D&D 4e General /4eg/

File: lost for words.png (24KB, 237x201px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 237x201px

Do people still take spellfury feats?

File: MM3 on a business card.png (10KB, 350x200px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 350x200px

>>50268429
>Use MM3 math.
Here you go.

>>50268494
Only if they're Elementalists.

Do you lot think we could get a PbP game going? Even if it's a printed adventure, or just a plain old dungeon crawl.

How bad/good would switching all the fire stuff to lightning stuff for desert wind monks be?

>>50269000
If you don't use mark of storm, it's not devastating, but leads to bonuses and potential radiant cheese using the gifts for the queen item set.

File: e566460259c9871587ed9c0ea1e33710.png (8MB, 2507x3541px) Image search: [Google]

8MB, 2507x3541px

>>50268816

4e does not lend itself well to play-by-post at all, what with its nitty-gritty tactical combat that demands plenty of mid-turn interruptions from other players.

4e absolutely demands real-time sessions and a virtual tabletop, such as Roll20 (which I cannot use for a number of reasons) or the new MapTool 1.4.1.7, for the intended play experience.

If /tg/ would like to start its own play-by-post game, it could hardly do worse than to run one of the better published adventures with Monster Manual 3 math.

I am a great fan of Madness at Gardmore Abbey for its sheer variety and its interesting gimmicks, and Reavers of Harkenwold is rather epic for such a low-level adventure too. Out of the Dungeon Magazine adventures, my favorites are The Art of Deception from #217 and Reign of Despair from #191, both of which manage urban intrigue and adventuring decently well, and Bark at the Moon from #185 for blending werewolf stories with Feywild adventuring.

>>50269000
>>50269059

Even without the Mark of Storm, it would arguably be a direct upgrade. Lightning resistance/immunity is much rarer than fire resistance/immunity (nearly all devils have fire immunity), and the Firewind Blade is an awkward choice for Desert Wind monks.

>>50269349
From a more optimized perspective, the existence of revenant tieflings makes fire monks comparable to the hypothetical lightning ones.

File: 2878def4bfe6741569b51125689ebcd8.jpg (307KB, 680x800px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 680x800px

>>50269455

Hellfire Blood is not *that* great a selection for a Desert Wind monk, because given an optimal power selection, such a monk will have only Blistering Flourish and a handful of other attack powers as fire powers. As well, monks have many other feats they would like to take, setting aside Expertise feats: Unarmored Agility, Melee Training or Internalize the Basic Kata, Superior Implement Training, Crashing Tempest Style, Implement Focus (since they will be targeting many enemies), and so on.

It is certainly not going to oust pixies as the premier Desert Wind race, with kapak draconians trailing shortly behind.

>>50269539
There is no problem taking most of those feats in addition to tiefling support.

What about the use of ongoing damage with slashing kama style? Icy clutch of stygia, and hellfire master if you decide to multiclass wizard. Only available to tieflings.

File: 6c0d714cdb0195a05c890bee01333065.jpg (3MB, 1999x2744px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1999x2744px

>>50269605

>There is no problem taking most of those feats in addition to tiefling support.

Opportunity costs are non-negligible. In a game with no free feats, a level 12 pixie or kapak draconian monk probably wants:
Level 1: Melee Training (Dexterity)
Level 2: Unarmored Agility
Level 4: Versatile Expertise
Level 6: Superior Implement Training
Level 8: Crashing Tempest Style
Level 10: Improved Defenses
Level 11: Implement Focus
Level 12: Starblade Flurry

I see no room for Hellfire Blood from levels 1-12 here, making it a mid-paragon purchase at best, in favor of another paragon feat.

>>50269605

Now, *this* would be a good use of tiefling racial feats on a revenant Desert Wind monk. The opportunity cost will be a high: two feats and locking yourself into a sickle with one hand. (At paragon, since you will want a dagger in one hand for Starblade Flurry, you will want to check with your GM on whether or not a Belt of the Brawler will activate Crashing Tempest Style.) Still, you can improve your damage a fair degree this way, although it will be delayed.

I imagine it would be better at mid-paragon with more feats to spend and with Lasting Frost and Wintertouched on the metaphorical table.

>>50270071
>Crashing Tempest Style
>+2 to flurry damage
You don't need this.

Pixie size shenanigans aside, what exactly are you doing with kapak draconian?

File: 96be71a06007090435ba5eb475e17952.png (625KB, 759x780px) Image search: [Google]

625KB, 759x780px

>>50270196

+2 flurry damage, which stacks with the increase from a Ki Weapon, is not bad at all. At heroic, it can help take down a single enemy. By paragon, it applies to two adjacent enemies plus whichever enemy you ping with Starblade Flurry.

For a single feat, it certainly pulls its weight.

>>50270348
For a single feat, yes. For a feat in addition to a weapon slot, not so much. It would certainly be lower on my priority.

>>50268497
The defence adjustments on this are incorrect.

>>50270537
Then by all means, inform the thread of the correct ones.

File: 880b5d9ff008500e73d7f6bc9097c98b.png (781KB, 849x1200px) Image search: [Google]

781KB, 849x1200px

>>50270196

>what exactly are you doing with kapak draconian

Instinctive Flight pairs well with monk movement techniques for unmatched melee mobility. It also makes Athletics mostly unnecessary.

>>50270452

The club can be a Ki Weapon club.

While I can certainly see Slashing Kama Style and Icy Clutch of Stygia paying off by early- or mid-paragon, it is a tougher sell at heroic. For a Desert Wind monk who starts with Dexterity 18+2 and Charisma 14+2, all Icy Clutch would do from levels 1 to 7 is ping for 3 cold damage in a delayed fashion, and that requires being paired with Slashing Kama Style.

I don't understand why class options like desert wind monk exist

Sorcerers clearly show that they understood that single-element focus needs resistance piercing, but desert wind monks are a single-element class option focusing on one of the most commonly resisted elements that gets nothing of the sort

>>50270818
You need a kama and a dagger for slashing kama and starblade flurry, not to mention the heavy blade requirement on firewind blade if you're using that. Weapon types matter for monks.

>>50271113
Of course, this matters a lot less if you arcane familiar into an item swapper with that wizard multiclass.

>>50271136
Why would you take a multiclass that requires 13 int as a class that pretty much invariably dumps int?

File: 67d26786a12365e6b3d233831be18501.jpg (734KB, 637x900px) Image search: [Google]

734KB, 637x900px

>>50269349

Correction: Nearly all devils have fire *resistance*.

>>50271113

Or, you can drop Slashing Kama Style in favor of a club and Crashing Tempest Style.

A Firewind Blade is an awkward choice for Desert Wind monks, as I say in >>50269349, because they lack implement proficiency with it and only some of their powers will actually trigger the property.

By level 11, a pixie or kapak draconian Desert Wind monk should be wielding a dagger in one hand for Starblade Flurry and a club in the other for Crashing Tempest Style.

Slashing Kama Style seems more suited to revenant tiefling Desert Wind monks. Either they drop Crashing Tempest Style altogether, or they keep it under a favorable GM ruling for the Belt of the Brawler.

>>50270868

This is an issue with the sorcerer (elementalist) as well, which is bizarre, given that the Player's Handbook 2 sorcerer has resistance-piercing while being less dependent on one or two damage types.

Desert Wind monks are neutered by any form of fire resistance/immunity. Nearly all devils have fire resistance, all demons have variable resistance, and many more monsters resist fire. A Gift of Flame can help, but that is a level 7 alternative reward at minimum, and resist 10+ fire will still be quite a bother.

>>50271568
How come it seems like every time there's a 4e general, you're always talking about desert wind monks?

File: 945a2781c79631e3b37fd6ad0e4f776c.png (618KB, 699x786px) Image search: [Google]

618KB, 699x786px

>>50272743

Because, for whatever reason, they seem to be a popular topic for others to bring up. In this thread, they were brought up first by >>50269000.

I personally prefer Iron Soul monks for being well-rounded striker/controller/defenders. They also do not immediately fold in the face of fire resistance/immunity

File: CBLoader problems.png (38KB, 501x192px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 501x192px

I'm trying to install the character builder from the resources in OP's post, and I ran into a problem. I followed the instructions provided up to running CBLoader.exe the first time, and it seemed to download all of the .part stuff okay, but when I try to run it again to launch the builder itself, I get pic related. Am I doing something wrong?

>>50273052
Speaking of iron souls, how would you go about strengthening it's defender qualities? Perhaps hybriding battlemind?

>>50272743
Simple, desert wind monks are awesome fluff-wise and frustratingly subpar mechanics-wise


I wish monks got more non-standard-action attacks, when I play a monk I want to play a fighting-game character, but 4e monks operate more like a Dynasty Warriors character

File: 3854d3837fad3c4e28a61e6ae4c4fad0.png (1MB, 709x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 709x1000px

>>50273361

I would not bother due to the high opportunity cost of such a thing. Rely on your Iron Soul Flurry of Blows alone for stickiness, and spend your feats on the usual monk options.

Being a revenant Iron Soul to abuse revenant durability will help with raw survivability, though not your ability to attract enemy fire.

>>50273471

I would not call Desert Wind monks "subpar." They have the highest single-target damage out of all monks due to Blistering Flourish pairing with Desert Wind Flurry of Blows. It is simply that fire resistance/immunity will neuter such a monk.

If you want to see the worst Monastic Tradition in the game, look no further than the near-worthless Stone Fist. It is a laughingstock of a monk build, especially when compared to the premier monk build that is Iron Soul.

>>50273534
Stone-fist is borderline unnoticeable, especially since an unarmed fighter does basically the same thing fluff-wise while being a far stronger pick overall

Personally my favourite monk spec is centered breath, because deadly draw abuse is super fun, and the monk powers with wisdom riders are the most fun monk powers to use

>>50273572
My favorite, most memorable, and most MVP 4e character of all time was a hobgoblin monk, Stone Fist...

>>50273649
>hobgoblin stone fist
>poorly supported race
>doesn't even have the right stat bumps
>MVP
must've been a pretty mediocre party

>>50273534
>>50273572
What is so terrible about stone fists? I would think being the only monk with a fullpowered MBA would give it an edge

File: c56e9b703e1f610b690282ebe85d1e5f.jpg (1MB, 1920x1357px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1357px

>>50273696

Stone Fist Flurry of Blows has negligible effects, and given that Dexterity 18+2 and either Melee Training or Internalize the Basic Kata is standard for optimized monks, Stone Fists are not particularly special in the melee basic attack department.

>>50273733
That seems like awfully little to render it a "laughingstock"

>>50273696
The edge it gets from having a good MBA is counteracted by being a purely damage-focused spec on one of the most control-oriented strikers

By going stone fist, you are choosing to not utilise what makes monks good

I was planning a goofy combo in a game, but upon realising it doesn't work I'm trying to see if there's any other ways to achieve it and/or evaluate how much it'd be worth if I can poke the GM into letting me have it with some extra investment.

I'm playing a Dragonborn Warlord and thought the Honorable Blade PP seemed cool. My Breath is cold, but I'm in a party with a lot of Fire support, so I was going to add on Adaptable Breath and Admixture Breath to make my Dragon Breath damage Fire/Cold and then transfer that to all my attacks.

However, Draconic Blade specifies one damage type, and as far as we can see the properties of Admixture Breath don't transfer in that way. You can argue it, but RAW it doesn't seem to work.

My question is, is there a way to make this work, and/or if I was going to poke the GM into allowing a custom feat or some such, how much should it be costed at? I'm already putting two feats and a PP trait into it.

Later on in the PP you also gain a resistance to one of your Dragon Breath damage types, but allowing the transfer of properties to apply to that seems like it'd be just too much, so I'm not particularly concerned on that front.

>>50273894
Well, the funny thing about draconic blade is that it stacks with any damage type the attack already deals

So if you get a fire or frost weapon, and use it with draconic blade of the opposite damage type, you can apply both damage types

>>50273894
You can just ask for a flame tongue weapon

>>50273927
>>50273933

Is weapon the only way to do it? I was hoping to not use an item slot, since I'm going for the Silver Dragon Regalia item set later on. Still, if it's the only way then I'll figure it out.

File: 1a6dd07ed605f86fed4a75e954ce32ed.jpg (4MB, 2550x3510px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2550x3510px

>>50273810

Compare Stone Fist to Iron Soul.

The Stone Fist uses Strength, while the Iron Soul uses Constitution for day-long durability and fuel for the party's Comrades' Succors.

Stone Fist Flurry of Blows, as a baseline, deals 3 (this never improves) + Strength modifier damage.

Iron Soul Flurry of Blows, as a baseline, deals 2 (this likewise never improves) + Constitution modifier damage and prevents the target from shifting until the start of your next turn.

Even at level 1, that 1 extra damage pales in comparison to the shift denial. As the levels rise, that 1 damage becomes more and more irrelevant.

>>50273894

A Flaming Weapon, a Flame Tongue Weapon (better), or a Weapon of Summer (best of all) will all confer fire damage and the fire keyword onto your attacks.

That said, I have little idea what constitutes "fire support." Sarifal Feywardens? A shaman with Scorching Sands?

>>50273969

If it was any easier to deal fire damage with all attacks, we would be seeing many more Firewind Blade builds.

>>50273994
>>50273933
>>50273927

Additional question-

If the GM ruled that Honorable Blade plus Admixture let me make all my attacks dual element anyway, how powerful would that be? The game is mid to low optimisation, for reference.

>>50274084
Most of the time it isn't that big a deal, especially not for a warlord who probably won't be using firewind blade + frostcheese

>>50271415
For tieflings, mostly for hellfire master.

File: 7b7177fc518b402f310f01fb3e42bef2.jpg (246KB, 1500x2000px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1500x2000px

>>50274084

It would probably be fairly strong, because then you could make use of both a Firewind Blade and Lasting Frost. As well, your attacks would bypass the resistances of enemies that lack both cold resistance and fire resistance; resistances are normally the bane of Firewind Blade and Lasting Frost builds.

However, I would not call it "overpowered" due to Adaptable Breath and Admixture Breath consuming two feats, and due to the Honored Blade taking up your paragon path. That is a heavy opportunity cost.

We can be thankful that one cannot be both an Honorable Blade and a Morninglord, because otherwise, the Radiant Breath feat would get out of hand.

>>50274133

Hellfire Master has dubious compatibility with Slashing Kama Style, because it is up for debate whether the ongoing damage originates from the power (Desert Wind Flurry of Blows) or from the feat.

DM with the fullblade avenger player from last thread here.

I want to give the PC a radiant weapon so I can make even more Jedi jokes. Please talk me out of it.

>>50274349
No

>>50269349
>and the Firewind Blade is an awkward choice for Desert Wind monks.
Well, unless it's wielded by an eladrin.

>>50274780
Dancing thorn style + firewind blade is pretty darn strong

Shame you have to give up a +2 in your secondary stat to get it

File: ddd1869388c65151a3e8536b5686932a.jpg (95KB, 600x818px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 600x818px

>>50274780
>>50274823

A better way for a Desert Wind monk to use a Firewind Blade would be to take the Gritty Sergeant background benefit, though that will rule out Auspicious Birth/Born Under a Bad Sign, and the monk will still be dealing fire damage only with *some* of their attacks.

I still do not advocate a Firewind Blade because not all of your attacks will be dealing fire damage.

A better loadout for a heroic-tier pixie Desert Wind monk would be a Goblin Totem dagger in one hand and a Ki Weapon club in the other.

For a heroic-tier kapak draconian monk, a Staff of Ruin in one hand and a Ki Weapon club in the other would be ideal. (Yes, this is legal, as monks have proficiency with quarterstaffs and staff implements are quarterstaffs. You need not be able to attack with it. This interpretation is supported by the online Character Builder, which even lists "staff implement" as one of the default implements in the marketplace for a monk.)

By the paragon tier, a monk wants a dagger for Starblade Flurry. Whether or not the kapak draconian above can keep Crashing Tempest Style depends on how their GM rules the Belt of the Brawler.

>>50274956
Yes but dancing thorn style is an untyped +1 to hit that only requires you to hold a longsword, not use it, which means it can stack with an accurate ki focus

That's a lot of accuracy

File: c24d582128fbe4299cac41c34a73febc.jpg (389KB, 507x1080px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 507x1080px

>>50275026

If you want to use Dancing Thorn Style, the best way to go about it would be to play a revenant eladrin Iron Soul or Desert Wind monk with the Gritty Sergeant background benefit.

You should check with your GM whether or not holding the longsword in both hands will grant you a +1 bonus to damage rolls. Page 270 of the Rules Compendium is ambiguous on this matter:
>Versatile: Versatile weapons are one-handed, but creatures can use them two-handed. An attacker that does so gains a +1 bonus to the weapon's damage rolls.
>A Small creature, such as a halfling, must use a versatile weapon two-handed and doesn't gain the bonus to damage rolls.

In the absolute best case scenario of GM rulings, you are a revenant eladrin Iron Soul or Desert Wind monk with a Ki Weapon longsword held in both hands, gaining both the +1 versatile bonus to damage rolls and the 1 extra Flurry damage from Dancing Thorn Style, and also availing of Crashing Tempest Style by wearing a Belt of the Brawler.

This is all fairly interpretation-dependent.

>>50275113
Ah, but that involves playing a Revenant, and playing a revenant is tantamount to cheating

A race that gets any feat support it wants, and a level 16 encounter utility power as a baseline at-will class feature, man, that sure seems fair

File: abb8020d9f7ba896d32d20c296b9d080.png (301KB, 773x1050px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 773x1050px

>>50275159

By that logic, we should also ban pixies, draconians, Battle Cleric's Lore on anything but a pure-classed cleric, hybrid assassin (executioner)|warlock characters, hybrid druids (sentinel), hybrid paladins (cavalier), and anything else that is of a questionable power level even at level 1.

>>50275238
I have played in groups where that actually was the case (more or less).

>>50275238
Yeah sure, that seems fine

Not liking revenants is a personal thing of mine, but I wouldn't complain about not being able to play them, pixies, hybrid clerics or essentials classes, or draconians, the power of all of them is a bit uncomfortable, like it exceeds what is expected of the game. Sort of like playing a 3.5 Bard in a party that otherwise consists of a Fighter, a Paladin, a Monk and a Rogue.

>>50275238
Those are rather common bans actually

File: 524bdc0445fa085f0af0e9a187543ab2.jpg (560KB, 1471x696px) Image search: [Google]

560KB, 1471x696px

>>50275387

Common by whose standards? 4e games are quite rare, especially judging from Roll20 statistics, so the sample size is quite low.

The most prominent 4e game on Roll20 at the moment, "The Guild," allows all of the above.

>>50275485
My experience with roll20 is a bunch of DMs that hate any race that isn't human/elf/dwarf/halfling and don't even consider essentials material, believing it to be universally broken. Out of irl 4e games I've been in (three), two have flatly banned all essentials classes, one has banned revenants and pixies. I don't think draconians were even an option back when I was playing

>>50275580

Being fair, essentials classes should be banned because they're either boring or shitty. Aside from the feats that whole line was fucking awful.

File: 1cbe10ce083ccb6f5a280d71ff346d68.jpg (1MB, 1000x909px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x909px

>>50275580

Do such GMs also ban Battle Cleric's Lore on anything but pure-classed clerics, if they have even heard of Battle Cleric's Lore?

>>50275485

At the very least, banning draconians, pixy and revenant had happened in basically every single 4e game I played (I allowed them when I DM'd, mostly just to see what'd happen; the answer is, the players didn't pick those options).

Either way, this is a pointless tangent. Adjusting a build down (usually) isn't hard, and doesn't invalidate the work put in, so if your "best" options aren't allowed, just find the ones that are, which sometimes happens to be an interesting brain teaser.

>>50275609
Their hybrids are okay, and it's a fun exercise to try build them in ways they weren't meant to be built.

>>50275616
Never joined the tolkien races only roll20 games to find out, but the irl DMs allowed battle cleric's lore on hybrids at least. Made a fighter|cleric for one of those games

>>50275636
The problem there is that the hybrids give you about 80-85% of the class features of the full class, which, considering that they don't actually break the game like that, just shows how poorly made the essentials classes are.

I love hybrids, but the hybrids I really love are the ones that need a bit of finagling to get working, rather than cheap success like Battle Cleric's lore or essentials hybrids

>>50275636
>Adjusting a build down (usually) isn't hard, and doesn't invalidate the work put in, so if your "best" options aren't allowed, just find the ones that are
Having specific races/classes banned invalidates whole builds. It's not a small thing like being denied a +2 damage item or something; losing a race/class choice locks you out of whole swaths of options. It's possible you'll lose the core mechanic of your build. You can't adjust for that, you can only throw the whole damn thing away

>>50275709
Right, but this usually isn't the case when you ban Pixy/Revenant/Draconian, unless we are talking about some very specialized builds that are seldom optimal anyway.

>>50275636
Speaking of "hybrids built in ways they aren't meant to be built"... How about a Tiefling Slayer MC Paladin for Wrath of the Crimson legion? Let's say, going into Polearm Master.

>>50275709
There's very few builds rendered totally worthless by banning Revenant, because revenant are valued for their racial stats and racial abilities, not their feats, the feat value comes from stealing from another race. So when they're banned, you just play the past soul race of your revenant character

This is also true for Draconians, who are just Dragonborn variants, so banning them just means you play an O-dragonborn instead.

Pixies are the hard ones, they have valuable racial feats and interesting, unique features that aren't OP, meaning that banning them will completely screw up some builds, mostly streak of light chargers and teeny, tiny defenders

>>50275749
What? That's a shitty build, and not even a hybrid.

>>50275749
A lot of revenant builds stop working without revenant. There's those that rely on their ability to stay up past zero, and others that rely on applying their stat bonuses to a race that otherwise doesn't have the right bumps

>>50275773
You very rarely NEED stat bumps in the right places for a build. Not to say it doesn't help immensely, but it's almost never outright required

Besides, the ability to stay up past zero is something anyone trained in endurance can pick up at level 16 anyway

>>50275783
I don't know many games that start or even progress to level 16. Out of all the 4e games I've played I've only been in paragon tier twice, and neither time as high as 16

>>50275760
I meant essentials classes, not hybrid, my bad. Also said "things they are not meant to do" not "good", although I'm not sure why you consider it a bad build.

>>50275773
Good point with the undying, but the stat bumps are just a bonus, not integral (usually).

>>50275800
I've been in a couple that started in epic, and one that started at 15 and progressed to 20

Level 20 dailies are fun stuff

>>50275801
Polearm feats use strength. What's the point of swapping it out for charisma to get what strength would give you anyway?

Martial cross-training is also unusable for charisma builds, and it's normally a great option for slayers.

>>50275783
>>50275801
Getting 18's without racial boosts is real hard, and impossible if you have dual stat requirements, which is the majority of my hybrid builds

>>50275826
What the hell are you trying to build that needs 18/18 in either con/dex or dex/cha that ALSO needs feat support from a race that doesn't have the right stats?

>>50275846
I meant in general, but I get your point

>>50275825
They use DEX/WIS/STR. The only ones you'd be kinda missing out on would be Polearm gamble and Spear Mastery. Polearm momentum is DEX / WIS, and surprising charge is DEX.

>>50275880
Note none of those ability scores are charisma.

>>50275888
Sure, but DEX is your secondary anyway.

Plus, you don't really have to be going for polearm shenanigans, the important part is combining Polearm Master with the Paladin's AoE marking abilities on a striker.

>>50275901
Instead of doing that, you could take a fighter utility power like kirre's roar to mark, and then use martial cross-training to get come and get it so you can actually put enemies where you want them.

Polearm master's mark punishment is an immediate action, anyway. You don't actually need a large area of marks.

>>50275957
I meant to say this build should take polearm gamble. Polearm momentum is optional and more difficult to use.

File: 22fde8024598d8172bda80f84ef982a7.jpg (619KB, 2480x3508px) Image search: [Google]

619KB, 2480x3508px

>>50275672

>which, considering that they don't actually break the game like that

They do not quite break the game, but the packages of the hybrid druid (sentinel) and the hybrid paladin (cavalier) are remarkably generous by the standards of hybrid classes. The hybrid assassin (executioner) is mediocre unless paired with the hybrid warlock or another basic attack-spammer, thus bringing out the best in Attack Finesse.

>>50275749

>Tiefling Slayer MC Paladin for Wrath of the Crimson legion? Let's say, going into Polearm Master

Could you perhaps explain your logic behind this? The tiefling would not appear to have any noteworthy synergy with the fighter (slayer). Wrath of the Crimson Legion keys off Charisma, which is normally worthless to a slayer.

Polearm Gamble requires Strength 15 and Wisdom 15, and the fighter (slayer)'s striker damage keys off Dexterity. Tieflings have +2 Charisma, +2 Constitution or Intelligence. This is a terribly MAD build.

>>50276184
>>50275957
The logic was simply to do something the Slayer wasn't meant to; that is get CHA to attack instead of STR, and since that involved the paladin multiclass, may as well take advantage of your newfound marks.

I didn't consider Polearm Gambit's requirements when I made that post, merely what I could make with that.

File: 1907368c4c29406fb28001c3a2d0afc7.jpg (210KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1000x1000px

>>50276241

A better way to go about this would be a tiefling fighter (knight) multiclassed into paladin. Take Wrath of the Crimson Legion. Prioritize Charisma and then Constitution and Dexterity. Use a shield.

You should now be able to enjoy a fairly durable multitarget defender who can lay down a sanction in a close burst 5 once per encounter... on top of Glowering Threat and Kirre's Roar, which means three rounds of mass-marking every battle.

This will still pale in comparison to a regular fighter (knight) as the levels go on, save for the brief renaissance at level 11 caused by Martial Power 2 basic attack feats, but such is life as an Essentials martial.

It's a decent off-Defender, I'll give you that, but it's nothing special. Even though you can probably pull it off to decent extents, you're still in need of optimizing your damage, since it's not particularly stellar.

Besides, if we're talking optimization of hybrids, I'd say either Knight or Oghma Warpriest are the best, the former due to its punishment being very good and having a Fighter base is an amazing running start; the latter due to free MBAs from using Healing Word.

File: 535d8f1367888fd01869420cc86b8a78.jpg (148KB, 779x1128px)

148KB, 779x1128px

>>50276349

The fighter (knight)'s punishment is not much better than that of a fighter (weaponmaster) with the Shield Push feat, and that is assuming the knight is constantly in Hammer Hands.

The cleric (warpriest) is mostly obsoleted by the cleric (templar) with Battle Cleric's Lore, even taking into account the fact that a warpriest can retrain their encounter attack powers. While Oghma warpriests certainly have impressive skill monkey capacities, granting basic attacks with Healing Word is merely a level 16 paragon path feature, so I am afraid that is not a major selling point. The vast majority of warpriests are outdone by Battle Cleric's Lore templars with Strength/Wisdom or Constitution/Wisdom builds.

>>50276349
I quite like Knight, especially because of Eladrin Knight.

Usually I advocate multiclassing warlock for the paragon paths, buuuut looking at the more standard Swordmage multiclass (for intelligent blademaster) PPs, Sigil Carver caught my attention. Note how the level 16 feature doesn't require you to actually mark with your aegis.

File: 366px-AZZEhPn.png (130KB, 366x588px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 366x588px

Bump

>>50276500
.... which doesn't matter for the Knight, admittedly, because you can't have the aegis of shielding feature.

>>50276507
Cat soldiers, kobold soldiers... furry soldiers rule.

>>50277129
Hope canon felinids are this.

>>50277308
They're Hengeyokai - Dex+Wis/Cha. So it fits if you go ranged in any way.

I'll be blunt - a party that's just basically an army squad would be extremely fun. Especially the adventures if it's something like Eberron during the war or whatever.

>>50277889
>Henjeyokai
Wat dis.

File: 1475182125490.jpg (142KB, 600x848px)

142KB, 600x848px

>>50277931
Literal fey catboys, foxgirls, dogboys, sparrowgirls, etc.

File: 1393194285669.jpg (13KB, 256x231px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 256x231px

>>50275238
>pixies
Not my pixies, nooooooo!
>draconians
Literally never seen them played, ever.
>Battle Cleric's Lore
Also fine with a hybrid with a scale / plate using class, really.
>Hybrid [any essentials class]
That's a good idea to ban.

File: 1412540378734.png (102KB, 333x250px)

102KB, 333x250px

>>50275580
>bunch of DMs that hate any race that isn't human/elf/dwarf/halfling
>Encourage players to play any race, I'll work it into the setting.
>After years, finally get a party of elf, eladrin, dragonborn, thri-kreen and warforged.
>mfw

>>50278213
>current party is half elf, elf, dwarf, dragonborn, eladrin, human
>human is a cunt
>eladrin is snooty to his "devolved" cousins and "the half(th)ling"
>dwarf grouses about all the pointy eared fey twats he's surrounded by
>dragonborn believes it all to be a challenge from Bahamut to show courtesy to the outlanders
>half elf don't give a fuck
>elf goes from party girl to basic bitch in the blink of an eye

>>50278358
Dragonborn sounds like a bro. That deserves free drinks at every tavern.

>>50278367
He is a bro.
He also takes minimal shit from everyone, and has stood up for, and against, everyone when things got out of line.
He is the beating iron heart of the group, and I thank him almost every session for getting them into working order.

>>50278562
Sounds like a proper Dragoborn

The foundation a party can stand against, fits very well with the natural tendency of Dragonborn towards honorable adventure

>>50278213
You are a good man

>>50278358
Half-Elf sounds like he'd be pretty chill with the Dragonborn, probably the two coolest guys in the party.

>>50270071
Plenty of people give improved defenses and versatile expertise for free because they're boring feat taxes that every single character should take.

>>50281100
But it's not guaranteed.

What paragon path should a hybrid Barbarian|Sorcerer take?
Dragonfoe Ragespell seems cool and is specifically built for it, but paragon hybrid is tempting because dragon magic riders are usually really fun. And my first hybrid talent feat had to be barbarian armored agility.

>>50281278
>And my first hybrid talent feat had to be barbarian armored agility.
You could pick dragon magic and unarmered agility, and you'd only be 2 AC behind the barb armor choice. There'd also be the +2 AC you'd get when bloodied from dragon magic

>>50281603
Right, I didn't think of dragon magic's defensive boost being able to partially compensate. That's tempting then.
I'd really miss Skins of the Slain + Screaming Hide Armor though.
Might still be the optimal choice though.

File: cae38df75beb2895e07858ed779705a2.jpg (538KB, 1000x1414px) Image search: [Google]

538KB, 1000x1414px

>>50281278

I would suggest a hybrid paragon, aiming for Hybrid Talent (Soul of the Cosmic Cycle). It is a far more generous option than all of the other Soul of the Sorcerer choice. Try to maintain Phase of the Sun to wear down adjacent enemies and automatically delete minions.

A hybrid barbarian|sorcerer wants Radiant Starfall as their sorcerer at-will power for a ranged and area burst option anyway, and unlocking its rider will be a swell benefit.

Take both Curtain of Steel (barbarian) and Spark Form (sorcerer) as level 7 encounter attack powers for an off-turn attack and an up-close AoE respectively, and Maiden's Waking (sorcerer) and Spirit's Eclipse (sorcerer) as level 10 encounter utility powers to stay in the fight.

You will lack a level 11 action point feature and a level 16 passive feature, but such is the price you must pay for cherry-picking.

>>50281603

Hybrid Talent (Barbarian Armored Agility), by the paragon tier, would confer a total of +3 AC and +2 Reflex over Unarmored Agility, making it the superior choice.

Also, Hybrid Talent (Dragon Soul) does not actually grant the bonus to AC when bloodied. That is why Hybrid Talent (Soul of the Cosmic Cycle) is the best of the lot.

Dual implement spellcaster works with a double weapon, right?

>>50281720
Thanks for the advise. I've never looked into cosmic soul sorcerers.
Although, really, all four of the sorcerer soul items are rad as heck.

I think the barb | sorc hybrid PP is rad as fuck; with the improved crit chance and the AoE-abilityof the sorc you are bound to get more crits than the barbarian, and your at-wills and damage boost are also better.

>>50282087
My only real complaint with it is that the 19-20 expanded crit range while raging only applies to at-will powers. So flame spiral or spark form can't trigger it.
However, the free attack is going to be way more devastating than a melee basic if it's something like blazing starfall hitting more than one dude.

File: 2643bee8d9d2c5221ca877ca9a588b43.jpg (1MB, 3541x2507px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3541x2507px

>>50282012

>Dual implement spellcaster works with a double weapon, right?

Yes, although it is probably not worth the trouble for a barbarian|sorcerer.

Barbarian|sorcerers are generally screwed over in the feat department and the item department. They cannot easily acquire a feat bonus to both implement and weapon damage rolls, and it is difficult for them to upgrade their damage via items until the Radiant Weapon + Siberys Shard of the Mage becomes affordable by mid-paragon.

At the very least, War Wizard's Expertise helps as an expertise feat, and being a bozak draconian can grant both pixie-style flight and a racial bonus to arcane damage rolls.

>>50282087

The benefits of Soul of the Cosmic Cycle and cherry-picking powers outweigh the Dragonfoe Ragespell in my mind. The Ragespell is not an especially strong paragon path by high-optimization standards anyway, even setting aside the Morninglord.

File: b99c1cd3cee38d3ebda6cda5b9c9bf47.png (8MB, 2232x3157px)

8MB, 2232x3157px

>>50282149

Another issue with Sorcerer's Rampage (aside from the fact that it comes only at level 16) is that a barbarian|sorcerer strongly desires Radiant Starfall for a long-distance area burst option in combat...

>Sorcerer's Rampage (16th level): Whenever you score a critical hit, you may use a sorcerer at-will attack power as a free action. This replaces any attack you might have from the Rampage barbarian class feature.

And yet if a barbarian scores a critical hit in melee that leaves the enemy standing, the barbarian cannot use Blazing Starfall without provoking an opportunity attack (short of magic items and other exemptions). That is just poor design.

>>50282155
>Barbarian|sorcerers are generally screwed over

Yeah, the allure of strength to AC with barbarian agility in hide armor is being somewhat tempered by a very inelegant combination of weapon and implement powers.
Having +29 to intimidate at level 11 with the Yakuza theme is cool though. And I like the flavor of rage mage.

>>50282149
>However, the free attack is going to be way more devastating than a melee basic if it's something like blazing starfall hitting more than one dude.

And considering you want to trigger it with AoOs to begin with, there's a pretty high possibility of that.

>>50282242
In that case you could just use a melee attack against him.

>>50282242
>short of magic items
Just wear your Shimmering Armor, anon.

File: 2a260926f2a11967cd82cb81ff36e0f7.jpg (183KB, 1200x849px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1200x849px

>>50282261

It is rather inconvenient that they absolutely must spend a feat on Arcane Implement Proficiency just to have a weapon-implement with an actually worthwhile enchantment (e.g. Radiant Weapon by mid-paragon, for radiant damage, an item bonus to damage rolls, and compatibility with a Siberys Shard of the Mage).

>>50282276

>In that case you could just use a melee attack against him.

Then the feature is being wasted.

>>50282307
Why not a dagger, which sorcerers can use as implements? Or even a Staff of Ruin.

File: 64cce627c7cebc1a0c08f4e011aa2946.png (784KB, 800x700px) Image search: [Google]

784KB, 800x700px

>>50282306

Shimmering Armor and Shadowdance Armor do not come in hide armor, and every bit of AC counts against Monster Manual 3 math.

Compare this to pure implement-users who can get away with wielding an Accurate Staff of Ruin with a Siberys Shard of the Mage and the opportunity-attack-ignoring Staff Expertise.

A barbarian|sorcerer will likely not even have a superior implement.

>>50282351

That will not be favorable for the barbarian's high-[W] weapon attacks.

>>50282307
>Then the feature is being wasted.

It could still be a sorcerer melee attack using sorcerous blade channeling.

It's an extremely specific case anyway. The way I see this combination, you should be keeping away to AoE blast aside from the one turn you activate your rage. The only time you should get in close is when you are focus firing one target, at which point having to use a melee attack isn't a problem.

>>50282364
The dagger has other benefits, like Lightning Cuts.

File: 45ba98b8a2662ae615ef16ee08168d78.jpg (324KB, 870x680px) Image search: [Google]

324KB, 870x680px

>>50282375

>It could still be a sorcerer melee attack using sorcerous blade channeling.

Sorcerous Blade Channeling costs a feat, and it does not work with area attacks like Blazing Starfall.

>The way I see this combination, you should be keeping away to AoE blast aside from the one turn you activate your rage.

As far as I am aware, the ideal playstyle is "AoE sorcerer powers when you can catch enemies together, and melee barbarian powers when enemies are too spread out for that." The latter is a grim reality at times, and a barbarian|sorcerer stands a non-negligible chance of landing a critical hit with a melee attack and leaving the enemy still standing.

>>50282443

The dagger is also a d4 damage weapon that will be wasted on barbarian attack powers.

You could keep a dagger in addition to another weapon, but maintaining the enhancement bonuses of both will be costly.

>>50282459
There's always the Ki Focus.

>>50282498
Or hoping for inherent bonuses.

>>50282443
That's what I mean by inelegant. The dagger is great (and can come in accurate) for sorcerer powers. But terrible for barbarian powers. There's just not a good way to mix it.
I'm currently going with 12/12 dex/wis so that at level 11 I can take and retrain staff fighting and dual implement spellcaster. Because 1d8 isn't the worst, and it gives defensive and stout properties, and gets me rod of ruin enchantment.

>>50282375
Yeah but I'm not that keen on having barbarian|sorcerer mostly just be a blaster hanging in the back. Especially since sorcerer has the tools to mix it up in melee, like the excellent flame spiral.

Another idea could be to go for the the re-breather dragonborn build and then just make use of the crit you get according to the situation.

>>50282703
>rebreather
Degeneracy.

Is there a way to make an MBA arcane without having to replace it with a different power? Or nabbing a "counts as MBA" arcane at-will without hybrid/paragon multi/half-elf?

Magic Weapon is probably the best at will for a half elf valorbard to snatch, right?
Warchanter with Sidhe Bargain is awesome.

>>50268816
Why pbp specifically?

>>50282883
Not that guy, but I work retail and have a messed up schedule that makes getting everyone together hard.

On top of that, most of my RPG friends are on the East Coast/ Old World, so times are even harder to deal with.

Some Con|Wis class or hybrid defender that multiclasses warden to take Crippling Crush with the Son of Mercy paragon path. Worth it or stupid? Maybe an avenger hybrid for Painful Oath too.

>>50282789
As far as I know nothing fucks around with power sources. You'd have to steal eldritch strike with a half elf.

>>50282976
That, really. It's a lot easier to set up a PbP game than hope that several people from different places in the world are online at the same time.

>>50283009
Virtuous Strike and Power of Arcana will do it, too. Sorcerers also have Ensorcelled Blade.

Shadar-kai have a feat called Reaper's Touch that turns Avenging Light, Acid Orb, Dragonfrost, Eldritch Blast, and Magic Missile into MBAs.

File: get a look of this.jpg (47KB, 359x305px)

47KB, 359x305px

>>50284611
>Power of Arcana

Neat. Didn't know about this.

>>50282976
West coast too?

>>50282721
>>50282721

What's rebreather?

>>50286474
A Dragonborn Sorcerer build that lets you use your Dragonbreath three times a round every round.

Iirc it works because feats let you,

1. Make your Dragonbreath an Arcane power

2. Make your Dragonbreath area instead of close.

3. Any time your are hit by damage of a type you resist refresh an Arcane encounter power.

So you hit yourself in the area but you resist it so it refreshes again and again.

>>50286808
>3. Any time your are hit by damage of a type you resist refresh an Arcane encounter power.
My understanding is that you have to TAKE damage of the breath's type, not just get hit by it.

>>50287168
I was recalling from memory so details may be wrong. Though breaking resist 5/10/15 isn't all that hard. And a bit of damage isn't so bad especially when your class and race love being bloodied.

Permastealth

Rogue|Assassin/Warlock or Warlock|Rogue/Assassin?

>>50288398
Does it work with Warlock | Executioner? Cause that'd get my vote.

I do remember Rogue | Assassin having some synergy tho, even beyond perma stealth.

>>50288628
I recall the eladrin warlock|executioner uses fey pact and the elusive hexer feat for permastealth, while shadow walk from the cursed shadow feat helps.

>>50288628
I don't think there's a way to get cunning sneak class feature through multiclass alone.
Otherwise, yeah, eldritch strike doubling up with executioner' striker feature would be WAY better.

Rogue|Executioner should be an alright hybrid for permastealth (and functional, just not very interesting otherwise). You don't get to stack striker features on one attack, but you get bonus damage dice to all of them and everything keys off of Dex, and you get a functional MBA out of it. Basically, it would seem to lose a lot less from the Rogue side compared to other variations.

>>50289468
Wouldn't Rogue | Assassin be better then? The shrouds at least can do some things. Plus some of the powers are actually quite excellent.

>>50268429
Hey guys.

Can I get a hand with this?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1X0ZzMYMBvaLlqTklglNR2sv08iwYAYPufCsmBV2TbeQ/edit#gid=420067988

Just looking to fill in the blanks.

I'd like to be able to spit out PC-Equivalent Friendly NPCs as quick and easy as you can spit out monsters, and I'm a good chunk of the way there, I think.

>>50289468
>You don't get to stack striker features on one attack
You do. Executioners and most other essentials strikers can use their assassin's strike/poisons/whatever else with the other class's powers

>>50289799
Executioner's discussed striker feature in this instance would be the extra 1d8 on Assassin attacks and MBAs with assassin weapons, not the powers.

>>50289588
Eh, with Executioner you can get away with just having that Assassin's Strike that doesn't take up an action, you get better action economy, poison can just be an encounter long buff, etc... Basically, you can just be a Rogue and also nab a few goodies (like Shadow Walk). Ossassin doesn't get you the MBA, doesn't compensate you for not getting SA on MBAs, eats up more of your actions... Not a fan.

Different thought: If there ever was a build to go Master of Poisons with (despite the pain of being Dex/Int), wouldn't this be it?

File: 360d8465cca415ec5b94b54973bd6a2a.jpg (59KB, 685x638px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 685x638px

>>50289468

Assassin (executioner)|warlock is indeed probably the way to go about it. Take Assassin's Strike (Hybrid) and an assassin poison as level 1 encounter and daily attack powers. Then, fill out your higher-level encounter and daily attack powers with the usual rogue powers of Low Slash/Darting Strike/Startling Offensive (all level 3), Bloodbath (5), Knockout (9), Stunning Strike (13), and so on.

You will want to start with pre-racial Dexterity 18, Constitution 13, Charisma 13, so that you can qualify for Student of Malediction and gain a 1/encounter Warlock's Curse.

In an earlier post here >>50242470, I claimed that "permaStealth" rogues are competitive with traditional Brutal Scoundrel rogues, but I am starting to rethink that assessment.

It takes a hybridization of assassin (executioner)|rogue or rogue|warlock and a total of three feats (a multiclass, Hybrid Talent [Cunning Sneak], and Cursed Shadow) to get going. It limits your action order on your turn to "standard action only before the move action."

As well, judging from this thread, unless you can make further movement after ending your move action, enemies know where you are anyway:
https://web.archive.org/web/20111106133108/http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/25474357/The_Rules_Of_Hidden_Club:__Targeting_things_you_cant_see_in_DD

Even setting aside the arguably overpowered assassin (executioner)|warlock, is a "permaStealth" hybrid rogue worth the trouble compared to a more traditional Brutal Scoundrel rogue?

>>50289971

Where is the synergy betweeen the Master of Poisons and a "permaStealth" build?

>>50290143
>Where is the synergy betweeen the Master of Poisons and a "permaStealth" build?

It's not a synergy, but an opportunity. Master of Poisons is quite nice, besides the twin problems of wanting Dex/Int and relying on poisons. Permastealth partially compensates for defenses and gives you a separate useful trick as well, and Venom Hand Master is absolutely necessary.

>>50268429
So, when making a monster, HP = N+CON Score+ (N*LV), right?

How do I know what's a reasonable CON score for a given level?

Presumably a Level 1 monster shouldn't be running around with a CON of 50, and a level 30 monster shouldn't have a CON of 10.

Anybody have any useful guidelines for that?

>>50290281
No, monster HP is not dependent on their Con scores at all.

File: 1391888322081.gif (7KB, 350x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 350x200px

>>50290281
Here you go

>>50290284
Yes, it is. The business card is inaccurate in this regard.

>>50290284
Clearly my memory on the subject is bad then. Can you link me that business card or post it?

>>50290292
Thank you for preemptively solving my problem before I even had to ask.

File: cce02dc7e6edf5781d90fddbe574aece.jpg (734KB, 1098x1600px)

734KB, 1098x1600px

>>50290253

It seems to me that the best user of the Master of Poisons paragon path is a Strength/Intelligence-based stormsoul genasi pure-classed ranger or hybrid fighter|ranger. Multiclass into rogue via Sneak of Shadows, take Weapon Proficiency (Double Sword), select the Mark of Storm if you can, and wield a mordant double sword outfitted with an Eberron Shard of Lightning if possible. Be sure to take Reserve Maneuver to drop out Blinding Dust.

This way, your attacks should bypass poison resistance anyway, and Fortitude and Reflex should be your good non-AC defenses.

>>50290395
You could do something silly like Thief with Intelligent blademaster.

Of course, that'd take your multiclass so you couldn't be assassin for all the poison feats and, you know, assassin poisons.

>>50290395
Without poison immunity bypassing it doesn't matter how many damage types you pile on, the non-damage effects get ignored regardless.
Poisoner multiclass would work, but you'd have to be a Rogue at base first.

>>50290424
A Cunning Bard could do it, of course.

File: 10f78b4177f83d7c95d4f88c01e70301.jpg (752KB, 833x1000px) Image search: [Google]

752KB, 833x1000px

>>50290441

In that case, you might have to settle for a Strength/Intelligence-based stormsoul genasi assassin (executioner)|ranger.

Multiclass into rogue via Sneak of Shadows, take Weapon Proficiency (Double Sword) and Venom Hand Master, select the Mark of Storm if you can, and wield a *Spiderkissed* double sword outfitted with an Eberron Shard of Lightning if possible. Be sure to take Reserve Maneuver to drop out Blinding Dust.

So I am joining an ongoing 4e campaign as a level 10 eladrin warlock, but I am all alone to do my powers and shit, which I have no idea how to do. I've only really watched people play, this is my first time playing. Any help friends?

>>50293269
Check the pastebin in OP for the offline character builder. It has all the options available in one place and is organized well enough to make the process as simple as possible.
If you want to get all uber optimization about it you can check the class guides from the guide link in the pastebin or ask Touhoufag. You can also make the character builder auto-build something for you, though I am uncertain on how well that turns out

I'm new on D&D 4e, me and my group will play the campaign zeitgeist.

I wanted to make a rogue using bludgeoning weapons, like a sap or or a blackjack, so I'm looking at the "Ruthless Ruffian" rogue tactics. I'm not sure if this is good? But I really want to use bludgeoning weapons with my character.

Also, I don't really know what to do with my stats since I'm new to the system.

I was looking at the singing stick for my weapon, it's really cool, but I need a proficiency feat to use it and I'm not sure it works with ruthless ruffian?

Every books is allowed, so feel free to give me obscure feats and references!

>>50294945
Ruthless Ruffian is a total wash. It specifically states the Club or Mace weapons, not weapons of the Mace family. Go Brutal Scoundrel if you're after a Signing Stick Rogue. You'll get much more mileage.

>>50295033
But not being able to use power requiring a light blade is not a problem? I see a lot of power that require it, forcing me to use one.

>>50294945
Ruthless Ruffians are very bad from a character optimization standpoint. Bludgeons have poor accuracy and don't have the support that makes light blades strong. The mechanic itself is not much different from Brutal Scoundrels who have it better in nearly every way.
If you just want to have fun, ruthless ruffians aren't utterly unplayable, they're just inferior to the other option

>I was looking at the singing stick for my weapon, it's really cool, but I need a proficiency feat to use it and I'm not sure it works with ruthless ruffian?
It does not. RRs are compatible with only the club and mace weapons, not the weapon category.

Personally I've been trying to build a ruthless ruffian that's not totally worse than a brutal scoundrel, and the only thing I can manage is a paragon multiclass into ranger for multiattacks, exploiting the added damage the RR feature gives with rattling attacks.

>>50295136
You can get the feat street thug to get maces with normal rogues, at the cost of a sneak attack die. It's cost you 13 STR, 13 CON and two feats to get a singing stick rogue. May not be worth it

>>50295150
Well, I'll see with my GM or abandon the idea. Thanks tho.

And just the street thug feat, would that work better? If I just take a club or a mace.

>>50295236
Maces are still a pretty bad weapon. You can still play the game, you just might miss more than intended and not be able to get some of the nicer feats

File: f8bff52f34598781cc4392a996734ed2.jpg (2MB, 875x1225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 875x1225px

>>50293269

Consult this handbook if you would like to play a pure-classed warlock:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?469339-Walk-With-Me-in-Hell-The-Warlock-s-Guide

Since you are a new player, a hybrid warlock might be too complex for you. Thus, a single-classed Sorcerer-King Pact warlock might be ideal. Consult the sidebar in page 6 of Dragon Magazine #390 for ideas on how to flavor such a warlock in settings outside of Dark Sun.

The Sorcerer-King Pact opens you up to the Mindbite Scorn feat, which gives you +1d6 Warlock's Curse damage. Take the Killing Curse feat, and you should have +2d8 Curse damage, improving to +3d8 at level 11.

Another good feat to look into would be Sorcerous Prodigy. This should net you training in Arcana, give you a modest bonus to a damage roll once per encounter, and grant you staff proficiency. This means that you can wield a Staff of Ruin for extra damage and upgrade it further with a Siberys Shard of the Mage. Staff Expertise, as well, is one of the best Expertise feats in the game for its defensive benefit.

A sorcerer multiclass also means that at level 11, you can take the Sorcerous Vision feat, letting you make an Arcana check in place of any Insight or Perception check. (Remember that passive checks are still checks, as per page 127 of the Rules Compendium.) For an eladrin with a +2 racial bonus to Arcana, this will be great. It will be even better if you have another Arcana bonus from a background benefit, and yet another from a theme.

At level 11, it will also be helpful to retrain one of your feats into Twofold Pact, greatly expanding your versatility. I would strongly recommend the Star Pact for this, because Dire Radiance is a wonderful soft control at-will power, and opening up riders on powers such as Delban's Deadly Attention (encounter 3) and Far Realm Phantasm (encounter 7) can be clutch.

What free feats are you entitled to? This is helpful to know for further feat selection.

File: 144092457555e77ed521bfac102bfc51.jpg (775KB, 1010x666px) Image search: [Google]

775KB, 1010x666px

>>50294945
>>50295287

There is absolutely no separation of weapon damage between bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing in D&D 4e. There are zero monsters that have different resistances or vulnerabilities based on the specific type of weapon you use.

As well, page 295 of the Player's Handbook 1 and page 261 of the Rules Compendium both make it clear that any time you reduce a monster or a DM-controlled character to 0 hit points, you can choose to either kill them or knock them unconscious.

Thus, the ideal solution for you is to simply take a dagger and call it a sap.

>>50295712
That just seems so...cheap though

File: d99238f8d1fe51c31f546cdd0336723e.jpg (232KB, 1125x1125px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1125x1125px

>>50297463

Reflavoring in D&D 4e is easier than in any other edition.

As well, there is no such weapon as a "sap" in D&D 4e, which means that reflavoring would be necessary anyway.

Use a dagger and call it a sap.

File: 1459831496005.png (8KB, 112x141px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 112x141px

>Cutting Wheel
>Parrying Knife

>>50293269
Keep in mind that, while perfectly sound, everything touhoufag (>>50295594) will probably tell you is heavily -perhaps even perfectly- optimized. Which is not appropriate for all games, especially if it's your first time.

Not that I am detracting from him, I'm sure he's right, you just will probably not need that level of expertise for your first game.

File: bugbear.jpg (123KB, 1000x1225px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1000x1225px

Anyone want to help me decide between shock trooper and blade dancer for a fighter|ranger?

Tempest technique hybrid talent and bugbear for d8 short swords with big boosts. Shock trooper would make them d10 and gives a triple tap, but blade dancer has an excellent immediately interrupt made encounter power made better with marking and nice boosts to defense.

>>50300323
Shock trooper also gives the +dex to a CA attack 1/round.
Seems if you want to be more strikery, shock trooper. Defendery, blade dancer. Sort of ironic.

>>50299676
You know that's all pretty tame advice, considering

>>50300445
Thanks, that's an easier way to swallow the decision that I agree with. Shock trooper to play up striker, blade dancer to play up defender.

>>50300497
I have no idea what most people are talking about in this thread.
I really like 4e, but all the games I tried to join fell through.

>>50300653
Then why are you posting here?

While wielding a polearm, centered breath flurry of blows doesn't count as a polearm attack for polearm momentum, does it?

File: bc319d1201ff5edb66b3bdc232c78c33.jpg (1MB, 1600x1200px)

1MB, 1600x1200px

>>50299676
>>50300445

Every bit of damage counts for a multiattacker, so the Shock Trooper would be my recommendation as well, given its level 11 and 16 features.

That said, I would suggest using a spiked chain via Spiked Chain Training rather than short swords. That way, you can deal 1d10 damage per [W] (though given that miniscule increase, you might as well have been a half-orc or a thri-kreen rather than a bugbear), enjoy reach 2, and save money on weapon enchantments.

Failing that, a double sword via Weapon Proficiency would net you +1 AC and a similar cost break for weapon enchantments.

>>50300883

Every Flurry of Blows power is an attack, as per page 90 of the Rules Compendium.

As far as I am aware, the only way to include a polearm or a spear as part of a Flurry of Blows is to use the Pointed Step Style feat. However, I am unsure if that would actually make it count as a "polearm or spear attack."

Check with your DM.

>>50300323
I'd generally say the best way to make a shock trooper fighter/ranger is to multiclass into monk via master of fist to get those meaty d12 off-hand weapons and access to powers like vicious uppercut and bare-knuckled rebuke, as well as the shock trooper level 20 power.

Blade dancer fits better with short-sword use, thanks to their powers needing bladed weapons and the defendery angle of the PP leading to them really wanting the effects of a rhythm blade in their off-hand

File: 5d51672b9ce4b1ed0ffdec1cd77bda36.jpg (62KB, 861x918px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 861x918px

>>50301217

Actually, yes, you are completely correct here. I had forgotten about Master of the Fist, and it is even better than using a double weapon.

A ki focus is a major price break anyway.

>>50301217
Hm, punchin. That's a thought. I think I'll go with that one if once I know more about the game it seems like a more political thing or something that isn't just monster fighting, where being incredibly deadly while unarmed would be a big boon. Can't disarm fists.

>>50301077
>I would suggest using a spiked chain via Spiked Chain Training rather than short swords. That way, you can deal 1d10 damage per [W] (though given that miniscule increase, you might as well have been a half-orc or a thri-kreen rather than a bugbear), enjoy reach 2, and save money on weapon enchantments.

On a bugbear shocktrooper, the short swords are 1d10 already. I'm not super concerned about money or having reach. But that's still something I'll keep in mind, since it is probably better than the short swords still.

>>50301304
I guess I'll give up on two weapon opening and a jagged weapon in the main hand (rhythm blade off hand)
I never look at ki foci. Know any good ones?

File: 7be92662271414b76221857609eeeef5.jpg (38KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 480x640px

>>50301343

1d10 per [W] would have been before the Shock Trooper upgrade. It would have been 1d12 afterwards.

Master of the Fist nets you the same end result.

At this point, the only reason to favor a double weapon would be if you are aiming to abuse cold or radiant damage somehow. Are you?

>>50301350

A plain Magic Ki Focus would be perfectly sufficient, but the Iron Body Ki Focus would raise your survivability considerably.

>>50301350
Iron Body, Ghost Strike, and Rain of Hammers are the strongest three for a fighter/ranger

>>50301343
Ki foci are technically physical things, so they can be removed from your body if someone is paranoid enough to remove any magical items you have on you

>>50301428
Thanks

>>50301394
Nah, I'm not planning on elemental shenanigans. Punchin is cool, I'll go with punchin.

Thanks, thread.

So uh, do we talk about anything other than charop here?

File: 1478428152216.jpg (469KB, 743x1200px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 743x1200px

>>50301614
We could talk about fox hengeyokai like /pfg/ if you want.

>>50301614
Nobody actually plays this game so it's not like there are any storytimes that can happen.
The lore is whatever as far as I know. Have only ever ran or played in custom settings.

>>50301760
pls no

>>50301760
What's the optimal number of tails?

>>50301760
I prefer cat hengeyokai. Great rogues that blend into civilized areas in animal form. Objectively superior.

File: 5fb69e88ccee02d89ba178074dfe327e.jpg (269KB, 700x950px)

269KB, 700x950px

>>50302751

Sparrow hengeyokai are perhaps the best of the hengeyokai, since they receive a +2 Perception bonus and can take sparrow form, both to blend in and to fly.

Flight is a game-changer, even if it is effectively limited to noncombat scenarios.

>>50301614
We could. Start a conversation about anything you'd like, Anon.

>>50304628
How about encounter design.

I've only recently gotten back into 4e after a short experience with in when it came out (I enjoyed the ideas of the game but not the execution, as I later learned that was because of boring MM1 monsters).

What sort of encounters do you build?
How many encounters per day? As many as the book recommends per level or more but tougher ones?
How larger are your encounter areas typically?
What sort of general advice do you have besides "use more minions"?
How much do you rely on traps, hazards and non-typical terrain?
Anything else you've learned about encounters you'd like to share?

File: 1a4e338505dd7ed57a2e64b7e269b616.jpg (3MB, 2309x1299px)

3MB, 2309x1299px

>>50304658

One piece of encounter and adventure design that I would take from 13th Age is to institute a system of "four encounters, three tougher encounters, or five easier encounters always culminates in a free and instantaneous extended rest on the spot, and PCs cannot take extended rests otherwise."

While it might be extremely unsimulationist and awful for traditional dungeon-crawling, it ensures that players can always count on three to five battles a "day." It also means that a single "adventuring day" can actually be one hour of fast-paced action or a whole week of spread-out encounters.

Having only one or two battles in an adventuring day heavily slants builds in favor of "daily nova" builds, diminishes the usefulness of encounter utility powers, and undermines the rage and polymorph mechanics of barbarians and wardens respectively.

>What sort of general advice do you have besides "use more minions"?

I think that minions are a good concept utterly ruined by how trivial it is to automatically damage huge swaths of them, thereby taking them out. At best, they become "suicide bombers" whose sole purpose in battle is to be taken out by a wave of automatic damage, then trigger their on-death effects.

I much prefer swarm-style monsters for representing large mobs of mooks.

As well, I would personally never use solo monsters for the reasons elaborated on here: >>50207320
On top of these reasons, solo monsters are simply *much* less offensively capable than two elite monsters and one standard monster of the same level and role. They are all damage sponge and little proactive force.

>>50304658
There was one encounter I enjoyed where the party was chasing a teleporting wizard through a labyrinth pocket dimension rooms. By the end of the encounter what we realized was that all the rooms actually fit together like a jigsaw puzzle. They had been shattered and flung into separate dimensions when the wizard went insane.

Another one was when we fought an illusionist that trapped us in an illusion as soon as we walked into the same room with him. It was set up to make us think we had to achieve some task to break the illusion, when really all you had to do was deny the illusion altogether and walk right out of it.

>>50304948
>"four encounters, three tougher encounters, or five easier encounters always culminates in a free and instantaneous extended rest on the spot


How do you deal with mixing encounter difficulties and explaining / justifying this concept to players?

File: gametransparency.png (4MB, 1476x1476px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1476x1476px

>>50304658
Ooh, a favorite topic of mine for the DM side. Part of what really drew me to this over other editions.

>What sort of encounters do you build?
I've done a variety. The general idea is that I come up with a theme for each storyline (level). It might be anything from a specific type of creature, to a specific theme of how enemies fight. The consensus of the group is they want to play, and I don't want to miracle up seven different fucking hooks and pray they take one, so we tend to agree what we're doing ahead of time before I build it. Whatever tickles their fancy for the next level is what I build, though I try to come up with ways to fit it into an overarching plot for the tier. We've had about four different campaigns now.

>How many encounters per day?
This is a variable. We've done as many as twelve before, but the story called for it. We've also done as few as one. I tend to err on the side of plot relevance for anything major. A good ballpark imo to expect is four to five a day though. Seems to be a good average for a battle heavy game.

>How larger are your encounter areas typically?
I honestly struggle with this the most. Some encounters I pick wide open areas, others tight spaces. It really depends on the enemies and the players, and who I want to give the advantage to. I have no real set design principal on this past that.

>What sort of general advice do you have besides "use more minions"?
Use minions as more than meat shields. Aid Attacks can make key monsters dangerous and really help to shift player focus one way or another.

Past minions though, limit controllers to one. Assign the party Leader as the guy who tracks HP and Status Ailments. It's his job to manage that for the party side anyways, so he should make your life easier too. Keep a rough level of transparency by letting people trained in relevant knowledges know basic shit like Defenses, HP, and Resistances. Roll for special stuff like Recharge powers and OoT attacks.

Cont...

>>50305048
Like in most gamist/narrative mechanics, the players just have to be on board.

Also, you can just decide to break the rules if it really, really doesn't make sense at the moment.

File: cryonax.png (2MB, 900x1196px)

2MB, 900x1196px

>>50304658
>>50305076
>How much do you rely on traps, hazards and non-typical terrain?
I don't really. At least not on a strict scale of terrain over creature. I find that traps work best if they are contextual. A random pit trap in the wild only makes sense if there's something int he wild capable of hunting in such a fashion. The terrain itself plays a big part too. You'll find more free roaming hazards in the Feywild or Elemental Chaos than the Natural plane.

>Anything else you've learned about encounters you'd like to share?
Alternate victory conditions.

Seriously. Do. This. Shit.

The best way to make combat not grow stale is make there be multiple ways to 'win'. Sometimes it's less about the fight itself, and more about the goal that the fight is centered around. You can always have your big 'kill all fuckers' fight at the end of a particular story, so give the players a goal to work towards in the mean time to get to that point.

I also don't really think you should use XP outside of an encounter building mechanic. It's a pain to track, and it's easier to update sheets before the next storyline starts than in the middle the trek through the current dungeon or wilderness, or cavern, or dead god's anus.

>Having only one or two battles in an adventuring day heavily slants builds in favor of "daily nova" builds, diminishes the usefulness of encounter utility powers, and undermines the rage and polymorph mechanics of barbarians and wardens respectively.
Agreed. I favor more fights per day that are quicker or have non combat related goals alongside them to make players branch out their power selections, or allow some classes to shine better.

>How do you deal with mixing encounter difficulties and explaining / justifying this concept to players?
You don't. It's a common sense thing. You wouldn't assume every soldier is a well trained veteran, so why assume every monster will be a 1000 year old war god in disguise?

>>50270597
>>50268497
The correct ones are:
Skirmishers - +2 Reflex
Controllers - +2 Will
Solider - +2 AC or +1 AC/ +1 Fort or Reflex
Brute - -2 AC, +3 Fort
Artillery -2 AC, +2 Reflex +1 Will
Lurker - nothing

>>50305190
Where are the NAD boosts from?

>>50305342
From how the vast majority of MM3 monsters actually function.
For example, brutes tend to have massive fort while artillery and skirmishers have great ref, which isn't represented in that business card thing.

>>50305455
Depends on the monster.

INSPIRING WORD

>>50305455
And what about the NADs being lower in some areas, instead of higher?

>>50305190
>>50305455
A monster's strong and weak NADs are typically based off their primary stats. Because a monster's ability scores do influence its defenses, which is why a monster's ability scores scale with its level.

Where as AC is purely by level and role, not ability scores. A high INT/DEX monster doesn't get higher AC. Hence why AC is the only defense to have a special adjustment based on monster role.

You're mistaking an observed trend for an actual rule.

>>50307354
Why is Battle Captain considered so good, anyway? Who even needs that much of an attack boost that comes only at level 16? Most classes can hit on a natural 4 on their own.

At least Battlelord of Kord adds damage and works from level 11.

How should I go about making a Sorcerer|Blackguard?
Currently I have them as a dragonborn, but I'm eyeing up human for Ardent Strike. Especially since attacking a slide to it through a feat would open up deadly draw and extra taps on flame spiral.
I don't know how much being stuck with 16 strength will hurt though.

>>50308467
In the online builder, supposedly nothing is stopping you from taking Ardent strike on a hybrid Blackguard (you don't need to be human for it). I don't have the online builder, but somebody who does can probably confirm.

Anyway, If you could go 18/18 STR/CHA anyway (since those are the secondary damage stats) I don't see the point in going human.

But I'm also not sure what this combination brings to the table that's better than going with a cavalier hybrid.

>>50308954
Ah, my builder doesn't allow for choosing any paladin at will on a hybrid. Of course, neither builder is an actual rules source so I can't say which is right.

I'm going with blackguard because even though having marking ability is cool the goal here is to at most off defend. Still trying to build a striker. Blackguard makes sure my melee attacks and paladin dailies still get a striker +damage feature.

>>50309106
I guess, now that you mention it, paladin does have a few AoE abilities that work for sorcerer-style striking. And you don't have to take dread smite either, which is not a bad power, but doesn't fit really well into what you are doing anyway.

>>50308954
I don't think the online builder exists anymore. The offline one will not let you pick the blackguard at will; it will always be what your vice is. And seeing how that how the actual class works, I'm inclined to think it legit

>>50309469
I'm pretty sure the blackguard was added with the CBLoader, so it reflects what the guys doing that thought should happen, not what actually was written for it. So the online builder is "more official" is what I'm trying to say.

Either way, it doesn't matter much, you probably wouldn't be using that power much anyway.

>>50310010
We don't have the online builder to go off of. If I remember correctly, the offline one allowed free pick of at-will until the online one was updated with hybrid blackguard and denied it, and so the offline one was likewise updated

>>50310428
Could be.

Anyway, I rest my case, with the online builder apparently now defunct (something I wasn't aware of, my bad), there's really no point in referencing it.

So! Hybrid blackguard | Sorcerer eh? I still feel that you'd be better off with either Paladin or Cavalier, as the striker feature it has is quite minor and you'd have better power selection. The feature doesn't scale with level, and it only functions when you have advantage, which isn't that easy to get without support.

That said the cold and necrotic ongoing damage on the smite is something you could definitely abuse. I'm just not entirely sure what the best method would be atm.

If i wanted to be a magic missile one-trick-pony, as in, failed wizard that sucks at everything except this one thing he does really well, how would i go about it?

>>50311885
Half-elf hunter, get magic missile as your dilettante power and turn it into an at-will in paragon.

Literally all you'll be doing is shooting magic missiles.

You may be able to do this without Half-elf if you can somehow get a spellbook on a hunter and the DM allows you to retrain into/pick up the Blackstaff apprentice theme.

File: War_of_Everlasting_Darkness_cover.jpg (315KB, 600x774px)

315KB, 600x774px

Does anyone have a pdf of the War of Everlasting Darkness adventure? I need to mine it for content and ideas.

File: 6e6dc44e1c3ba99603dbf704afef6ebf.jpg (284KB, 1200x850px)

284KB, 1200x850px

>>50311885

Magic Missile has been nearly worthless to optimize ever since the errata had completely gutted it into a no-hit, negligible damage attack.

It is a lost cause, even with Wizard's Fury.

>>50312071

This is a poor idea. Adept Dilettante does not actually work with Magic Missile because there is neither an attack roll nor a damage roll, Disruptive Strike will still require Dexterity (a Dexterity/Intelligence build is frail by paragon, and a half-elf Dexterity/Intelligence build even more so).

Neither Aimed Shot nor Clever Shot do anything for Magic Missile, and many Aspects of the Wild have minimal compatibility with Magic Missile.

That leaves you with Rapid Shot, and you will still be significantly worse than a regular ranger (hunter) who bothers to optimize for something other than Magic Missile.

Magic Missile not having a Hit line or a damage roll makes it basically unusable with everything, so that's still about the best you can do with it I think.

File: 3fcec46cd0bbc21a644f53070a6a22be.jpg (959KB, 774x1092px) Image search: [Google]

959KB, 774x1092px

>>50307984

Characters are not actually guaranteed to have high attack bonuses by level 11. Tempestuous Inspiration grants a minor bonus to attack rolls *and* a major bonus to damage rolls, thereby helping allies with their nova rounds. It is especially useful with the Fight On paragon feat, which gives another use of Inspiring Word each encounter.

The Battlelord of Kord might not be the Battle Captain, but it and the Mithral Arm are probably the best overall paragon paths for a Strength/Charisma-based warlord.

>>50308467

Is there any reason in particular you are aiming for a paladin (blackguard)|sorcerer? There is minimal synergy between the two.

As >>50310595 says, a regular hybrid paladin (for pelting enemies with ranged/area sorcerer powers while you Challenge them from afar) or a hybrid cavalier (for being a spectacular hybrid all-around, what with its full defender features and the leader-style heal from Spirit of Sacrifice) might be a better choice.

If you are dead-set on a hybrid striker that includes the blackguard, you might consider a Dexterity/Charisma-based assassin (executioner)|paladin (blackguard) who makes the most of Virtuous Strike being both a melee basic attack and a paladin power. It grows obsolete by the paragon tier, but throughout the heroic tier, it is a fine striker, albeit overshadowed by the assassin (executioner)|warlock. You can read more of such a build here:
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/48865239/#48887871

Bumperity bump

For magic missile optimization:

http://funin.space/compendium/feat/Inescapable-Force.html

This gives it a damage roll, which means it can now be improved. Now you only need to enforce insubstantial on your enemies.

I suspect that's easier said than done.

>>50314414
Actually, would malec-keth janissary give 1d4 energy damage to it with it's level 16 feature? That means it could then be augmented a lot easier.

In fact, would that work with the bladesinger's bladespells? You could then have genasi muscle wizardry trigger there.

File: ccc398a4ce9bfb5b6e5d61f507396f89.png (890KB, 1024x724px)

890KB, 1024x724px

>>50314549

Placing the insubstantial quality on enemies is rather difficult.

>>50314549

The Malec-Keth Janissary would indeed add a damage roll to Magic Missile, but bladespells still require a *hit* with a melee basic attack.

>>50314757
I meant to ask if it would add the damage to the bladespells. I'm afraid you can't get a wizard power MBA on a genasi either way, as awesome as that would be.

File: f64390091aba12e693aa94cfd989a601.jpg (689KB, 1300x1262px) Image search: [Google]

689KB, 1300x1262px

>>50314790

Bladespells are attack powers, so it would seem so.

Do note that bladespells lack the implement and weapon keywords, however, and you will have to hold out until level 16 for this.

You might also encounter some MAD between Strength, Dexterity, and Intelligence.

>>50314907
I'm guessing this'd be an STR/DEX build, picking up powers that don't rely on hitting/INT in general (like Shield).

...

Could you target yourself with Hypnotism to make a MBA at +4?

File: dragon whisperer.jpg (156KB, 700x528px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 700x528px

>>50313338
>Is there any reason in particular you are aiming for a paladin (blackguard)|sorcerer?

Eh I guess I should probably just do pure sorcerer.
I'm wanting to be as melee as possible with them but dragon sorcerer probably has enough stuff for that on its own.

>>50314757
would Malec-keth Janissary stack with other things? For example a radiant weapon, could the attack have both radiant and one of the other damage types, since the other one comes from the L16, not the weapon?

File: d588dd4d7cdba279e23a380ed0c60575.jpg (1MB, 1570x1110px)

1MB, 1570x1110px

>>50315188

Certainly, though you will be lagging behind a half-orc, thri-kreen, or bugbear until level 16 given a lack of racial +2 Dexterity. As well, there are no level 1 wizard encounter attack powers that do not use Intelligence, unless I neglected one. Let us hope you are starting at mid-paragon.

I am unconvinced that the wizard (bladesinger) is even worth looking into, since you will hardly be much better than a generic basic attack-spamming fighter (slayer), ranger (scout), rogue (thief), warlock (hexblade), or hybrid assassin (executioner)|warlock.

>>50315251

No, because you are not your own enemy mechanically, and page 106 of the Rules Compendium suggests nothing to change that.

Even if you could treat yourself as your own enemy, you would still provoke opportunity attacks for using a ranged power unless you have Shimmering Armor or Shadowdance Armor on.

>>50315450

The best arcane attack-spamming melee hybrid striker is probably the assassin (executioner)|warlock.

What exactly are you aiming to accomplish with this character?

>>50315470

To my knowledge, nothing is stopping a Radiant Weapon from being used in conjunction with the Malec-Keth Janissary for both cold and radiant abuse, although then you would be missing out on the Morninglord, the main source of radiant damage abuse.

File: dragonfire.jpg (567KB, 1000x731px) Image search: [Google]

567KB, 1000x731px

>>50315582
>The best arcane attack-spamming melee hybrid striker is probably the assassin (executioner)|warlock.

Right, my bad, I didn't word my post well. I'm aware that eldritch strike spamming warlock|executioner is the best for that. I more meant, make a sorcerer who is the most comfortable also being in melee with all their blasts and close bursts and whatnot.
Rather than optimize a specific mechanical concept, I'm just trying to make a good melee sorcerer. Some things are better off hybrid (like barbarian) so that's why I was looking into blackguard. The stats line up and both have their striker features fairly built in.

File: b2d7d9f7672f6915426cca276997e4e6.jpg (74KB, 600x752px)

74KB, 600x752px

>>50315711

From levels 1 to 2, a bozak draconian sorcerer (elementalist [fire]) might be the best choice for that due to Constitution and the rock-solid Blazing Cloud power, but by level 3, Flame Spiral solidifies the regular sorcerer as king of up-close sorcery. Spark Form at level 7 helps too.

Unless you are playing a level 1-2 mini-campaign, I would favor a bozak draconian Dragon Magic sorcerer, possibly one that spams non-Hurl Breath-based rebreathing via Ancient Soul and Nusemnee's atonement. I do not think that rebreathers are all that overpowered, and if anything, they require prickly positioning and are quite fragile.

>>50315905
Yeah, I'll just go dragonborn sorcerer. I'll take ancient breath to get a minor action attack that uses my striker feature, but I don't think I'll go the rebreather route. Would rather not be fragile.

>>50315905
>>50316079

Staff or Ruin seems like the best thing generally, but I am liking the idea of getting rods and using Rod of the Dragonborn (thunder breath) and resounding thunder feat eventually.

>>50316098
A good way to abuse thunder as a dragonborn dragon sorcerer is to multiclass into fighter and take the honorable blade PP, then just put thunder damage on everything

File: 1333be68a1be4fd578fc7a9092c20737.jpg (61KB, 600x677px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x677px

>>50316079
>>50316098
>>50316138

What is your character's starting level? Do you have access to any free feats?

If you are not intending to be a rebreather, I would advise a bozak draconian (Arcane Blood, Instinctive Flight, Dragonfear), since Dragonfear is usually a far better racial encounter power than Dragon Breath.

>>50316249
I would recommend dragonfear to any dragonborn that isn't a dragon sorcerer, but the ancient soul benefits, even on something that isn't a rebreather, makes it powerful enough as an off-action attack on a class that gets very few of those that it outdoes dragonfear

Especially with honorable blade letting you abuse it further

>>50316249
Probably going to start at level 3 or 5, but I like planning characters to 11.

>since Dragonfear is usually a far better racial encounter power than Dragon Breath.

Nah I think I'm going to stick with my minor action attack(!) that benefits from my striker damage feature(!).

>>50316138
That's actually a pretty cool path. But I also like the idea of using the sorcerer path that makes blasts have a crit range of 16-20 on an action point. Crits are fun.
Definitely not ruling out honorable blade now though.

File: 6fa7a16801ee4343708d936c7ebee2cd.jpg (1MB, 1500x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x2000px

>>50316303
>>50316311

Ancient Soul takes a feat. A sorcerer wants many feats: Staff Expertise, Unarmored Agility, Superior Implement Training (Accurate Staff), and Implement Focus (Staffs), to name a few.

Taking Ancient Soul means delaying some of the feats above. Without Ancient Soul, assuming you have Constitution modifier +1, all your Dragon Breath deals is 1d6+1 damage in a close blast 3.

Dragonfear, on the other hand, is an offensive and defensive debuff in a close burst 5. It is also ally-friendly. That has much more impact on an encounter than a stock Dragon Breath ever will.

If you take Dragon Breath anyway, I would suggest selecting cold damage, not thunder. Resounding Thunder will be of relatively little use to a melee sorcerer's powers, whereas Lasting Frost and Wintertouched will be golden.

>>50316501
>A sorcerer wants many feats
You listed four and they're all generic number feats that most people want. None of those are sorcerer specific.
Sorcerer feats by and large suck, and there aren't many of them.

>Resounding Thunder will be of relatively little use to a melee sorcerer's powers
Burning spray, tempest breath, lightning breath, thunder leap, adamantine echo... I'm sorry, I just can't understand where your point of view is coming from. Melee sorcerers are mostly about blasts, which are great with resounding thunder.
Not to mention every sorcerer should take blazing starfall anyways just to have the option, which, again, resounding thunder helps a bunch.

>>50316633
Add flame spiral to that list

It's a close burst, not a blast, but it benefits from resounding thunder (when thunder is added to it) and is one of the linchpins of a melee sorcerer's power

>>50316501
I'd generally recommend melee sorcs use daggers, not staves, since most of the powers they'll be using will be close bursts and blasts, and having ensorcelled blade is great if you have an MBA-granter in the party

Partially because, by RaW, ensorcelled blade benefits from the dual implement spellcaster damage boost

File: 579e062723768f2fc6ed8afecaad4165.jpg (82KB, 800x600px)

82KB, 800x600px

>>50316633

>You listed four and they're all generic number feats that most people want. None of those are sorcerer specific.
They are not. They are still feats a sorcerer wants.

>Sorcerer feats by and large suck, and there aren't many of them.
Dual Implement Spellcaster, a multiclass feat of your choice, Sorcerous Vision, Superior Will, Superior Fortitude. There will always be good feats to take. Ancient Soul will cut into that feat budget.

Do you even have a free Expertise feat?

The point I am trying to make is that Dragonfear is far better than Dragon Breath, and you should not spend a feat slot on Ancient Soul just to make Dragon Breath somewhat better.

>Melee sorcerers are mostly about blasts
Resounding Thunder benefits burst-users most. Blasts increase their AoE size only by 1 with Resounding Thunder. It is still quite a solid feat for blast-users, but if you are looking to cheese out damage types, cold damage would still overshadow thunder in this case.

Blazing Starfall, Howling Tempest, and Thunder Leap are good powers, but they are not your mainstays.

>Burning spray, tempest breath, lightning breath, thunder leap, adamantine echo
You will probably be taking Explosive Pyre at 3 and Spark Form at 7, and those do not even benefit from Resounding Thunder all that much.

>>50316777
Nice trips, but I still can't understand your conviction in your stance.

I'd rather spend a feat on an encounter power minor action attack that's a close blast 3~4 than, say, multiclass monk for an encounter use of blistering flourish (although that's still good.)

I think you're overvaluing frostcheese way too much here. It's not like I'm building a ranger. Cold is good but doesn't seem to mesh with sorcerer's thing at all.

You are right that explosive pyre is better than tempest breath though. But, while spark form is great, I think flame spiral at 3 and lightning cuts at 7 is better.

File: a93a0eec337f516739bbe222e32d6643.png (998KB, 800x1131px)

998KB, 800x1131px

>>50316687

Flame Spiral has minimal benefit from Resounding Thunder since it has a hard cap of three creatures anyway.

>ensorcelled blade
That means lacking both Blazing Starfall and Burning Spray.

>>50313338
Did you misunderstand what I was saying about the two paths? I was saying Battle Captain was overrated, especially compared to Battlelord of Kord.

>Mithral Arm
I hate this meme.

File: fd0b746be38177f9df06fe4a14f0ba2d.jpg (97KB, 626x1000px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 626x1000px

>>50316882

A minor action encounter attack power to deal 1d6 + your low Constitution modifier + your striker damage in damage is all well and dandy, but given that it costs a feat to make the most of, it still pales in comparison to Dragonfear.

I had mistyped there; I meant Explosive Pyre at 1, Flame Spiral at 3, and Spark Form at 7.

If you prefer Lightning Cuts at 7, then that still does not change my stance.

If you would prefer not to take Lasting Frost and Wintertouched, that is still fine. What I would ultimately recommend is a bozak draconian with Dragonfear entering some paragon path other than Honorable Blade.

>>50316978

The Battle Captain is absolutely not overrated. A +2 bonus to attack rolls for everyone in the first round of combat helps with alpha striking (especially since a paragon-tier warlord will be ensuring that the party goes first with Combat Commander), Bolt of Genius can recharge a top-notch encounter attack power, and, at level 16, supercharging allies with Inspiring Words can be a huge boon.

What exactly is your issue with the Mithral Arm? You can cherry-pick a good level 7 encounter attack power, your level 12 encounter utility power negates an attack and lets you teleport. At-will teleport 2 is a good movement mode to have by level 16; it even works with charges.

>>50317032
The +2 in the first round is okay.

>Bolt of Genius, the standard action that does nothing when used
Absolutely disgusting.

The 16 feature ONLY adds attack, which is my issue. An ability score mod power bonus to attack that only kicks in at level 16 is just overkill, when Battlelord of Kord's untyped +2 to hit and +mod to damage is much more useful without being redundant, and also works five levels earlier.

Mithral Arm doesn't add enough damage. It's just not very leader-like.

>>50317032
Lightning cuts is a minor action attack, so it means it's more likely my standard action attack will be an at will. Both of which do benefit from resounding thunder.
I'm absolutely choosing a minor action attack on a striker. Especially since most people who care about combat advantage figure out how to get it anyways.

>entering some paragon path other than Honorable Blade

That being said, pretend I want to do cold optimization. Is honored blade worse than Primordial Adept theme for rod proficiency (and a +2 power bonus to damage) and a rod of the dragonborn?

>>50317066
The Battle Captain level 16 feature adds attack and speed

A speed bonus based on an ability modifier is ridiculous, at level 16 you're almost guaranteed to be doubling the speed of anyone you use inspiring word on, and it only gets bigger from there

>>50317134
Yeah, it'll help you reach the monsters you can reach anyway. Great.

>>50317140
OK, sure, if you are happy having your entire party operate like a 3.5 Monk or Fighter, more power to you, but mobility is really important in 4e if you actually utilize it, and no leader boosts party mobility like a warlord does

File: 5ec75ecdc09a6e2006009c50ec71c588.jpg (594KB, 1100x1035px) Image search: [Google]

594KB, 1100x1035px

>>50317066

Bolt of Genius potentially allows the party barbarian to regain their Storm of Blades, or the party rogue to recharge Stunning Strike. That is a good deal to me.

>The 16 feature ONLY adds attack
And speed.

>when Battlelord of Kord's untyped +2 to hit and +mod to damage is much more useful without being redundant, and also works five levels earlier.
The Battlelord of Kord's level 11 passive feature and the Battle Captain's are probably equally matched. It is just that the Battle Captain's level 16 feature is more effective than the Battlelord's, thus giving the edge to the Battle Captain.

>Mithral Arm doesn't add enough damage. It's just not very leader-like.
You are correct in this sense. It is not so much a leader paragon path as it is a good paragon path overall for many a character.

>>50317084

>Lightning cuts is a minor action attack, so it means it's more likely my standard action attack will be an at will. Both of which do benefit from resounding thunder.
As far as I am aware, Lightning Cuts does not benefit from Resounding Thunder in any way. If anything, it would work best with Lasting Frost + Wintertouched, since it could set up the combo on a single enemy in the first place.

>Is honored blade worse than Primordial Adept theme for rod proficiency (and a +2 power bonus to damage) and a rod of the dragonborn?

If you want to do this, I would suggest taking Primordial Adept for rod proficiency as you say, wielding a Rod of the Dragonborn, multiclassing into paladin, and then taking the Radiant Breath feat. Then you can be a Morninglord with cold *and* radiant damage on all of your attacks, for twice the cheese.

The problem here is that you will be missing both a Staff of Ruin and a Siberys Shard of the Mage.

>>50317183
>>50317231
>speed
Yes. Remember that you are still a warlord. You can get enough mobility that the speed bonus to one target at a time shouldn't matter.

>Battle Captain's 11 feature
If you're setting up your "nova rounds" in round 1, great. Enjoy being wrecked by enemy gimmicks.

Remember that Battlelord of Kord has actually effective powers at all of E11, U12 and D20. U12 can give you another Hail of Steel, for example.

>>50317301
Battle Captain U12 and Battlelord U12 are almost identical in terms of quality

Battle Captain U12 gives an encounter power to an ally, not yourself (slightly better for Battle Captains due to flexibility)), does not cost a heal (better for Battle Captain) but takes a standard action instead of a minor action (better for Battlelord)

Of course, this whole argument is just stupid, because Battlelords and battle Captains apply to different Warlord setups, Battlelord for Bravura, Battle Captain for Tactical, with Infernal Strategist being the Resourceful option and tears and pain for skirmishers and insightfuls.

They're both very good, but which one you take will not be decided at level 11, but at level 1 when deciding between going int-secondary or cha-secondary

>>50317401
Are you really saying using a standard action to recover a power is comparable to a minor action to do so? That difference by itself makes Bolt of Genius near horrible due to opportunity costs. Not only that, there are very, very few encounter powers more powerful than Hail of Steel, which every warlord takes.

A large part of why Tactical Presence is considered valuable at all is Battle Captain. Of course the quality of the paragon path in question is relevant and worth discussion.

File: 4267d7c09d5c46437a80ce740174afe9.jpg (198KB, 1110x1110px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1110x1110px

>>50317301

>You can get enough mobility that the speed bonus to one target at a time shouldn't matter.

While it is true that Reorient the Axis and Tactical Orders already make for excellent mobility, it can never hurt to have even more mobility from the level 16 passive feature. That is the side benefit anyway; the real draw is the attack bonus.

>If you're setting up your "nova rounds" in round 1, great. Enjoy being wrecked by enemy gimmicks.
It is fully possible to take out enemies quickly enough that they have little time to bring out said gimmicks. Adaptive Stratagem works wonders for this with allies' multiattacks.

>Remember that Battlelord of Kord has actually effective powers at all of E11, U12 and D20. U12 can give you another Hail of Steel, for example.
Only the level 20 power notably exceeds the Battle Captain's equivalent.

>>50317401

>Battlelord for Bravura
And Inspiring.

>Infernal Strategist being the Resourceful option
For a game that will never reach level 16, I would consider the Battle Captain for an Intelligence-based Resourceful Presence warlord as well.

>>50317444

You are trading in an (upgraded) Inspiring Word for that encounter attack power, remember.

>>50317444
Wow, if you really think Hail of Steel is the cream of the crop of encounter powers, you need to re-think how you view 4e

I mean, don't get me wrong, it's stupid powerful... in a party built to abuse it, but most of the time that will not be the case, most of the time it's a slightly worse version of storm of blows or storm of blades due to requiring MBAs from characters probably not built to abuse MBAs

>>50317474
Mobility has quickly diminishing returns. Damage does not.

By gimmicks, I meant triggered effects that ruin your nova.

Infernal Strategist's damage feature at 11 and the U12 are worthwhile on their own. The U12's attack bonus option even works on multiattacks, unlike Tactical Presence.

I am trading an upgraded Inspiring Word for that encounter attack power, which I will use immediately with the STANDARD ACTION I didn't spend on recovering that power.

>>50317503
Hail of Steel is one attack from the warlord, and then whatever your party has.
>Storm of Blows
Requires multiple targets to hit three times. Did you mean the barbarian power, Storm of Blades, which is three attacks IF you don't miss any earlier?

>>50317540
The diminishing returns of extra mobility are usually counteracted by the increasing number of huge and gargantuan creatures to be fought in late paragon and epic

The bigger they are, the more move speed you need to circle around them without provoking an opportunity attack

Also, note that I said storm of blows OR storm of blades, I mentioned both powers, because in practice, Hail of Steel often acts like sort of a combo of the two.

>>50317639
Circling around is technically a valid point, though I believe it shouldn't be a big problem unless you have some kind of flank bonus like Infernal Strategist. But then the paragon paths in question are Battle Captain and Battlelord of Kord.

>or
Well, okay. But combo? Hail of Steel is a pure focus fire power, while Storm of Blows is anything but that.

>>50317681
Oh, whoops. I thought Hail of Steel was better than it actually is

I thought it said your allies could make an MBA against "a" target, not "the" target, that's a fair bit worse

File: 19e17c96b75ee39b66613e94b834863a.png (1MB, 1000x1414px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x1414px

>>50317540

Resourceful Presence builds *in general* are better for supporting multiattackers, yes, because of the way their action point feature yet. Paragon paths do not change this state of affairs.

I am still not entirely sure what you are trying to say here though.

Strength/Charisma warlord: Battlelord of Kord
Tactical Presence warlord: Battle Captain
Strength/Intelligence Resourceful Presence warlord *not* intending on reaching level 16: Battle Captain
Strength/Intelligence Resourceful Presence warlord intending on reaching level 16: Infernal Strategist

>>50317681

I believe they mean Storm of Blades, which is often mixed up with Storm of Blows. I am guilty of that at times.

>>50317711
Where does lazylord go?

File: 266b8414c0188667723620791da40103.jpg (136KB, 843x981px)

136KB, 843x981px

>>50317720

"Lazy" warlords drop off considerably by the paragon tier since they are even less supported then. I would say that a paragon-tier "lazy" warlord should probably be a Tactical Presence warlord entering Battle Captain and swapping out the level 11 encounter power via Reserve Maneuver. There is nothing that can be done about the level 20 daily power, however.

>>50317706
If you actually want to attack multiple targets, look no further than controllers and AoE strikers. Focus fire is valued because they're rarer and more effective.

>>50317711
The main point is still Battle Captain is overrated. I've added that, by extension, so is Tactical Presence. The other points are mini-corrections.

>>50317720
To hybrid, or cry in a corner.

>>50317759
Battle Captain is overrated, tactical presence is not, the main reason why Battle Captain is so good is because tactical presence is already such a strong option, and Battle Captain is the best PP for Tactical presence warlords

>>50317776
If Tactical Presence is so valuable, then Infernal Strategist is just as valuable, as it gives you that presence as a feature.

I say Tactical Presence isn't so great by itself. It has some decent feat support, though.

File: 18ba1cff8ee8b0380e9a1f8768e0ba32.png (5MB, 1748x2480px)

5MB, 1748x2480px

>>50317759

>The main point is still Battle Captain is overrated.

As opposed to what paragon path for a Tactical Presence warlord, exactly?

No other paragon path can quite compete with the first-round +2 bonus to attack rolls, or the level 16 supercharging of Inspiring Word (which works wonders with Fight On).

>>50317794

I do think Resourceful Presence is the better class feature in a party heavy on multiattackers. Otherwise, I would take Tactical Presence to ensure important powers actually hit.

>>50317840
As opposed to not being a Tactical Warlord. That's the whole point of comparing to Battlelord of Kord.

>>50317794
The main value of tactical presence is its power riders and the fact that it uses intelligence and thus benefits users of commander's strike

Also, there's no armor that does for charisma what tacticians armor does for intelligence.

>>50317840
The point I was making is that there is no other PP for tactical presence, that's why Battle Captain is good, because it benefits tactical presence warlords the most. Most of the value comes not from Battle Captain alone, but from how it fits with tactical presence

File: f03c2f0c2797e4649f9133272cee5368.jpg (544KB, 1120x984px)

544KB, 1120x984px

>>50317853

I am not sure what your logic here is, exactly. You choose between Strength/Intelligence and Strength/Charisma for overall playstyle and power selection, not for paragon paths.

For instance, if the party has excellent basic attacks but little in the way of multiattacks, Tactical Presence is the way to go.
For a party with strong multiattacks, Resourceful Presence.
For a party with neither... well, if you are keeping to the warlord class nevertheless, you could look into the Inspiring Presence.

>>50317879
I'm more in favor of defensive enchantments for leader armor, so they don't get taken out as easily. Tactician's Armor costs a feat or ruins your AC, anyway.

>>50317880
Considering the discussion has linked Tactical Presence inexorably to Battle Captain, to discredit Battle Captain means to discredit Tactical Presence. If Battle Captain isn't that great compared to other options, and Tactical Presence isn't that great, either, then it means one should look to other builds. Ones that can use Battlelord of Kord, for example.

>>50317750
Hold on. The one who posted the lazy eladrin glaive warlord on charop forums was a 2huposter. Was that you?

File: fb5e9be4103e2e0ebdc43e49041a5b6c.jpg (489KB, 758x1060px)

489KB, 758x1060px

>>50317922

>Considering the discussion has linked Tactical Presence inexorably to Battle Captain, to discredit Battle Captain means to discredit Tactical Presence.

Not quite; Tactical Presence is also for those warlords with allies who have little in the way of multiattacks, but do have good attacks that they would like to see land accurately. It is also for those Strength/Intelligence warlords who want Devastating Offensive as their level 3 encounter power (probably the best power of its level) and/or prefer Surprise Attack over On My Mark at level 7.

>>50318036
Yeah, but that build still takes Battle Captain. It's linked.

If you only care about heroic tier, then sure, the Paragon Path doesn't matter. But if you plan on playing paragon, then you have to look at the build as a whole, including the Path. And if the Presence + Path combo falls behind, say, Bravura + Battlelord, then maybe the latter is the correct choice.

Battle Captain being flaunted as the reason to take Tactical was largely what I took issue with.

>>50318036
I will concede that Battle Captain has merit for a powerful controller, since that role does kind of exist outside/before the nova.

How well would a STR/DEX barbarian|rogue hybrid workout?

>>50318224
What do you have in mind? The two don't really have any synergy I think. No way to stack their bonuses, although I guess the passive benefits of rages could be a good thing.

>>50318224
The barbarian half would not get you much. Multiclassing would be better.

>>50318078
Tactical is better than Bravura, Battlelord is better than Battle Captain, but since Tactical pairs with Battle Captain and Bravura pairs with Battlelord, they balance out in the end

File: Kaminas_signature_pose.gif (87KB, 512x288px)

87KB, 512x288px

>>50318323
>Tactical is better than Bravura

Dem's fighting words, son

I can't get the image of two warlords hotly debating which of their leadership methods is superior out of my mind, after this thread.

File: 8b9f2bb0a704864174da10ba8643e5fc.png (1MB, 600x840px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 600x840px

>>50318323

>Battlelord is better than Battle Captain

I would still contest that strongly, given that the level 11 passive features of the two are equal but the Battle Captain's level 16 is clearly the superior of the two.

>Bravura pairs with Battlelord

Not quite; the Battlelord pairs with Strength/Charisma warlords in general. The issue there is that Strength/Charisma warlords lack the sheer *enabling* power of Strength/Intelligence warlords.

My stance is:
1. Strength/Intelligence warlords are simply that much better at enabling a party.
2. The Battle Captain is better than the Infernal Strategist and the Battlelord of Kord, which are about equal.
3. The only scenario wherein a Strength/Charisma warlord would be a better mechanical option is the event that the party lacks both good multiattackers and good basic attackers.

>>50318259
Rogue does offer minor action attacks, which barb lacks. Rogue also has a lot of ways to shift around freely, which would help enable charge spamming

>>50318374
If you want loads of shifting as a Barbarian, just play a whirling Barbarian, they have loads of shifts

>>50318374
Rogue can do all that without being a barb

>>50318385
Alternatively, you can just multiclass with the barb. to grab those minor action attacks

>>50318385
I suppose it could, but perhaps OP is coming at it as a way to improve barbarian

>>50318401
You'd only ever get one and with significant feat cost. Barbs don't lose much just going hybrid

File: a255ff7bcc33d06e435d719a9a7b3635.jpg (182KB, 1000x708px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1000x708px

>>50318353

In the end, it is party-dependent.

Good basic attacks, better single-target attacks than multiattacks: Tactical is the best option, although you might still pick Resourceful Presence regardless.
Good basic attacks, good multiattacks: Strength/Intelligence-based Resourceful Presence should be your pick, though Tactical is still decent given the Tactical Assault feat.
No good basic attacks or multiattacks: Settle for Inspiring Presence.

In no scenario are the Bravura, Insightful, or Skirmishing Presences the top picks. The latter two offer very little mechanically, and if the party has good basic attacks that might make the Bravura Presence tempting, the character may as well be Tactical or Resourceful instead.

Between Bravura, Insightful, and Skirmishing, Bravura is probably the best of the lot. In fact, Bravura is probably better than Inspiring overall... but the Inspiring Presence at least covers the scenario of "no good basic attackers in the party, no good multiattackers either."

How do archery warlords stack up against melee ones?

>>50318629
They work best in a party that already has a melee leader, like a melee artificer or skald/fake skald

If there isn't already a melee leader, melee warlord is just plain better

File: 71e035077b3629d631d436c328ba174d.jpg (1MB, 1800x2350px)

1MB, 1800x2350px

>>50318224

This is a poor hybrid for a simple reason: weapons.

The barbarian wants to wield two-handed weapons with large [W], and indeed, Howling Strike requires a two-handed weapon.

The melee rogue wants to wield a light blade, and is required to by some powers.

There is simply a near-irreconcilable difference between the two here.

>>50318629
>>50318701

Archer warlords are actually quite solid provided that the party has good melee basic attacks (specifically *melee* basic attacks). In such a case, they are arguably on par with melee Strength/Intelligence warlords. Their powers do not disappoint.

I disagree with >>50318701; what is important is not so much having a melee leader already in the party (an archer warlord works just fine as the party's only leader), but rather, having good melee basic attackers.

>>50318935
There are two ways to reconcile that issue

1. Take versatile duelist and use a longsword or bastard sword in two hands. Howling strike doesn't require a two-handed weapon, but rather a weapon wielded in two hands thanks to errata, and versatile duelist says you can use a one-handed heavy blade for rogue powers and sneak attacks, not a heavy blade wielded in one hand, so a versatile weapon works with both

2. Just go Whirler and use two rapiers

>>50318935
The only functional weapon setups for the combination that I can think of is the Dragon Paw (which is shit for both damage and accuracy) and the Spiked Chain. Spiked chain eats your multiclass feat, but it's easily the best option I can see here.

>>50318935
>There is simply a near-irreconcilable difference between the two here.
Spiked chain training?

File: c0dc67b2ccb905bb944169c7fe6e1cf1.png (463KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

463KB, 1024x768px

>>50319031
>>50319050
>>50319112

Versatile Duelist is spending a feat for the privilege of using a weapon worse than a fullblade.

Spiked Chain Training, however, is probably the best option here. I had not thought of that. It can allow such a barbarian to effectively be a hybrid Whirling Slayer barbarian|rogue... though it begs the question of why the character is not just a pure-classed Whirling Slayer, a barbarian|fighter taking Hybrid Talent (Tempest Technique), or a barbarian|ranger.

>>50319311
I love versatile duelist

Primarily because using it as a halfling rogue leads to a build that isn't the strongest, but is rather amusing in overall execution

>>50319347
Did you mc Fighter for Small Warrior's Defense?

File: b3ee6156fb09237630686fe765f0db3b.jpg (884KB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

884KB, 750x1334px

>>50319347
>>50319779

I am not so sure aiming for Versatile Duelist and Small Warrior's Defense is actually worth the trouble compared to just using a dagger (or, with Gritty Sergeant, a rapier) and a Rhythm Blade.

>>50319846
If light blade support wasn't so bullshit powerful it'd be a more interesting question.