Community

but doesnt this only mean that Wotc totaly failed with 4E?
if the opted choise is more dmg...then the encounters will be even easier

you see?
opted choise is more dmg, that in itself makes the encounters faster and therefore more easy, therefore again is dmg better then defense and so on until its a fast spiral to steamrolling

why doesnt the GM just make the offensive players go in to defense in their feat-choise?
he is God, he can choose monsters with aura 5 auto-weakened if he like for instance...that would make players more suggastable to defensive feats.

ahh
darn english as second language

my point is, if dmg is the opted choise then the fights become even easier cause every defensive feat a player take is a loss in dmg and therefore a longer battle

so if I draw a bigger picture
see the encounter as a scale between GM and Players
if the GM makes a hard encounter (many dominate, stun, weakened, half healing-aura and so on) then players will be forced to not only rely on encounterpowers that "dodge" but also take defensive feats like resilient focus, saving grace and martial resolve for instance.

but as you said
dmg is opted
that must mean that the player side is on the offense, forcing the encounters to go even faster and therefore becoming more and more easy (since dmg is allways right featchoise).

so basicly my question is:
why doesnt GM make the encounter more hard? not in the way of monster-dmg-output but in the way of forcing players pick more versatile feat-choise? It just seems like a very bad idea if the GM builds encounters where the opted choise for playerstrikers is to allways go for more dmg and let the other roles carry him on his defensive side. I would like to see a more versetile battlefield where all the players had a variaty of feats and let their base-role define what role they play (as in the defender is a defender cause of the class not cause of his feats mainly). It just seems like GM forces all roles in to a copy-paste situation where there are given "right" answers on how a good striker should be, dont missunderstand of course should a ranger go for dmg-feats but when +1dmg/attack is mostly the right answer over +2 to all saves then I just feel its a bit one-sided and not very intelligent designed encounters...

thank you for your patience I hope my english doesnt make it impossible to understand, I know what Im trying to get at its just hard to explain

Apr 24, 2012 -- 3:54PM, Armisael wrote:

I think I grok what you're trying to say - the thing is, this does happen, but not in the way you're thinking of. Even fights become easier, sure...but since when does a fight have to be even? What optimized characters do is give the DM a carte blanche to up the difficulty of his fights, and consequently, their ante. Fighting a group of kobolds is one thing. Fighting a brigade of kobolds, goblins and orcs is an entirely different kettle of fish, however. I am a believer in optimization being desirable, not just because it makes you feel strong and effective, but also because it means the DM gets a license to skip trash fights entirely. Instead of wasting time with an equal-level encounter that will take time to resolve but will be won in Round 1 (and which you NEED to fight because you have to win X fights to level up), he can skip straight to a Level+5 slugfest that will take only 50% more time to resolve than the gimme match, but will be much more interesting throughout. The cardinal rule of RPGs is that the greater the heroism and skills of the protagonists, the greater the challenges they must face become. Fights never become a rocket-tag exercise except if the DM throws you fights aimed at a level of baseline optimization. That make any sense to you?

this makes perfect sense...god damn you are my soulmate I could really need you irl to solve all my problems. Yes of course this is brilliant!

I mean I was very good at WoW and allways hated "trashmobs" and most of the time in DnD I just feel "oh another trash-mob-fight", with a non-opted-group the only real fights are the +5 ones, those I enjoy. It would be horrific if I would have to endure 5 hour trashfights with a GOOD group lol

ok thanks for the answer I finaly understood. Sorry for hi-jacking this thread

Utility/Defensive resources are a blend of items, feats, powers and smart, tactical play.  So while we analyze powers or feats in a vacum, their usefulness depends on a number of individualized factors and other choices that all interelate with each other. 

One takeaway is that there is more than one way to skin a cat. 

A second point is that all of the advice given on handbook and other CB threads has to be filtered through every player's (and character's) individualized gaming experience.  For example, powers that grant basic attacks aren't good when no one has a basic attack.  Daily Utility powers lose value in games where the DM stretchs the number of encounters.  And on and on.  In short, you should always be looking at your play experiences and figure out what works for you and what doesn't.

As far as some of the feats go, I am big fan of Superior Will.  I consider it virtually a must have feat [barring attribute issues in earlier play, i.e. you don't qualify for it] and the optimized players I know and have played with in LFR and home games almost universally agree.  The only caveat being is that the Circlet of Arkhosia can largely duplicate the Save benefits (depending on DM's interpretation) and some people have utilities that can mimic some of the effects.  But the ability to save all or most of a turn by removing some of the nastier conditions is huge.

More generally, I tend to focus on action enconomy a lot.  That's really the purpose of Superior Will -- saving actions.  The strategy behing Alpha Striking is all about killing the enemies before they get actions, or assure they get less of  them, etc.  So I really value for no action or free action powers or will spend resources to turn downgrade actions that way or to get more actions.  No doubt that spending resources in this area is worthwhile.

On the other hand, dealing out a lot of damage can really solve a lot of other issues.  Hence, the title of thread, noting that Death is the best condition.    When you kill the enemy you don't have to worry about saving out of conditions he could have imposed.  And it is true that every bit helps and it all adds up.  So while 1hp of damage per die may not sound like much.  If you Nova an elite and hit him with 15 dice worth of powers, the 15 additional damage can often be the difference between killing the crucial elite and leaving him standing.  Which, depending on when he goes (i.e. if he is next) can be huge.

To sum up:

1.  As a striker, your main job is to do damage.  You need to make sure you can do that by spending the necessary resources (whether through feats, items, powers, etc.);
2.  Defensive and utility capabilities are certainly valuable and you will be spending resources here.  However, there are multitude of choices to make and ways to accomplish things.  Which areas you focus on, and the means you choose to get there are individualized; and (related to 2)
3.  Realize while handbooks need to be generalized and "objective," every choice you make is particular and specific to your situation.  Don't be afraid to make choices that might be lower rated in a handbook if you know (or reasonably think based on experience), that a particular power/feat/item is right for you, your character and your situation.

Daren