|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 7:16PM
#11
|
|
|
and for the love of all that is holy, take away all of the requirements on powers to use a bow, its just annoying that a class with so few powers has more taken away
Anyone else have an opinion on this? On the one hand, yes, there aren't many options. On the other, keeping the two builds distinct also seems important.
the problem is that this is not a issue of bloodbond v spiritbond. a crossbow is a good choice for a bloodbond seeker but he cant use the bow powers. it just makes no sence from a flavor or balance point of view
So adding "or crossbow" would also be fine, then.
I would say any projectile weapons just so you got the bases covered, if a seeker wants to use a sling or something then why not let them?
Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes.
Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 7:19PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2004
|
Though, I'm not sure it's that important how the revised version stacks up against the original. What's important is how the revised version stacks up against the competing options. Right?
Yes, but that is in an ideal world. Each power would look like this:
1) Properly worded/formatted original
2) What the original is competing against at that level and why it is underpowered
3) Proposed change to fix that
4) Properly worded/formatted changed version.
But that is a ton of work and Im not suggesting that you do it. The bit we need to focus on, and where our attention needs to be is on what changes. This will cut down on the "glancing" errors of things we are just skimming over on powers and we don't know what changed.
Let me explain why it is important to highlight the changes: With me looking at just 1 power that I looked up on the Compendium and copy-pasted in to reformat for you and highlight the changes I missed one of the changes when I copied it over on the first readthrough. Since nothing pointed to the size of the area burst changing specifically (although it is clear as day on the one you posted) I didn't mentally change it when I read the updated power when seen next to the old one, and when I copied it down I didn't copy it down correctly and had to reread and fix it afterwards.
The things that are red/purple powers are red/purple for reasons. Those reasons (again, from a design perspective not a player perspective) is what we have to look at and toss under the microscope.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out hereSpoiler:
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here
If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here
Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 7:21PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2004
|
and for the love of all that is holy, take away all of the requirements on powers to use a bow, its just annoying that a class with so few powers has more taken away
Anyone else have an opinion on this? On the one hand, yes, there aren't many options. On the other, keeping the two builds distinct also seems important.
the problem is that this is not a issue of bloodbond v spiritbond. a crossbow is a good choice for a bloodbond seeker but he cant use the bow powers. it just makes no sence from a flavor or balance point of view
So adding "or crossbow" would also be fine, then.
I would say any projectile weapons just so you got the bases covered, if a seeker wants to use a sling or something then why not let them?
I want to use a Ranged Weapon Burst 2 with a Ballistae please. I'm kidding, but I think it should be broadened a bit, but not completely opened up. Naming specific things is important for Eclasses who are designed to be a bit more niche than the others. Bow/xbow is as far as I think it should go. You can go bow/xbow/sling if you really want to, but I wouldn't.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out hereSpoiler:
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here
If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here
Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 7:30PM
#14
|
|
|
Because Slings suck mechanically and bad choices shouldn't be encouraged, it leads to under-performing builds (and I mean by normal standards, not CharOp standards).
I think you're going about this backwards. Problems ought to be outlined before fixes are outlined. If you're going to ask CharOp for advice, and it is a good idea to do so if you are careful to listen to their advice, that would probably be the best way of doing so. Suggestions for fixes can be made note of, but first collect the problems, then ask for solutions. And work your way down from systemtic to indivudal because it is quite possible that an individual change to a class/power/whatever will be rendered moot or invalidated outright by a systemtic change (the actual errata does this all the time).
So the problem with Seekers is essentially that they have no strong secondary role, they have basically all soft-control (with 3-4 exceptions, like Fey-Jump Shot), they lack effective area control (all the burst powers they have are pretty bad), they have no good in-class PPs (sole exception: Occular Adept, which is Blue at best), they lack critical feat support (they don't even have feat patches for their most glaring weaknesses), and outside of being a primal archer, which is a cool archetype, they have no real interesting mechanical draws. Also anything said by one person should be taken with a grain of salt. If only one person says something is a problem, ignore it. Which is also why you should separate people talking about problems from talking about solutions. People will argue about solutions to something they both agree is a problem and that'll bog down the focus of the discussion.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 7:41PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Mar 21, 2006
|
Wait, Seekers have feats? I thought they just had Primal Eye :p
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 9:11PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2008
|
I have the luxury of being familiar with all of those powers, KDM. Good to see you over here.
The Seeker has features as mechanically distinct as the Wizard and the Invoker do- in this particular case, the correct fix really is to go through and bring the Seeker power list up to par. If you want to pm me, I'm your man when it comes to the Seeker.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 9:46PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Nov 16, 2010
|
Wait, Seekers have feats? I thought they just had Primal Eye :p
I lol'd.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 14, 2012 - 10:24PM
#18
|
|
|
In playing in a group that had a bloodbond elf seeker, the biggest complaint against the seeker was that he just was...there. He didn't really have anything flashy outside of Swarm of Bats and Feyjump shot. Everything else was using grappling spirits or biting swarm, round after round.
Thematically speaking, the seeker is a cool class. Mechanically speaking, it's terrible and boring. Granted, Controllers in general have it pretty rough as a character role. If you want to get some inspiration from the primal power source, the Primal Source seems to have a defendery bias, what about something like handing out attack penalties, or setting up difficult terrain to help your defender?
Large splashy powers seems more in line with the wizard, but having an accurate (with inevitable shot) movement hampering, attack debuffing primal archer might be okay.
I'm sure that the heavyweights have much better ideas for this class.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 15, 2012 - 7:54AM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
Because Slings suck mechanically and bad choices shouldn't be encouraged, it leads to under-performing builds (and I mean by normal standards, not CharOp standards).
This is the thing, though - they shouldn't suck mechanically, and a class which could really make them work, would be something I'd dearly love.
I also think they both (Sling and Dejada) ought to be +3 prof, to given them something with which to compete against the bows and xbows.
I've thought about drafting up a Sling Hunter, but tbh the Hunter itself is poor enough that sling options wouldn't make much odds.
FWIW, I'd far prefer for both builds to be able to use all the powers. The Seeker's bad enough, and limited enough in options, without limiting them further.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 15, 2012 - 8:24AM
#20
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2009
|
I've always been a fan of the notion of rolling the Hunter and Seeker into a single class and grafting the Sentinal's animal companion onto them on top of that (but just the animal part). It doesn't feel like there's enough design space to support two ranged controllers that channel primal magic to me.
I'd also consider divorcing weapon use from the seeker bond. Grant them some mechanical benefit in their selected ranged weapon (bow, crossbow, sling, or thrown) like the Hunter does, but let them grab whatever bond benefits they want on top of it. Then make the power riders dependend on bond, not on weapon.
But I realize all of this is outside the scope of the OP's intent. And that it opens you up to a bad Terminator reference. (Hunter-Seekers)
|
|
|
