My Artificer|Cleric has 3 encounter and 2 daily methods of moving my allies. In a party/encounter where people are constantly running off because of an irrational fear of clumping (seriously, we all have surge+4 THP, suck it up!) these powers are used to scatter/position the party initially (AFTER everyone has my Magic Weapon buff), and then later to either recall allies out of bad positions, or simply drag a 2nd PC adjacent to me (because I will always be adjacent to one, or whine until they stop running off for no reason).
There are only a few builds that you clump the party with regularly because you absurdly overpower the risk of a couple enemy bursts, every decent Artificer build is part of that list (now, if you're fighting, say, 3 dragons? Yeah, spread the hell out)
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
Well, yes, allies are cowards, until they get used to your methods. Seriously, Artificers are forced to use their movement powers like Come And Get It, instead of rearranging the battlefield, half the time...
If only we had some sort of Marking ability like the Aegis of Ensnarement for allies.
There's a reason I rated Warweaver's Tether as high as I did
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
You might want to look around CharOp for a bit. Basically every character should get their standard and the occasional Immediate attack, at a minimum, and quite a lot of classes standards are either double-taps or bursts. Add into that minor action attacks (themes, racials, class powers) and the number of optimized characters who make one attack per round as a normal thing (and remember, this is CharOp) is literally zero. Add into that actions points and action point recovery and the minimum attack rolls per round for at least the first three rounds of an encounter isas least 2. If you're not, then you're not optimized, not even to a moderate degree. Defenders ought to be setting up a catch-22, where they either get to enforce their mark or punish a monster for attacking them. Strikers should all have minor/immediate attacks, or busts (Monk/Sorc). Controllers have bursts. Leaders are the only thing that might not fall into that category, but even then you can hit and grant an attack > that is an extra roll for the party.
False logic: If you take Expertise and have MW you're still ahead by +1. There is no rational situation where MW is not ahead by 1. And you clearly haven't done the math to establish how big a difference +1 can make, just in terms of damage alone, completely ignoring the other effects of powers hitting.
Artificer feats, stat boosts, other misc game elements.
And I'm just going to clarify this for you: this isn't an opinion. Zathris helpfully did some very basic math do demonstrate why MW is better. Objectively better. Opinions are not facts, MW being better is a fact. I don't mean this in an mean way, but there are some fairly obvious gaps in your knowledge of 4e optimization and 4e math. If this actually interests you there is quite a lot of content on this forum you can read that'd be very educational, but you will really need to approach the information with the idea that what you've probably seen of 4e is haphazard and below optimal to a large degree. For instance there is one solid argument against MW's accuracy boost that actually has merit: really optimized strikers often hit on a 2 anyway, so the accuracy increase does nothing for them. Of course that just makes the damage increase even better.
Okay. I totally see the math, and I understand the mindset. I might try it later, but I won't be taking Magic Weapon for the artificer I have in mind. Before that elicits "then you're not optimizing your character", consider whether or not it's optimizing a character when you compromise the core character concept. It's more like assimilating him to the numbers. I want to optimize the character I have, not change him into somebody else. That's what the forum is for, right? To help people optimize their characters?
You've convinced me that Magic Weapon is exclusively better. Honest. But only if you look at it in a vacuum, which I might have been willing to do if I hadn't already conceived of this character. An at-will attack is a major part of that character's behavior, and in this case I don't necessarily find the benefits of the compromise to his behavior so good that it's something I'm willing to do. I might be willing to maneuver around like MW would want me to, if it really showed me something I liked. I might do it in some cases, but not this one. So, thanks for helping me with this part of my query.
Moving on, I guess I don't see all those minor attacks because I don't have the books with themes. I just have the 3 PHBs, Arcane and Primal Power, FR Player's Guide and Heroes of the Feywild. I'll look around a bit for the immediates. On some of the powers and feats (action point recovery?) that allow those habitual multiple attacks per turn, how far are you looking forward in level (does it vary by class)? When can a typical character expect to be doing that kind of thing? This may not be appropriate for more than a brief discussion in the Potent Potables thread, but I'm just stunned that that kind of thing is possible and even expected.
Minor action attacks are awesome if you're a Ranger or a Rogue, and Avenger to a slightly lesser degree, but other strikers are kind of shortchanged. Barbarians don't have any, Warlocks don't, Monks don't, Sorcs have a grand total of one... But if you look at the strikers, each has at least some kind of way to multiattack. Except for Assassin which barely counts, they all have immediate reaction attacks, for one. And some other stuff:
Ranger: Minor action attacks, multishots Rogue: Minor action attacks Barbarian: Multishots (Storm of Blades), free action attacks (Rampage) Avenger: Minor action attacks Warlock: Varies, there's Hellish Rebuke as a multishot, some zone abuse, a lot of AoE... Sorcerer: Zone abuse (Flame Spiral, Lightning Field, Cloak of Winter Storm), lots of AoEs Monk: AoEs Assassin: Multishots? (Flurry of Talons, Shadow Fire)
Okay. I totally see the math, and I understand the mindset. I might try it later, but I won't be taking Magic Weapon for the artificer I have in mind. Before that elicits "then you're not optimizing your character", consider whether or not it's optimizing a character when you compromise the core character concept. It's more like assimilating him to the numbers. I want to optimize the character I have, not change him into somebody else. That's what the forum is for, right? To help people optimize their characters?
You've convinced me that Magic Weapon is exclusively better. Honest. But only if you look at it in a vacuum, which I might have been willing to do if I hadn't already conceived of this character. An at-will attack is a major part of that character's behavior, and in this case I don't necessarily find the benefits of the compromise to his behavior so good that it's something I'm willing to do. I might be willing to maneuver around like MW would want me to, if it really showed me something I liked. I might do it in some cases, but not this one. So, thanks for helping me with this part of my query.
Moving on, I guess I don't see all those minor attacks because I don't have the books with themes. I just have the 3 PHBs, Arcane and Primal Power, FR Player's Guide and Heroes of the Feywild. I'll look around a bit for the immediates. On some of the powers and feats (action point recovery?) that allow those habitual multiple attacks per turn, how far are you looking forward in level (does it vary by class)? When can a typical character expect to be doing that kind of thing? This may not be appropriate for more than a brief discussion in the Potent Potables thread, but I'm just stunned that that kind of thing is possible and even expected.
You're not even making a "it doesn't fit my character concept" argument, you're saying "I don't want to change my playstyle to be a better player". There is no nice way of saying it, quite frankly, but there is no room in optimization for that kind of nonsense; it's like not taking Come and Get It as a Fighter because you don't want your character to be adjacent to multiple enemies or avoiding Dishearten on a Psion because you want to be a single target striker. There are reasons to not do it, but "I don't want to" is just stubborn and childish.
Examples of additional Damage Rolls in the books you have, within low heroic tier: Dragon Breath (Dragonborn Racial), Consecrate Ground (Cleric Daily), Combat Challenge (Fighter Feature), Rain of Blows (Fighter Encounter), Rain of Steel (Fighter Daily), Twin Strike (Ranger At-Will), Disruptive Strike (Ranger Encounter), Riposte Strike (Rogue At-Will), Critical Opportunity (Rogue Encounter), Dire Radiance (Warlock At-Will), Thunderwave (Wizard At-Will), Flaming Sphere (Wizard Daily), Fury's Advance (Avenger Encounter), Echoing Weapon (Bard Encounter). In a low level game, even with all the sources available, it's fairly tricky to have multiple Minor Action attacks. If I were you, I'd invest some money in being an Insider for a little bit so you can use the online compendium and character builder in order to have all the options available (There are 45 Minor Action damage roll powers in the game, the books you have only contain 4 of them).
Typically I assume characters will at least enter paragon and need to make a decision about what Paragon Path to choose, up until the release of Themes, I wouldn't even play a character lower than 5th level; the game is too dull and slow for me when the only action I'd take per round (after the 1st round) is using 1 at-will power.
We also assume, because we did the math to prove it, that attacking multiple times is basically the only way for a Striker to maintain sufficient damage in order for the fight to be over on round 4 (the other method is charging and stacking the various things that boost charging). Controllers and Leaders attack multiple targets per round by simple nature of what they do.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
You're not even making a "it doesn't fit my character concept" argument, you're saying "I don't want to change my playstyle to be a better player". There is no nice way of saying it, quite frankly, but there is no room in optimization for that kind of nonsense; it's like not taking Come and Get It as a Fighter because you don't want your character to be adjacent to multiple enemies or avoiding Dishearten on a Psion because you want to be a single target striker. There are reasons to not do it, but "I don't want to" is just stubborn and childish.
I'm a person, you know. Is this how you treat a person who comes to you for help optimizing? I can't even get through to the rest of your post. I made it pretty clear that I have a concept for the character, and I want to optimize him within that concept. That was too much, apparently. Not everybody plays in paragon tier, but that doesn't make their games dull and slow, but you can't see that. Just because you don't like it, or can't wrap your mind around why someone would want to do it that way, it's nonsense to you. Forget it. Next time someone comes looking for help, and you feel this way about their build, at least don't post, stay out of the way of people who are actually trying to provide help and guidance. That's the least "help" the author of the handbook can give.
What even decides who is a better D&D player? Mindblown. I may not play the way you do, but I'm a damn good D&D player. How can anybody tell anyone else that? What makes you want to play an artificer period, or another person a ranger? You don't play a character or build because it's the best, you play it because you want to. Who's stubborn and childish? Man, wake up, Zathris. There is a nice way of saying just about anything, if you have the heart to try.
If anyone has anything else helpful to add, I'd be grateful. Please PM me. I'm afraid of the response I'm going to get going forward in this kind of thread. It was nice of a couple of you to try.
Let me get this out of the way, "I want to be an Artificer without Magic Weapon" isn't a character concept. Character concepts are the Who and Why, not the What or How. "Arcane Tinkerer who studied under a master for a decade and is on a journey to find new and amazing things" is a Who and Why, Magic Weapon is a How.
Being a good player means creating a character with 1 an interesting backstory but plenty of room for future character development 2 who can work with the other characters to make an interesting social roleplay dynamic in the party 3 who is played in a way that allows other players to shine when they ought to 4 who excels at it's own particular thing which fits in with the rest of party to allow the group to overcome challenges 5 who is passably self-sufficient should plans go awry 6 and is played in a way that that will not only not hinder other players but actually enable their characters to also excel.
You're absolutely right that you play characters because you want to. However, you don't come to the Character Optimization Forum because you want to play a character; you come here because you want to make that character the best it can be. Not choosing Magic Weapon without a very specific reason (ex. being a hybrid that has to have a different power for its trick) is a failure to achieve #4 and the reason you gave was a result of not achieving at #6. Not only ignoring, but dismissing the advice of experts as situational is a slap in the face, while I have no obligation to be nice to anyone on these forums, it's crossing a line with me to do that and then continue to illicit advice.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
Please remember to keep your comments positive, productive, and on topic. Remember we are trying to create a mutually beneficial and productive community for everyone to take part in. At the end of the day we are all in this thing together, and if we don't work together we will never get anywhere!
If you have any questions or would like to read the CoC you can find it here:
