|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:27PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
For a mental exercise, I'm compiling a roster for two parties. One consists of classes/builds that are generally acknowledged to be top tier by CharOp posters, the other consists of those who are generally considered to be bottom tier. The rules are as follows:
- The parties should consist of a defender, ranged striker, melee striker, leader and controller
- Characters selected as individuals, no party tricks like Radiant Mafia, etc...
- No hybrids
- No Essentials builds, although other essentials content would be allowed (example - feats)
- Once class and build selected, I would attempt to optimize to the best of my ability, so no intentional gimpings other than choosing class and build
- Characters would be assumed to progress in items and gold as though participating in an LFR campaign and consistantly selecting "Bundle X - one uncommon of level or common of level +2", no saving slots for a later level
My initial thoughts are as follows: The HeroesBattlerager Fighter Tactical Warlord Archery Ranger Rageblood Vigor Barbarian Orb of Imposition Wizard The ZeroesEnsnaring Swordmage Devoted (AKA Laser) Cleric Star Pact Warlock Bleak Disciple Assassin Spiritbond Seeker Any feedback appreciated.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:44PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2008
|
Damn, no Essentials builds? There goes the Enchantment Mage, then.  For The Heroes, I'd definitely replace the Battlerager Fighter with a Weapon Talent Shield Fighter. Battleragers are second-class citizens among Fighters, nowadays. Everything else I can't really argue with.
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
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:48PM
#3
|
|
|
As long as the battlerager is a dwarf or mul, then it's a pretty good build. With the new MM3 damage expressions, the THP you can generate really comes in handy. Plus, if you pick up plate and shield, you'll have great defenses as well.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:51PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2008
|
You can still build a very effective lazer cleric if you use the new battle cleric's article so that would probably be the strongest character of the group especially if you went with a radiant vulnerability build. Combined with a starpact warlock you might have a mini-radiant mafia right there without even really trying. Maybe use a chaos sorcerer instead?
Part of the issue is that none of the pre essentials leader builds are bad, even though some builds might be a little weaker than others. The only leader I think is weak is the sentinel.
And swarm druid might be the weakest controller since you have to boost dex or int to keep it alive at higher levels.
Invoker might top orb wizard.
my handbooks & builds
Show
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:54PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2008
|
As long as the battlerager is a dwarf or mul, then it's a pretty good build. With the new MM3 damage expressions, the THP you can generate really comes in handy. Plus, if you pick up plate and shield, you'll have great defenses as well.
I didn't say Battleragers were bad. I just meant they don't have the potential that WT Fighters do.
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
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:57PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
You can still build a very effective lazer cleric if you use the new battle cleric's article so that would probably be the strongest character of the group especially if you went with a radiant vulnerability build. Combined with a starpact warlock you might have a mini-radiant mafia right there without even really trying. Maybe use a chaos sorcerer instead?
Part of the issue is that none of the pre essentials leader builds are bad, even though some builds might be a little weaker than others. The only leader I think is weak is the sentinel.
Yeah, I struggle with bad non-essentials leader...
I tossed around runepriest and ardent, because they are poorly supported, but I've seen some really effective examples. (One of my favorite LFR characters is an ardent.) Another thought was wand artificer...no Magic Weapon, but you still get Punishing Eye, and good stuff from there out.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 1:59PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
As long as the battlerager is a dwarf or mul, then it's a pretty good build. With the new MM3 damage expressions, the THP you can generate really comes in handy. Plus, if you pick up plate and shield, you'll have great defenses as well.
I didn't say Battleragers were bad. I just meant they don't have the potential that WT Fighters do.
Hmm. My internal tiebreaker would be "best at role". I think a shield WT fighter might be better at defending then a battlerager, which the latter would generally make up with more damage.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 2:21PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
More damage absorption, you mean. Part of the package for Weapon Talent Fighters is that you're not chained to Constitution like a Battlerager is, and Wisdom is where all the damage bonuses are at (Pit Fighter, Marked Scourge, Slashing Storm, even Cruel Cut Style - and let's not forget the +1 to hit, either). A Weapon Talent Fighter should be out-damaging a Battlerager fairly handily overall and have superior defenses (and OA's), but the Battlerager brings tons and tons of THP and surges to the table, plus a Shield of Fellowship will let you hand out said temps (which combines with Dreadnought's status shaking abilities to make the gap between them plenty smaller than what it would otherwise be).
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 2:58PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2001
|
I would definitely rate the Runepriest below the Lazer cleric. Although I suppose it depends on the level involved. is this L30?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Jul 06, 2011 - 3:01PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
In a perfect world, I would want to compare these parties at several different levels....3rd, 6th, 9th, 13th, 16th, 19th, 22nd, 25th and 30th.
|
|
|
