|
3 years ago ::
Sep 18, 2010 - 8:09AM
#21
|
|
|
Blah. As useful as the information is, I think we're getting too many stickied threads in this forum. With the screen layout I have now, I need to page down to actually see discussion threads (as opposed to the Community banner header and the currently stickied threads). This looks like it'll be a thread which new people might read once, and then never again.
In that end, someone may just want to copy this to an already sticked thread. Easy enough to drop at the top of the Build Collection one.
guides
Show
my builds
Show
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 Does an excellent job at keeping an enemy disabled in a few ways. Strong.
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.
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
Unnamed Avenger|Runepriest/Hammer 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, only 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.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 19, 2010 - 5:40PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2009
|
'Just because we, in CO, deal in strict RAW because TheoOp has no DM, does not mean you, your group or your DM has to. Remember this.'
1.) Just because we can, doesn't mean we will.
2.) Just because we can, doesn't mean you have to let us.
3.) Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.
4) Just because we can, doesn't mean it wouldn't be pointless. I have a partial Fighter build that, by level 6, is getting an extra +7 on attack rolls for opportunity attacks - at level 12, gets two tries on an OA and will get yet another +2 if the first misses - at level 16, the OA-specific attack bonus is up to +9 and the oops-try-again OA attack bonus is up to +4. You don't need to hit level+6 enemies on a 2, because well before you get there your DM will have intelligent enemies stop provoking OAs from you - and nobody in the party, including you, can handle level+6 enemies anyway.
"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
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 21, 2010 - 3:25PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Dec 22, 2006
|
There's more than a hint of dogma in certain parts of the CharOp boards. I've seen it a number of times; "You can't do that - it's ridiculous" because some build doesn't follow the 'accepted' approach.
I welcome the OP's position (and my comment wasn't aimed in that direction) - I think it's what CharOp should be all about - inclusive, constructive in its criticism and more holistic than it currently is e.g. damage, damage, damage.
Hap
You can do whatever you think you can do ... but that is Houserule territory.
You can say a build works in whatever way you think it does, or should do ... but that is Houserule territory.
Here's the thing - it is NOT dogma. You can say the rules work what ever way you wanna say they work. That doesn't mean, that the other 6 Billion people on the planet, are hyper-reflexively going to agree with you. And why would they? So here on the C.O. board "we" try to figure out how the rules work, without needing Me Myself and I , to be overdeity of everyone elses universe.
Building "good" builds on the C.O. board is actually downstream, from the assumption that the rules are the rules.
Building a "good" build with the assumption that the rules don't matter, or that the rules are gonna be changed to suite someone's overdeity-esque ideas ... isn't anything at all to do with C.O.
No dogma involved. Magic Tea Party doesn't need any rules.
C.O. does.
EDIT - oh, and Action Denial (hint).
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
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 21, 2010 - 11:19PM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Dec 14, 2004
|
There's more than a hint of dogma in certain parts of the CharOp boards. I've seen it a number of times; "You can't do that - it's ridiculous" because some build doesn't follow the 'accepted' approach.
I welcome the OP's position (and my comment wasn't aimed in that direction) - I think it's what CharOp should be all about - inclusive, constructive in its criticism and more holistic than it currently is e.g. damage, damage, damage.
Hap
You can do whatever you think you can do ... but that is Houserule territory.
You can say a build works in whatever way you think it does, or should do ... but that is Houserule territory.
Here's the thing - it is NOT dogma. You can say the rules work what ever way you wanna say they work. That doesn't mean, that the other 6 Billion people on the planet, are hyper-reflexively going to agree with you. And why would they? So here on the C.O. board "we" try to figure out how the rules work, without needing Me Myself and I , to be overdeity of everyone elses universe.
Building "good" builds on the C.O. board is actually downstream, from the assumption that the rules are the rules.
Building a "good" build with the assumption that the rules don't matter, or that the rules are gonna be changed to suite someone's overdeity-esque ideas ... isn't anything at all to do with C.O.
No dogma involved. Magic Tea Party doesn't need any rules.
C.O. does.
EDIT - oh, and Action Denial (hint).
I think you misunderstood his position, there are several vocal members of this board that tend towards an attitude of "if it isn't the best, it isn't worth considering", and mistake some of the theoretical builds provided on CharOp as goalposts to which a build must strive for in order to be viable. I don't think he's talking about RaW arguments, but rather, the dogma of the handful of powergamers that post on the boards that don't seem to truely understand the what the OP is saying with his "just because you can..."
I know I come off as Hostile and abrasive. It is not my intention to do so, I am just a very emotionally driven individual. I apologize if I come off as such to you and ask that you please don't take it personally, as I can assure you, it is not intended as such. --------------------------------------------------------- duel colour
Show
Storm Sorcerer: Bowling with the gods
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 22, 2010 - 2:22AM
#25
|
|
|
Thanks Kratch - yes that's what I was getting at. I don't want to derail the discussion though so in the interest of practising what I preach perhaps some constructuive feedback would be to suggest that when builds are posted it's made clear what the flavour of the optimisation is and what kind of feedback/suggestions the OP is looking for. It's fine if it is damage, damage, damage but in my view this is usually far from optimised in reality. But hey, just my opinion  Hap
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 22, 2010 - 6:59AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2005
|
Then I ran aground trying to figure out why the Q&A sticky was here instead of Q&A and whether the 3.5 redirect was still needed. 
By this point, if a poster doesn't realize 4e is the current edition, and doesn't notice the name of the forum is "4e Character Optimization", there's really no helping them. 
It's fine if it is damage, damage, damage but in my view this is usually far from optimised in reality.
I've found the "most optimal" setups in the campaigns I've been in tend to rely targeting/positioning, to be able to get my DPR.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 22, 2010 - 8:38AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2009
|
I don't want to derail the discussion though so in the interest of practising what I preach perhaps some constructuive feedback would be to suggest that when builds are posted it's made clear what the flavour of the optimisation is and what kind of feedback/suggestions the OP is looking for.
Most of the theoretical-optimization point make it really obvious, in the thread name or in the beginning of the first paragraph, exactly what they are optimizing.
Heck, I even do that with theoretical builds that are so weird I put them in chardev rather than charop - The Crazy Cat Lady (You get one guess what that build maximizes.)
"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
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 22, 2010 - 10:10AM
#28
|
|
|
Most of the theoretical-optimization point make it really obvious, in the thread name or in the beginning of the first paragraph, exactly what they are optimizing.
Heck, I even do that with theoretical builds that are so weird I put them in chardev rather than charop - The Crazy Cat Lady (You get one guess what that build maximizes.)
Sometimes but not always and regardless I think it would help to make it a factor of an optimisation build that it's of a certain type and you're looking for feeback (after all this thread is about a primer so we're talking about giving some guidelines to the process).
Hap
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 22, 2010 - 10:47AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Sep 27, 2009
|
I think you misunderstood his position, there are several vocal members of this board that tend towards an attitude of "if it isn't the best, it isn't worth considering", and mistake some of the theoretical builds provided on CharOp as goalposts to which a build must strive for in order to be viable. I don't think he's talking about RaW arguments, but rather, the dogma of the handful of powergamers that post on the boards that don't seem to truely understand the what the OP is saying with his "just because you can..."
I can't tell you how many hundreds of threads I have read where someone of CO notability responds with, "Class X (or build X or add-on X) does this so much better, you should just play/use X" instead of constructively trying to assist someone in bringing a different build to the table with practical optimization. It usually takes a long time to break through this wall for some people whose feedback is otherwise interesting.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 22, 2010 - 3:12PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Dec 22, 2006
|
Oh. My bad for the over reaction. Sorry.
Yeah, for a while the 3e CO-board had guys who would answer every build, with Pun-pun.
Annoying.
(smirk)
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
|
|
|
