Protection Style Question

Hello!

 

If a Fighter/Paladin/Ranger uses his Protection Style Feature to give an attacker disadvantage (using his reaction) and the attacker is attacking with two attacks - does only one or both weapon's attacks get disadvantage? As in the wording it says "the attack roll" this seems to indicate only one of the weapons. On the other hand, as the attack consists of the attack of BOTH weapons this seems to indicate both weapons. But what is right? ^^

 

MagicSN

 

I would say that you can impose disadvantage on a single attack.  The Multiattack action that many monters have reads (as an example): "The monster makes two longbow attacks."

 

Protection Style doesn't say that it imposes disadvantage on all attacks the creature makes until the end of its turn, just on "the attack".  So I would say that the PC must decide which attack to block.

This fact is what balances Defensive with Protector. Protector is better against single-attacking, single foes, one-on-one combat, defensive is better across a wide range of scenarios and massive incoming attacks (probably better overall, though I love Protector because it's more fun).

 

As a houserule, I might make the reaction trigger be : "an attack that would be successful, now has disadvantage". One of the brilliant bits of advantage or disadvantage system, is that you can roll the second D20 after the first, so you could put triggers after the first. If you're a fighter who sees the enemy sword about to hit him, instead of dodging it, he deflects it (imposes disadvantage).

 

So the reaction would have to be after the attack roll but before damage is dealt (there are no interrupts in 5e, aside from OAs).

It does specify attack roll, not attack action.    I wouldn't go with saying that makes it "balanced" with Defensive, since Defensive doesn't take your reaction, nor does it only work against one monster.

Defensive can't be shared with an ally either though.

Reality Refracted: Social Contracts

My blog of Random Stuff 

Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl

"It is a general popular error to suppose the loudest complainers for the publick to be the most anxious for its welfare." - Edmund Burke

Back to Product and General D&D Discussions -- because the mobile site is bad. (Fixed!)

ThorinShield wrote:

This fact is what balances Defensive with Protector. Protector is better against single-attacking, single foes, one-on-one combat, defensive is better across a wide range of scenarios and massive incoming attacks (probably better overall, though I love Protector because it's more fun).

 

As a houserule, I might make the reaction trigger be : "an attack that would be successful, now has disadvantage". One of the brilliant bits of advantage or disadvantage system, is that you can roll the second D20 after the first, so you could put triggers after the first. If you're a fighter who sees the enemy sword about to hit him, instead of dodging it, he deflects it (imposes disadvantage).

 

So the reaction would have to be after the attack roll but before damage is dealt (there are no interrupts in 5e, aside from OAs).

 

I would hate this with a passion.   Once the to hit roll has happened, a hit has occurred in my universe.  You can't undo it unless you have a time machine.  I don't allow that magic item in my games so no.

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

As much as i like time machines, IMO it slows the game down too much.

 

I saw this in 4e when everyone interupted everyone else.  It basicly took a round of combat to resolve 1 attack.

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.

Mephi1234 wrote:

It does specify attack roll, not attack action.    I wouldn't go with saying that makes it "balanced" with Defensive, since Defensive doesn't take your reaction, nor does it only work against one monster.

 

That's besides the point, you only get one reaction per round, regardless of how Protector is defined.

Emerikol wrote:

 

ThorinShield wrote:

This fact is what balances Defensive with Protector. Protector is better against single-attacking, single foes, one-on-one combat, defensive is better across a wide range of scenarios and massive incoming attacks (probably better overall, though I love Protector because it's more fun).

 

As a houserule, I might make the reaction trigger be : "an attack that would be successful, now has disadvantage". One of the brilliant bits of advantage or disadvantage system, is that you can roll the second D20 after the first, so you could put triggers after the first. If you're a fighter who sees the enemy sword about to hit him, instead of dodging it, he deflects it (imposes disadvantage).

 

So the reaction would have to be after the attack roll but before damage is dealt (there are no interrupts in 5e, aside from OAs).

 

 

I would hate this with a passion.   Once the to hit roll has happened, a hit has occurred in my universe.  You can't undo it unless you have a time machine.  I don't allow that magic item in my games so no.

 

Good point, so it'd be better to allow interrupts. I can guarantee, that it is quite possible in real life to selectively decide what to block, based on whether it would have otherwise hit you. To wit : a boxer. Or a fencer. Or a tennis player practicing vs a ball-throwing machine that throws them quickly and randomly. You can pick which to respond to, in real time. This is not beyond the realm of human reaction time. I do kung fu, I know whereof I speak on this. If someone punches wide, I won't even try to deflect it. I wait, and watch, and react to their attacks and feints. If you auto-react to the first attack, you will leave yourself open to the next.

RAW I am pretty sure it is just one attack. I do not think it would be overpowered if it was all attacks however. Possibly better balanced with the other options even. I am not very happy about this ability at all, since it reaction it uses prevents you from using tactical warrior :/

kalil wrote:

RAW I am pretty sure it is just one attack. I do not think it would be overpowered if it was all attacks however. Possibly better balanced with the other options even. I am not very happy about this ability at all, since it reaction it uses prevents you from using tactical warrior :/

 

Though I wonder if this "not at the same time as tactical warrior" is not on purpose, to avoid the use of TWO defense features. Of course it is a bit strange due to Protection being stronger than Tactical Warrior. Tactical Warrior is a bit strange anyways, the "-2" stuff sounds like 4e to me, in Next the mechanics is usually Advantage/Disadvantage, not Bonus/Malus.

 

MagicSN wrote:

 

kalil wrote:

RAW I am pretty sure it is just one attack. I do not think it would be overpowered if it was all attacks however. Possibly better balanced with the other options even. I am not very happy about this ability at all, since it reaction it uses prevents you from using tactical warrior :/

 

 

Though I wonder if this "not at the same time as tactical warrior" is not on purpose, to avoid the use of TWO defense features. Of course it is a bit strange due to Protection being stronger than Tactical Warrior. Tactical Warrior is a bit strange anyways, the "-2" stuff sounds like 4e to me, in Next the mechanics is usually Advantage/Disadvantage, not Bonus/Malus.

 

 

I hope not. I would assume that the precense of this fighting style and the feat is to support a more defender style fighter, hence I think they should work together. I agree in tactical warrior being odd with the -2, but I guess they want it stackable with disadvantage so you can protect your enchanter mage or dodging rogue.

kalil wrote:

 

MagicSN wrote:

 

kalil wrote:

RAW I am pretty sure it is just one attack. I do not think it would be overpowered if it was all attacks however. Possibly better balanced with the other options even. I am not very happy about this ability at all, since it reaction it uses prevents you from using tactical warrior :/

 

 

Though I wonder if this "not at the same time as tactical warrior" is not on purpose, to avoid the use of TWO defense features. Of course it is a bit strange due to Protection being stronger than Tactical Warrior. Tactical Warrior is a bit strange anyways, the "-2" stuff sounds like 4e to me, in Next the mechanics is usually Advantage/Disadvantage, not Bonus/Malus.

 

 

 

I hope not. I would assume that the precense of this fighting style and the feat is to support a more defender style fighter, hence I think they should work together. I agree in tactical warrior being odd with the -2, but I guess they want it stackable with disadvantage so you can protect your enchanter mage or dodging rogue.

 

Yeah. I do not say it should be changed. Just saying that it is a bit weird for using a different mechanics which was removed/changed at all other places, as an observation.

We have a huge dicussion on this in the D&D Next google group. There are two things at play here: Does the interrupt effect both attacks, and the trigger for the interrupt itself.

 

As to wether the interrupt effects both attacks or not: In my opinion, it does effect both attacks because you are interrupting the Multi-attack action of the monster. I don't really agree with it, but that's the way it's written. Does that extend to another player? That depends if you consider the Extra Attack feature of the Fighter to imply that he now has a Multi-Attack action. I would say no because there is no Multi-Attack action defined in the How To Play section. It seems to be for monsters only. This sets up a contradiction that I think they need to resolve.

 

Now on to the trigger issue: The root of the problem boils down to the advantage/disadvantage mechanic.

 

Right now, the trigger for the Protection reaction is stated as the Attack. This means that the DM must announce his attack prior to rolling and allow the player with Protection the opportunity to interrupt and pose disadvantage. This is important only when the monster is attacking with advantage. If it's a normal attack, then the DM can simply roll another die to create the disadvantage. If the monster is already in disadvantage, the player would never use it because disadvantages don't stack. If the monster has advantage however, now there's a problem. If the two attack die are already rolled and the player calls for an interrupt, which occurs before the attack, the DM must scrap both of those die rolls and re-roll with one die to fairly resolve the attack.

 

This is not a huge problem in my opinion, but it does need to be addressed in the rules.

 

I personally think the trigger for Protection needs to be the Hit, similar the a shield spell. This allows the skilled fighter the option to use his reaction judiciously and not waste it on an attack where the monster rolled a 1 and had no chance to hit him in the first place. I think the Fighter should get this option because his reaction is at stake and it also puts the Protection Fighting style on par with the other styles which offer guaranteed bonuses.

 

This does not however solve the problem of having to re-roll if an interrupt occurs on an advantage roll. If the monster is attacking with advantage and hits, and the fighter uses his reaction to interrupt, there is no fair way to determine which dice to use. The roll must be scrapped and re-rolled using one die. This is true for the Shield spell as well, which has a Hit trigger for everything but MM, which is a Target trigger. 

 

The point of all of this is that, unless they want to write in text for requiring interrupts to be called out prior to any advantage attack roll, which sounds horrible, then they will need to write in text to address an interrupted advantage attack that states it must be re-rolled. Which is not a terrible solution IMO.

Spykes wrote:

We have a huge dicussion on this in the D&D Next google group. There are two things at play here: Does the interrupt effect both attacks, and the trigger for the interrupt itself.

 

As to wether the interrupt effects both attacks or not: In my opinion, it does effect both attacks because you are interrupting the Multi-attack action of the monster. I don't really agree with it, but that's the way it's written. Does that extend to another player? That depends if you consider the Extra Attack feature of the Fighter to imply that he now has a Multi-Attack action. I would say no because there is no Multi-Attack action defined in the How To Play section. It seems to be for monsters only. This sets up a contradiction that I think they need to resolve.

 

Now on to the trigger issue: The root of the problem boils down to the advantage/disadvantage mechanic.

 

Right now, the trigger for the Protection reaction is stated as the Attack. This means that the DM must announce his attack prior to rolling and allow the player with Protection the opportunity to interrupt and pose disadvantage. This is important only when the monster is attacking with advantage. If it's a normal attack, then the DM can simply roll another die to create the disadvantage. If the monster is already in disadvantage, the player would never use it because disadvantages don't stack. If the monster has advantage however, now there's a problem. If the two attack die are already rolled and the player calls for an interrupt, which occurs before the attack, the DM must scrap both of those die rolls and re-roll with one die to fairly resolve the attack.

 

This is not a huge problem in my opinion, but it does need to be addressed in the rules.

 

I personally think the trigger for Protection needs to be the Hit, similar the a shield spell. This allows the skilled fighter the option to use his reaction judiciously and not waste it on an attack where the monster rolled a 1 and had no chance to hit him in the first place. I think the Fighter should get this option because his reaction is at stake and it also puts the Protection Fighting style on par with the other styles which offer guaranteed bonuses.

 

This does not however solve the problem of having to re-roll if an interrupt occurs on an advantage roll. If the monster is attacking with advantage and hits, and the fighter uses his reaction to interrupt, there is no fair way to determine which dice to use. The roll must be scrapped and re-rolled using one die. This is true for the Shield spell as well, which has a Hit trigger for everything but MM, which is a Target trigger. 

 

The point of all of this is that, unless they want to write in text for requiring interrupts to be called out prior to any advantage attack roll, which sounds horrible, then they will need to write in text to address an interrupted advantage attack that states it must be re-rolled. Which is not a terrible solution IMO.

 

I dont see the trigger problem.

 

1) DM declares attack

2) Player decides to use his reaction or not

3) Resolve attack

kalil wrote:
I dont see the trigger problem.

 

1) DM declares attack

2) Player decides to use his reaction or not

3) Resolve attack

It's not really a problem. It's just that making the trigger on the attack makes the power very weak compared to the other fighting styles. If the player decides to use it and the DM rolls a 1 and a 2. The monster had no chance to hit the fighter to begin with. A skilled fighter would not have bothered to use his precious reaction to impose disadvantage on such a feeble attack. He would save it for the next incoming attack. 

 

While Defense offers a guaranteed +1 to AC without any risk.

 

If the trigger was on Hit, now it has some power.

Spykes wrote:

 

kalil wrote:
I dont see the trigger problem.

 

1) DM declares attack

2) Player decides to use his reaction or not

3) Resolve attack

 

It's not really a problem. It's just that making the trigger on the attack makes the power very weak compared to the other fighting styles. If the player decides to use it and the DM rolls a 1 and a 2. The monster had no chance to hit the fighter to begin with. A skilled fighter would not have bothered to use his precious reaction to impose disadvantage on such a feeble attack. He would save it for the next incoming attack.

 

While Defense offers a guaranteed +1 to AC without any risk.

 

If the trigger was on Hit, now it has some power.

 

I don't agree actually. Protection is significantly stronger against single opponents (disadvantage roughly equals -4 to hit against most creatures) and also allow you to protect allies if need be.

kalil wrote:
I don't agree actually. Protection is significantly stronger against single opponents (disadvantage roughly equals -4 to hit against most creatures) and also allow you to protect allies if need be.

That is true in a vacuum. But if there are several opponents, as in most real encounters, the effectiveness of the Protection ability pales next to a +1 AC. The Protection fighter has sacrificed an increased AC vs. all of the other incoming attacks, not to mention the fact that the enemy no longer fears any reaction. They can run all around me in and out of range with no problems. All for the CHANCE to block one attack, which is not even guaranteed to be a hit in the first place. Very poor. At least give the fighter the good sense of knowing if an attempted attack is worth a reaction.

Spykes wrote:

 

kalil wrote:
I don't agree actually. Protection is significantly stronger against single opponents (disadvantage roughly equals -4 to hit against most creatures) and also allow you to protect allies if need be.

 

That is true in a vacuum. But if there are several opponents, as in most real encounters, the effectiveness of the Protection ability pales next to a +1 AC. The Protection fighter has sacrificed an increased AC vs. all of the other incoming attacks, not to mention the fact that the enemy no longer fears any reaction. They can run all around me in and out of range with no problems. All for the CHANCE to block one attack, which is not even guaranteed to be a hit in the first place. Very poor. At least give the fighter the good sense of knowing if an attempted attack is worth a reaction.

 

+1 AC does nothing 95% of the time...

kalil wrote:

+1 AC does nothing 95% of the time...

 

False... it increases your AC by one point 100% of the time.

 

But let's say you are correct, just for the sake of this duscussion because I'm not going to bite on that attempt to derail the discussion with horrible math...

At least I can take my "5%" to the bank. It's guaranteed. I don't risk wasting it at all... AND I have my reaction.

Spykes wrote:

 

kalil wrote:

+1 AC does nothing 95% of the time...

 

 

False... it increases your AC by one point 100% of the time.

 

But let's say you are correct, just for the sake of this duscussion because I'm not going to bite on that attempt to derail the discussion with horrible math...

At least I can take my "5%" to the bank. It's guaranteed. I don't risk wasting it at all... AND I have my reaction.

 

How much does the bank pay you for that +1 AC that didn't matter because the attack hit you by more than one or missed you regardless?

 

The thing about using the reaction is a problem yes (I really think the protection should give you an extra reaction that you can use only for this), but setting that aside for a sec I am pretty confident that protection averages out to negate more damage than defence in the vast majority of fights. Plus it can be used to defend allies. Your +1 AC does not protect your ally in any way.

kalil wrote:
The thing about using the reaction is a problem yes (I really think the protection should give you an extra reaction that you can use only for this), but setting that aside for a sec I am pretty confident that protection averages out to negate more damage than defence in the vast majority of fights. Plus it can be used to defend allies. Your +1 AC does not protect your ally in any way.

 

OK great.. the +1 AC thing is debateable, whatever. Agree to disagree.

Sounds like we do agree on the reaction part of it, which can be solved by changing the trigger, which is the whole point of this discussion. The trigger needs to be changed to Hit instead of Attack so that the fighter can judiciously determine what is a good use of his reaction without wasting it protecting himself or an ally from an attack that had no chance of hitting. 

 

I think we have more common ground here than may appear.

Spykes wrote:

 

kalil wrote:
The thing about using the reaction is a problem yes (I really think the protection should give you an extra reaction that you can use only for this), but setting that aside for a sec I am pretty confident that protection averages out to negate more damage than defence in the vast majority of fights. Plus it can be used to defend allies. Your +1 AC does not protect your ally in any way.

 

 

OK great.. the +1 AC thing is debateable, whatever. Agree to disagree.

Sounds like we do agree on the reaction part of it, which can be solved by changing the trigger, which is the whole point of this discussion. The trigger needs to be changed to Hit instead of Attack so that the fighter can judiciously determine what is a good use of his reaction without wasting it protecting himself or an ally from an attack that had no chance of hitting. 

 

I think we have more common ground here than may appear.

 

It is noit solved by changing the trigger. The enemies can still ignore you when you have used it. It would be solved by not using your reaction however.

kalil wrote:

It is noit solved by changing the trigger. The enemies can still ignore you when you have used it. It would be solved by not using your reaction however.

 

yes, but then you haven't wasted the reaction on a hit that wasn't going to land. You used your reaction effectively to protect yourself or an ally. I don't mind using my reaction on a defensive maneuvere, but I do mind wasting it when I didn't have to use it in the first place. Trigger change solves that.

We have a similar discussion going on the Facebook D&D Next group. Protection definitly affect an attack individually, and unless you can take more than 1 reaction per round, you won't be able to use it again against multiattacks. As to the timing, i think the intent is before the attack roll result is determined, since in attack resolution terms, it says when it ATTACK you, and not HIT you, so a hit hasn't been determined yet when you can use your reaction to impose disadvantage to it, considering that advantage/disadvantage is not a reroll mechanic but one letting you roll a second d20 when you make the roll, i think the intent is clear that it happen when you roll, not after it. Personally i use it that way.

Anyone try math?

 

Baseline:

3 attacks, @ 40% chance to it, for X damage.

= 1.2X damage.

 

+1 AC

= 1.05X

15

 

Disavantage on 1 attack.

8 + 1.6

= 0.96X

 

 

Protection is 8.5% better then Defense.     Roughly +1.5 AC.

*Assuming you don't otherwise use a reaction, and only protect yourself.

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.

Sign In to post comments