|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 12:54AM
#41
|
|
|
@Katsue: Grappling Spirits slow lasts until the end of your next turn. It is easy to prone with this power, not hard.
My Articles for Dragon and Dungeon
Show
My CharOp Guides and Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 2:50AM
#42
|
|
|
@Katsue: Grappling Spirits slow lasts until the end of your next turn. It is easy to prone with this power, not hard.
I thought Grappling Spirits was until the end of the target's next turn, not yours, and that this was a source of some big timing woes. I would be thrilled to hear that I'm mistaken!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 5:18AM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2008
|
Ah, good catch on the Grappling Spirits duration. That does reduce the utility of WSG, though it's still very valuable. Inevitable Shot, Enabling Leaders, allies that slow, and powerswapping for Ranger powers like Disruptive Strike and Spitting Cobra Stance are other means by which you can get out of turn attacks to slow and/or hit slowed targets.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 5:32AM
#44
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm wrong. Wow, that's an annoying flaw for that power.
My Articles for Dragon and Dungeon
Show
My CharOp Guides and Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 11:39AM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Feb 25, 2011
|
While I don't agree with your guide 100% (maybe 95-98%), I think for the most part, you are right on the money with your assessment. Good to see a guide for the underdog of the controller world 
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 11:46AM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Feb 24, 2011
|
Yea Grappling is just plain sad. I don't see why this has not been erratad it feels like an obvious typo.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 12:46PM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2009
|
A very good guide overall. Thanks for that!
I know I will almost certainly be in the minority here, but I actually like Storm of Spirit Shards. At the very least, I think it is worth more than a red.
Yes, it doesn't add more control... but does a controller always have to take only the control powers? Is there not something to be said for having another power tool in the toolbox (in this case, AoE damage), especially on a class that isn't the greatest in that regard? At first level at least, this is some serious damage, with half on a miss, and it doesn't affect allies. The Seeker in our party loves it, after she absolutely pounded a large group of Orcs with it. You can say that's not her role... but it's hard to argue with a bunch of dead orcs. If you need to do some good AoE damage, this is a solid power.
"What is the sort of thing that I do care about is a failure to seriously evaluate what does and doesn't work in favor of a sort of cargo cult posturing. And yes, it's painful to read design notes columns that are all just "So D&D 3.5 sort of had these problems. We know people have some issues with them. What a puzzler! But we think we have a solution in the form of X", where X is sort of a half-baked version of an idea that 4e executed perfectly well and which worked fine." - Lesp
"They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins." - Thecasualoblivion
"When I DM Next I feel that I might as well be running a game based off of notes scribbled on a paper napkin." -Reinhart
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 9:03PM
#48
|
|
|
Perhaps the Seeker could get the ability to stack effects. Hit a slowed creature with a power that slows -> immobilize instead. Hit a dazed creature with a power that dazes -> stun instead.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 13, 2011 - 9:21PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2008
|
A very good guide overall. Thanks for that!
I know I will almost certainly be in the minority here, but I actually like Storm of Spirit Shards. At the very least, I think it is worth more than a red.
Yes, it doesn't add more control... but does a controller always have to take only the control powers? Is there not something to be said for having another power tool in the toolbox (in this case, AoE damage), especially on a class that isn't the greatest in that regard?
Thanks!
Swarming Bats does AoE damage just fine, and is also decent battlefield control for L1. No reason to miss out on control for, like, a couple more points of damage on average to a smaller number of targets.
In general though: No, a controller doesn't always have to take pure control powers. An Invoker can afford to do a little blasting. The Seeker, however, needs every scrap of control it can get.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 14, 2011 - 12:34PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2009
|
Swarming Bats does AoE damage just fine, and is also decent battlefield control for L1. No reason to miss out on control for, like, a couple more points of damage on average to a smaller number of targets.
I understand what you're saying, but to be accurate, it would be more than a couple more points of damage. 2d6, or 7 on average, to be exact, against each target in the burst. At first level, that is a fair amount. And Shards also does damage on a miss, so that is more damage to tack on. Yes, bats has a bigger area of effect, but Shards has a greater range.
Also, I'm not sure if you're saying Shards is rated lower because Bats is better... that would be strange, IMHO. I think powers should be rated on their absolute value, not on their value relative to other powers of the same level. As you note, Shards is essentially Bats with the 'unimpressive' control removed and some damage added. Yet Shards rates a red, while Bats gets a blue? That seems a bit off to me.
In general though: No, a controller doesn't always have to take pure control powers. An Invoker can afford to do a little blasting. The Seeker, however, needs every scrap of control it can get.
Again, I get what you're saying, but taking a weaker control power when a stronger damage power is readily available seems to me to be a choice not everyone would take. If you have no other control in the party and think you really, really need it then fine... but to me control is the one archetype that I think parties can largely do without (unlike healing, tanking and DPS). Personally, I'd choose good damage over 'unimpressive' control.
It's your guide of course, so you can rate things as you please... I'm just playing devils advocate here.
Thumbs up as well for the Tennyson quote 
"What is the sort of thing that I do care about is a failure to seriously evaluate what does and doesn't work in favor of a sort of cargo cult posturing. And yes, it's painful to read design notes columns that are all just "So D&D 3.5 sort of had these problems. We know people have some issues with them. What a puzzler! But we think we have a solution in the form of X", where X is sort of a half-baked version of an idea that 4e executed perfectly well and which worked fine." - Lesp
"They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins." - Thecasualoblivion
"When I DM Next I feel that I might as well be running a game based off of notes scribbled on a paper napkin." -Reinhart
|
|
|
