1 is excessive, true if you build your party around it then it can work but that means you have no melee characters, and you dont mind taking more damage from casters who like to burst.

even then runepriest can stack the damage bonus higher reliaby for the first 2 or 3 rounds, and have more things that help the entire party, and more options should the **** hit the fan.

and while in a non LFR setting the party is a given nothing else is, what if you enter a room from two sides?  or terain makes it such that attacking from a burst 1 is not easy or a good idea?

you should not a make a character assuming that everything will always go according to plan, have options should your plan A not work, THAT is what makes runepriest awsome, they always have options, and good use of there powers.

word of diminishment cant be wasted, magic weapon can be easily wasted if people cant clump up
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
You're acting like you have to get everyone with Magic Weapon in order for it to be good.  That just isn't the case.

You just need to get one ally next to you and it's already great.  An artificer can hang out next to a bow ranger all day long and just fire his crossbow next to him.
You're acting like you have to get everyone with Magic Weapon in order for it to be good.  That just isn't the case.

You just need to get one ally next to you and it's already great.  An artificer can hang out next to a bow ranger all day long and just fire his crossbow next to him.



Magic Weapon works great in two cases. One, at the beginning of combat before anyone else goes (great for alpha striking) and chilling next to a striker/powerful defender (fighter). It works brilliantly and I do it frequently.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
on one person its maringal weather its worth it, though yes a twin strking ranger does make it worth it even for one person.

the thing with runepriests is that you dont have to worry about that, I can give my +1 hit, +4 dmg to anyone I want be they melee, ranged whatever. as long as they attack one target

while I give out my other stuff like +4 weapon damge from action pointing, heal bonus ect
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
Another major reason artificer is dominant (and I realize this is mainly just a charop thing and not a statement on the parent classes) is Killswitch and how well artificer hybrids with warlord.  I know runepriest also hybrids well, espec. with some defenders, etc., but artificer|warlord go together like peanut butter and chocolate.
Another major reason artificer is dominant (and I realize this is mainly just a charop thing and not a statement on the parent classes) is Killswitch and how well artificer hybrids with warlord.  I know runepriest also hybrids well, espec. with some defenders, etc., but artificer|warlord go together like peanut butter and chocolate.




true, but compairing anyting to killswitch is like comparing a strikers damage to a fully optimized twin striker, it is not a good metric because no one is going to get close
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
It's not just with Warlords, Artificer just hybrids very well (and so does Warlord) with anything that uses Con, Wis, or Int (oh look, that's pretty much everything!) and can even work with things that completely don't (One Stroke to kill them All, the Arti|Avenger DPR King comes to mind)

Given your replies, captpike, it really just seems like you want people to help you justify your desire to play a Runepriest regardless of how effective it is compared to an Artificer.  So simply: Play the character you want to play.  You'll be more effective when having fun
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
true, but compairing anyting to killswitch is like comparing a strikers damage to a fully optimized twin striker, it is not a good metric because no one is going to get close

Mmm, I'd say any discussion of Artificers has to include Killswitch, because that build deftly avoids the biggest weakness of the class: The Artificer has a large handful of stunningly good powers, but also several levels full of blah from top to bottom. Hybriding normally would be painful, but doing so with the Warlord mitigates the primary loss (multiples on Healing Infusion) and offers some much more attractive power options at what would be dead levels for a pure Artificer.

Likewise, the Runepriest also has a few really underappreciated powers, and a few levels that just don't bring the sexy. They hybrid fantastically with Rangers and Wardens, but both builds end up being more striker than leader. 

As a pure leader, I could only see the Runepriest competing with the Artificer if the party defender was a really optimized Chaladin who opens each encounter absolutely blanketing the fight with mass Divine Sanctions. Back his play up with a Master of the Forge, and Team Monster will have a truly tough nut to crack ...   
  

on one person its maringal weather its worth it, though yes a twin strking ranger does make it worth it even for one person.

the thing with runepriests is that you dont have to worry about that, I can give my +1 hit, +4 dmg to anyone I want be they melee, ranged whatever. as long as they attack one target

while I give out my other stuff like +4 weapon damge from action pointing, heal bonus ect

No, it isn't. For one thing you can't KTFM like that because you aren't adacent to the mage and you're not nearly as good at enabling your striker to focus fire on the target that is actually the most dangerous. For another you can start with 20 int on an Artificer, giving you +2 to hit on MW vs Runepriest at-wills, which is pretty big in the overal numbers since you need to hit to really do anything effective.

Zathris is probably right about your motivations though. /shrug.
I have no problem playing a non-optimal character, I have a LFR seeker I leveled from 11-18,

most of the good hybrids dont operate the way either of there parent classes do, they have to be considered there own class in most cases.

and I do belive that runepriests are underestinated, mostly because they require more tracking then most characters, and are odd. optimizers also tend to only care about the one thing they are build for, they tend not to see flexablity as an asset.

and a pet peave of mind is how people overesttimate magic weapon, or assume that every party member will have it all the time

----

I would say articers are ahead of runepriest untill paragon, just because articers tend to add secondary stat to damage, whereas runepriest add more static mods. in paragon runepriests pull ahead
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
I have no problem playing a non-optimal character, I have a LFR seeker I leveled from 11-18,

most of the good hybrids dont operate the way either of there parent classes do, they have to be considered there own class in most cases.

and I do belive that runepriests are underestinated, mostly because they require more tracking then most characters, and are odd. optimizers also tend to only care about the one thing they are build for, they tend not to see flexablity as an asset.

and a pet peave of mind is how people overesttimate magic weapon, or assume that every party member will have it all the time



How did we overestimate it? Or ever assume you're adjacent to all your allies?
Flexibility can be an asset, but it can also be a detriment. Flexibility comes at a cost, the cost being potent at your duty. 
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
Flexibility is like anyting else it depends what you pay for it. for most leaders you pay a faily high cost, geting a heal power VS an enableing power ect. because of the way runepriest powers work you often dont pay much at all (though there are some powers that only have one good rider, so its the same as other classes)

the problem with leaders that can only enable damage well is what happens when they need more then that? when they get into a fight they cant nova through? in such a situation a runepriest would have options that other leaders could not have while still being good at there main job.

and as far as magic weapon, past the first round you can only count on 1 or 2 people gaining the bonus each round, and that is if you hit. and strikers and other leaders tend to have power bonuses to damage, so often it is not as good as it sounds.

let us say an articer is able to give two people the magic weapon bonus in paragon, they both have +1, +5, if the articer misses then he gives nothing

a runepriest can give everyone (besides himself) +1 to hit, +4 to damage.

assuming a 5 person party that is +10 dmg from the articer and +16 damage (with +1 hit for the entire party hit or miss).

even in the first round when everyone can get the magic weapon bonus that is just +1, +5. a paragon runepriest can give +1,+8 plus action point benifit, and the second standard action (up to [W]+12 damage on weapon attacks)
-----

in paragon at least my exspernce is that in a vacume artificer is better but in a real fight runepriests are better
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
Dunno how you can say runepriests pull ahead in paragon, since that's when the spell commander gets:

1. extra granted attack when spending an ap
2. spell tracer for another extra attack
3. crossbows as implements, saving a feat for retrain
4. enhanced resistive formula, DOUBLING the effectiveness of the artificer's infusions
5. barbed automaton at 13

A battle engineer would get greater magic weapon as a turn 1 play, and at 16 the bonus to MW becomes +3 to attack with +Con/Wis to damage AND brutal 1.  +3 to attack obviously obliterates anything the runepriest is doing (hit >> dmg).

I think you're kind of locked in to your own class at the moment and just assuming it's better without really looking at artificer.  Artificer also has a ton of bombs whose power persists well into paragon/epic (punishing eye, healing figurine).
I have looked at the artificer, I would say they are roughly equal they dont do the same things, there overall effectiveness is about the same.

as far as healing/damage reduction/damage prevention goes the articer is better at healing and temp granting but the runepriest is better at preventing it. the runepriest has zones that give defence bonuses, as well as ways of making enimeys do less damage, have less chance to hit.

they dont go about it the same way but as far as healing/damage reduction they are both good at there job.

and you say the +3hit is better then anything the runepriest can give, I must say again that is only to the people next to you, not everyong like the runepriest's +1 hit is, and my +damage is going to be higher unless we get into 5 or so rounds of combat.

and with the runepriest paragon path and the right dailys your party can practicly unhitable, +4 to all def all encounter, +2 from daily zone (and you can get 2 or 3 of them), +1 from heal.

---

in an ideal situation the artificer might be better, but the higher you get the less ideal things become.

same for a 1 round nova group, but if you want 3 or 4 rounds of soild buffs, or a character that can change stragagy when need the runepriest is better.

again I would say they are about equal as leaders, but they dont do the same things the same way







Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
So we're comparing Aritificer Encounters and At-Wills to Runepriest Dailies? ooooookayyyyyy... (not to mention the +Def stuff is while adjacent to you, and weren't you just complaining about that being bad?)

And the runepriest's +1 hit is only against enemies adjacent to him.  Which is easier, standing next to an ally and using a power which gives them a bonus EonT (and they can move away), or standing next to an enemy who is fully capable of moving away (or dying) to give a bonus.  No, Magic Weapon isn't an end-all be-all, that doesn't matter, it's not their only power that gives out bonuses.  Giving buffs to: all allies against all enemies > some allies against all enemies > all allies against some enemies > some allies against some enemies.

I would also hope that this goes without saying, but clearly it doesn't: Enabling Leaders > Defensive Leaders.  I don't care how much you're boosting defenses or preventing damage, PC's do statistically worse the longer a fight takes.  Forcing clumping to boost those defenses isn't going to help much.

Also, Slick Concoction, Armor of Shared Recovery, and Shield of Fellowship say hi.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
in thory articicers can give more bonuses but that assumes everyone stays in burst one, something that cant happen but in ranged only parties, even then some fights will require changes to that because of terrain.

whereas a runepriest can always get next to someone and hit them, then everyone gets the bonuses, not just one or two people who happen to be next to the artificer.

there are situations where magic weapon would be better then aura+word of diminishment but what if you have two melee strikers and a warlock who is build around prime shot? then you will only get one good round of magic weapon and that is only if you win init.

even if you just look at pure damage increaseing, I would put on average the runepriest about the same level as the artificer, but the artificer spikes higher and lower depending on the situation and the party.

the runepriest also has a deeper bag of tricks when it comes to doing things they dont normily do, like leading more defencsivly then ofensivly

---

and I would say it is better to grant everyone a bonus to damage on one target then two people a bonus on everyone, given the the runepriest's bonus(es) are going to be on the focus fire target. this would only be different if the two given bonuses are bursters, even then it is better to have one target dead then two at half health
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )


I would also hope that this goes without saying, but clearly it doesn't: Enabling Leaders > Defensive Leaders.  I don't care how much you're boosting defenses or preventing damage, PC's do statistically worse the longer a fight takes.  Forcing clumping to boost those defenses isn't going to help much.

Also, Slick Concoction, Armor of Shared Recovery, and Shield of Fellowship say hi.



Offensive Leaders > Defensive Leaders, then. Not Enabling. Enabling is only a part of the offense.

Chauntea/Lathander/Torm Cleric since 1995 My husband married a DM - καλὸς καὶ ἀγαθός

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/14.jpg)

in thory articicers can give more bonuses but that assumes everyone stays in burst one, something that cant happen but in ranged only parties, even then some fights will require changes to that because of terrain.

whereas a runepriest can always get next to someone and hit them, then everyone gets the bonuses, not just one or two people who happen to be next to the artificer.

there are situations where magic weapon would be better then aura+word of diminishment but what if you have two melee strikers and a warlock who is build around prime shot? then you will only get one good round of magic weapon and that is only if you win init.

even if you just look at pure damage increaseing, I would put on average the runepriest about the same level as the artificer, but the artificer spikes higher and lower depending on the situation and the party.

the runepriest also has a deeper bag of tricks when it comes to doing things they dont normily do, like leading more defencsivly then ofensivly

---

and I would say it is better to grant everyone a bonus to damage on one target then two people a bonus on everyone, given the the runepriest's bonus(es) are going to be on the focus fire target. this would only be different if the two given bonuses are bursters, even then it is better to have one target dead then two at half health

I've played both. Unless your party is retarded, you're wrong. If you want to play a  Runepriest, fine, go ahead, it is a fine class. But your question was which is better. The answer is Artificer. Multiple people have told you this. There is zero room for debate here, the Runepriest does not have the support to be better.

Your assumptions are ignorant on multiple levels. There is no rational optimal reason to play a Runepriest over an Artficer.

Christ.
Catpike is not the OP.
Catpike is not the OP.

And to be fair, it's "captpike" presumably per Star Trek rather than something evoking the household guards abusing domestic pets.

I've had some measured sympathy for his position, because he's trying to articulate a valid point: A Runepriest cannot hope to match the sheer utility of the Artificer's A-list powers, but the Runepriest is far more flexible, perhaps the most reactive leader build in the game.

IIRC Alcestis advised the OP to not play a leader if the other players weren't prone to cooperative play, which is pure wisdom for Artificers or Warlords. But a Runepriest can amble around and tailor his contribution to the situation at the time. Fight going well? Pour on some more enabling (if not as much as the big boy leader builds). An ally getting in a crunch? Switch to some defensive buffing to help pull him out.

Does this flexibility add more value than the massive healing and very solid buffing brought to the table by an Artificer? If you took Enhanced Resistive Formula off of the board maybe you could have a debate, but as it stands: highly unlikely.      

Catpike is not the OP.

And to be fair, it's "captpike" presumably per Star Trek rather than something evoking the household guards abusing domestic pets.


LOL, whoops. I thought it was a mammal/fish hybrid.
One thing that's not been said in all this.  Runepriest often get their own bonuses.

So they get +4 damage with diminish, and +4 when they heal, and possibly Secondary if they where attacked.  Though they do loose out on the +1 magic weapon grants.

They also hybrid avenger (with hammer of vengence PP) quite well.   Check my sig for a nice one.

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.

Check my sig for a nice one.

siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh

"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
While artificers are certainly more powerful healers, "better" is rather ambiguous. It really depends on your party, your play style, and what you want to do with your leader. Personally I like the runepriest more than the artificer, every time you heal, you give an aoe buff and if you take some of the rune feats, you start granting aoe temps and eventually aoe healing with your 2-3/encounter heal. If you are playing in eberron, a dwarf with mark of warding makes a flippin' amazing party buffer. I am not arguing which one is better, just which one I like better and why...
Check my sig for a nice one.

siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh


Would you prefer Mellow to make a brand new build every time someone asks a question about a runepriest? He's only got 10,000 posts, ya know. =)