Half-elf Dilettante Resource.

185 posts / 0 new
Last post
You're overstating the case.

Eyebite doesn't give you +5 to all defenses against all attacks, even from a single target. Even if it did, if the target wasn't going to attack you anyway, it's worthless. And it doesn't give you +2 to hit, it gives you combat advantage - which, depending on your class and build, you may very well have had anyway.

-5 to them is +5 to me. CA is +2 to hit.

I think people aren't realizing how good the power is because all they see is the words "invisible to the target", and don't realize the effects of invisibility are better than any other effect from an at-will in the game, with the possible exception of Dragon's Tail or Righteous Brand.
-5 to them is +5 to me.

Oh no, I agree about this. My point was that the -5 penalty only applies to melee and ranged attacks, so although the -5 is going to apply to most enemies, canny ones will often be able to avoid it.

CA is +2 to hit.

It's +2 to hit, but it doesn't stack with other sources of combat advantage. I just had a thought. If you could pay a feat for the following benefit:

Flanking a target no longer grants you combat advantage; instead it gives you a +2 bonus to attack rolls against the target.

..would you take it? I think it would be extremely powerful for some builds. The fact that people would pay a feat for such a feat illustrates the rather large gap between CA and a +2 bonus.

The other thing is, an enemy usually has more than one viable option as to who to attack (and it's likely to take the better of two options most of the time, especially if the choice is obvious). Unless you're a defender replete with punishment abilities that are powerful enough to outweigh a -5 to hit, your target is highly likely to attack someone else instead. If there's a squishy wizard standing right next to you, and you have nothing to disincentivise the enemy from attacking said wizard, is giving the enemy a -5 to attacks against you really worth anything? Probably not.
-5 to them is +5 to me. CA is +2 to hit.

I think people aren't realizing how good the power is because all they see is the words "invisible to the target", and don't realize the effects of invisibility are better than any other effect from an at-will in the game, with the possible exception of Dragon's Tail or Righteous Brand.

Well, you can immobilize at will with eyes of the vestige at epic level. But not as a half-elf dilettante
-5 to them is +5 to me. CA is +2 to hit.

I think people aren't realizing how good the power is because all they see is the words "invisible to the target", and don't realize the effects of invisibility are better than any other effect from an at-will in the game, with the possible exception of Dragon's Tail or Righteous Brand.

You are not alone.

I also think Eyebite is on top 5 at-will.

It is like a mark, but its the opposite. One will never attack you if you are invisible.

Pros:

No OA.
Chance to stealth(and for warlocks thats absurd because you can easily mantain concealment).
Total concealment is equal to +5 in ALL defenses.
Can use the combo Eyebite, run in and attack with another ranged(action point), but *adjacent* to the target(using prime shot, what means +1 to hit) without OA.
Attack vs. will.
Psichic AND Charm keyword(Charm keyword give +1 to hit. Again +1 TO HIT!!! with laurel circlet, Psichic give you psichic lock)
Give free CA, that is +2 to your next attack... your daily, for example.
It is perfect for defense... its like a close hit and run. And its good for offense, as it is a free CA.


To sum it up. In my opinion:
1) Twin strike
2) Dual strike
3) Commander´s Strike(because of those 2 above and the avenger´s oath)
4) Eyebite
5) Righteous Brand

Top 5
I'm thinking about grabbing Eyebite for my rogue, who focuses on Stealth, because it seems like it would be a good power to use when I wanted to either get out of combat and go hide, or if I didn't have CA and wanted to spend an action point to sneak attack right after.

How do the implements work? Does that mean I have to be holding a wand or something in order to use it?

It doesn't give +2 to hit unless you spend an action point, though, right? Because it goes away at the beginning of your next turn?
No implement required (none ever are) but if you want an enhancement bonus to-hit, you'll want an implement. You can also take arcane implement proficiency to get daggers or light blades as an implement, but this would only make sense if you were taking lots of MC powers from an arcane class.

I believe that, since it only lasts until the beginning of your next turn, you don't get CA from it unless you AP or use a minor action power to attack.
No implement required (none ever are) but if you want an enhancement bonus to-hit, you'll want an implement. You can also take arcane implement proficiency to get daggers or light blades as an implement, but this would only make sense if you were taking lots of MC powers from an arcane class.

I believe that, since it only lasts until the beginning of your next turn, you don't get CA from it unless you AP or use a minor action power to attack.

For Eyebite, there's two main options:
1) Star of Corelleon (neck slot, functions as an arcane implement). So you can use your weapons or whatever and still get the bonuses to hit and damage
2) Master's Wand of Eyebite (what I use on my pally). The CA granted by Eyebite lasts through the end of your next turn. It's like a free +2 to hit. And pre-paragon, it's an additional Eyebite per encounter.

Personally, I'd rate the top 5 Dilettante powers as such:
1) Twin Strike
2) Eyebite
3) Righteous Brand
4) Dragon's Tail
5) Five Storms

Why do two monk powers make the list? Because they incorporate both a damn good attack and a utility-like power in one at-will. Dragon's Tail is an at-will that knocks a target prone (and lets you swap places with allies and prone enemies - compare with the divine feat that lets you do the same 1/encounter). Five storms is a close burst 1 at-will that also lets you shift twice with a single move, which is ridiculously good.

I'd also note that of my top 5, only Eyebite uses a half-elf stat (charisma).
I'd also note that of my top 5, only Eyebite uses a half-elf stat (charisma).

Almost need a 2nd list for Revenants ...
For Eyebite, there's two main options:
1) Star of Corelleon (neck slot, functions as an arcane implement). So you can use your weapons or whatever and still get the bonuses to hit and damage
2) Master's Wand of Eyebite (what I use on my pally). The CA granted by Eyebite lasts through the end of your next turn. It's like a free +2 to hit. And pre-paragon, it's an additional Eyebite per encounter.

Wow, now that it's been pointed out that eyebite normally only lasts until the start of your next turn, this makes eyebite so much worse (for someone without the defender/mark abilities to back it up)! Neither of the two options above are particularly enticing for a non-defender.

The first option is a pretty lame way to get combat advantage. If you want to get combat advantage regularly, there are ways of doing it without wasting a standard action and then having to spend an action point to benefit from it.

If you want to have eyebite last until the end of your next turn, you need to have and equip a specific wand. This is a pretty big pain. Most characters will want quick draw to pull this off, although I guess some rogues might not mind wielding the wand in their off-hand (it stops them from dual wielding or using a shield though, which may deter some).

And, HagiaSophia, re-read the rules on total concealment. As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread already, total concealment does nothing against close or area attacks.

That said, I'd still rate it either dark or light blue, simply for its utility for a paladin.
Rogue 1: Probing Strike
M or R weapon, 1 creature, dex vs ac, 1[w]+dex, 2[w]+dex @ 21st. effect: get + 1 pwr bonus to next attack against that target before end of next turn.

Warlord 1: Rousing Assault
weap, Melee, 1 creature, Strength vs. AC, Hit: 1[W] + Str, 2[w]+str @ 21st. add your Cha mod to hit points restored with any warlord healing power used before the end of the next turn.

Fighter 1: Knockdown Assault
weap Melee, 1 creature, Str vs. Fort, hit: str mod dam, knock target prone. can be used when charging instead of a melee basic.

Sorcerer 1: Arcing Fire
Fire, Implement, Rng 10, One creature, Cha vs Ref, Hit: 1d8 + Cha mod fire dam (2d8 + cha mod dam @ 21st). Any enemy giving the target cover vs this attack takes fire damage equal to your Cha mod.


Wizard 1: Chilling Cloud
Cold, Implement, Area burst 1 within 10, Each enemy in burst, int vs. Fort, hit: Int mod dam. Effect: Until the end of your next turn, any enemy in the power’s area takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls. 2x int mod @ 21st lvl

Paladin 1: Challenging Strike
Melee weapon, One creature, Str vs. AC, Hit: 1[W] + Str mod dam (2[w] + str mod @ 21st lvl), target is marked until the end of your next turn or until char moves into a square not adjacent to the target.

Cleric 1: Gaze of Defiance
Implement, Psychic, Ranged 5, One creature, Wis vs. Will, Hit: 1d8 + Wis mod psychic damage (2d8+wis mod dam @ 21st), allies gain a +1 pwr bonus to attack rolls against the target until the end of your next turn. If the target attacks you before the end of your next turn, the bonus increases to +3.

Barbarian 1: Foe to Foe
Melee weapon, One creature, Strength vs. AC, Hit: 1[W] + Str mod damage (2[w] + str mod @ 21st). If you have reduced at least one non-minion enemy to 0 hp during this encounter, add 1d8 extra damage. While raging, instead add 1d10 extra damage.

Druid 1: Grasping Tide
Implement, Area burst 1 within 10 sq, Each creature in burst, Wis vs. Fort, hit: 1d6 + Wis mod dam. (2d6+wis mod dam @ 21st) Until the end of your next turn, if the target leaves the burst’s AoE, you can use an opp. action to make a secondary attack against it.
Secondary Attack: Wis vs. Ref, Hit: Knock target prone.
Almost need a 2nd list for Revenants ...

not really. Statline hasn't been a major factor in the decision-making up to this point. It's been a factor in some of the discussion, but a minor enough one that I don't think anything actually changes from the swap of cha to dex.

On that note, though, riposte strike might be worth a second look. Unlike with its use for rogues, including this one with a solid mark means that you can put the enemy in the position of either being punished by the riposte for attacking you or punished by the mark for attacking someone else. It's pretty much strictly weaker for optimizing than twin strike, but it can be done without dual wielding. Of course, it has a few problems.
- has to be done with a light blade. This one hurts, especially since the most obvious benefit of it otherwise would be for something like a pursuit avenger/priest/warpriest with an enormous sword. You could conceivably do it with an axe - but only if you were a dwarf and a rogue and took the right feat. You're a half-elf. Revenant versions can be one or the other but not both.
- Dex-based. there are no heavily dex-based defenders out there. The closest thing to a heavily dex-based defender is the tempest fighter, who is dual-wielding already, and thus already has something better in his own at-wills. There are no dex-based ways of getting a solid mark that do not involve starting out as a defender. You could conceivably go with charismadin/bard and take the bard feat to make it charisma-based... at which point it has cost you an extra feat all by itself, it's trying to compete with Eldritch Strike/Eyebite, and you *still* have to wield a light blade.

I can't quite see how to make it cool, but it feels like there should be *some* way to make it better than straight black. Either that, or most of the rogue powers out there ought to be purple - the light blades thing and the dex thing are both disadvantages for almost everyone who is not a rogue already.

EDIT: another bit - I suspect that the remaining (black) barbarian at-wills ought to be blue - or at least some of them. Even without rage effects, they still get the scaling striker damage just tacked on. Devastating strike is admittedly somewhat pathetic at this, but howling strike gets scaling 1d6s and can be used on a charge. Recuperating strike gives conmod in temp HP, and gets +1d6 damage at paragon and +2d6 at epic. Given that we're effectively optimizing for paragon and above, this is pretty significant. As a comparison:

Wild Strike (level 17 fighter encounter power)
str vs AC, 4[W]+str, can be used on a charge, grant combat advantage to all enemies until start of next turn, +wis damage if you are human.
Howling Strike (barbarian at-will as of level 21)
str vs AC, 2[W]+3d6+str, can be used on a charge, must be wielding a 2H weapon.

Barring size increases from an ED, the highest-damage non-superior weapons are mauls and heavy flails, at 2d6. (Trying to keep things simple for the moment.) With one of those, Howling Strike does 7d6+str, and can charge. Wild Strike does 8d6+str(+wis if human), can charge, and gives combat advantage to everybody for a round. The comparison swings a bit more in Wild Strike's favor when superior weapons are taken into account, but Howling Strike at Epic is at least comparable to an encounter power that you'd expect to keep through level 30.
Sanity: I agree with the rogue parts. I've always though implements were a bigger deal than most. The barbarian part I'm a little more hesitant about, I don't want to spam blues if I can help it.
Gavin: Thanks.

Added the missing things. Arcing looks nice... blue?
Gaze looks nice, but that ranged kinda sucks, as does the implement.
Grasping Tide is...wow. Dark blue?
actually probing strike seems to work with ANY melee or ranged weapon! It looks like it is the only rogue (level 1 attack) at will that doesnt require anything weird. Errata coming soon maybe?
Wow, now that it's been pointed out that eyebite normally only lasts until the start of your next turn, this makes eyebite so much worse (for someone without the defender/mark abilities to back it up)! Neither of the two options above are particularly enticing for a non-defender.

The first option is a pretty lame way to get combat advantage. If you want to get combat advantage regularly, there are ways of doing it without wasting a standard action and then having to spend an action point to benefit from it.

If you want to have eyebite last until the end of your next turn, you need to have and equip a specific wand. This is a pretty big pain. Most characters will want quick draw to pull this off, although I guess some rogues might not mind wielding the wand in their off-hand (it stops them from dual wielding or using a shield though, which may deter some).

And, HagiaSophia, re-read the rules on total concealment. As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread already, total concealment does nothing against close or area attacks.

That said, I'd still rate it either dark or light blue, simply for its utility for a paladin.

Well, i do know concealment only work against melee and ranged. No need to re-read.
But that don´t change my opinion that its one of the best at-will of the game, so far.
Not only for pally, but for warlocks too; as i said before warlocks can easily sustain the concealment for stealth. Also, warlocks can exploit it to get prime shot bonus with action point.
Well i listed all pros that make me think it is a very solid power on my last post.
If you want to have eyebite last until the end of your next turn, you need to have and equip a specific wand. This is a pretty big pain. Most characters will want quick draw to pull this off, although I guess some rogues might not mind wielding the wand in their off-hand (it stops them from dual wielding or using a shield though, which may deter some).

It's not much of a cost - you need an implement anyway, and all classes which mix melee and implements have to deal with these issues.

And, HagiaSophia, re-read the rules on total concealment. As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread already, total concealment does nothing against close or area attacks.

Yes they do - they can't see you to target you with the close or area attack.
Yes they do - they can't see you to target you with the close or area attack.

Uhum, they need to guess square if you roll stealth at the end of your move action.

Even for area and close, eyebite is great for defense.

Edit
Other thing no notice:
It works with laurel circlet AND feyborn charm(feat) for enhanced to-hit bonus. Eladrin and gnomes rejoice!
(Not to mention that bard paragon path, Life Singer... double roll.)
For Eyebite, there's two main options:
1) Star of Corelleon (neck slot, functions as an arcane implement). So you can use your weapons or whatever and still get the bonuses to hit and damage

Holy symbols don't take any slot; the Star isn't a neck slot item.
It's not much of a cost - you need an implement anyway, and all classes which mix melee and implements have to deal with these issues.

The cost isn't so much that you need to weild a star of corellon, it's that if your invisibility only lasts until the start of your next turn (which is the case without that one specific wand), you can only make use of that combat advantage if you spend an action point or make an OA. You can't use it, round after round after round, to make consecutive eyebite attacks that all have a +2 to hit (like you could, say, with a frost-cheese spec). The main thing that you get is that enemies may have a hard time hitting you, and your OAs get CA. That's pretty useful - for a defender. If you're not a defender however, your enemy is likely to just attack another adjacent ally (you know, the one that it moved up to on it's last turn because it's ignoring you). You probably won't get an OA, your target won't get a penalty to their attack and you aren't going to get CA on your attack unless you blow an action point.

Yes they do - they can't see you to target you with the close or area attack.

Actually you know the location of invisible enemies unless they make a stealth check at the end of a move action. Thus, in order for you to be untargetable, you need to take a move action after casting eyebite (so this strategy won't normally be available to a PC that had already chosen to shift away out of melee to get the eyebite off), and at the end of that move you have to make a stealth check against the enemy's passive perception. And even if you succeed on this, they are allowed an active perception check on their turn against the same perception check you rolled. Even if they fail at this, if they think they know where you are, they can just guess and target the square they think you're in although this might not be such a good idea.
The cost isn't so much that you need to weild a star of corellon, it's that if your invisibility only lasts until the start of your next turn (which is the case without that one specific wand)

If you're picking Eyebite as your one half-elf dilettante power, expecting people to use the wand of +2 to hitness is not really a big step. Just like how people that pick up twin strike can be reasonably expected to have to buy two weapons, one on-hand, one off-hand and pump stat points into Str. Or people with Eldritch strike might try to optimize their AOOs with polearm gambit or whatever. It's all part of the package you're optimizing for - it doesn't make Eyebite any weaker.

Actually you know the location of invisible enemies unless they make a stealth check at the end of a move action. Thus, in order for you to be untargetable, you need to take a move action after casting eyebite (so this strategy won't normally be available to a PC that had already chosen to shift away out of melee to get the eyebite off), and at the end of that move you have to make a stealth check against the enemy's passive perception. And even if you succeed on this, they are allowed an active perception check on their turn against the same perception check you rolled. Even if they fail at this, if they think they know where you are, they can just guess and target the square they think you're in although this might not be such a good idea.

Right, right.

It's not hard. Monsters in general aren't great at spotting things. And if they're going fishing with ranged burst 1 attacks, bully for them. If nothing else, they're hitting one less party member with their attacks. Only the really massive AOE spells (like a dragon with some ridiculous close burst 20 breath weapon in this one game I played) really negate the benefits of the invisibility.
If you're picking Eyebite as your one half-elf dilettante power, expecting people to use the wand of +2 to hitness is not really a big step. Just like how people that pick up twin strike can be reasonably expected to have to buy two weapons, one on-hand, one off-hand and pump stat points into Str. Or people with Eldritch strike might try to optimize their AOOs with polearm gambit or whatever. It's all part of the package you're optimizing for - it doesn't make Eyebite any weaker.

If you're structuring a build around eyebite, that is indeed what you do - but as we've discussed previously, eyebite isn't so much a power that you structure a build around as it is a power you add to an already functional build to make it better. Given that, having to give up a hand and pay for a dedicated implement is a significant drawback, and probably more costly than the significantly limited +2 to hit. (note: in order for the wand to be worth +2, you have to attack a target with eyebite in one round, hit, and then attack him again in the next round. If you simply keep spamming single-target eyebites, and somehow keep hitting round after round, it's *almost* as good as a +2 to hit - which, amusingly, is exactly what you're giving up at paragon if you don't take implement expertise with that wand - so now the combo costs you an extra feat, too. It's not *quite* as good, because you still don't get the +2 to hit the first round - and every time you switch targets, miss, and/or choose to attack with something other than eyebite, the effect gets weaker.)
Okay okay, I'm making an executive decision here because I'm tired of this debate:
I'm marking it skyblue, not just because of its merit to some builds, but also because of its rarity as an at-will, granting invisibility. Theres only 2 sky blues in the section, I'm sure the readers can sort it out.
Zendu! You need to change probing strike! See my earlier notes...
Oops! Thought I had allready!
I think sky blue is a good choice.
I believe, given the current errata, that we can downgrade dual strike to black - or possibly purple.
Jumping in on this one since I'm working on creating a half-elf for our next session... I noticed that the artificer powers aren't included on the list. I'd really like to suggest Magic Weapon for inclusion as at least a dark blue.

Not as big of a bonus to attack as the Cleric's Righteous Brand but it can affect multiple friendlies and gives a bonus to damage as well (and Con is a Half-Elf stat). And it gives you a bonus to hit for this attack and lasts through the end of your next turn. My honest assessment is that it is at least as good as Righteous Brand and in some cases is better. I'm taking it for a hybrid Bard/Warlord in a party with two rogues and a warden so we're all generally in close.
Vicious Mockery is actually a lot better than Eyebite for a Chaladin.

Eyebite vs. marked enemy = -5 to hit you, -2 to hit allies
Vicious Mockery vs. marked enemy = -2 to hit you, -4 to hit allies.

VM makes it more unattractive to attack your allies, which is kinda the point of being a defender in the first place. Also like Eyebite, it's a Charm and it's Psychic, which means it's also boosted by Psychic Lock (thus making VM -4/-6 for one attack).

For a Striker such as an AD Rogue or Sorcerer, yes, Eyebite is better.
Vicious Mockery is actually a lot better than Eyebite for a Chaladin.

Eyebite vs. marked enemy = -5 to hit you, -2 to hit allies
Vicious Mockery vs. marked enemy = -2 to hit you, -4 to hit allies.

VM makes it more unattractive to attack your allies, which is kinda the point of being a defender in the first place. Also like Eyebite, it's a Charm and it's Psychic, which means it's also boosted by Psychic Lock (thus making VM -4/-6 for one attack).

For a Striker such as an AD Rogue or Sorcerer, yes, Eyebite is better.

Actually, if said Chaladin is a Hospitaler, the opposite is true: you want your enemy to attack your allies and trigger your auto-healing. So Eyebite is the way to go for them.
Actually, if said Chaladin is a Hospitaler, the opposite is true: you want your enemy to attack your allies and trigger your auto-healing. So Eyebite is the way to go for them.

Not really. With VM, the difference between attacking you and attacking your ally is still the standard -2, i.e., enough to make a difference in hit chance but not enough to completely dissuade the enemy from attacking your ally if he's the greater threat to the enemy's well-being. Which means with VM, there's still a decent chance your ally might be targeted instead.

And it's not like the enemy's going to do much better attacking you even with VM + PsyLock. -4 is a hefty penalty regardless, plus you tend to have higher AC to make up the difference, anyway.

In the case of AoE, VM is definitely better, since the AoE will likely flat-out miss your allies (and thus heal outright).
Not really. With VM, the difference between attacking you and attacking your ally is still the standard -2, i.e., enough to make a difference in hit chance but not enough to completely dissuade the enemy from attacking your ally if he's the greater threat to the enemy's well-being. Which means with VM, there's still a decent chance your ally might be targeted instead.

VM lacks one crucial aspect of Eyebite.

With Eyebite, you can move up to your target after you shoot them, then threaten them with potential DC+OA damage if they refuse to engage you. Whack 'em with HBO, and they can have lots of issues...but because they're at -5 to hit you instead of -2, attacking you is likely a waste of their turn.
...and, indeed, *they don't know you've done this*. If you go invisible before you move, they don't even know which square to target.

Also worth noting that Enfeebling strike, an ordinary paladin at-will, is essentially a melee, weapon-based version of vicious mockery (though not psychic). It is at least close enough to vicious mokery that the difference is not worth the hassle. (Have to get an appropriate implement, and keep it up to date. Have to be a half-elf and spend your nifty at-will here.)
For eyebite to REALLY work, don't you have to eyebite, move two, hide as part of the move action, and beat their passive perception for them to not know what square you are in?
You don't have to move 2, you just have to take a move action. But if you move more than 2 you get a -5 penalty to the roll.

That said, even just total concealment (without being hidden) is very good.

To be honest, I think that the tradeoff between Eyebite and Vicious Mockery is pretty much down to the specific paladin in question. If the paladin is a hospitalier, he/she already provides a huge disincentive to attack his/her allies and therefore anything which penalises the enemy for attacking him/her is going to be preferable (eyebite).

I think for most non-hospitaliers however, the enemy's default choice without eyebite/VM may very well be to ignore the mark and attack someone else, because paladins tend to have such high ACs anyway. For many paladins, therefore, I think VM may be better because it penalises the target for taking their otherwise preferred option.

There are some other differences between the powers too. As pointed out earlier, eyebite can make things difficult if your target doesn't know where you are. Vicious Mockery, on the other hand, is effective against non-marked targets and targets using close/area attacks (eyebite will provide no defensive benefit to you against such attacks unless you're hidden, although the hospitalier feature heals allies even if you were included in the attack).
Vicious Mockery for the Paladin - what does Vicious Mockery do for Chaladins that Enfeebling Strike does not? Given how much less costly it is to acquire Enfeebling strike, what circumstances would make a Vicious Mockery build preferable?
I think the main difference between vicious mockery and enfeebling strike is the range. Vicious mockery provokes OAs, but can be used against pesky foes that think they can avoid the paladin and cause the mark to drop off due to the engagement clause.
...and, indeed, *they don't know you've done this*. If you go invisible before you move, they don't even know which square to target.

Have you checked the invisibility/stealth errata? You have to be hidden to make the enemy guess your square. And since Paladins aren't likely to have Stealth trained, or the DEX to take advantage of Stealth even if they did have it trained, AND are likely to wear plate mail which gives the armor check penalty ... yeah.
Have you checked the invisibility/stealth errata? You have to be hidden to make the enemy guess your square. And since Paladins aren't likely to have Stealth trained, or the DEX to take advantage of Stealth even if they did have it trained, AND are likely to wear plate mail which gives the armor check penalty ... yeah.

Not to mention, if there's more than one enemy, then...

The more relevant part is that you position yourself to be able to OA potential shift & charge lanes.
Vicious Mockery for the Paladin - what does Vicious Mockery do for Chaladins that Enfeebling Strike does not? Given how much less costly it is to acquire Enfeebling strike, what circumstances would make a Vicious Mockery build preferable?

Half-Elf wants Ardent Strike (at-will Sanction) and Virtuous Strike (MBA, radiant). Then picks up Vicious Mockery to give himself the same benefit as Enfeebling only at range and PsyLock-enhance-able.

The more relevant part is that you position yourself to be able to OA potential shift & charge lanes.

I'd say that's not much of a tougher proposition with VM. It'd be interesting to see if a -7 would make a practical difference over a -4.
Enfeebling Strike only applies the -2 to attack if the target is marked and has melee range. Vicious Mockery applies the -2 to attack without this restriction, and has a range of 10.
I'd say that's not much of a tougher proposition with VM. It'd be interesting to see if a -7 would make a practical difference over a -4.

If a monster normally hits on a 11(and given we're talking about a Paladin, that might even be a little generous), then that's a 18 vs 15. Plus there's the free CA for being invisible vs. none for VM.

18 is near auto-miss - some monsters will actually only hit, not crit on a 20. 15 on the other hand makes the choice reasonable compared to the alternative.

But I think the combo of DC+OA(which includes a debuff) > Paladin being attacked.