light blades how does they work? dex or str or what?
Stanley Rexwinkle
what happened to weapons finesse? is it coming back or is it already built
in? can light weapons use dex? for example dagger with a 1d4. with
proficiency 2+1d4. where does str modifiers or dex modifiers enter in. I
know that it is opposed by targets armor.
Keith Davies
Trying to parse this and possibly failing here... I'll try to answer,
from a 3.x perspective (if you're asking about 4e you're on your own):
* all melee attacks use Str modifier on the attack roll
** if you have Weapon Finesse you may use your Dex modifier in place
of your Str modifier with finesseable weapons (light weapons and
certain others such as rapier and *spit* spiked chain)
* all ranged attacks use Str modifier on the attack roll
* all melee and *thrown weapon* attacks use Str modifier on damage roll
** melee attacks made two-handed with non-light weapons have the Str
bonus increased by half; light weapons gain nothing from two-handed
use
** offhand attacks get one-half the Str bonus to damage
* ranged attacks using devices with Str modifiers (composite bows, IOW)
get the Str rating of the bow added to damage; if your strength is
less than the rating of the bow you take a penalty to attack with the
bow
RAW, at least. IMC it's a little different:
* all melee attacks with finessable weapons use Dex modifier on the
attack roll, and are limited to Str modifier to damage (two-handing
gets you nothing)
* all melee attacks with non-finessable weapons use Str modifier on the
attack roll, and you can use them two-handed for +half |Str modifier|
to damage (if you have -2 Str modifier, you can get up to -1 with your
longsword using it two-handed)
* ranged attacks use Dex for the attack modifier
* ranged attacks may get Str modifier to damage, consistent with 3.x
rules
Keith
--
Keith Davies You know you're working too much when you
keith....@kjdavies.org receive spam with
keith....@gmail.com "Subject: Erection issues resolved!"
http://www.kjdavies.org/ and you go looking for the trouble ticket.
Mad Hamish
<hahn...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>melee weapons are using str and ranged using [dex] except heavy which use str.
>what happened to weapons finesse?
It's gone as a standard option at least for now and probably for ever.
(Otherwise the archer ranger with 20 dex becomes the best hth damaging
combatant as well as ranged...)
> is it coming back or is it already built
>in? can light weapons use dex?
If you want to play a dex based melee combatant you play a rogue who
use dex to hit for most of their powers.
I don't think there is any way to get a basic melee attack to use dex.
> for example dagger with a 1d4. with
>proficiency 2+1d4. where does str modifiers or dex modifiers enter in.
If you use it in melee then you use strength unless you are using a
power that says otherwise.
If you throw it you use dex for hit and damage (again, unless using a
power that says otherwise)
> I know that it is opposed by targets armor.
--
"Hope is replaced by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Keith Davies" <keith....@kjdavies.org> wrote in message
news:slrnged7f3.es...@kjdavies.org...
unfortunately, its 4e. weapons finess is gone. light ranged weapons use dex,
haevy ranged use str. they list light blades but some seems confusing.
phb 4e says this
Melee basic attack Strength vs. AC
Ranged basic attack Dexterity vs. AC
Stunning steel Strength vs. Fortitude
Fireball Intelligence vs. Reflex
Cause fear Wisdom vs. Will
but also this
Melee Weapon Groups and Associated Statistics
Axe: Constitution and higher than normal Strength
(battleaxe, handaxe, greataxe, halberd)
Flail: Dexterity (flail, heavy flail, spiked chain)
Hammer: Constitution (maul, throwing hammer,
warhammer)
Heavy Blade: Dexterity (bastard sword, falchion, glaive,
greatsword, longsword, scimitar, scythe)
Light Blade: Dexterity alone is sometimes enough
(dagger, katar, rapier, short sword, shuriken, sickle)
Mace: Constitution (club, great club, mace, morningstar)
Pick: Constitution [and rarely Dexterity] (war pick)
Polearm: Wisdom [and rarely Dexterity] (glaive, halberd,
longspear)
Spear: Dexterity (javelin, longspear, spear)
Staff: Constitution (quarterstaff)
my poor halfling has 10 str and 20 dex so it makes a difference.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Mad Hamish" <newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote in message
news:e8cde455co9ejl1mb...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 15:24:01 -0700, "Stanley Rexwinkle"
> <hahn...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>>melee weapons are using str and ranged using [dex] except heavy which use
>>str.
>>what happened to weapons finesse?
>
> It's gone as a standard option at least for now and probably for ever.
> (Otherwise the archer ranger with 20 dex becomes the best hth damaging
> combatant as well as ranged...)
>
>> is it coming back or is it already built
>>in? can light weapons use dex?
>
> If you want to play a dex based melee combatant you play a rogue who
> use dex to hit for most of their powers.
>
> I don't think there is any way to get a basic melee attack to use dex.
4e phb pg 77
Light Blade: Dexterity alone is sometimes enough
(dagger, katar, rapier, short sword, shuriken, sickle)
and no weapons finesse feat available in 4e seems to indicate that weapons
finesse may be built in. ranger's racial hatred became hunter's quarry and
can now vary with targets.
J.O. Aho
>>> melee weapons are using str and ranged using [dex] except heavy which
>>> use str.
>>> what happened to weapons finesse?
>> It's gone as a standard option at least for now and probably for ever.
>> (Otherwise the archer ranger with 20 dex becomes the best hth damaging
>> combatant as well as ranged...)
>>> is it coming back or is it already built
>>> in? can light weapons use dex?
>> If you want to play a dex based melee combatant you play a rogue who
>> use dex to hit for most of their powers.
>> I don't think there is any way to get a basic melee attack to use dex.
> 4e phb pg 77
> Light Blade: Dexterity alone is sometimes enough
> (dagger, katar, rapier, short sword, shuriken, sickle)
> and no weapons finesse feat available in 4e seems to indicate that
> weapons finesse may be built in.
If there isn't any further mention about it, it's due
A. A suggestion for a house rule where you can use dex instead of str
B. There will be an expiation where they will write more about this
C. It's in more in detail in dmg
PS. Fix that news client, it should strip everything
below "-- " when replying, with other words, this should be the
last line you see when you reply to this post.
--
//Aho
Stanley Rexwinkle
"J.O. Aho" <us...@example.net> wrote in message
news:6knvtaF...@mid.individual.net...
> Stanley Rexwinkle wrote:
>> "Mad Hamish" <newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote in message
>>> On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 15:24:01 -0700, "Stanley Rexwinkle" wrote:
>
>>>> melee weapons are using str and ranged using [dex] except heavy which
>>>> use str.
>>>> what happened to weapons finesse?
>>> It's gone as a standard option at least for now and probably for ever.
>>> (Otherwise the archer ranger with 20 dex becomes the best hth damaging
>>> combatant as well as ranged...)
>>>> is it coming back or is it already built
>>>> in? can light weapons use dex?
>>> If you want to play a dex based melee combatant you play a rogue who
>>> use dex to hit for most of their powers.
>>> I don't think there is any way to get a basic melee attack to use dex.
>> 4e phb pg 77
>> Light Blade: Dexterity alone is sometimes enough
>> (dagger, katar, rapier, short sword, shuriken, sickle)
>> and no weapons finesse feat available in 4e seems to indicate that
>> weapons finesse may be built in.
>
> If there isn't any further mention about it, it's due
>
> A. A suggestion for a house rule where you can use dex instead of str
>
> B. There will be an expiation where they will write more about this
in PHB 2 4e?
>
> C. It's in more in detail in dmg
not really covered in DMG 4e
>
>
> PS. Fix that news client, it should strip everything
> below "-- " when replying, with other words, this should be the
> last line you see when you reply to this post.
> --
it's windows mail in vista [so of course it sucks].
>
> //Aho
J.O. Aho
> "J.O. Aho" <us...@example.net> wrote in message
>> B. There will be an expiation where they will write more about this
> in PHB 2 4e?
In something like "warriors handbook", "armor and weapons handbook", ...
There are things that have been mentioned in a book in a way it feels it will
then be mentioned in another book, but it didn't.
--
//Aho
Mark Blunden
news:EFzFk.3042$yr3....@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
>
> "Mad Hamish" <newsunsp...@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote in message
> news:e8cde455co9ejl1mb...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 15:24:01 -0700, "Stanley Rexwinkle"
>> <hahn...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>melee weapons are using str and ranged using [dex] except heavy which use
>>>str.
>>>what happened to weapons finesse?
>>
>> It's gone as a standard option at least for now and probably for ever.
>> (Otherwise the archer ranger with 20 dex becomes the best hth damaging
>> combatant as well as ranged...)
>>
>>> is it coming back or is it already built
>>>in? can light weapons use dex?
>>
>> If you want to play a dex based melee combatant you play a rogue who
>> use dex to hit for most of their powers.
>>
>> I don't think there is any way to get a basic melee attack to use dex.
>
> 4e phb pg 77
> Light Blade: Dexterity alone is sometimes enough
> (dagger, katar, rapier, short sword, shuriken, sickle)
>
> and no weapons finesse feat available in 4e seems to indicate that weapons
> finesse may be built in. ranger's racial hatred became hunter's quarry and
> can now vary with targets.
The table on page 77 refers to one thing only: The ability score that is
most necessary to qualify for feats related to a particular weapon group.
Thus, if you're a fighter wanting to specialise in light blades, you'll take
Dexterity as a tertiary ability score, as that alone will be enough to
qualify you for some of the Paragon-tier or higher feats relating to light
blades.
There is no weapon finesse. The ability score used for a type of attack is
determined by the power you're using unless you're using a basic attack, and
rogues get to use Dexterity for just-about all their attack powers,
including melee powers.
--
Mark.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Mark Blunden" <markDASHbA...@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:006c5f93$0$2482$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
Ubiquitous
And you posted this here because?
--
It is simply breathtaking to watch the glee and abandon with which
the liberal media and the Angry Left have been attempting to turn
our military victory in Iraq into a second Vietnam quagmire. Too bad
for them, it's failing.
Parvati V
desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
Rexwinkle" <hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>melee weapons are using str and ranged using str except heavy which use str.
>what happened to weapons finesse? is it coming back or is it already built
>in?
No idea whether it is coming back, but certain class powers have it
built in. When you use a power to attack, your attack roll is based on
the ability written there.
In the case of rogues, for instance, this is usually Dexterity.
> can light weapons use dex? for example dagger with a 1d4. with
>proficiency 2+1d4.
the +2 from proficiency is *not* to damage, but to hit rolls. It is
used in basic attacks and powers with the "Weapon" descriptor.
>where does str modifiers or dex modifiers enter in.
In the description of the power you are using to attack, and as per
said description.
Basic attacks, by the way, are fully worded as if they were powers in
the Combat section of the PHB, page 287. As you can see they have the
"Weapon" descriptor and as such the proficiency bonus to hit is used.
Parvati V
--
"What is brain? Pai doesn't have such thing" - Pai, 3x3 eyes
UnaMoleDiDadi (TreEmme Torino): http://umdd.altervista.org/
http://parvatiquinta.blogspot.com/
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Parvati V" <parvat...@email.it> wrote in message
news:1ujhe452lm3n21f8n...@4ax.com...
> Nel tempo Fri, 3 Oct 2008 15:24:01 -0700, il mio fedele schiavo Wu
> desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
> Rexwinkle" <hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>>melee weapons are using str and ranged using str except heavy which use
>>str.
>>what happened to weapons finesse? is it coming back or is it already built
>>in?
>
> No idea whether it is coming back, but certain class powers have it
> built in. When you use a power to attack, your attack roll is based on
> the ability written there.
> In the case of rogues, for instance, this is usually Dexterity.
>
>> can light weapons use dex? for example dagger with a 1d4. with
>>proficiency 2+1d4.
>
> the +2 from proficiency is *not* to damage, but to hit rolls. It is
> used in basic attacks and powers with the "Weapon" descriptor.
>
>>where does str modifiers or dex modifiers enter in.
>
> In the description of the power you are using to attack, and as per
> said description.
>
> Basic attacks, by the way, are fully worded as if they were powers in
> the Combat section of the PHB, page 287. As you can see they have the
> "Weapon" descriptor and as such the proficiency bonus to hit is used.
what does that table on pg 77 mean? I can see rogues using dex over str. I
can see using str else where.
but what does this mean:
Melee Weapon Groups and Associated Statistics
Axe: Constitution and higher than normal Strength (battleaxe, handaxe,
greataxe, halberd)
Flail: Dexterity
(flail, heavy flail, spiked chain)
Hammer: Constitution (maul,
throwing hammer,warhammer)
Heavy Blade: Dexterity (bastard
sword, falchion, glaive, greatsword, longsword, scimitar, scythe)
Light Blade: Dexterity alone is sometimes enough (dagger, katar, rapier,
short sword, shuriken, sickle)
Mace: Constitution (club,
great club, mace, morningstar)
Pick: Constitution [and rarely Dexterity] (war pick)
Polearm: Wisdom [and rarely Dexterity] (glaive, halberd,
longspear)
Spear: Dexterity
(javelin, longspear, spear)
Staff: Constitution
(quarterstaff)
longsword gets to use dex? since when do you use con?
Mark Blunden
I answered this earlier in the thread. The table on page 77 refers to the
ability scores you need to have higher than average in order to qualify for
feats relating to the listed weapon groups. It has nothing at all to do with
which ability score you use when wielding the weapons.
--
Mark.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Mark Blunden" <markDASHbA...@address.invalid> wrote in message
Parvati V
>will weapons finesse ever return? in phb 2?
No idea. They did put a similar talent in the FR Player's Guide
(Intelligent Blademaster for swordmage, use Int instead of Str for
basic attacks) so I'd think it likely. The Martial Power splatbook
coming soon is a likely place it may turn up in, but do note this is
just my guess.
Why are you so concerned with Weapon Finesse though? At-wills is where
it's at really, not basic attacks.
Jasin Zujovic
> Nel tempo Sun, 5 Oct 2008 12:15:16 -0700, il mio fedele schiavo Wu
> desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
> Rexwinkle" <hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>> will weapons finesse ever return? in phb 2?
>
> No idea. They did put a similar talent in the FR Player's Guide
> (Intelligent Blademaster for swordmage, use Int instead of Str for
> basic attacks) so I'd think it likely. The Martial Power splatbook
> coming soon is a likely place it may turn up in, but do note this is
> just my guess.
>
> Why are you so concerned with Weapon Finesse though? At-wills is where
> it's at really, not basic attacks.
Right.
I'm not even sure that a 4E Weapon Finesse (use Dex for basic attack,
probably limited to light blades) would be worth taking for, say, a rogue.
Intelligent Blademaster is a special case; Int is the swordmages'
primary stat, but they can get relatively many bonus basic attacks from
their mark, so switching your basic attacks to Int could be worthwhile.
Most other people will just use their At-Wills, so they won't really
care what stat their basic attacks are keyed to.
--
Jasin
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Nel tempo Sun, 5 Oct 2008 12:15:16 -0700, il mio fedele schiavo Wu
> desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
> Rexwinkle" <hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>>will weapons finesse ever return? in phb 2?
>
> No idea. They did put a similar talent in the FR Player's Guide
> (Intelligent Blademaster for swordmage, use Int instead of Str for
> basic attacks) so I'd think it likely. The Martial Power splatbook
> coming soon is a likely place it may turn up in, but do note this is
> just my guess.
>
> Why are you so concerned with Weapon Finesse though? At-wills is where
> it's at really, not basic attacks.
my halfling has a str of 10 and a dex of 20, so it makes a big difference.
his weapons are light blades and a sling.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Jasin Zujovic" <jasin....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:gcbd91$qht$1...@localhost.localdomain...
str is only 10.
>
>
> --
> Jasin
Matthew Miller
> will weapons finesse ever return? in phb 2?
I wouldn't be surprised to see a feat as soon as next month's Martial
Power book which works only for basic attacks.
Mark Blunden
>
> "Parvati V" <parvat...@email.it> wrote in message
> news:2r7ie45c1nv42t4vv...@4ax.com...
>> Nel tempo Sun, 5 Oct 2008 12:15:16 -0700, il mio fedele schiavo Wu
>> desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
>> Rexwinkle" <hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>>
>>>will weapons finesse ever return? in phb 2?
>>
>> No idea. They did put a similar talent in the FR Player's Guide
>> (Intelligent Blademaster for swordmage, use Int instead of Str for
>> basic attacks) so I'd think it likely. The Martial Power splatbook
>> coming soon is a likely place it may turn up in, but do note this is
>> just my guess.
>>
>> Why are you so concerned with Weapon Finesse though? At-wills is where
>> it's at really, not basic attacks.
>
> my halfling has a str of 10 and a dex of 20, so it makes a big difference.
> his weapons are light blades and a sling.
But as stated, around 95% of the time you'll be using your (dex-based) class
powers, not your basic attacks. Even with that stat disparity, Weapon
Finesse just wouldn't be worthwhile for the miniscule number of occasions
that you're using a basic melee attack.
--
Mark.
Parvati V
> as a rogue my halfling's 20 dex is great for light blades and his
> sling. his str is only 10.
Yes. But how often are you using basic attacks? You have two at-will
attacks, both Dexterity-based.
Are you often involved in an action that forces you to make basic
attacks (such as charge or AoO)? Genuine question there, I'm curious :)
Kyle Wilson
Hmm...this just seems wrong to me.
I guess that the real issue here is that in 4e, with at will powers,
your basic attack is mostly irrelevant (kind of like the dagger on
your belt in prior editions...nice to have, but you'll almost never
use it and if it is pretty much ineffective, you really don't care).
Sounds like 4e makes basic attacks a kind of degraded capability that
you use very occasionally and your at will power(s) are effectively
your basic attack mode.
So I'd guess that as long as you have a good at will power available,
most 4e builds won't much care (5% is nearly irrelevant) how useless
their basic attack is as they'll almost never use them.
--
Kyle Wilson
email: kylew...@wilson.mv.com
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Stanley Rexwinkle ha scritto:
>
>> as a rogue my halfling's 20 dex is great for light blades and his
>> sling. his str is only 10.
>
> Yes. But how often are you using basic attacks? You have two at-will
> attacks, both Dexterity-based.
only if the halfling is a rogue.
>
> Are you often involved in an action that forces you to make basic
> attacks (such as charge or AoO)? Genuine question there, I'm curious :)
>
a halfling wizard or other non rogue class, not depending on rogue at wills
nor rogue using dex phrase.
wanting another path. otherwise halflings get locked into rogue only.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Mark Blunden" <markDASHbA...@address.invalid> wrote in message
I'm trying to see if my halfling can go any non rogue route. rogue class has
dex for most attacks in class section so it's not a rogue problem. if I
choose anything but rogue for halflings they seem to bite the dust. most at
wills for dex are rogue's.
>
> --
> Mark.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Matthew Miller" <mat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8e4875b0-8b8d-4073...@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
I hope so.
Parvati V
>>> as a rogue my halfling's 20 dex is great for light blades and his
>>> sling. his str is only 10.
>>
>> Yes. But how often are you using basic attacks? You have two
>> at-will attacks, both Dexterity-based.
>
> only if the halfling is a rogue.
You did say "as a rogue"... ;)
> a halfling wizard or other non rogue class,
Why would a halfling wizard "waste" a 20 on Dexterity when Intelligence
is his primary attack stat for Wizard powers (and why would he use a
blade instead of wizard at-wills).
Ditto for other non-rogue classes.
> otherwise halflings get locked into rogue only.
Not really.
A halfling with 20 Dexterity on the other hand is not your everyday
halfling.
Parvati V
> I'm trying to see if my halfling can go any non rogue route. rogue
> class has dex for most attacks in class section so it's not a rogue
> problem. if I choose anything but rogue for halflings they seem to
> bite the dust. most at wills for dex are rogue's.
If you choose other classes, you'll set your scores to match the primary
stats of those classes.
I really don't get your point.
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Stanley Rexwinkle ha scritto:
>>>> as a rogue my halfling's 20 dex is great for light blades and his
>>>> sling. his str is only 10.
>>>
>>> Yes. But how often are you using basic attacks? You have two
>>> at-will attacks, both Dexterity-based.
>>
>> only if the halfling is a rogue.
>
> You did say "as a rogue"... ;)
>
>> a halfling wizard or other non rogue class,
>
> Why would a halfling wizard "waste" a 20 on Dexterity when Intelligence
> is his primary attack stat for Wizard powers (and why would he use a
> blade instead of wizard at-wills).
> Ditto for other non-rogue classes.
>
>> otherwise halflings get locked into rogue only.
>
> Not really.
> A halfling with 20 Dexterity on the other hand is not your everyday
> halfling.
20 dex or 20 cha is making the best of the racial bonuses.
Jasin Zujovic
>>>>> as a rogue my halfling's 20 dex is great for light blades and his
>>>>> sling. his str is only 10.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. But how often are you using basic attacks? You have two
>>>> at-will attacks, both Dexterity-based.
>>>
>>> only if the halfling is a rogue.
>>
>> You did say "as a rogue"... ;)
>>
>>> a halfling wizard or other non rogue class,
>>
>> Why would a halfling wizard "waste" a 20 on Dexterity when Intelligence
>> is his primary attack stat for Wizard powers (and why would he use a
>> blade instead of wizard at-wills).
>> Ditto for other non-rogue classes.
>>
>>> otherwise halflings get locked into rogue only.
>>
>> Not really.
>> A halfling with 20 Dexterity on the other hand is not your everyday
>> halfling.
>
> 20 dex or 20 cha is making the best of the racial bonuses.
Being a rogue or a warlock is also making the best of the racial bonuses.
--
Jasin
Parvati V
>20 dex or 20 cha is making the best of the racial bonuses.
For sure.
But not making the best does not necessarily mean "bite the dust".
Mark Blunden
news:1d6ke4tqlu6ss5hhl...@4ax.com...
It depends a lot on your class, your build, and your play-style.
Rogues aren't likely to use a lot of melee basic attacks, though they'll use
them more than, say, wizards or warlocks, as there will be circumstances in
which they'll charge or get to make Opportunity Attacks.
Fighters, on the other hand, are all about getting up close and personal
with the enemy and locking them down, so they'll often be making charge
attacks to close in, and threatening opponents with their highly effective
Opportunity Attacks. (Not actually *making* many OAs, mind you - the point
is that they're such an effective threat as to dissuade the enemy from
provoking them). They also get a basic attack via their Combat Challenge if
a marked opponent doesn't behave himself.
Warlords also make a difference. A few of their tactical powers allow other
characters to make free attacks, and these free attacks are almost always
basic attacks.
To sum up, basic attacks are more or less important depending upon your
class and build, but they're far from marginalised. However, there are very
few cases in which a class build will emphasise Dexterity over Strength
*and* want to make a lot of weapon-based melee basic attacks, so a version
of Weapon Finesse which allows a character to use Dex instead of Strength
when making melee basic attacks won't be of interest except in some very
obscure corner-cases.
A version that lets you use Dex instead of Strength when using melee weapon
*Powers*, on the other hand, would be far too valuable - it'd make purely
Dex-based Rangers an insanely powerful build. On the other hand, extending
it only to Fighter powers would open up the possibility of a Dex-based,
light-armour-wearing Fighter build that could be fairly cool without being
broken.
It's certainly possible that the Martial sourcebook may cover such choices.
--
Mark.
Kyle Wilson
<markDASHbA...@address.invalid> wrote:
Thanks, that makes more sense. I've only played a wizard in my
limited 4e sessions to date (and wizards have never really expected
their melee attacks to be useful in any version of D&D). So far I've
been too busy since 4e came out to run any games myself :-(.
Matthew Miller
> So I'd guess that as long as you have a good at will power available,
> most 4e builds won't much care (5% is nearly irrelevant) how useless
> their basic attack is as they'll almost never use them.
Yeah, but it's kinda weird. Opportunity attacks use basic attacks, and
the warlord class has several powers which let allies make "free"
basic attacks (including an at will, and one which grants combat
advantage to the attacker). It's strange that a dex-based rogue is
effectively penalized for these
Especially since a wizard could use magic missile with Int (when
ranged attacks are possible).
That's why I think we'll probably see a Weapon Finesse feat that works
with basic attacks. It's not amazing, but still often useful (which
seems to be the baseline for a 4E feat).
Matthew Miller
wrote:
> I'm trying to see if my halfling can go any non rogue route. rogue class has
> dex for most attacks in class section so it's not a rogue problem. if I
> choose anything but rogue for halflings they seem to bite the dust. most at
> wills for dex are rogue's.
Look through the feats and take note of their prerequisites. 4E (at
least in the core PH) seems pretty careful to reward well-rounded
characters via feats, in different defenses, and through secondary
effects of powers.
See what you can do with "17 14 14 10 10 8" as a starting array of
numbers. Choose a class that focuses on something other than Dex or
Cha, and put the 17 in that stat. Put the two 14s in ability scores so
each one improves one of the other defenses. (That is, if your 17 goes
for Str, put one 14 in Cha or Wis and the other in Dex or Int.) If Cha
or Dex is useful at all to your chosen class, obviously prefer that
for a 14, but otherwise make the numbers line up where they need to be
for future feat picks (keeping in mind that you can bump both your
primary stat and a second one at 4th level, and that everything goes
up at 11th).
Your to-hit won't necessarily be as high as it could be, but you'll
have a lot more class options. And you can prioritize your magic gear
selection on weapon/implement plusses.
Stanley Rexwinkle
On Oct 6, 10:38 am, "Stanley Rexwinkle" <hahnt...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>> I'm trying to see if my halfling can go any non rogue route. rogue class
>> has
>> dex for most attacks in class section so it's not a rogue problem. if I
>> choose anything but rogue for halflings they seem to bite the dust. most
>> at
>> wills for dex are rogue's.
>Look through the feats and take note of their prerequisites. 4E (at
>least in the core PH) seems pretty careful to reward well-rounded
>characters via feats, in different defenses, and through secondary
>effects of powers.
>See what you can do with "17 14 14 10 10 8" as a starting array of
>numbers. Choose a class that focuses on something other than Dex or
>Cha, and put the 17 in that stat. Put the two 14s in ability scores so
>each one improves one of the other defenses. (That is, if your 17 goes
>for Str, put one 14 in Cha or Wis and the other in Dex or Int.) If Cha
>or Dex is useful at all to your chosen class, obviously prefer that
>for a 14, but otherwise make the numbers line up where they need to be
>for future feat picks (keeping in mind that you can bump both your
>primary stat and a second one at 4th level, and that everything goes
>up at 11th).
if I put 18 on wis +2 racial bonus gets 20 wis as in str 12, dex 10, con
10, int 12, cha 12, wis 20 for halfling cleric this gets modifier of +1 for
str,int,and cha, and +5 for wis.
>Your to-hit won't necessarily be as high as it could be, but you'll
>have a lot more class options. And you can prioritize your magic gear
>selection on weapon/implement plusses.
with weapons finesse more oportunities open up for quick races over the
brawnier ones. for now I may go with depending on at wills.
Stanley Rexwinkle
oops its +2 cha so only warlock and rogue for halflings until weapons
finesse come back. no halfling clerics for now.
12 str, 10 dex, 12 con, 12 int, 10 wis, 20 cha that's it.
Matthew Miller
> if I put 18 on wis +2 racial bonus gets 20 wis as in str 12, dex 10, con
> 10, int 12, cha 12, wis 20 for halfling cleric this gets modifier of +1 for
> str,int,and cha, and +5 for wis.
Errr, well, leaving aside that halflings don't have a racial bonus to
wisdom, that's exactly what I suggested *not* doing.
You'll have a high Will save, but dangerously low Reflex and Fortitude
(and possibly AC too). You'll be able to get into some entry-level
feats once you hit fourth level, but you'll be restricted overall. And
your powers may hit a lot but will be limited in their effectiveness.
You've got optimization tunnel-vision.
Stanley Rexwinkle
I saw it was cha as the other bonus in halflings. warlock halflings. if I
get a +2 bonus for a race why not get a 20 [+5 modifier]? each time two
abilities go up by two why not increase the dominant used ability by two
each and every time?
Mark Blunden
>
> "Matthew Miller" <mat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:85b85878-52d4-4f08...@h60g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 6, 4:49 pm, "Stanley Rexwinkle" <hahnt...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> if I put 18 on wis +2 racial bonus gets 20 wis as in str 12, dex 10, con
>> 10, int 12, cha 12, wis 20 for halfling cleric this gets modifier of +1
>> for
>> str,int,and cha, and +5 for wis.
>
>>Errr, well, leaving aside that halflings don't have a racial bonus to
>>wisdom, that's exactly what I suggested *not* doing.
>
>>You'll have a high Will save, but dangerously low Reflex and Fortitude
>>(and possibly AC too). You'll be able to get into some entry-level
>>feats once you hit fourth level, but you'll be restricted overall. And
>>your powers may hit a lot but will be limited in their effectiveness.
>>You've got optimization tunnel-vision.
>
> I saw it was cha as the other bonus in halflings. warlock halflings. if I
> get a +2 bonus for a race why not get a 20 [+5 modifier]?
Because you want to play a halfling as something other than a rogue or
warlock? The 20 is nice, but it's not this fantastic, essential thing you're
building it up to be. Sure, you should generally tend towards classes whose
primary or secondary key ability matches at least one of your racial
bonuses, but there's no need to get so hung up on making that perfect match,
or maximising that primary stat at the expense of all else. It's just not
all that important.
> each time two abilities go up by two why not increase the dominant
> used ability by two each and every time?
That's perfectly reasonable - but the dominant two abilities don't
necessarily have to be the two abilities in which you get your racial bonus.
As noted, you're focusing on racial ability bonuses with tunnel vision. Just
ease back and concentrate on making well-rounded characters.
--
Mark.
Parvati V
> I saw it was cha as the other bonus in halflings. warlock halflings.
> if I get a +2 bonus for a race why not get a 20 [+5 modifier]?
It's certainly a possibility. You'll be giving up a lot in other fields
however, so it's not _the_ way to go. You'll have weaknesses.
A well-rounded character will have a less promiment high stat, but also
less weaknesses.
> each time two abilities go up by two why not increase the dominant
> used ability by two each and every time?
That's not allowed by the rules. The two increments MUST go to two
different abilities.
Parvati V
> Yeah, but it's kinda weird. Opportunity attacks use basic attacks,
> and the warlord class has several powers which let allies make "free"
> basic attacks (including an at will, and one which grants combat
> advantage to the attacker). It's strange that a dex-based rogue is
> effectively penalized for these
Well, yes. My point wasn't that Weapon Finesse is useless, I simply see
it being situational - and thus not a "must have".
Especially since swordmages get a similar talents.
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Mark Blunden" <markDASHbA...@address.invalid> wrote in message
I just like to fully utilize whenever pogssible - seems like a waste
otherwise. rogues don't really use wis much, fighters and wizards don't use
cha much.
>
>> each time two abilities go up by two why not increase the dominant
>> used ability by two each and every time?
>
> That's perfectly reasonable - but the dominant two abilities don't
> necessarily have to be the two abilities in which you get your racial
> bonus. As noted, you're focusing on racial ability bonuses with tunnel
> vision. Just ease back and concentrate on making well-rounded characters.
sometimes its a 2ndary and tertiary score that is racial bonus. my fighter
takes highest score for str but next up are con, wis.
str=17 , dex=11 , con=17 , int=11 , wis=15 , cha=9
>
> --
> Mark.
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Stanley Rexwinkle ha scritto:
>
>> I saw it was cha as the other bonus in halflings. warlock halflings.
>> if I get a +2 bonus for a race why not get a 20 [+5 modifier]?
>
> It's certainly a possibility. You'll be giving up a lot in other fields
> however, so it's not _the_ way to go. You'll have weaknesses.
>
> A well-rounded character will have a less promiment high stat, but also
> less weaknesses.
but wis for a rogue seems like a waste as do cha for fighter and wizard. why
bother wasting points ther when I can put them to good use in bonus ability
that is importamt to class?
>
>> each time two abilities go up by two why not increase the dominant
>> used ability by two each and every time?
>
> That's not allowed by the rules. The two increments MUST go to two
> different abilities.
sorry, you're right - miss read phb section.
Parvati V
>but wis for a rogue seems like a waste as do cha for fighter and wizard. why
>bother wasting points ther when I can put them to good use in bonus ability
>that is importamt to class?
Because it will increase your chances to make Perception checks and
avoid surprise or detect traps, as well as other Wis-dependent
abilities (Insight also springs to mind as useful for a rogue in
social situations).
Of course it depends on your and your group's playstyle. Skills matter
a lot in my games, so all abilities get to shine.
>sorry, you're right - miss read phb section.
No worries, glad to be of help :)
Matthew Miller
> >>> if I put 18 on wis +2 racial bonus gets 20 wis as in str 12, dex 10, con
> >>> 10, int 12, cha 12, wis 20 for halfling cleric this gets modifier of +1
> >>> for str,int,and cha, and +5 for wis.
> I just like to fully utilize whenever pogssible - seems like a waste
> otherwise. rogues don't really use wis much, fighters and wizards don't use
> cha much.
Sure, every class has main ability scores, lesser ones, and ones which
don't play to that class's functions much. But you're stretching for a
20 at the expense of everything else. This isn't "utilizing fully".
I don't quite get it, because you seem to totally realize this here:
> sometimes its a 2ndary and tertiary score that is racial bonus. my fighter
> takes highest score for str but next up are con, wis.
> str=17 , dex=11 , con=17 , int=11 , wis=15 , cha=9
Why does this approach magically not work with a halfling?
Stanley Rexwinkle
str=10 , dex=19 , con=12 , int=13 , wis=8 , cha=17 is what I settled on for
the halfling rogue. I don't see the point of putting points in wisdom for a
halfling rogue. well roundedness seems a bit overrated IMO. if you have 4 or
more characters, every character does their part, you have at least basic
core parts [cleric/leader, fighter/defender, rogue/striker,
wizard/controller], why do they need to overlap and retard their main
advantages just to be well rounded individually?
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Nel tempo Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:17:34 -0700, il mio fedele schiavo Wu
> desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
> Rexwinkle" <hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>>but wis for a rogue seems like a waste as do cha for fighter and wizard.
>>why
>>bother wasting points ther when I can put them to good use in bonus
>>ability
>>that is importamt to class?
>
> Because it will increase your chances to make Perception checks and
> avoid surprise or detect traps, as well as other Wis-dependent
> abilities (Insight also springs to mind as useful for a rogue in
> social situations).
couldn't the cleric do that? that's why they would have high wisdom, isn't
it? isn't that what teamwork is for?
Mark Blunden
Because there are some things that others can't do for you. If the party
Cleric has excellent Perception, that doesn't help your Rogue beat a Stealth
check with passive Perception and get to act in the surprise round. If the
Warlord has excellent Insight, that doesn't help your Rogue discern whether
the noble he's speaking to is lying if he's acting as the party spokesman
and other characters are expected to keep quiet during the meeting. If the
Wizard knows enough about Dungeoneering to spot that a certain fracture
pattern in a tunnel ceiling indicates a potential cave-in, that doesn't help
your Rogue if he's stealthily scouting ahead of the party.
I'm not saying there's any need to make your character capable of doing
everything. But you may suffer as much, or more, by overspecialising as you
would by generalising. Often, it's best to find a happy medium.
--
Mark.
Parvati V
>> Because it will increase your chances to make Perception checks and
>> avoid surprise or detect traps, as well as other Wis-dependent
>> abilities (Insight also springs to mind as useful for a rogue in
>> social situations).
>
> couldn't the cleric do that?
Depends.
I've seen or played many an ambush where each character had to make
their own Perception (or the old equivalent) check in order to act in
the surprise round. And as a rogue, you'd benefit from making that check.
> that's why they would have high wisdom, isn't it? isn't that what
> teamwork is for?
Teamwork is a wonderful thing. But you can't always be with your team!
Suppose you're scouting ahead in the dungeon, because you're stealthy
(while the cleric with all that tingling armor would make enough noise
to wake a corpse).
Or suppose you're in a city. You want to get some info by local thugs.
They will not, in their right mind, admit what they are to a *cleric*
(the stench of authority can be smelled a mile apart). Unless we're
considering clerics of Lolth or such, I guess - still not your everyday
PC cleric, is it ;)
But they might pass on some hot info to a 'man in the business', if you
get what I mean. You're there, the cleric is not. Who rolls Insight?
Parvati V
> well roundedness seems a bit overrated IMO.
For sure, D&D pushes toward 'roles' and teamwork. Still, a character
will be called to handle some tasks individually at least every now and
then.
Suppose your enemy turns invisible. It's your turn. Your Perception will
be rolled, not anyone else's. You can delay or prepare an action, but
what if the others are too slow and your enemy gets away because you
didn't even try?
> if you have 4 or more characters, every character does their part,
> you have at least basic core parts [cleric/leader, fighter/defender,
> rogue/striker, wizard/controller], why do they need to overlap and
> retard their main advantages just to be well rounded individually?
For many reasons, from "the player likes a well-rounded character" to
"the campaign features many kinds of scenes, so that that advantage is
not /really/ their main advantage".
Matthew Miller
> str=10 , dex=19 , con=12 , int=13 , wis=8 , cha=17 is what I settled on for
> the halfling rogue. I don't see the point of putting points in wisdom for a
> halfling rogue. well roundedness seems a bit overrated IMO. if you have 4 or
> more characters, every character does their part, you have at least basic
> core parts [cleric/leader, fighter/defender, rogue/striker,
> wizard/controller], why do they need to overlap and retard their main
> advantages just to be well rounded individually?
Yeah, much better — at least you have two decent ability scores giving
you two decent defenses. You're going to be a bit weak on fortitude,
and as others have pointed out are going to rely on the rest of your
party to tell you what's going on. But nothing wrong with that, and it
can be fun to roleplay a low-wis character.
And to get back to what I was responding to initially here: the fact
that more spread-out stats are as good or better than putting all your
eggs into one ability basket is why you can play a perfectly good
halfling wizard if you want to, even though that's a poor alignment of
racial ability bonuses.
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Stanley Rexwinkle ha scritto:
>> well roundedness seems a bit overrated IMO.
>
> For sure, D&D pushes toward 'roles' and teamwork. Still, a character
> will be called to handle some tasks individually at least every now and
> then.
>
> Suppose your enemy turns invisible. It's your turn. Your Perception will
> be rolled, not anyone else's. You can delay or prepare an action, but
> what if the others are too slow and your enemy gets away because you
> didn't even try?
>
>> if you have 4 or more characters, every character does their part,
>> you have at least basic core parts [cleric/leader, fighter/defender,
>> rogue/striker, wizard/controller], why do they need to overlap and
>> retard their main advantages just to be well rounded individually?
in that case make them 14,13,13,13,13,13 and after most bonus's
15,15,14,13,13,13 for truly blandness?
Stanley Rexwinkle
> Stanley Rexwinkle ha scritto:
>
>>> Because it will increase your chances to make Perception checks and
>>> avoid surprise or detect traps, as well as other Wis-dependent
>>> abilities (Insight also springs to mind as useful for a rogue in social
>>> situations).
>>
>> couldn't the cleric do that?
>
> Depends.
> I've seen or played many an ambush where each character had to make
> their own Perception (or the old equivalent) check in order to act in
> the surprise round. And as a rogue, you'd benefit from making that check.
>
>> that's why they would have high wisdom, isn't it? isn't that what
>> teamwork is for?
>
> Teamwork is a wonderful thing. But you can't always be with your team!
>
> Suppose you're scouting ahead in the dungeon, because you're stealthy
> (while the cleric with all that tingling armor would make enough noise
> to wake a corpse).
>
> Or suppose you're in a city. You want to get some info by local thugs.
> They will not, in their right mind, admit what they are to a *cleric*
> (the stench of authority can be smelled a mile apart). Unless we're
> considering clerics of Lolth or such, I guess - still not your everyday
> PC cleric, is it ;)
> But they might pass on some hot info to a 'man in the business', if you
> get what I mean. You're there, the cleric is not. Who rolls Insight?
16, 13, 12, 12, 12, 12 gets at least 1 for modifiers and bonuses should be
top heavy. getting 18,15,12,12,12,12. that gets the safety of 1 modifier
values cut higher where it's needed.
Matthew Miller
> in that case make them 14,13,13,13,13,13 and after most bonus's
> 15,15,14,13,13,13 for truly blandness?
Right, clearly that extreme is not ideal either. Basically what you
want to strive for is three decent stats in one each of the pairs
which contribute to defenses: str/con, cha/wis, and dex/int.
If you can only manage two, that's probably okay but ideally your
third is at least a 13 for feat access. And if you have to have two in
the same pair high for some concept, that's not great but survivable.
Here's what I recommend to my players as starting ability arrays
(before racial bonuses):
Top Recommendations:
---------------------------------
16 16 13 11 10 8
If your race gives a bonus to the primary stat for your class, and
you want a high
secondary stat as well, this is hard to beat.
16 14 14 13 10 8
Same, but more well-rounded for access to more feats and obviously
a lower secondary.
17 14 14 10 10 8
You really need a decent primary stat, and if your race doesn't
give you a bonus there,
this is a good choice. The 17 becomes an 18 at level 4 — remember,
optimize for
play, not for a mythical level 30 character.
Alternates
---------------------------------
18 14 11 10 10 8
If you really must start with an 18 (or a 20!), this isn't
terrible.
16 16 12 10 10 10
And, finally, if you can't bear to have a flawed ability, this one
has no negative numbers.
Stanley Rexwinkle
On Oct 8, 6:43 pm, "Stanley Rexwinkle" <hahnt...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> in that case make them 14,13,13,13,13,13 and after most bonus's
> 15,15,14,13,13,13 for truly blandness?
>Right, clearly that extreme is not ideal either. Basically what you
>want to strive for is three decent stats in one each of the pairs
>which contribute to defenses: str/con, cha/wis, and dex/int.
>If you can only manage two, that's probably okay but ideally your
>third is at least a 13 for feat access. And if you have to have two in
>the same pair high for some concept, that's not great but survivable.
>Here's what I recommend to my players as starting ability arrays
>(before racial bonuses):
>Top Recommendations:
>---------------------------------
>16 16 13 11 10 8
> If your race gives a bonus to the primary stat for your class, and
>you want a high
> secondary stat as well, this is hard to beat.
why the 11, 10, and 8? isn't that weak abilities? that's what everybody kept
telling me here.
>16 14 14 13 10 8
> Same, but more well-rounded for access to more feats and obviously
>a lower secondary.
again they keep on telling me to go rounded but there's that 10 and an 8 the
end. I wanted that was told it was too weak. I said it was in skills I
didn't need as much for the class. but, oh no, couldn't allow specialized
characters, better have it 'well rounded'.
>17 14 14 10 10 8
> You really need a decent primary stat, and if your race doesn't
>give you a bonus there,
> this is a good choice. The 17 becomes an 18 at level 4 — remember,
>optimize for
> play, not for a mythical level 30 character.
>Alternates
.---------------------------------
>18 14 11 10 10 8
> If you really must start with an 18 (or a 20!), this isn't
>terrible.
but that is not far from what I started with and told that it was 'tunnel
vision'. with bonuses can become 20,16,11,10,10,8. I was pushing for speed
over brawn.
>16 16 12 10 10 10
> And, finally, if you can't bear to have a flawed ability, this one
>has no negative numbers.
I was willing to let other party members take on other duties. I was led to
believe you needed at least 1 as a modifier in every ability regardless
whether it was primary, secanodary or even tertiary to the class. I cam up
with that 14,13,13,13,13,13 then a 16,13,12,12,12,12 just so no ability
would be weak. now someone else is talking about concentrating scores on
class skills. I found the feat jack of all trades so all skills would have
something. but no must have at least 10s in abilities. why start in any
ability with 8 if that was so detrimental?
Matthew Miller
wrote:
> >want to strive for is three decent stats in one each of the pairs
> >which contribute to defenses: str/con, cha/wis, and dex/int.
> >16 16 13 11 10 8
> > If your race gives a bonus to the primary stat for your class, and
> > you want a high secondary stat as well, this is hard to beat.
> why the 11, 10, and 8? isn't that weak abilities? that's what everybody kept
> telling me here.
The problem isn't a few weak abilities. It's all weak abilities but
one. And
that wasn't really what I was responding to anyway. I was talking
about
class/race combination, and the point is that having bonuses to your
secondary or tertiary abilities can work too, which vastly broadens
the
possible combinations.
> >16 14 14 13 10 8
> > Same, but more well-rounded for access to more feats and obviously
> >a lower secondary.
> again they keep on telling me to go rounded but there's that 10 and an 8 the
> end. I wanted that was told it was too weak. I said it was in skills I
> didn't need as much for the class. but, oh no, couldn't allow specialized
> characters, better have it 'well rounded'.
It's a matter of extremes. And I'm not saying that you *can't* do it,
just
that lopsided characters aren't the epitome of optimized after all.
> >18 14 11 10 10 8
> > If you really must start with an 18 (or a 20!), this isn't
> >terrible.
>
> but that is not far from what I started with and told that it was 'tunnel
> vision'. with bonuses can become 20,16,11,10,10,8. I was pushing for speed
> over brawn.
Well, except you didn't say 20,16,11,10,10,8.
You said 20, 12, 12, 12, 10, 10 (in two different configurations).
I still think the 18, 14, 11, 10, 10, 8 is usually not the best choice
(which is why I put it as an alternate recommendation rather than
as a top one). It's just the best if you must have 20 to start.
Stanley Rexwinkle
gets secondary some what high and only one -1 modifier, negated by jack of
all trades feat in skills. you get some in all skills.
>You said 20, 12, 12, 12, 10, 10 (in two different configurations).
gets one high with 3 other abilities with at least 1 as modifier and no -1
modifiers. what's the problem? can't utilize fully without being 'tunnel
vision', can't be bland average out 15,15,14, 13,13,13?
Matthew Miller
>>Well, except you didn't say 20,16,11,10,10,8.
> gets secondary some what high and only one -1 modifier, negated by jack of
> all trades feat in skills. you get some in all skills.
Skills aren't my main concern, although they are useful. I'm more worried
about (as I said) feat access, secondary effects, and defenses. This
particular array at least has two feat-prereq-meeting stats and two decent
defenses.
>>You said 20, 12, 12, 12, 10, 10 (in two different configurations).
> gets one high with 3 other abilities with at least 1 as modifier and no -1
> modifiers. what's the problem? can't utilize fully without being 'tunnel
> vision', can't be bland average out 15,15,14, 13,13,13?
You've got it backwards. You were looking for some sort of Awesome Best
Match. I'm saying there really is no such thing and you'll have strengths or
drawbacks either way. (And that if you go really extreme in one or the other
directions, those drawbacks will be large.)
The game is designed so that there are both obvious niches (eladrin wizard,
halfling rogue) AND that if you go outside of those niches there are
alternate rewards.
Just a little bit back in this thread, you were trying to see if a halfling
"can go any non rogue route". I'm answering that: yes you can.
Loup-Garou
<hahn...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>again they keep on telling me to go rounded but there's that 10 and an 8 the
>end. I wanted that was told it was too weak. I said it was in skills I
>didn't need as much for the class. but, oh no, couldn't allow specialized
>characters, better have it 'well rounded'.
>
From the 25 or so characters we've had, I can honestly say that "well
rounded" abilities suck. The most effective characters are those who
boost their key abilities (typically two) as high as possible and then
cover the weak defense with the third highest number.
Warlock
Str Low
Con High
Dex Low
Int Higher
Wis Low
Chr Highest
Of course quite a few of the classes resist this build.
Fighter
Str Highest
Con High
Dex or Int One High, One Low
Wis or Chr One High, One Low
Unfortunately, the more you resist the stereotypical builds, the less
effective your character will be. Our Cleric initially had a 16
wisdom and couldn't figure out why he was consistently missing with
his attacks when the archer Ranger with a 20 dexterity was hitting (of
course there's the +2 proficiency bonus with bow, too).
Clawful
> Nel tempo Mon, 6 Oct 2008 08:32:38 -0700, il mio fedele schiavo Wu
> desto' nel mio animo interesse sopra il conversare di "Stanley
> Rexwinkle"<hahn...@sbcglobal.net>:
>
>
> For sure.
>
> But not making the best does not necessarily mean "bite the dust".
If you ain't optimized, you're food-for-flies.
That's life, kid.
C.
Allen Wessels
Clawful <Cla...@fyrefox.net> wrote:
No, life is everyone is food for flies.
- Allen
Matthew Miller
> From the 25 or so characters we've had, I can honestly say that "well
> rounded" abilities suck. The most effective characters are those who
> boost their key abilities (typically two) as high as possible and then
> cover the weak defense with the third highest number.
Two high numbers and a third one with at least a decent bonus is
well-rounded in my book. All 13s and 14s isn't well-rounded -- it's flat.
[...]
> Unfortunately, the more you resist the stereotypical builds, the less
> effective your character will be. Our Cleric initially had a 16
> wisdom and couldn't figure out why he was consistently missing with
> his attacks when the archer Ranger with a 20 dexterity was hitting (of
I don't recommend a 16 in your primary stat. That's why I suggest the 17,
14, 14, 10, 10, 8 starting array for cases where your racial bonus doesn't
match your class. (For 17, 16, 16, 10, 10, 8 or at worst 17, 16, 14, 12, 10,
8.)
That said (and I haven't played enough at higher levels to really test this
theory), assuming there's not an infinite supply of magic items, the ranger
will probably need to spend some of his magic item budget (in terms of both
slots and gold) on shoring up weaknesses, whereas the cleric can focus on
making those attacks stick with a high + holy symbol.
And same for feats.
In other words, it'll all work out.
Of course, the ranger could continue to push towards lopsidedness, and
that's probably okay too -- but the difference in perceived effectiveness
will go down.
> course there's the +2 proficiency bonus with bow, too).
FWIW, the cleric is generally either also getting a weapon proficiency bonus
or else targeting a defense other than AC (which tends to be the highest).
--
Matthew Miller
Clawful
An optimized character never dies permanently.
C.
Loup-Garou
<mattdm...@mattdm.org> wrote:
>I don't recommend a 16 in your primary stat. That's why I suggest the 17,
>14, 14, 10, 10, 8 starting array for cases where your racial bonus doesn't
>match your class. (For 17, 16, 16, 10, 10, 8 or at worst 17, 16, 14, 12, 10,
I agree completely. 17 should be the lowest for your primary stat.
>
>FWIW, the cleric is generally either also getting a weapon proficiency bonus
>or else targeting a defense other than AC (which tends to be the highest).
Unfortunately, the good at wills for a 1st level cleric target reflex
which isn't too far from AC. Except for Zombies, which the cleric was
actually able to hit with his lance of faith. He was so happy...
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Matthew Miller" <mattdm...@mattdm.org> wrote in message
news:slrnget9kk...@jadzia.bu.edu...
I'll see how it works out
Stanley Rexwinkle
"Clawful" <Cla...@fyrefox.net> wrote in message
news:uxyHk.8390$JJ4....@newsfe06.iad...
then blandness?