This build has 100% accuracy because it doesn't roll to hit.
Typical Encounter Nova turn: Minor Action - Glowering Wrath Move Action - Move Owlbear next to target enemy to blow up Standard - Storm Pillar
Wait until enemy's turn comes up, then use Forceful Push as a Free Action to slide it 4 squares (Controlling Advantage + Glowering Wrath) and trigger Storm Pillar 4x. If it is not dead, use Forceful Push a second time (Discipline Adept).
Damage Breakdown: 1d6 + 13 per storm pillar
5 Int mod 2 Enhancement 4 Element Empowerment 2 Owlbear aura
Damage Total:
(2 Forceful Pushes) 8d6 + 104 = 132
(1 Forceful Push) 4d6 + 52 = 66
For more fun, Action Point and throw in a Psychic Anomaly. Since Psychic Anomaly requires a hit, it can also be boosted to slide an insane number of squares.
First time posting a build so let me know when I mess up.
Anyways, this is a Level 6 controller build that throws out insane damage without even rolling to hit thanks to the oversight of Storm Pillar.
I'd recommend making it very clear that you intend it as a nova build, not a KPR one.
That being said, a 132 damage nova at level 6 (with no APs or set up round!) is pretty awesome.
If you want a tiny bit more damage added, be Causticsoul instead and use Acid Surge as you move your Owlbear (and then you can probably get some items that would boost Acid Surge damage). This is pretty much the only thing I can think of that would add anything to the nova though.
I am okay with you saying my argument is stupid, or commits the munchkin fallacy, or any other bad thing you want. Particularly if you give a reason/explanation for it.
However, I will ignore any post that calls me stupid, or a munchkin, or what have you. Not because it bothers me; I've just found that people only start name-calling when that's the best argument they have left.
2) Your resistances from the armor, PP and Dragonsoul. Armor gives you 15 thunder, PP gives you 20 lightning, and Dragonsoul gives 15 fire. You take the lowest one because your attack does all 3. You have 15 resist to those 3 elements, but you have 15 pierce fire from dragonsoul... how does that play out? Maybe since you pierce 15 fire, one of your resistances becomes 0, and thus you get 0 resistance for the entire attack. Do you pierce any of the 30 resist-all from the belt?
After searching through the Rules forum, it seems like the consensus is that there's no definitive RAW answer, because resist/vulnerable "all" is not actually defined clearly anywhere. But, the general agreement is that it should not be treated like "resist/vulnerable fire and lightning and cold and..." because that breaks a number of game elements. So by the normal assumptions, piercing from Dragon Soul would not apply to the Resist All from the belt.
I am okay with you saying my argument is stupid, or commits the munchkin fallacy, or any other bad thing you want. Particularly if you give a reason/explanation for it.
However, I will ignore any post that calls me stupid, or a munchkin, or what have you. Not because it bothers me; I've just found that people only start name-calling when that's the best argument they have left.
But i still feel movement needs to be added somewhere in DPR calculations. Expecting to start next to an enemy, and have it not move, is kinda... expectant...
Yeah, I agree.
There's a lot of factors involved in determining how the mob will act though. Depends if they are melee or ranged, what other targets are around, what effects are on them (being in a 120 damage zone, for instance), special abilities/movement modes...
Example: if the enemy is melee with reach 2, then on my last DB of my turn, I don't slide them back adjacent. Instead, I slide them so they end up 3 squares away (no charging, no melee attacks). Then they are forced to move closer on their turn, and I only need one "secondary" DB to slide them back to the main zone when my next turn starts. Depending on how close the enemy has to get to me (i.e. their reach), it changes how much damage I can pull off with the forced movement.
It's really hard to give accurate, general assumptions. But I wouldn't be opposed to the idea of figuring out a way to incorporate movement. It's definitely an important part of combat.
(Sorry for the triple post, I'm responding to so many different things...and I still want to get back to Greyville at some point, but not tonight)
I am okay with you saying my argument is stupid, or commits the munchkin fallacy, or any other bad thing you want. Particularly if you give a reason/explanation for it.
However, I will ignore any post that calls me stupid, or a munchkin, or what have you. Not because it bothers me; I've just found that people only start name-calling when that's the best argument they have left.
Yea, I just read the errata and found my DB combo now does not work as well. I was using a sorc/wiz hybrid, and cast cloud of daggers that at low level I would just walk through to recharge my breath and take my 1 point of damage, and at paragon take the lightning transport and the planestrider boots to tp in and out to get 3 DBs on my turn. It had a ~75DPR... but now, cloud of daggers only lets to take the damage once per turn, so that makes it a 1/my turn attack I would need to find some off-turn effect that lets me either move or use the DB and kill to recharge. Opportunity breath comes to mind, but we can't really figure DPS on "if enemy provokes me to take OA on it". And sweet, I'm currently playing a storm sorc, and plan on taking the PP to get the zone they missed. (Lightning Fury)
I wouldn't depend on lighting fury to last much longer. They've made the decisiion to nerf zones, they just a few missed it. I expect them to be tagged 1/turn next update. (though, if they survive next update, then you'll probably be good for a year).
Conflaguation breath probably will go too. But enjoy the top spot while you have it
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.
When an attack score a critical hit against a target, the target takes the maximum damage possible from the attack. Don't make a damage roll. Instead, the target takes damage as if the maximum result had been rolled for damage. [etc.]
It is clearly stated that the damage comes from the attack, and the sentence you quoted can easily be a sort of ellipsis. ("Instead, the target takes damage [from the attack] as if the maximum result had been rolled for damage.")
So, cite something in evidence of 'For starters, the rules generally treat "the target takes damage" due to your attack identically to "you deal damage to the target."'
You actually didn't disagree with me. I said the rules treat taking damage due to your attack as being the same as you dealing damage. The crit entry says the target takes damage due to your attack...and you agree that this is the reason it's the same as you dealing damage. If the target "takes damage" as a consequence of your attack, then you dealt damage to the target.
Arena Battle Rhythm specifically causes damage to the target of your attack; the damage is coming from the fact that you attacked it. This is the same as the crit entry, where the "takes damage" comes from your attack, so therefore it's the same as "you deal damage."
Similar are the rules on Ongoing Damage (RC 224). Ongoing damage is still damage dealt by you; this can be deduced from the rules, but it's also explicitly confirmed by the errata to Pacifist Healer, that says "whenever you deal damage" would include "ongoing damage and other damaging effects" (so they changed PH to avoid that). But everything about OGD just says that the target "takes damage." The fact that you are the one causing the damage is enough to make it dealt by you.
You can also look for all the effects that lead to an enemy "taking extra damage" from something. For example, Crippling Crush: "When you immobilize or slow an enemy with a weapon attack using a hammer or mace, that enemy takes extra damage equal to your Constitution modifier." Since extra damage is always in addition to other damage, this is actually completely meaningless unless it's considered part of the damage you're dealing. If it's an independent bit of damage (the target just "takes" the damage, separate from everything else), then it actually cannot function, because it's extra damage. There are multiple effects that behave this way, I just did a Compendium search for "takes extra damage".
I am okay with you saying my argument is stupid, or commits the munchkin fallacy, or any other bad thing you want. Particularly if you give a reason/explanation for it.
However, I will ignore any post that calls me stupid, or a munchkin, or what have you. Not because it bothers me; I've just found that people only start name-calling when that's the best argument they have left.
Where do I find the rules for how many creatures you can target with bursts? - e.g. the whirling barbarian power, whirling skirmish (hit a single target, then shift [DexBonus] squares and do damage to all creatures adjacent).
On a similar note, can an epic sohei assume he can get to position where he has two creatures adjacent?
So, the DPR Kings cheese tags came up in ThatWasTotallyNinja's 'legit DPR' thread, and at Borg's invitation, I decide to take a peek in here and throw in my .
Anyway, Borg mentioned that he picked the cheese tags based on what he thought might be considered cheesy by a normal DM and group, which is how the Charge, CA, Fey Beast Tamer, Frost, Radiant et al tags came to be. I, personally, think this is the wrong approach to them. Not only does this perpetuate the 'Frost/Radiant/Whatever is OP!' myth among optimization newbies, but it's also opposite to what Cheese is. Frost is with almost 100% certainty the most effective weapon for damage optimization for a normal character (particularly in the post-HotEC world, where Element Focus and Pale Tooth get you a better Weapon Focus AND an extra attack). This doesn't make it cheesy, it just makes it the optimal choice. No matter how balanced the system, there are always optimal choices, but those choices need not be cheesy. A Rending weapon used to create an infinite loop is cheesy. A Frost weapon isn't. I feel like this thread might be the best place in the whole board to have a discussion that should have been had a long time ago. That discussion is, 'where do we draw the line between optimized and cheesy'? And where do we draw the line between oft-masturbatory theorycrafting and practical assumptions?
For example, for the first question, these are tags I'd question:
-Is Frost cheesy? Battlecrazed is very competitive with it, for instance. For nova focused characters, multiple Tyrant's weaponry reign supreme with their insane damage boost. -Is Radiant cheesy? Most of the Radiant Mafia pieces come together only by the work of multiple characters. Moreover, this kind of party optimization has a certain opportunity cost...and now speaking from a design standpoint and not a player standpoint, this is exactly the sort of thing 4e is about. Teamwork. A team of KAMmers is likely to pump out way more damage than a Radiant Mafia, so while the numbers look pretty impressive on paper, they come at the expense of much coordination, the use of many more pieces than usual (which implies that you should compare builds that use an equivalent amount of pieces to Radiant Mafia), and they only work on single targets if stacked to maximum effectiveness (since they use Encounter resources). -Is Fey Beast Tamer cheesy? Sohei and Guardian are ten times as effective for damage, if not more. Why does it deserve a tag and not them? (Just to clear this up, I think Sohei and Guardian are not cheesy in the slightest. They push the envelope on what is acceptable power, but I think they fall within a reasonable margin, if only just. Themes like Yakuza can be equally or even more potent in some circumstances, Sohei and Guardian are just widely usable.)
There's probably more, but these come to mind first. Now, for the second question:
-Is the Charge tag based on too much theorycraft? I'm not sure - it does require party intervention to make work. Then again, there are very, very few parties that don't have reliable repositioning effects of all sorts. -Is the CA tag based on too much theorycraft? In this case I have no doubts that the answer is 'yes, these tags need to be more lax'. 99% of the time, your party WILL grant you CA one way or another. To assume otherwise is kind of crazy, because even new parties will work for CA if an optimizer is on deck to help bring things together. If you assume you could take a super optimized, glass jawed, updated Stormwarden build out for a spin (totally random example here. Use whatever build you prefer if it doesn't suit you), then assuming your allies will work with you so you'll get CA all day erryday isn't far-fetched.
So yeah. That's pretty much all I wanted to say. These tags need a significant dose of of practical optimization sense in spite of dealing with theory op for the most part. I'll be watching the thread closely, so feel free to tear into my points and I'll see if I can put up a decent reply.
Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).
My understanding of the "Charge", "CA", and "Solo" tags is for builds that can't actually guarentee their ability to charge/get CA/isolate a target, but instead assume sane teammates who will help them do so.
"Nice assumptions. Completely wrong assumptions, but by jove if being incorrect stopped people from making idiotic statements, we wouldn't have modern internet subculture." Kerrus
Practical gameplay runs by neither RAW or RAI, but rather "A Compromise Between The Gist Of The Rule As I Recall Getting The Impression Of It That One Time I Read It And What Jerry Says He Remembers, Whatever, We'll Look It Up Later If Any Of Us Still Give A Damn." Erachima
Right, my point is that grouping that with the 'cheese' tags creates a bad impression. It'd be better to split tags between 'descriptive' tags and 'cheese' tags.
Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).
.
