My group wants to nerf my barbarian

132 posts / 0 new
Last post
I am a level 10 rageblood barbarian, and my group wants to nerf me because I deal such good damage to single targets.  They say it breaks the balance in the game because I kill the big monsters so quickly.  I say just add more big monsters.  I am quite annoyed that they want to nerf me because doing single target damage is ALL I do, it's my role, and if they take that away, what good am I?  What do you guys think?  Do you have any suggestions for balancing the game?
If they want you to dial it back, dial it back.  It won't kill you to retrain a feat or power or two into something less effective.  You'll still be a big damage dealer, just not AS big.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
The thing is, changing a power or two isn't enough for them.
The thing is, changing a power or two isn't enough for them.



What, exactly, do they want?

Your other option is to play less well; do things that are less tactically savvy, hold back on your big gun powers until the group is in the soup, then you can do a cool heroic-resurgence-save-the-day thing.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
It might help if you post your build for people to examine.

HAND OF KARSUS!

 

 

I dunno.  When I have a striker in my group that can dish out a crapton of damage in one hit, I usually cheer them on and let them get to work.

The DM should be challenging you not by throwing Elites out every encounter, but also by putting minions out there.  With a minion, it doesn't matter if you can hit for 60 points in one hit, because that's 59 damage that doesn't get applied anywhere.

Controllers love lots of minions and enemies.  They may feel less than useful when it comes down to one large monster.  Conversely, strikers love big monsters because they can knock out huge chunks of hit points, while minions make them feel as if their character is wasted.

The DM should be taking your strength into account, but also your weakness.  When your group sees that you're not as effective on a large number of minions, it might allay their fears that you're "breaking the balance" of the game.

Of course, if your DM is the type that doesn't use minions .... 
They don't know what they want to do yet, but I've suggested changing a power or two and they said that wouldn't be enough because I'd still be ending encounters to quickly and easily.  The annoying thing is, they have no problem at all optimizing their characters, but apparantly I'm not supposed too. 
I like the idea of using the minions to do that.  I hope they go for it, haha.
They don't know what they want to do yet, but I've suggested changing a power or two and they said that wouldn't be enough because I'd still be ending encounters to quickly and easily.  The annoying thing is, they have no problem at all optimizing their characters, but apparantly I'm not supposed too. 



Yes, that would be annoying.  I assumed you were in my boat; I'm the only person in my group who optimizes at all, therefore I am occassionally asked to dial it down because I outperform everybody (pardon my hubris).

Another pertinent question ... what is the DM's opinion of your character/optimization level?  If it doesn't bother him, then you should politely say 'I'll build my character, you build yours', especially since they're being rather hypocritical.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
If this were my group, and the players were complaining that I was ending combat too quickly for them, I'd agree to reroll, and then I'd build a completely optimized Twin-Strike Ranger to show them how much damage a striker can really put out. 
The DM isn't sure what to do.  He isn't sure how to balance it and hasn't said he wants to nerf me for sure, but he is considering it.  I hope they go for the minion idea, because I think that sounds pretty decent, but who knows? 
I like the idea of using the minions to do that.  I hope they go for it, haha.



Minions and Swarms are both counter points to strikers - damage isnt everything - 

A war zone or series of battle scenes featuring lots of these can actually make doing all that focused damage feel a bit futile.

 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

first off let me say that thewok is absolutely correct, part of the problem is likely due to the DM not setting up the encounters as well as he/she could.  Now having said that, the striker controversy has been one that has seen some resurgence the last few days around here.  what your group is probably feeling is a lack of satisfaction in their own characters (because they don't do big damage and the role of their character is not as satisfying to them as hitting things), and they are expressing this by attacking you--intentionally or unintentionally.  There are players in my own game that get a bit envious at our half-orc monk when he unleashes an attack and then stacks furious assault and stone fist flurry of blows on top of it.  I can tell that our defender, a new player, has a bit of a WTF moment every time this happens.

You've already mentioned that they have brought this challenge to you without any solid solutions in mind, which does not speak well to their communication about this. The way I see it you have a couple of options, all of which may require you to be the bigger man:

1) You could offer to re-roll a character that is not a striker.  I don't think it's wise to just make your character bad or to make a new character that is intentionally un-optimized--this will not lead to a satisfying experience for you.  Let them experience life without a striker.  It may go just fine and fit your group's and DM's style just fine.  At that point, you get to have the satisfaction that you are selfless enough to be flexible for the sake of the group--even if another member wouldn't do the same.  If it goes badly, then they have a big "I told you so" moment coming to them.

2) You can find an "in-game" story reason for your character holding back until the tide of the battle demands him to step-up.  Perhaps he is capable of incredible feats in battle, but he is also equally gifted at strategy and has many Warlord-like traits about him that cause him to shout commands an let others mount their attacks before he takes action.  This could be expressed by positioning yourself lower in the initiative order by delaying your turn or readying actions.

You could also have a surprising heel turn in the middle of the combat and slaughter the rest of your party! ;)

 
I am a level 10 rageblood barbarian, and my group wants to nerf me because I deal such good damage to single targets.  They say it breaks the balance in the game because I kill the big monsters so quickly.  I say just add more big monsters.  I am quite annoyed that they want to nerf me because doing single target damage is ALL I do, it's my role, and if they take that away, what good am I?  What do you guys think?  Do you have any suggestions for balancing the game?

A series of questions for you to think about...

How long would it take you to tell me about your character as a person? Not as a set of stats or a combat machine, but his personality and background and whether he's on good terms with his family and why or why not? How long would it take most of the other players in your group to tell me about their characters?

Now, how much time do you put into picking an attack power when the character levels up (or did you plan the complete progression before the game started)? Did you read the guides in charop? What would the other players in the group say to these questions?

And, how many feats and attribute points did you put into NON-combat stuff? Does your character have any non-combat gear other than the basic adventurer's kit? Again, how would the other players in the group answer these?

How is the amount of combat in the game as your DM is running it? Too much, too little, about right? And yet again, about the other players...

If you think that your answers are quite a bit different from those of others in your group, then apparently there's a mismatch between your expectations for the game and the expectations of the other members of the group.

NOBODY IS WRONG. It's just that characters built on significantly different expectations often create exactly the sort of problem you're seeing.

The alternatives, then, would be

  1. Everyone else, including the DM, adjust their expectations. This works best when the group is roughly evenly divided. Not so much when there's a 5-1 split - even if the 1 is the DM.

  2. You adjust your expectations. This (and adjusting your character to match adjusted expectations) is what your group is asking for. You sound willing but unenthusiastic.

  3. Some combination of the above. With a 5-1 split, expect an agreed adjustment to be more of #2 than #1.

  4. You find another group. Sometimes this is the best solution for everyone involved. Just part ways on good terms; nobody's terrible, you collectively just have contradictory desires so you decided not to pursue them collectively.

Now here's another possible cause. Maybe everyone else wants to be as effective in their combat role as you are in yours, but doesn't know how to optimize their character. You'd have to ask them if that is the case, and then decide if the ones who say 'yes' really mean it. If this looks like a viable way to go, offer to help them and/or point them at the specific charop handbooks relevant to their characters.

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose

You could also have a surprising heel turn in the middle of the combat and slaughter the rest of your party! ;)

 



I know there's a smiley there, but just because that's such a horrible idea, I'm going to say Oh, HELL No.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Come on Salla, you know want to read about how THAT would turn out!
Come on Salla, you know want to read about how THAT would turn out!



Not really, no.  I despise PvP and traitorous PCs.  Goes against everything I stand for in gaming.

But we digress.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Well, I've never experienced it happening and I wasn't at all serious about it. I thought based on the content of my post it would be fairly obvious that I was joking about that part but perhaps that didn't translate well.  My apologies if I rubbed you the wrong way.
If this were my group, and the players were complaining that I was ending combat too quickly for them, I'd agree to reroll, and then I'd build a completely optimized Twin-Strike Ranger to show them how much damage a striker can really put out. 



I'd go the opposite route and make the most useless character I could, as an example of "be careful what you wish for"

Yeah, the problem is, I put ALOT of effort into my character, I tried to make him the best I possibly could.  So did everyone else, but I have spent more time then them in the character creater.  I've leveled my character to 30 at least 12 different times to see how things combine and to see what combinations I like best.  We all agreed at the start that optimizing our characters was acceptable, so that is what I did.  It would just suck to have all my hard work be nullified.  Someone asked about my character's backstory, so here it is:

 My character was a part of a barbarian tribe in the mountains who tamed rocs.  In this tribe surnames aren't given, they are earned.  My character earned the surname "The Mountain Breaker" when he hit the edge of a cliff face he was on hard enough to cause an avalanche that took out an invading force of gnolls.  Once per generation someone is born with the ability to channel their rage into a devestating berserker state.  This generation, it was my character who was born with it.  Unfortunetly it manifisted itself during a friendly hand to hand fighting tournament in which my character was unable to stop himself from killing his brother.  Thus, my character was banished from the tribe and eventually came to worship Pelor.  Through the peace that Pelor offers, my character was able to master and control his rages and has vowed to fight evil and protect the innocent in the adventuring group he is in.
Well, I've never experienced it happening and I wasn't at all serious about it. I thought based on the content of my post it would be fairly obvious that I was joking about that part but perhaps that didn't translate well.  My apologies if I rubbed you the wrong way.



I assumed such with the smiley, but there are people who would have taken you seriously.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.

If they're calling you out specifically, there is something that doesn't work for the group.  The goal of the game is to have fun.  If they're not having fun because of your PC - whether it is baanced or not - a change would be a good thing.

The game works best with suboptimal builds.  Efficient, but not optimal, builds are the sweet spot where everything is balanced well without the need for DMs to adjust encounters while the players face an appropriate level of challenge.  A well built barbarian can slip out of that sweet spot pretty easily. 

My recommendation: Play something else for a few sessions and see if you like it.  have the barbarian go on a trip to vist his aunt Bertha and introduce something else - perhaps a Warlock - and see if that can be fun too.  If not, ask to switch back to the barbarian.  If you like it just as much and the other players like it better... obvious answer.   

D&D & Boardgames If I have everything I need to run great games for many years without repeating stuff, why do I need to buy anything right now?
If you're going to role reversal. I suggest something that does no damage, but can't be killed (revenant battlemind). Or something that enables your allies to kill things faster (warlord).

But really, if you ARE overshadowing your other players, you should dial it back. Take linguist instead of weapon focus.

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.

If you're going to role reversal. I suggest something that does no damage, but can't be killed (revenant battlemind). Or something that enables your allies to kill things faster (warlord).



Or a pacifist cleric. :D
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
The thing is, I'm not overshadowing them at all.  Our tank is epically unkillable, our sorcer does awesome AOE damage, our healer (I forget the class name) heals incredibly well, and our sentinel also is quite awesome.  I also don't kill stuff super fast either, on average it takes me 3 to 4 attacks to kill something big, and thats if I don't miss or I don't get incapacitated.  I could make myself even more damaging than I am, but I decided that a little bit of survivablity would be a good thing.
Yeah I would ease back, don't Nova unless the party is in trouble, you end up being the Hero rather then the guy who doesn't let an encounter go past him. 

You don't have to alter your character per say, but use sub optimal powers that you already have, more at-will less encounters. 

The big thing is you won't have fun if the people you're playing with aren't having fun, so you need to come to a consensus that works for everyone.
Hmm cooperative games with large power disparities inherent in the system do lead to interesting dynamics. All optimized party means DM needs to redo all encounters. With char-ops around it's not even hard to make a very powerful PC now. I would just tone it down a bit get rid of a bit of the synergies that lead to damage and up the defense a bit and maybe even some non-combat skills. 

Still be effective, don't sabotage your group. The game is about socialising and having fun as much as anything else. 
Hmm cooperative games with large power disparities inherent in the system do lead to interesting dynamics. All optimized party means DM needs to redo all encounters. With char-ops around it's not even hard to make a very powerful PC now. I would just tone it down a bit get rid of a bit of the synergies that lead to damage and up the defense a bit and maybe even some non-combat skills. 

Still be effective, don't sabotage your group. The game is about socialising and having fun as much as anything else. 



Thing is, from the sound of it, his character isn't much more, if at all, more optimized than the rest of the party.  Perhaps only in terms of damage, but it sounds like everybody else is quite good at the jobs they do as well.

I need to think more about this ... it's kind of a tricky situation.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Yeah, see, I wouldn't have a problem with toning it down a bit if they all would too...but they won't.  They don't think that them being awesome that their jobs hurts anything, but me being awesome at mine apparantly breaks things.  I mean, how long is combat supposed to last anyway?  It's not like I walk in and absolutely destroy everything, I just happen to lay down a big amount of hurt on the enemy when my turn comes up, which is what i'm supposed to do.  What I find odd is the fact that they don't seem to mind our Sorceror laying down a crap ton of Aoe damage on his turns...
Hmm cooperative games with large power disparities inherent in the system do lead to interesting dynamics. All optimized party means DM needs to redo all encounters. With char-ops around it's not even hard to make a very powerful PC now. I would just tone it down a bit get rid of a bit of the synergies that lead to damage and up the defense a bit and maybe even some non-combat skills. 

Still be effective, don't sabotage your group. The game is about socialising and having fun as much as anything else. 



Thing is, from the sound of it, his character isn't much more, if at all, more optimized than the rest of the party.  Perhaps only in terms of damage, but it sounds like everybody else is quite good at the jobs they do as well.

I need to think more about this ... it's kind of a tricky situation.

It actually sounds like the first few months after 4e was released, and people started seeing rogues and rangers in play.

That leads me to ask: is this an experienced gaming group in general?  If so, are they experienced with 4e?

The group is most certainly not experienced, this this the first we've played.  The DM used to play alot back in the 2.0 days, and hated 4.0 at first until he tried it out.
First things first : I agree with mboss77, except about the "rage against my team" bit

Damage is the most visible power indicator in 4E - it's easier to "evaluate" than tactics, forced movements, staus, etc, and is often a cause of jealousy. And it makes fights shorter, this can be a problem when some classes/character concepts only shine when they have more time to fight.

Reading your character's story, I would suggest that you insist on the "inner peace given by Pelor" aspect.
First, change a little the way you fight, by spending more time, in a fight, looking after the well-being of the other players : use low damage attacks, keep big ones and rages for when monsters attack your fragile friends. Damage becomes something you do to save their lives. Role play this as your character trying to harness his violence - maybe he fears it ?- but letting it flow when the people he cares about are in danger.

Second, ask your DM to retrain some of your feats and powers. Choose less "damage oriented" powers, the ones with status effects, or forced movements, that could be useful to the other members of the team. Keep enough to be efficient in time of crisis : the goal is not to make you "bad" at striking, but to "look" more team oriented.
As your character as gained a lot of "wisdom" trying to control his rages, leader- like powers may be interesting.

I think you can easily "sacrifice" part of your "extreme damage ability" without "breaking" your character concept.
It seems that your team would like to have more time to play their own characters, and use their own powers, and they just think you are too fast a killer for them to have fun. Make sure you let them know, by the way you play and role play, that you want them to have fun too.
Remember Tunnel Seventeen !
Hmmm.. they don't see there own role as equally valuable I am gathering?  Is the DM using published adventures or homebrew?  If homebrew they might be missing some elements that might make the fights a bit more challenging for all involved.

How many fights you guys do before ERs?


These are homebrewed adventures.  Also, our combat takes a long time to resolve so the other players have plenty of time to do their abilities.  The thing is this I think...the other players didn't have a problem with my damage until the DM said he wasn't sure how to balance combat because of my damage ablitity, then they all jumped on the "nerf the barb" bandwagon.  The DM is worried that combat will be too easy if I can take out the big monsters so well, and he is also worried that if he puts in more big monsters and I fall, then the other characters won't be able to take out the big monsters.
The thing is, I'm not overshadowing them at all.  Our tank is epically unkillable, our sorcer does awesome AOE damage, our healer (I forget the class name) heals incredibly well, and our sentinel also is quite awesome.  I also don't kill stuff super fast either, on average it takes me 3 to 4 attacks to kill something big, and thats if I don't miss or I don't get incapacitated.  I could make myself even more damaging than I am, but I decided that a little bit of survivablity would be a good thing.

As a note while I'm replyin to this post..this is an overall reply.  You just happened to post some of the party here.

Ok first you are a striker, a rageblood barb to be specific.  How much damage is 'too much' damage?  When you action point and lay all the smackdown on a single target do normal enemies tend to be bloodied and/or die?  Do elites tend to be bloody/heavily wounded?  Do Solo's edge right near being bloody?

How long are combats in general?  (in rounds, not in time actually spent).  About 5 rounds is what most people agree tends to be the optimum length.

What class is your tank?  Fighter, Warden, Paladin, Swordmage (I feel like I'm missing another..but not remembering right now).

Sorcerer is heavily AOE based?  Do you have push/slide powers you can use to set up some Sorc AOE nova rounds?  (If you can..use em to do this...you add on more damage by letting two strikers hit).

You got two healers or one?  The sentinel is technically a healer class and has access to some of the goodies of a controller class.  So is he the healer you couldn't remember the class for?  Or is there another?

Assuming two leaders (the other healer).  You've got one defender, one AOE based striker, one single target/heavy damage melee striker, and two leaders, one of whom has access to controller powers.

This is actually a party that needs a strong striker in it in order to do well.  Unless the defender is a fighter and the other healer is an artificer (or a warlord).  However I'm assuming the defender is a warden given the epically unkillable (instead of unhittable..the warden is all about taking damage and just not dieing..instead of not being hit).

So I honestly need to ask...can you give a better party compisition (fill in the missing holes?  can you name some of the effects your other healer gives for instance?  Name how the tank handles marks, equipment being worn, etc etc?  Or just give us class names).  I also need to know what sort of fights you tend to have.  How easy are enemies to hit, how much damage can they usually take, what sort of damage do they deal out, do the enemies tend to use hit and run tactics...attack in groups or in big numbers...etc etc etc?

Because, honestly, your character should be doing big damage, for one thing, for another your party seems ok in the way of being solid.  And yes to re-iterate, how many rounds do combats usually take?
The DM is worried that combat will be too easy if I can take out the big monsters so well, and he is also worried that if he puts in more big monsters and I fall, then the other characters won't be able to take out the big monsters.


I would give you the same advice that when I thought your fights were too short : keep enough big damage to be a life-saver, but "shine" less. Spend more time using less damaging powers, but with enough effects to be fun for you and the other team members. It should reduce the balancing problems of your DM : a typical fight will be less " barbarian regulated", and crisis fights will have your abilities helping the team.

Remember Tunnel Seventeen !
Lets see...the defender is a fighter who is sword and shield and focused on invigorating attacks and having high AC and temp hit points.  The sentinel is going the healer route mostly and our main healer is a leader class, I just can't remember what class he is exactly.  Combat takes on average 5 to 6 rounds, sometimes more.  The fighter has + 4 full plate armour and a heavy sheild and uses a broadsword.  I wear hide armour and I use a fullblade.  I don't have any magical weapons or armour.  The sentinel has a +1 frost spear, the sorceror has a +1 staff, and the main healer has +1 full plate armour and uses a bastard sword.

Our main healer also got resurrection automatically at level 9.  He has moves like hammer of the gods, a healing ability that lets someone heal as if they spent two healing surges.  He also has alot of ablities that let us make saving throws.
5-6 rounds doesn't seem like you are blowing stuff up. How many encounters berfore extended rests?  One encounter shouldnt typically be a huge test. Attrition over a 5-6 encounter day however should be.
We usually go two, sometimes 3 encounters before resting
These are homebrewed adventures.  Also, our combat takes a long time to resolve so the other players have plenty of time to do their abilities.  The thing is this I think...the other players didn't have a problem with my damage until the DM said he wasn't sure how to balance combat because of my damage ablitity, then they all jumped on the "nerf the barb" bandwagon.  The DM is worried that combat will be too easy if I can take out the big monsters so well, and he is also worried that if he puts in more big monsters and I fall, then the other characters won't be able to take out the big monsters.

Okay, this changes things. It isn't a problem that the party sees, it's the solution that the DM practically begged the party for to a problem the DM sees.

But it isn't the real problem. The real problem is that the DM doesn't yet know how to DM with decent strikers.

3-4 rounds to kill a same-level elite is NOT super-optimized. It's good but not overdone.

What Team Monster needs, to deal with a good striker, is minions and a DM that knows how to use them. Be glad you aren't playing a minion, because they face a fundamental conflict: their job is to bunch up and get in the melee striker's way, which makes them a real inviting target for the controller or burst striker. Therefore, they sometimes come in multiple waves. But the DM needs to remember that the regular monsters have to get involved early, so that hopefully there are still some minions left to harry the striker when he gets to them.
"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
Lets see...the defender is a fighter who is sword and shield and focused on invigorating attacks and having high AC and temp hit points.  The sentinel is going the healer route mostly and our main healer is a leader class, I just can't remember what class he is exactly.  Combat takes on average 5 to 6 rounds, sometimes more.  The fighter has + 4 full plate armour and a heavy sheild and uses a broadsword.  I wear hide armour and I use a fullblade.  I don't have any magical weapons or armour.  The sentinel has a +1 frost spear, the sorceror has a +1 staff, and the main healer has +1 full plate armour and uses a bastard sword.

Our main healer also got resurrection automatically at level 9.  He has moves like hammer of the gods, a healing ability that lets someone heal as if they spent two healing surges.  He also has alot of ablities that let us make saving throws.

So..for those who can't guess from how it goes...

Sword/Board fighter who focuses on temp HPs (not a damaging build).
A druid (Sentinal) focusing on healing skills.
A cleric (warpriest) that's the other leader..also healing focused (with saves).
A sorcerer (unnamed type..but AOE focused).
And a rageblood Barbarian.

I will also note the fighter is in +4 armor.
The sentinel has a +1 weapon.
The sorc has a +1 weapon.
The healer has a +1 armor.
And the barbarian has a weapon with an unnamed bonus (or non-existant).

Finally I will note that combats go 5+ rounds at a time.


With this said..your party is full of wankers, as is your DM.  5 rounds is the average..going more than 5 rounds means that all of you arn't blowing stuff up fast enough.  In other words the fact you often go into more than 6 rounds indicate that you and the sorcerer either don't do enough damage..or everybody else isn't keeping you two up.  In other words you need to be more optimized instead of less optimized.