Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Switch to Forum Live View Optimized Party Core Matchups 1.0
3 years ago  ::  Jul 30, 2010 - 8:46AM #11
borg285
Date Joined: Jan 23, 2008
Posts: 2,868

Jul 29, 2010 -- 9:18PM, marigoldran wrote:


3.  Everyone has artificer weapon-buffing powers like Magic Weapon or Fleeting Dweeomer (Battle Engineer Paragon Path) that gives like a +2 to attack and a +4 to damage.  The Magic Weapon bonuses don't stack, but Fleeting Dweeomer does(?).  This works well with swordburst. 



I thought that bonuses from the same game element don't stack.

DPR King Candidates 3.0
How much damage should I shoot for? Show

You're fired          : 1 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .2 KPR
Fair Striker          : 2 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .4 KPR
Highly Optimized : 3 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .6 KPR
Nerfbat please     : 4 Kills Per 5 Rounds = .8 KPR
It's OVER 9000!!!!!: 5 Kills Per 5 Rounds = 1+ KPR

DPR?  KPR?  KP4R?  Bless you Show

DPR = Damage Per round ~= Chance to hit * damage on a hit
KPR = Kills Per Round.  1 Kill = 8*Level+24 damage
       = DPR/(8*level+24)
KPNR = Kills Per N Rounds.  How many standards can you kill in N rounds?
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 30, 2010 - 1:12PM #12
awaken_D_M_golem
Date Joined: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 2,655
" ... core ... "
has historically ment PHB DMG and MM only.
But heck this is 4e, so semi-anything goes right.

If core-core the old fashioned meaning then
Wizard + Fighter / Swordmaster / Deadly Trickster
gets the most recharge, gets stunlock-lite, the important div rituals, 2 errata-baits (by now).
my kitty avatar's Royale Lineage ---> http://static.neatorama.com/images/2009-09/original-keyboard-cats.jpg

new helpful bg/mmx refugee locale ---> http://www.ruleofcool.com/smf/index.php/topic,632.0.html
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 30, 2010 - 3:10PM #13
Rancid_Rogue
Date Joined: Mar 25, 2009
Posts: 948

Jul 30, 2010 -- 1:12PM, awaken_D_M_golem wrote:

" ... core ... "
has historically ment PHB DMG and MM only.
But heck this is 4e, so semi-anything goes right.




I suppose this is my thread for syntax problems.

Admittedly, we mostly use "core" in "corebooks." Here though, what I mean by the term is the nucleus of a party that may extend to four, five, or more characters in size. In my experience a typical group has two or three really dedicated players, who show up every week and fully engage in the game, and several others who filter in or out with less interest in the proceedings.

Hence, a practical party design perhaps should rely on only those core players being present, with anyone else's PC being icing on the cake.

But yes, I can see the possibility for confusion.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 30, 2010 - 4:19PM #14
The_Crimson_Dawn
Date Joined: Oct 2, 2005
Posts: 2,548
For the all "martial" party perhaps use a seeker.  A seeker that does not pick supernatural dailies may seem more martial and less primal than a beastmaster ranger.  In fact the class fits the essentials martial class mold as it uses basic attacks for most everything.  It ay be primal but when ou make a basic attack every turn that is not too supernatural and could be otherwise explained as skill or a device I think the seeker is the closest ou can get to an official martial controller.

EDIT:  Also the seeker has a strong striker feel to it which also matches the feel of the martial classes which have a tendency to secondary striker or boost striking.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 31, 2010 - 12:26PM #15
awaken_D_M_golem
Date Joined: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 2,655
Oh, please don't take it as a slam.
It's just that core can mean more than just the core 3, in 4e.
So already having to clairify this core vs. that core, makes another core, a little too tricky.

**

"two or three really dedicated players, who show up every week and fully engage in the game, and several others who filter in or out with less interest in the proceedings."

See, I like the second half, as a problem.
Companion Characters can do stuff that PCs can't, and they're easier to get going.
That's just me.

1 - Recharge guy
2 - Companion char for the easy come easy go people
3+ builds as prefered
my kitty avatar's Royale Lineage ---> http://static.neatorama.com/images/2009-09/original-keyboard-cats.jpg

new helpful bg/mmx refugee locale ---> http://www.ruleofcool.com/smf/index.php/topic,632.0.html
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 31, 2010 - 2:19PM #16
yargon
Date Joined: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 767

Jul 29, 2010 -- 9:18PM, marigoldran wrote:

A party of three shielding swordmage|wizards MC into artificer, and two shielding swordmage|artificers MC into cleric and wizard. 




One of them needs to be artificers|warlord>Spell Commander for the insane tactical positioning and more basic attacks with arcane @wills etc...

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 31, 2010 - 2:41PM #17
Litigation
Date Joined: Jun 10, 2008
Posts: 3,135

Jul 30, 2010 -- 4:19PM, The_Crimson_Dawn wrote:

For the all "martial" party perhaps use a seeker.  A seeker that does not pick supernatural dailies may seem more martial and less primal than a beastmaster ranger.  In fact the class fits the essentials martial class mold as it uses basic attacks for most everything.  It ay be primal but when ou make a basic attack every turn that is not too supernatural and could be otherwise explained as skill or a device I think the seeker is the closest ou can get to an official martial controller.

EDIT:  Also the seeker has a strong striker feel to it which also matches the feel of the martial classes which have a tendency to secondary striker or boost striking.



Only use a Seeker if you want to be dead weight.

Srsly, play a Sniper Rogue who loads up on his class' AoEs instead if you need a "martial controller."

D&DN Paladin: Half-Fighter, half-Cleric, all useless.
D&DN Ranger: Third-Fighter, third-Rogue, third-Druid, all useless. With one interesting concept that has its execution botched.

My 4e Character Op work:

Character guides Show
Builds Show
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 31, 2010 - 8:34PM #18
Rancid_Rogue
Date Joined: Mar 25, 2009
Posts: 948

Jul 31, 2010 -- 2:19PM, yargon wrote:

Jul 29, 2010 -- 9:18PM, marigoldran wrote:

A party of three shielding swordmage|wizards MC into artificer, and two shielding swordmage|artificers MC into cleric and wizard. 




One of them needs to be artificers|warlord>Spell Commander for the insane tactical positioning and more basic attacks with arcane @wills etc...




I'm a big fan of the Killswitch build too, but I feel compelled to point out that he would actually add less value to this party than many others. The swordmages can reliably mark at a little bit of range, which makes a decided difference in how important tactical positioning is to them.

The real problem is deciding whether to take the wonderful Sword Burst, or the oh-so-pertinent Frigid Blade, or being a human and taking both ...

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Jul 31, 2010 - 9:53PM #19
CrimsonLyre
Date Joined: Mar 7, 2010
Posts: 692
I think the best matchups would be taking advantage of warlord powers pretty much every time. The build by Daega community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758... of a Warden/Warlord/Arkhosian Blademaster in which he uses hail of steel just about every turn would be utter destruction to the enemies almost immediately. Put 3 of these in (more if you can of course), all with Time Out as the lvl 10 utility, and you have a group full of VERY high hp and defenses wardens who use second wind every other round or so and all deal insane damage. Would be best if they all had Dwarven Throwing enchanted weapons as well. They would probably only get hit on a 20, as they can realistically spend every turn using second wind at lvl 21 (giving +10 or so to all defenses).
Currently Playing:
lvl 6 Pixie Skald in Home Campaign
lvl 2 Human Bard in Forgotten Realms
---
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing