# Essentials multiclassing playtest?



## BobTheNob (Jun 10, 2011)

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (New Hybrid and Multiclass Options)

Cant log in at the moment for some reason, so havent read, but its there


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jun 10, 2011)

Firewall!!!!!!!! not cool.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 10, 2011)

I seem to have gotten mine just fine. Right now, I'm trying to wrap my head around the Assassin and Executioner inter-class swaps and it is pretty odd. 

As an Ossassin (no new name for that?) you can now have the option to take Guild training (instead of being a Bleak Disciple or Night Stalker). You also gain Assassin's Strike and can never gain another assassin Encounter power. . . ouch.

As an Executioner you can now take the Assassin's Shroud power instead of the d8 per tier with attack finesse (though you still get Dex for MBA w/ one handed weapons).

Executioner MC feat (no prereq) = Ki Focus, training in 1 skill, and 1d8 to 1-handed weapon (+garrote, shortbow, blowgun) once an encounter. Better off multi-ing with the original Assassin feat (there are 2) if anything because you can cheat past the 2 shroud limit with other feats/items.

Assassin/Executioner daily/poison switch feats.

Hybrid Executioner. Cannot Hybrid with old Assassins. Standard hybrid hp/defense/skill/item set up. Hybrid Talents: Nimble Drop and Flawless Disguise (laughable option. Nimble Drop MIGHT be worth it. EDIT: must be level 4 to take it, just like the original class) . Things get fuzzy after that. Various rules for how your powers mesh. Assassin's Strike hybrid is a mouth full. Otherwise everything else makes sense. Kind of boring (I loathe this class. Check every other thread to see)...

Hybrid Blackguard. Also pretty standard in terms of hybrid rules/options and cannot hybrid with Paladins. Damage bonus only to paladin attacks. More easily worded solution to the lone encounter power. Paladin armor proficiency and their temp HP granting encounter as hybrid options.

Blackguard multiclass(noprereq?) give you a bit. Skill, holy symbols, once per encounter Charisma damage sneak attack and once per day temp HP encounter power. Sweet.


Vampire MC: surge = 2 with multiclass (and hybrid). You gain the vulnerable 5 radiant and sunlight destroys you and the short-rest-"drink"-a-friend's-surge mechanic. One feat is literally incapable of working. Blood Thirst. It gives you  the blood drinker power (which can only be triggered by a Vampire melee  attack power specifically). Then all the other feats (specified by your classes power source +1 more for Monks) give you a pseudo Blood Drinker power that triggers off when your martial/divine/arcane/etc encounter power hits. Plus an additional benefit or 2.

Hybrid Vampire. More or less the same deal as MC... only 1 Hybrid option. Embrace Undeath. Resist 5 Necrotic and Darkvision. Pretty poor choices.

Moving on: A feat to pick up a Wilderness Knack. There's no pre-req. And you can take it if you already have knacks (from class features I assume).

Sentinel MC feat (wis13): Nature training, Healing Word once per day. Staffs/totems prof.

Sentinel Hybrid is straightforward. Again, alternating encounter powers for additional uses and no hybridizing into Druid. A few hybrid talent options, though some are for paragon/epic class features. Druid Armor Prof and Wilderness Knacks (though I guess that's not so necessary if there's a feat now).

Cavalier MC feat is pretty crazy (str/cha 13): 1 skill, holy symbols, defender aura and their enforcer power once an encounter. Which yes, you'll only be able to enforce your mark once an encounter but a defender aura is always a -2. Bet that'll change.

Cavalier also very similar hybrid to Blackguard. Almost the same in every way (switch defender/strike mechanics). Too bad you cannot hybrid them together.

New Ranger options: Feat swap for at-will to 1 expert archer feature attack. Feat swap for encounter power to Disrutive Shot (the hunter's standard encounter power). And anpther feat swap to go one way for a power strike. Little bummed the opposite feats aren't here. Hunters/Scout's cannot pick up at-wills or encounter powers. But still reasonable feats if you like those features.

Warlock feats are interesting. Get a pact-weapon from the hexblade and it's at-will at the cost of a feat. You have to already be a pact that has a Hexblade weapon (so no sorc-king weapons or gloom weapons). Another feat to swap for a hexblade encounter power.

MC and Hybrid is the Binder warlock....lame.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 10, 2011)

Both of those are ridiculously awful options. I'm not sure who comes off worse there.


----------



## Zaphling (Jun 10, 2011)

I managed to read the article. What I like about the Executioner Assassin Hybrid option is you will be able to do melee basic attacks with dexterity. So much original class combinations can be effective with it: Rogues, Rangers, and especially Monks; Ninja! Waapaak!

I also like that the rangers can now spend a feat to have a Hunter's Trick Shot. I understande you have to spend a feat since the Trick Shots are very powerful combined with the original ranger's hunter's quarry. I still don't get it why we can't have the Aspects.

The warlock is fun. You can now spend a feat to have a pact blade. Talk about coolness to the max. Although the original warlock still lacks the chainmail prof but what the heck.

The most interesting is the Vampire. 2 healing surges regardless of classes. Now that's cool. i guess you have to be very careful if you hybrid your defender with it. But on the contrary, they do get ALL of the vampire's features including the one that if you have more than the max surges, you're HP will be full after the battle. Think of your Wardens, fighters, and paladins with this. But if you'll be fighting long battles, I'm not sure this will help.

Lastly, the paladin variants. I was thinking of a cool mix of Blackguard and warlock. The dark knight. Clerics and cavaliers will fit nicely. Since both key off of strength and charisma. 

For me, the literally wildest combination is the beastmaster ranger and sentinel druid. Talk about having 2 animal companions, plus if you have the animal master theme, 3 animals!!!! WOOOT!


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 10, 2011)

The hybrid vampire is one of those cases where the hybrid is going to more than likely be flat out better than the original class.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 10, 2011)

So if I'm reading this correct an Ossassin can take Executioner's Guild and use both Assassin's Strike and their Shrouds on the same target...

I also like how any Warlock can use Pact Blade Manifestation with just a feat, even though there's no Hybrid rules for the Hexblade.


----------



## Nemesis Destiny (Jun 10, 2011)

I thought there were some interesting options there (and some really _terrible_ ones), but I'm left wondering, "where's the rest?!?"


----------



## Mummolus (Jun 10, 2011)

The assassin options are _terrible_. They had a chance to improve both the executioner and the oassassin here, and they failed badly. The only really solid thing about them is that they are, in fact, new feats, which means there's still support for feats (I'd been wondering, given that the races/classes in HoS got basically none).


----------



## Xris Robin (Jun 10, 2011)

A few weird things... firstly, most of this is one way into Essentials, letting the normal class trade out things for E-versions.  Like the Warlock can trade out for pact weapon powers, but there's nothing for a Hexblade to gain normal Warlock powers.  Also, didn't see a hybrid of the Hexblade or Hunter/Scout.

The hybrid Vampire IS the class, except for what, darkvision and resist necrotic?  And it comes with a feat for every power source (plus monk) that lets you use encounter as if they were Blood Drinker, gaining a healing surge.  So you only have to take it once, and then take real class powers and still gain surges.  (So a Martial Vampire can use Come And Get It and gain a surge, plus he gains a surge when bloodied).   And extra benefits.  Primal Vampire gains two surges, for example. Martial gains a surge when bloodied.  Arcane can spend a surge for extra damage.   But I think Divine stand out... when you use a power that lets and ally spend a surge, they gain choose to regain no HP and the vampire gains a surge.  Plus they lose vulnerable radiant and sunlight damage.

Also of note... Cavalier hybrids gain Defender Aura.  Isn't that like, their entire defender mechanic?


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 10, 2011)

I have to note just how ridiculously awful the Hybrid Binder is. 

The more I think about the Hybrid Vampire though, the more I think it should never have been a class in itself and should have been done this way from the beginning. It actually feels really thematic this way.


----------



## Mummolus (Jun 10, 2011)

Aegeri said:


> I have to note just how ridiculously awful the Hybrid Binder is.
> 
> The more I think about the Hybrid Vampire though, the more I think it should never have been a class in itself and should have been done this way from the beginning. It actually feels really thematic this way.



That's likely because as a hybrid it's one step closer to being a theme, which it should have been from the start.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Jun 10, 2011)

Aegeri said:


> The hybrid vampire is one of those cases where the hybrid is going to more than likely be flat out better than the original class.




I cannot read it, but I am 100% certain this is correct.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 10, 2011)

Dice4Hire said:


> I cannot read it, but I am 100% certain this is correct.



It gives you absolutely ALL the vampires fun stuff and then you put it on top of the class of your choice (with the other feat to make it even more neat). It's like this is the way it should have been.


----------



## Destil (Jun 10, 2011)

Aegeri said:


> I have to note just how ridiculously awful the Hybrid Binder is.




What are you talking about? They hit the ball out of the park with that one.

Half of 0 is 0. Hybrid binder is *perfect.*


----------



## Mummolus (Jun 10, 2011)

Not sure if this works, but...

Executioner takes Pact Initiate (Warlock MC feat) and chooses a pact, then takes Pact Blade Manifestation from the article, and ends up getting a sweet MBA replacement that uses DEX thanks to the Executioner class feature, and qualifies for Cursed Shadow at the same time?

Seems potentially awesome.


----------



## Zaran (Jun 10, 2011)

Seems like Mearls missed all the cPaladins wanting to be able to get the Cavalier's Steed.  I saw no option for them to get that ability.


----------



## SabreCat (Jun 10, 2011)

Zaran said:


> Seems like Mearls missed all the cPaladins wanting to be able to get the Cavalier's Steed.  I saw no option for them to get that ability.



There used to be a very simple way, then they took it out by removing the level from the power. It's a head-scratching design decision, but it seems intentional that Cavaliers and only Cavaliers get horsies that level up.

I agree with those above who said the Pact Blade feat looks like a lot of fun. Too bad there is no Dark Pact hexblade build yet--though you could probably let Dark Pact count as Gloom Pact for that purpose.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Jun 10, 2011)

Some stuff probably needs to be addressed (the cavalier hybrid probably needs some sort of hybrid "update". If only making it's OA power an Immediate Action, to prevent it being a full defender in terms of 'mark+punishment' regardless of the other half of the class. 

Similarly, the monk's unarmored defense and avenger's armor of faith require hybrid talent, but the vampire gets it's reflex right away (it is a shield bonus, while the others are untyped, so that could be part of it). Consistency would say it probably has to be put into the hyrbid talent options, although it would probably be better if the other features were put into the original class (or perhaps put into 'equivalent of leather/hide armor in determining worse of 2' ... with the unarmored agility being the equivalent of adding a heavy shield). They would probably need to make sure the class features don't stack if they did that. [Altough, at the moment, a vampire + monk or avenger with hybrid talent can have some awesome AC the way things are. A monk/Avenger [or swordmage] can do that now, but it does require double hybrid talent, and thus needing to take the hybrid paragon path.

The "able to use MBAs for striker bonus damage" for the executioner assassin is interesting, and could become more so in the case of classes with a "counts as MBA" power. An executioner/warlock, for example, could use eldrtich strike (or the new feat) to use a warlock mba and get both curse damage and executioner bonus damage on the same attack (and throw assassin's strike on top of that). They may need to clarify things to avoid those kinds of loopholes (i.e. only MBAs that don't have a class/level associated?)

Another unintended consequences thing to test would be archery mastery. How would in interact with say, a ranger/warlock hybrid. Would it allow for use of both quarry and curse? It would be interesting to see a half-elf picking this up by grabbing a ranger power via dilletante, and then having fun with it with "counts as rba" powers. A half-elf mage would have some fun with magic missle combined with being able to slide/prone/slow(s/e) or make it a burst.

The vampire stuff at least creates some interesting options via hybrid or multiclassing into vampire. Considering stuff like the backgrounds which determine hp based on different stats ... someone can dump stat con and multi into vampire and have some interesting stuff going on. A martial or primal defender could make use of the extra surges and extra regen. Psionic/arcane controllers on the other hand can, if they are succesfully protected by their allies, benefit greatly from alternate outlets for 'extra' surges ... especially as they would have lots of extra surges in a fight. The Psionic Vampire is especially interesting because, if you go with minimum augmentation, you can get a lot more healing surges (potentially). The thing to remember with those is that, unlike blood drinker, you don't get to keep trying to hit, so you could miss with an encounter power and lose a chance to gain a surge (also, encounter powers without attack rolls would be wasted ... so multiclassing from knight or slayer into vampire may not be the best idea.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Jun 10, 2011)

Since it's a playtest, it's important for all of us to remember to send in all this info to WotC themselves, and not just cheer or rail against it here.  There's still time for many of these issues to be addressed... let's just not assume that they will read all the ENWorld threads that talk about them.


----------



## Wednesday Boy (Jun 10, 2011)

Zaphling said:


> For me, the literally wildest combination is the beastmaster ranger and sentinel druid. Talk about having 2 animal companions, plus if you have the animal master theme, 3 animals!!!! WOOOT!




Then multiclass with Shaman to add a Spirit Companion to the mix!!!



Aegeri said:


> The hybrid vampire is one of those cases where the hybrid is going to more than likely be flat out better than the original class.




True.  The only negative for me is that the hybridizing requirement of balancing your powers between both hybrid classes could keep some vampire themes out of your reach.  (Although if you were a vryloka you could probably make up for that with their replacement racial utility powers.)



DEFCON 1 said:


> Since it's a playtest, it's important for all of us to remember to send in all this info to WotC themselves, and not just cheer or rail against it here. There's still time for many of these issues to be addressed... let's just not assume that they will read all the ENWorld threads that talk about them.




Very good point.  I often wonder how many posters send their complaints/feedback/recommendations to WotC in addition to discussing them on ENWorld.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 10, 2011)

WalterKovacs said:


> Another unintended consequences thing to test would be archery mastery. How would in interact with say, a ranger/warlock hybrid. Would it allow for use of both quarry and curse? It would be interesting to see a half-elf picking this up by grabbing a ranger power via dilletante, and then having fun with it with "counts as rba" powers. A half-elf mage would have some fun with magic missle combined with being able to slide/prone/slow(s/e) or make it a burst.




All powers gained by Expert Archer say in the power that it is an RBA with a weapon. So implement powers are out. Quarry and Curse can only be used on Ranger and Warlock powers specifically. A RBA is not a ranger power (though could be a Warlock power with Eldritch blot/blast). Similarly a fighter hybrid cannot mark a target with an MBA.


----------



## Imaro (Jun 10, 2011)

I was just wondering did WotC release an article with multi-class/hybride options for the classes in Heroes of the Fallen Lands?


----------



## Zaran (Jun 10, 2011)

Imaro said:
			
		

> I was just wondering did WotC release an article with multi-class/hybride options for the classes in Heroes of the Fallen Lands?




Yes. It's was last month and where we saw the new subclass names for the core classes.


----------



## Imaro (Jun 10, 2011)

Zaran said:


> Yes. It's was last month and where we saw the new subclass names for the core classes.




Cool, thanks.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 10, 2011)

Imaro said:


> I was just wondering did WotC release an article with multi-class/hybride options for the classes in Heroes of the Fallen Lands?






Zaran said:


> Yes. It's was last month and where we saw the new subclass names for the core classes.




does anyone have a link...I found power swaps, but no multi class for thief or slayer, and no hybrids for them eaither...


----------



## OnlineDM (Jun 10, 2011)

GMforPowergamers said:


> does anyone have a link...I found power swaps, but no multi class for thief or slayer, and no hybrids for them eaither...




Same here. I was interested to see Hybrid Thief, Hybrid Slayer, Hybrid Knight, Hybrid Hunter and Hybrid Scout. Are those options out there?


----------



## Wednesday Boy (Jun 10, 2011)

Mummolus said:


> Executioner takes Pact Initiate (Warlock MC feat) and chooses a pact, then takes Pact Blade Manifestation from the article, and ends up getting a sweet MBA replacement that uses DEX thanks to the Executioner class feature, and qualifies for Cursed Shadow at the same time?




Good thought but unfortunately the Attack Finesse lets the Executioner replace Dex for Str on a MBA, so the Pact Blade at-will would still use Cha.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 10, 2011)

OnlineDM said:


> Same here. I was interested to see Hybrid Thief, Hybrid Slayer, Hybrid Knight, Hybrid Hunter and Hybrid Scout. Are those options out there?




I was hopeing for an assasin/thief


----------



## Nemesis Destiny (Jun 10, 2011)

Much as I liked the Multiclass and Hybrid options presented for the Vampire and Hexblade, I was most looking forward to seeing said options for Fallen Lands characters. Perhaps next week or next month?

I dislike Assassins in general, Binders I find very 'meh,' for lack of a better term, but I thought the Blackguard, Cavalier, Ranger, and Sentinel options were interesting. Cavalier multiclass granting _defender aura_ seems a little potent (even though it doesn't grant you the ability to punish the mark at-will).


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 10, 2011)

The Warlock options look interesting. I'll have to spec out a Paragon Infernal Warlock and see how Elricky I can make it. I see some possibilities here. [MENTION=76245]SabreCat[/MENTION] I agree it's a shame that there's no Dark Pact Hexblade yet. I'd much prefer statting a Fey/Dark Dual Pact Warlock, with the Hexblade multi-class feats. Gloom Pact just doesn't feel right, to me.


----------



## Zaran (Jun 10, 2011)

Yeah, I guess I was misleading.  There are ways to tie slayers to weaponmasters but no way to make a hybrid slayer yet.  Not quite sure why they skipped over that.


----------



## keterys (Jun 10, 2011)

Hybrid Slayer will be a tricky one for them to figure, I suspect. Same for all the "I'm barely more than a melee basic" classes.

Got to make sure a hybrid executioner / slayer isn't just a slayer with an extra d8 per tier damage, for example.


----------



## Zaran (Jun 10, 2011)

keterys said:


> Hybrid Slayer will be a tricky one for them to figure, I suspect. Same for all the "I'm barely more than a melee basic" classes.
> 
> Got to make sure a hybrid executioner / slayer isn't just a slayer with an extra d8 per tier damage, for example.




Serves them right for making those Totally-Compatible-with-Core classes so incompatible.  =)


----------



## Mummolus (Jun 10, 2011)

Wednesday Boy said:


> Good thought but unfortunately the Attack Finesse lets the Executioner replace Dex for Str on a MBA, so the Pact Blade at-will would still use Cha.




The pact blade at-wills can be used as MBA's though, which to me would imply that Attack Finesse would function as normal for them. It's kinda like how Bracers of Mighty Striking still provide a +2 damage bonus to the pact blade at-wills.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Jun 10, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> All powers gained by Expert Archer say in the power that it is an RBA with a weapon. So implement powers are out. Quarry and Curse can only be used on Ranger and Warlock powers specifically. A RBA is not a ranger power (though could be a Warlock power with Eldritch blot/blast). Similarly a fighter hybrid cannot mark a target with an MBA.




There is the eternal debate over wording of 'attack with a weapon' vs 'weapon attack' where a warlock firing an eldritch blast through his pact blade is "attacking with a weapon".

I know that RBAs aren't ranger powers, but Clever Shot is a ranger power, that allows you to make a RBA as part of the power, I was only wondering how that concept of "attack power that causes an attack to happen but doesn't involve an attack in and of itself" [Although, even with the 'attack through a weapon' assumption above, only rapid shot would be useful with magic missle, since it never hits, and therefore would be useless with clever shot]. 

In terms of interesting combinations: A hybrid ranger/executioner with throw and stab. A single at-will power would allow for both striker features to trigger at once (you'd have to build str/dex based, but an executioner doesn't really need charisma ... you'd rather get a good fort if you are going to garotte people anyway.)

The MBA with the Executioner thing is probably a bigger question than stuff involving clever shot (I'm pretty sure your interpretation is right, the power itself allows for an RBA, so the initial 'attack power' never hits or misses and thus doesn't trigger the quarry.) However various 'counts as an MBA' powers, whether conditional or always on, could create a stacking effect with the executioner.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Jun 10, 2011)

Zaran said:


> Yeah, I guess I was misleading. There are ways to tie slayers to weaponmasters but no way to make a hybrid slayer yet. Not quite sure why they skipped over that.




They did only do some classes from Forgotten Kingdoms. There is no hybrid hexblade (although you can sort of make one with the feat support), there is no hybrid hunter (again, you can sort of make it with the feat support), not much in the way of hybrid scout. While feat intensive, it's possible to get a domain and/or school into a cleric or wizard hybrid. (In some cases, they may end up updating existing hyrbids instead, so that, for example, you can pick up a school or domain class features via hybrid talent. The MBA classes would be problematic, but a possible solution is:

Give the hybrid classes with MBA based builds an at-will attack power that is basically just a MBA, 'counts' as a MBA, and happens to have the classes name on it, voila. Not the most elegant solution, but avoids problems like double dipping and getting the best of both worlds for striker damage, for example. [Don't give the at-wills power to avoid weird interactions with half-elves, humans, etc].

They still have to do something for Essential classes that don't have dailies ... as you have to give them some choice between taking a daily at this level, or something else from the 'other' class. The assassin poison subs for a daily easily ... they are practically the same thing, but a slayer, theif, etc don't have dailies ... so you have to figure out how to work that out.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Jun 10, 2011)

Hmmh, why mix str and dex?

the executioner can use str as well as dex for his melee base attacks...


----------



## interwyrm (Jun 10, 2011)

Hybrid binder is slightly better than full binder because the pact boon works better with a melee class.

Hybrid vampire being better than full vampire is fine because it makes it a viable addition to a party.

Hybrid cavalier aura is fine because the mark punishment is just not that good anyways - especially vs. teleporting enemies.


----------



## Dragonhelm (Jun 10, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> Cavalier also very similar hybrid to Blackguard. Almost the same in every way (switch defender/strike mechanics). Too bad you cannot hybrid them together.




Why would you want to?  

Essentially, you're asking to multiclass two forms of a paladin.  These forms are like night and day.  Cavaliers gravitate towards good.  Blackguards gravitate towards evil.   In a sense, it would be like a warlock having two different pacts (i.e. infernal and fey).

I guess I'm having difficulty seeing how a character can represent both a virtue and a vice.


----------



## Zaphling (Jun 10, 2011)

Dragonhelm said:


> Why would you want to?
> 
> Essentially, you're asking to multiclass two forms of a paladin.  These forms are like night and day.  Cavaliers gravitate towards good.  Blackguards gravitate towards evil.   In a sense, it would be like a warlock having two different pacts (i.e. infernal and fey).
> 
> I guess I'm having difficulty seeing how a character can represent both a virtue and a vice.




Hear hear.


----------



## Wednesday Boy (Jun 10, 2011)

Mummolus said:


> The pact blade at-wills can be used as MBA's though, which to me would imply that Attack Finesse would function as normal for them. It's kinda like how Bracers of Mighty Striking still provide a +2 damage bonus to the pact blade at-wills.




I see what you're getting at but the difference between Attack Finesse and the Bracers of Mighty Striking is that the Bracers only refers to MBAs.  They don't refer to Str and MBAs like Attack Finesse does.  I think you might have a solid argument if the pact blade at-wills were Str based instead of Cha based or if Attack Finesse said you could use Dex for your MBAs and didn't specify Str.


----------



## interwyrm (Jun 10, 2011)

Dragonhelm said:


> Why would you want to?
> 
> Essentially, you're asking to multiclass two forms of a paladin.  These forms are like night and day.  Cavaliers gravitate towards good.  Blackguards gravitate towards evil.   In a sense, it would be like a warlock having two different pacts (i.e. infernal and fey).
> 
> I guess I'm having difficulty seeing how a character can represent both a virtue and a vice.




You're not trying hard enough. Most traditional virtues are associated with a vice if taken to an extreme.

Pride and hubris.
Love and lust.
Zeal and fury.
Valor and bloodthirst.


----------



## renau1g (Jun 10, 2011)

Dragonhelm said:


> Why would you want to?
> 
> Essentially, you're asking to multiclass two forms of a paladin.  These forms are like night and day.  Cavaliers gravitate towards good.  Blackguards gravitate towards evil.   In a sense, it would be like a warlock having two different pacts (i.e. infernal and fey).
> 
> I guess I'm having difficulty seeing how a character can represent both a virtue and a vice.




He wants to make a real True Neutral PC


----------



## OnlineDM (Jun 10, 2011)

interwyrm said:


> You're not trying hard enough. Most traditional virtues are associated with a vice if taken to an extreme.
> 
> Pride and hubris.
> Love and lust.
> ...




I'm starting to learn about Pathfinder, and one of the links I was given to read about the game talked about the Runelords in that setting. Apparently they were exactly this - intended to be the embodiment of virtues but corrupted to become the embodiment of the corresponding vices (in their case, the seven deadly sins).


----------



## mneme (Jun 10, 2011)

Dragonhelm said:


> Cavaliers gravitate towards good.  Blackguards gravitate towards evil.   In a sense, it would be like a warlock having two different pacts (i.e. infernal and fey).




So, paragon, then?
*
*


			
				Wizards said:
			
		

> Twofold Pact*Paragon Tier*
> *Prerequisite*: 11th level, Eldritch Pact class feature
> *Benefit*:  You gain a second Eldritch Pact. You gain the at-will spell and pact  boon of that pact. You can use only one of your pact boon benefits at a  time, however.



(huh.  didn't realize they fixed Twofold Pact a year ago).

Seriously, I don't see that this is a justification.  Mechanically, you can make a vampire cleric, or in Darksun, a wizard druid defiler.  Contradictory class/race/subclass patterns can be justified or ignored, or their contraditction can be leveraged into something interesting.

I think the best explaination for why you can't take the same class as hybrid is that it throws off the balance inherent with hybrid.  Normally, hybrid characters are required to take at least one power in every category from each class -- even if they don't want to.  But a hybrid paladin/paladin could take any powers she wanted.  Also, it's silly.


----------



## Luinnar (Jun 10, 2011)

Does the Sentinel Druid get a power swap feat like the Thief and Slayer did in a previous article?


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 10, 2011)

Dragonhelm said:


> Why would you want to?
> 
> Essentially, you're asking to multiclass two forms of a paladin.  These forms are like night and day.  Cavaliers gravitate towards good.  Blackguards gravitate towards evil.   In a sense, it would be like a warlock having two different pacts (i.e. infernal and fey).
> 
> I guess I'm having difficulty seeing how a character can represent both a virtue and a vice.




I only look at character from a mechanical aspect (dice, numbers, abilities). Not a fluff aspect. Or even power source. I can come up with all of that on my own. Who's to say this wouldn't generate a character that is true to his friends and ruthless to his enemies? Also, there's already a paragon feat to take two pacts. In fact it's called Two-Fold Pact. It's an insanely good feat mechanically speaking. You can fluff it however you want (to this day I haven't played a Warlock that actually made a pact. Just an student of the arcane who makes things hurt more than a Wizard).

So. . . anyway; What're we sending in our email to WotC? Does anyone think the Cavalier multi-class feat is ridiculously good? Permanent Defender Aura: yay or nay?


----------



## interwyrm (Jun 10, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> So. . . anyway; What're we sending in our email to WotC? Does anyone think the Cavalier multi-class feat is ridiculously good? Permanent Defender Aura: yay or nay?




Timid yay. It's got marginal utility since there is no punishment and it's not that hard to get out of it. I'd probably mostly use it on a permanently invisible wizard or the like.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 10, 2011)

interwyrm said:


> Timid yay. It's got marginal utility since there is no punishment and it's not that hard to get out of it. I'd probably mostly use it on a permanently invisible wizard or the like.



For sheer "that shouldn't work" mayhem I was thinking of using one on a Star Pact Binder with a Starshadow Blade.   The goal is perma-invisibility, a Defender Aura, and a decent weapon to exploit opportunity attacks.  Not sure how it would work in play - but it really leverages that invisibility boon.


----------



## Destil (Jun 11, 2011)

keterys said:


> Hybrid Slayer will be a tricky one for them to figure, I suspect. Same for all the "I'm barely more than a melee basic" classes.
> 
> Got to make sure a hybrid executioner / slayer isn't just a slayer with an extra d8 per tier damage, for example.




Yeah, there's plenty of stuff to look over here, but as far as feedback making sure that you can't double dip something like Slayer/Thief is the most important thing to get right. Unifying all the 'basic attack bonus' features somehow and forcing the hybrid to choose one and only one would be the best way to make it work, I think.


----------



## ravenheart (Jun 11, 2011)

Repost from rpg.net:

I [] suspect they are reluctant to create hybrid options for the sub-classes that lack a close-to-normal power progression (such as Knights, Scouts, Slayers and Thieves). The Executioners poison uses are effectively daily powers, so I get how they could hybridize it.

The problem is how to balance static bonuses to basic attacks and at-will stances/tricks/special use powers with alternating power selections for hybrids, since there is great potential for abuse there, whether it is intentional or not.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 11, 2011)

ravenheart said:


> Repost from rpg.net:
> 
> I [] suspect they are reluctant to create hybrid options for the sub-classes that lack a close-to-normal power progression (such as Knights, Scouts, Slayers and Thieves). The Executioners poison uses are effectively daily powers, so I get how they could hybridize it.
> 
> The problem is how to balance static bonuses to basic attacks and at-will stances/tricks/special use powers with alternating power selections for hybrids, since there is great potential for abuse there, whether it is intentional or not.




I think there's a more fundamental question about hybrids of things like Slayer. WHY would you do it? A Slayer is thematically no more or less than a highly striker optimized great weapon fighter. The whole point of the sub-class was to create a fairly simple 'canned' class build that someone could use who doesn't want a lot of complexity. Why on Earth would you want to hybridize that? If you want some fighter in your whatever, the use the existing hybrid fighter. There is neither a thematic nor a mechanical argument in favor of hybrid rules for the E-martial style classes. No new character concepts are opened up, no really interesting mechanics, nothing. It is no more than a tinkering exercise with no real benefit to the game. I seriously doubt you will see hybrids of these classes.

Cavalier, Blackguard, etc are much more arguable. They may not cover totally unique concepts, but they do have a good chunk of conceptual ground of their own that can be justifiably useful as hybrids (or what I would call 'neo-hybrid' in the case of things like some of the Vampire and Hexblade feats).


----------



## KidSnide (Jun 11, 2011)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> I think there's a more fundamental question about hybrids of things like Slayer. WHY would you do it? A Slayer is thematically no more or less than a highly striker optimized great weapon fighter. The whole point of the sub-class was to create a fairly simple 'canned' class build that someone could use who doesn't want a lot of complexity. Why on Earth would you want to hybridize that? If you want some fighter in your whatever, the use the existing hybrid fighter. There is neither a thematic nor a mechanical argument in favor of hybrid rules for the E-martial style classes. No new character concepts are opened up, no really interesting mechanics, nothing. It is no more than a tinkering exercise with no real benefit to the game. I seriously doubt you will see hybrids of these classes.




Speaking just for myself, I've thought that Slayer would be best used as a hybrid since I first read it.  There are many character concepts that would be well served by taking another hybrid class and adding a good chunk of melee striker combat efficacy.  The special advantage of the Slayer is that this efficacy comes with very little complexity.  As I mostly create characters for other people to play, the ability to create hybrid concepts with an easier-than-normal learning curve would be a major advantage.

-KS


----------



## erleni (Jun 11, 2011)

Mummolus said:


> The assassin options are _terrible_. They had a chance to improve both the executioner and the oassassin here, and they failed badly. The only really solid thing about them is that they are, in fact, new feats, which means there's still support for feats (I'd been wondering, given that the races/classes in HoS got basically none).




Fully agree. They are really showing no love for the assassin and the executioner.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 11, 2011)

KidSnide said:


> Speaking just for myself, I've thought that Slayer would be best used as a hybrid since I first read it.  There are many character concepts that would be well served by taking another hybrid class and adding a good chunk of melee striker combat efficacy.  The special advantage of the Slayer is that this efficacy comes with very little complexity.  As I mostly create characters for other people to play, the ability to create hybrid concepts with an easier-than-normal learning curve would be a major advantage.
> 
> -KS




I guess the question is whether or not a messy hybridization between an AEDU and an E-martial class really is in any way 'easier-than-normal'. The original hybrid rules for all the straight PHB style AEDU classes seemed fairly straightforward to me. OTOH looking at these new hybrid rules makes my eyes cross, lol. Speaking for myself I'd have to spend a good chunk of time just experimenting with all the various permutations of swaps and interactions between the core hybrid rules and the various exceptions and modifications that are needed to deal with the less regular Essentials classes. I don't anticipate that building effective PCs hybridized with any of the Essentials classes (let alone the much different E-martial ones) is going to be at all simple or straightforward. What I see is a lot of complex interacting bits which only a rather deep understanding of the rules and careful study is going to let you do the most interesting and effective things with.

Obviously opinions on all of this will vary, but personally I'm not convinced hybridized E-martial classes would have any measurable benefit to the game. More likely they would represent a perpetual minefield to the devs where almost any little change to a class/build/feat/etc is likely to produce some incredibly obscure rules loophole that will then have to be closed up by yet more errata, etc etc etc.


----------



## KidSnide (Jun 11, 2011)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> KidSnide said:
> 
> 
> > Speaking just for myself, I've thought that Slayer would be best used as a hybrid since I first read it.  There are many character concepts that would be well served by taking another hybrid class and adding a good chunk of melee striker combat efficacy.  The special advantage of the Slayer is that this efficacy comes with very little complexity.  As I mostly create characters for other people to play, the ability to create hybrid concepts with an easier-than-normal learning curve would be a major advantage.
> ...




To clarify, I was speaking of the simplicity to play such a character, not to design such a system.  I would assume that any essentials multi-classing system would need to break down the character benefits into sets of powers that can be exchanged for some number of encounter or daily powers of a minimum level.  I agree that designing such a breakdown would be a total PITA, but I think widening the range of possible characters with fewer powers and more static bonuses is a plus for the game.

-KS


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 11, 2011)

KidSnide said:


> To clarify, I was speaking of the simplicity to play such a character, not to design such a system.  I would assume that any essentials multi-classing system would need to break down the character benefits into sets of powers that can be exchanged for some number of encounter or daily powers of a minimum level.  I agree that designing such a breakdown would be a total PITA, but I think widening the range of possible characters with fewer powers and more static bonuses is a plus for the game.
> 
> -KS




Yeah, at the very least such a system would have to exist so we could evaluate that.

IMHO E-martial characters aren't actually easier to play in practice than 'classic' 4e characters. So I don't really see why they would be simpler to play hybrids either. At best I'm pretty skeptical they would be appreciably easier to play than a standard hybrid. In fact by the time you deal with all the odd little quirks of meshing things together they might be harder to play than anything we have now. Who knows though for sure. For all I know the devs have already been through this exercise and rejected the whole concept as just too awkward and not adding anything to the game. Perhaps we'll see, though. If it did work well I don't grudge people their fun. I doubt it would open up any really new concepts though.


----------



## AntlerDruid (Jun 11, 2011)

Wish the Binder had been a playtest - still a disappointing class - I had wanted to play one til they out , then I found them very lacking.

Hexblade and Binder abilities should be abilities available to any warlock instead of sub-classes - I love the feat that grants the Pact Weapon.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Jun 11, 2011)

Mummolus said:


> Not sure if this works, but...
> 
> Executioner takes Pact Initiate (Warlock MC feat) and chooses a pact, then takes Pact Blade Manifestation from the article, and ends up getting a sweet MBA replacement that uses DEX thanks to the Executioner class feature, and qualifies for Cursed Shadow at the same time?
> 
> Seems potentially awesome.




I was just double checking, and the wording of pact initiate seems that you don't actually get a pact that way (you get the pact's at-will, and qualify specifically for paragon path's requiring that pact, but it doesn't actually say you gain the pact).

I was actually thinking the same thing, as it would have made it possible to do weird builds for various E-classes (a half-elf knight, for example, that uses a pact blade and thus charisma for all his MBAs; not to mention a thief that can pick up a +3/d10 light blade) but I don't think you actually get the pact unless you are a 'true' warlock (or at least hybrid). [the Binding Initiate seems to function the same way, giving you things associated with the pact, but not giving you the pact itself].

Seems they may have caught it (or just avoided it accidentally), as there doesn't really seem to be an easy way to mix the pact blade + associated MBA with the Eclasses that riff on MBAs themselves. The closest would be Executioner/Warlock hybrid, which would have some fun, but the only tricks Executioner's do with MBAs is the bits of striker damage, compared to stuff like power strike, backstab, the various stances, etc that the other Eclasses have. They still may want to address the Executioner issue.


----------



## Mummolus (Jun 11, 2011)

WalterKovacs said:


> I was just double checking, and the wording of pact initiate seems that you don't actually get a pact that way (you get the pact's at-will, and qualify specifically for paragon path's requiring that pact, but it doesn't actually say you gain the pact).
> 
> I was actually thinking the same thing, as it would have made it possible to do weird builds for various E-classes (a half-elf knight, for example, that uses a pact blade and thus charisma for all his MBAs; not to mention a thief that can pick up a +3/d10 light blade) but I don't think you actually get the pact unless you are a 'true' warlock (or at least hybrid). [the Binding Initiate seems to function the same way, giving you things associated with the pact, but not giving you the pact itself].
> 
> Seems they may have caught it (or just avoided it accidentally), as there doesn't really seem to be an easy way to mix the pact blade + associated MBA with the Eclasses that riff on MBAs themselves. The closest would be Executioner/Warlock hybrid, which would have some fun, but the only tricks Executioner's do with MBAs is the bits of striker damage, compared to stuff like power strike, backstab, the various stances, etc that the other Eclasses have. They still may want to address the Executioner issue.



I was probably reading too much into the part that says "Choose a pact" rather than the explanation thereof. It was pretty late and I was trying desperately to find something awesome in an otherwise wholly disappointing article.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 12, 2011)

Yeah, I seem to remember that whole debate about "having a pact" vs "having the at-will" but I don't really recall if anything official was ever said about that. The wording for Pact Initiate still seems to indicate you don't really have the pact. OTOH some odd things can arise out of that.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 12, 2011)

Mummolus said:


> The assassin options are _terrible_. They had a chance to improve both the executioner and the oassassin here, and they failed badly. The only really solid thing about them is that they are, in fact, new feats, which means there's still support for feats (I'd been wondering, given that the races/classes in HoS got basically none).




I don't think you're viewing the article in the correct light. The Executioner can now be Multiclassed, Hybridized and cross-classed with the Ossassin. That too me seems like it covered all fronts in a "Hybrid/Mulitclass" article.

The fact that these classes kind of suck is an entirely different matter. Hopefully this will be addressed at some later point. Though seeing as they are classes that have been out for a while (the Executioner was fail-tastically "play tested" back in October, released in December) and have gotten no support even from a major print release, I would not get my hopes up. I am making sure to specifically NOT mention that the Assassin and Executioner are awful classes in my e-mail that I am preparing. 

Also, one particularly nasty combo is a Hybrid Executioner/Blackguard built solely on Charisma and building on Virtuous Strike since now, as a Hybrid Blackguard you have a choice of powers. Once you're given a choice of powers, you can take any from your class. With a Bastard sword that 1d10+1d8+Cha, with Cha again and +2 (Fury Vice) if you include combat advantage. Suddenly I feel more effective than I did with the full class of either . . .

Also, now Hybrid Warlock's are monsters if they can gain a Pact Weapon (they were already a decent hybrid option before). The support for Warlock seems to be largely invalidating the Hexblade these days (Curse Damage off-turn) and now the loss of their *key *feature? Or the staggering amount of At-Wills a (human) warlock can now end up with?

Similarly the Ranger being able to pick up *more* options? Anyone who complained they aren't supporting older 4E builds is now mistaken between this and the Warlock (though Rangers may see a nerf in their CC article. It's a 50/50 chance).


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 12, 2011)

> Similarly the Ranger being able to pick up more options? Anyone who complained they aren't supporting older 4E builds is now mistaken between this and the Warlock (though Rangers may see a nerf in their CC article. It's a 50/50 chance).




Most of the complaints I've seen about classes lacking support are laments about the post-PHB1 classes.  Just sayin'.


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 12, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> Similarly the Ranger being able to pick up *more* options? Anyone who complained they aren't supporting older 4E builds is now mistaken between this and the Warlock (though Rangers may see a nerf in their CC article. It's a 50/50 chance).



PHB martial classes have never been the ones in trouble support wise.


----------



## Zaphling (Jun 12, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> I don't think you're viewing the article in the correct light. The Executioner can now be Multiclassed, Hybridized and cross-classed with the Ossassin. That too me seems like it covered all fronts in a "Hybrid/Mulitclass" article.
> 
> The fact that these classes kind of suck is an entirely different matter. Hopefully this will be addressed at some later point. Though seeing as they are classes that have been out for a while (the Executioner was fail-tastically "play tested" back in October, released in December) and have gotten no support even from a major print release, I would not get my hopes up. I am making sure to specifically NOT mention that the Assassin and Executioner are awful classes in my e-mail that I am preparing.
> 
> ...





I beg to disagree, you can never choose at-wills for your Blackguard since you're still choosing your vices like normal. And i think you cannot hybridize your own class, hence Executioner/Oassassin.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 12, 2011)

Zaphling said:


> I beg to disagree, you can never choose at-wills for your Blackguard since you're still choosing your vices like normal. And i think you cannot hybridize your own class, hence Executioner/Oassassin.




Spirit of Vice: You choose a vice and gain the
benefit of the Spirit of Vice class feature.

The Spirit of Vice class feature does not give you at-wills. The Spirit of Vice feature is a damage mechanic. Normally, as a regular blackguard you would pick a Spirit of Vice class feature and get associated at-wills via the Vice At-Will class feature, which is listed on a normal blackguard as and which is not listed on the hybrids. As it stands now, you can select any at-will from your class (paladin) and from your other class.

You can disagree if you want, but the rules are pretty clear. Also, it's a playtest, so if  this irks you, you can email WotC. I plan to.

Honestly it just needs to say "Vice At-Will (hybrid)- You gain one Vice At-will as your chose At-Will".

Also, I haven't looked closely at the Executioner but I believe they get an Assassin at-will AND 2 guild at-wills (which isn't so bad since the guild atwills are situational).

Edit: In response to  @Aegeri  and [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION]. I think I phrased my initial comment on older build support poorly. Though you guys alluded more to what I had meant. 

I think a lot of people peg Essentials as killing old school support, but in reality, if Essentials were just regular splat books it would still be support for PHB1. This is no longer Old vs Essentials, but PHB1 vs Everything Else. WotC still wouldn't be supporting classes, but people wouldn't be erroneously complaining that it's Essentials fault. I'm not defending Essentials, just saying WotC not caring about PHB2 and 3 is what is at fault (I mean, where was the cross druid/sentinel feats?)


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 12, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> Spirit of Vice: You choose a vice and gain the
> benefit of the Spirit of Vice class feature.
> 
> The Spirit of Vice class feature does not give you at-wills. The Spirit of Vice feature is a damage mechanic. Normally, as a regular blackguard you would pick a Spirit of Vice class feature and get associated at-wills via the Vice At-Will class feature, which is listed on a normal blackguard as and which is not listed on the hybrids. As it stands now, you can select any at-will from your class (paladin) and from your other class.




This has given me my next hybrid idea; a Star Pact Binder|Blackguard multi-thread.  The trick here is using a Hybrid Blackguard allows Charismadin powers which are then boosted by Dark Menace; you're getting to count your Charisma twice (and a further +2 to damage from the Vice of Fury whenever you have Combat Advantage).  You gain CA from going invisible from your Star Pact.  And because you have Paladin powers, you can break out the Divine Sanctions so you are a defender (with Paladin Armour Proficiency) doing striker damage whenever you have CA, and who commonly marks in Close Burst 3 then vanishes (or vanishes then marks - who cares?)


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 13, 2011)

I'm just thinking of the Bard which can pick up an unlimited amount of multiclass feats.  It's just 2 feats to get a pact-blade, and it certainly seems within reason that they can have both Pact Initiate and Binder Initiate, or 2 feats of any superclass that has a separate multiclass feat it's  different subclasses.


----------



## Akaiku (Jun 13, 2011)

Kobold Avenger said:


> I'm just thinking of the Bard which can pick up an unlimited amount of multiclass feats.




And, as a cha user and a healer, they can eaisly 'also vampire' plus 'also blackguard' or some divine class to get 'also ignores daylight/radiant vulrn'.

More hilarity ensues if you have encounters from more than one power source to use the 'you can get a healing surge with your encounter' feats for each power source.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 13, 2011)

Multiclass feats don't qualify for a pact blade; they only provide membership of that pact for specific circumstances.

As for the "Healing surge with your encounter", I spy hybrid PCs multiclassing into vampire...  That said, a good way of getting an encounter attack power (as required) is a Paragon Path.


----------



## Xris Robin (Jun 13, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> Honestly it just needs to say "Vice At-Will (hybrid)- You gain one Vice At-will as your chose At-Will".



Why?  Hybrid Warlock's get to choose their at-wills, I don't see why the Blackguard shouldn't.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 13, 2011)

Christopher Robin said:


> Why?  Hybrid Warlock's get to choose their at-wills, I don't see why the Blackguard shouldn't.




This is true. I was speaking from more of a hypothetical standpoint I guess to demonstrate my point. Is it an issue that needs to be resolved? No, probably not. Though to me it seems a bit of silly thing to have half a class be better than the entire thing. That's what this article feels like to me in general. 

Oh well... most of my email so far (writing it over days) is me pointing out a few things that are worded oddly or that Vampire feat that doesn't do much/anything and asking if most of this is OK. Actually the only change I specifically think they should make is the Pact Blade theft feat. Like, that's what made Hexblades cool and unique (outside of what a couple daily summons?) so don't take it away and give it the ever increasingly supported core Warlock class (they weren't rogues or rangers but were badass in their own right).


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 13, 2011)

The problem with Blackguards choosing their At Wills is that they can choose all Charisma-based powers and dump Strength.

As for the pact blade feat, it solves the biggest problem with Warlocks (although accidently); terrible At Wills - if you're a feylock, you have Eyebite (worse than almost all its rivals - and other than MM the at wills worse than it are never picked) and Eyebite (awful damage, weak control).


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 13, 2011)

Actually I always found Eyebite quite good for increasing my chances of pasting someone with an Encounter, or Daily.

... or just running away.


----------



## Nemesis Destiny (Jun 13, 2011)

Yeah, Eyebite has been great fun for my Feylock as well, though I agree that the damage is terrible, and it would be better if the invisibility lasted a little longer.

That said, neonchameleon makes a good point - I had been considering retraining Eldritch Blast into Eldritch Strike for a decent MBA on OAs or a good option when I would otherwise provoke for making a ranged attack, but taking Pact Weapon Manifestation is hands down better in pretty much every way I can think of.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 13, 2011)

Eyebite is good for running away, or any multiclass combo that involves extra damage with Combat Advantage.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 13, 2011)

Nemesis Destiny said:


> Yeah, Eyebite has been great fun for my Feylock as well, though I agree that the damage is terrible, and it would be better if the invisibility lasted a little longer.
> 
> That said, neonchameleon makes a good point - I had been considering retraining Eldritch Blast into Eldritch Strike for a decent MBA on OAs or a good option when I would otherwise provoke for making a ranged attack, but taking Pact Weapon Manifestation is hands down better in pretty much every way I can think of.




My build was based on reasonable melee damage; Melee Training: INT, Arcane Implement Proficiency (Heavy Blade), Weapon Focus (Heavy Blade), and the choice of a weapon that added/modified the damage type. With a longsword and Curse damage, I didn't do half bad.

Now, though, I'd likely go the Pact Weapon route.


----------



## Ajar (Jun 13, 2011)

Kobold Avenger said:


> Eyebite is good for running away, or any multiclass combo that involves extra damage with Combat Advantage.



Yeah, my Rogue|Warlock hybrid/multiclass Assassin used it quite often enable Stealth checks to get combat advantage right before spending an action point. 

Now he has Cunning Sneak + Shadow Walk, though, so he can make a Stealth check to hide anytime he moves 3+ squares. Next level I'm probably going to retrain Eyebite to Eldritch Strike, and then I'll pick up Pact Blade with my next feat. Tough to say no to a +3/1d10 light blade that works with Sly Flourish.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 13, 2011)

Kobold Avenger said:


> Eyebite is good for running away, or any multiclass combo that involves extra damage with Combat Advantage.




In other words it's good for losing fights and letting the devil take the hindmost, and for hybrids rather than the actual warlocks it was meant for.  Great.

And [MENTION=85901]Ajar[/MENTION], the pact blade is great - but Eldritch Strike won't help you much as it's not a rogue power and therefore can't sneak attack; you might as well just use the MBA that comes with the Pact Weapon.  I'd recommend the Sorceror King Pact At Will I think.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 13, 2011)

Eyebite aside, sure the Warlock could use some boosting. But this a class that has at least been supported for a few years now and is at least getting better. It has more feats and options. Varied encounter powers.

Hexblades had one thing going for them. A solid implement/weapon attack that you could do fun things with. I think it'd be a shame if they got that. I know they aren't superb strikers either, so why you would detract from them is just beyond me.


----------



## Ajar (Jun 13, 2011)

Neonchameleon said:


> And  @Ajar , the pact blade is great - but Eldritch Strike won't help you much as it's not a rogue power and therefore can't sneak attack; you might as well just use the MBA that comes with the Pact Weapon.  I'd recommend the Sorceror King Pact At Will I think.




Oh, I know Eldritch Strike doesn't work with sneak attack, but I've got Sly Flourish for that. I just want an MBA between now and when I can pick up the Pact Weapon. I can't retrain into it, because all of my feats are spoken for: Hybrid Talent (Cunning Sneak), Acolyte of the Veil (multiclass Assassin), Mark of Passage (+1 teleport distance), and Cursed Shadow (to get Shadow Walk).

I have sort of a Nightcrawler type build where I sneak around or bamf around and stab people. So Mark of Passage might seem optional, but it's the reason my Otherwind Stride is 7 squares, which got me from the ground to the back of a flying enemy drake a few encounters ago. 

I'll check out the Sorcerer-King Pact at-will as a potential replacement for Eyebite, though.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 13, 2011)

I gotta say, as far as hexblades go it does seem like this new feat really steals their thunder. OTOH you could argue that in a game where PHB1 and Essentials are being used things are a bit easier on everyone as you can now just use the PHB1 warlock to do all your various concepts and the hexblade and binder warlocks are really just useful in Essentials only play (the issue of gloom and shadow pacts aside). Still, I gotta agree, it seems a bit overboard to have a feat that effectively lets you loot the one interesting mechanic of the hexblade (though note that a regular warlock can't get the hexblade's damage bonus, OTOH it has curse damage so that probably doesn't matter much). 

Eyebite is a highly useful at-will. You have to remember to context of the build it is designed for. Feylocks are supposed to be tricky ranged strikery controllers. Eyebite is really (IMHO) intended as a way for them to say ping a lurker that jumps out at them or some monster that charges on up through the line so they can slip away, or to set up for a nasty daily on your next attack. I kind of agree though, it would be more interesting if the effect lasted UEOYNT. I guess they were worried about it being too tempting for other classes to scavenge? In any case, while 1d6+Cha single target is rather sub-par it does have a lot of keywords and can be pumped up rather well. That isn't exactly terrible damage either when you need it.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 14, 2011)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> Eyebite is a highly useful at-will. You have to remember to context of the build it is designed for. Feylocks are supposed to be tricky ranged strikery controllers. Eyebite is really (IMHO) intended as a way for them to say ping a lurker that jumps out at them or some monster that charges on up through the line so they can slip away, or to set up for a nasty daily on your next attack. I kind of agree though, it would be more interesting if the effect lasted UEOYNT. I guess they were worried about it being too tempting for other classes to scavenge? In any case, while 1d6+Cha single target is rather sub-par it does have a lot of keywords and can be pumped up rather well. That isn't exactly terrible damage either when you need it.




The core problem with that defence of Eyebite is that At Wills are most needed at low levels.  The levels where you have only one or two encounter powers and one daily.  As a Warlock, your other At Will is the frankly sucky Eldritch Bolt - weak damage, no control and poor at low levels when you are likely to be facing lots of kobolds and goblins.  Eldritch Bolt has the approximate accuracy and damage of a longbow RBA with absolutely no control.

In Paragon with four encounter attack powers and three dailies then yes, I agree that Eyebite is a useful power with its place in the toolbox.  But across the bottom-middle of heroic, it _sucks_ because it sets you up but you don't have anything else you can do after that set up.  And the bottom-middle of heroic is precisely when you need your at wills the most.

Edit: And Warlocks getting CA these days is _trivial._  Hidden Sniper feat - the Warlock has CA for ranged attacks whenever (s)he has partial concealment.  Combine with Shadow Walk and season to taste.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 14, 2011)

Sure, except that a Feylock's shtick is evasion and control, perhaps more than damage. Eyebite fits that model. At low levels having the guy who's trying to track me down and hit me have to do so, with a -5 on the attack, is pretty darned good. I used it more than Eldritch Blast.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 14, 2011)

Neonchameleon said:


> The core problem with that defence of Eyebite is that At Wills are most needed at low levels.  The levels where you have only one or two encounter powers and one daily.  As a Warlock, your other At Will is the frankly sucky Eldritch Bolt - weak damage, no control and poor at low levels when you are likely to be facing lots of kobolds and goblins.  Eldritch Bolt has the approximate accuracy and damage of a longbow RBA with absolutely no control.
> 
> In Paragon with four encounter attack powers and three dailies then yes, I agree that Eyebite is a useful power with its place in the toolbox.  But across the bottom-middle of heroic, it _sucks_ because it sets you up but you don't have anything else you can do after that set up.  And the bottom-middle of heroic is precisely when you need your at wills the most.
> 
> Edit: And Warlocks getting CA these days is _trivial._  Hidden Sniper feat - the Warlock has CA for ranged attacks whenever (s)he has partial concealment.  Combine with Shadow Walk and season to taste.




If there's a problem with Eldritch Blast, then that is what should be fixed. Heck, just being able to Eyebite and run up with your nice Hexblade and not need to worry about the guy whacking you before you get to hit him is not a bad tactic. hehe.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 14, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> Sure, except that a Feylock's shtick is evasion and control, perhaps more than damage. Eyebite fits that model. At low levels having the guy who's trying to track me down and hit me have to do so, with a -5 on the attack, is pretty darned good. I used it more than Eldritch Blast.




The big problem here is why would anyone want to try to hit you?  You're doing not much damage.  You're not throwing out marks.  You're not easy to hit.  And out of the PHB you don't even have an Opportunity Attack worth speaking of.  They are better off simply ignoring you wherever possible.

Forcing the enemy to make a good move (i.e. Focus Fire on someone rather than spread their attacks around in a direction that includes you) is not control.  It's going out of your way to help the enemy.



AbdulAlhazred said:


> If there's a problem with Eldritch Blast, then that is what should be fixed. Heck, just being able to Eyebite and run up with your nice Hexblade and not need to worry about the guy whacking you before you get to hit him is not a bad tactic. hehe.




Oh, Eldritch Blast _absolutely_ needs to be fixed.  Without a Warlord I can't think of a single time when a Hell'lock would want to throw Eldritch Blast - both are anti-reflex attacks and in almost all cases Hellish Rebuke is simply _better_.

And your defence?  You can burn a feat to make a viable tactic.  Yes, it's what I've thought of for ages with ES.  But Warlocks and low levels are already feat-tight.  And applying a feat tax is simply bad class design.  Warlock At Wills should be somewhere near the level of the pactblade attacks, not a collection of powers (with the exception of Eldritch Strike and Hellish Rebuke (with honourable mentions for Dire Radiance and Eyes of the Vestige - all Con-based for some reason)) that just about any other class would throw back as bad choices.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 14, 2011)

Neonchameleon said:


> The big problem here is why would anyone want to try to hit you?  You're doing not much damage.  You're not throwing out marks.  You're not easy to hit.  And out of the PHB you don't even have an Opportunity Attack worth speaking of.  They are better off simply ignoring you wherever possible.
> 
> Forcing the enemy to make a good move (i.e. Focus Fire on someone rather than spread their attacks around in a direction that includes you) is not control.  It's going out of your way to help the enemy.




Funny; that's what the DM thought too as I was robbing his creatures of actions, occasionally tugging on a puppet's strings for kicks, and quietly spreading 100+ of multi-keyword damage around the board. Of course that wasn't a pure Feylock, but that was the idea 

Oh, and my party loved it when I used Mire the Mind.


----------



## WalterKovacs (Jun 14, 2011)

Akaiku said:


> And, as a cha user and a healer, they can eaisly 'also vampire' plus 'also blackguard' or some divine class to get 'also ignores daylight/radiant vulrn'.
> 
> More hilarity ensues if you have encounters from more than one power source to use the 'you can get a healing surge with your encounter' feats for each power source.




The bard could have some fun (albeit at a steep feat cost) grabbing stuff like martial vampire, primal vampire, the afforementioned divine vampire, which can all help feed the damage boosting from arcane vampire. 4 surges, an extra one on a hit with each encounter power, an extra surge when first bloodied, and the ability to turn your heal powers into surge drains is pretty whacky. [Speaking of which ... does an at-will power usable 1/encounter, for example via multiclass feats like the one for the invoker ... is that technically an encounter attack power? If so the bardpire [probably a half-elf for the 'all m/c powers use charisma' feat] could be quite the surge generator (he can also grab the domination daily from the vampire for one more surge). He may want to grab some of the other vampire powers in order to have something to spend his surges on (or maybe some paladin powers).


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 14, 2011)

WalterKovacs said:


> The bard could have some fun (albeit at a steep feat cost) grabbing stuff like martial vampire, primal vampire, the afforementioned divine vampire, which can all help feed the damage boosting from arcane vampire. 4 surges, an extra one on a hit with each encounter power, an extra surge when first bloodied, and the ability to turn your heal powers into surge drains is pretty whacky. [Speaking of which ... does an at-will power usable 1/encounter, for example via multiclass feats like the one for the invoker ... is that technically an encounter attack power? If so the bardpire [probably a half-elf for the 'all m/c powers use charisma' feat] could be quite the surge generator (he can also grab the domination daily from the vampire for one more surge). He may want to grab some of the other vampire powers in order to have something to spend his surges on (or maybe some paladin powers).




I think the standard interpretation is that an at-will usable 1/encounter (such as dilettante grants) is still an at-will power for rules purposes, you simply only get to use it less often. So I don't think powers like that would count for surge stuff. Still, the whole concept sounds pretty funny. I'm thinking they're going to have to put a 1/encounter limit on that whole feature.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 14, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> Funny; that's what the DM thought too as I was robbing his creatures of actions, occasionally tugging on a puppet's strings for kicks, and quietly spreading 100+ of multi-keyword damage around the board. Of course that wasn't a pure Feylock, but that was the idea
> 
> Oh, and my party loved it when I used Mire the Mind.




So you were playing a high level Warlock with multiple encounter powers and dailies.  Right.  But we're talking about _Eyebite_, not the whole warlock package - Warlocks don't have the whole package for quite a few levels to come.

To quote myself a few posts up 







> The core problem with that defence of Eyebite is that At Wills are most needed at low levels. The levels where you have only one or two encounter powers and one daily. As a Warlock, your other At Will is the frankly sucky Eldritch Bolt - weak damage, no control and poor at low levels when you are likely to be facing lots of kobolds and goblins. Eldritch Bolt has the approximate accuracy and damage of a longbow RBA with absolutely no control.




Over the first two levels, something like 75% of your attacks are going to be At Wills; this is where the power of the at wills is most important.  And Eyebite might set a few things up (and I'm certainly not ragging on the Feylock as a whole) - but with only one encounter you have almost nothing to set up.  Its use for setting things up is therefore negligable.

Eldritch Bolt compares unfavourably with just about every other RBA implement power in the game (with the arguable exception of Magic Missile) especially at low levels where reflex not fort is the high defence and RBA attacks compare unfavourably to normal At Wills.  And Eyebite is a nice combo spell, or would be if the Warlock had anything to combo it with most of the time (one encounter power - which might be a very nice one but is still just one power and the daily is ... daily).

When your only powers are Eldritch Blast (poor) and Eyebite (poor unless you have support for it/something for it to support), this means that you are going to be making a poor attack.  This means that 75% of Feylock attacks across the first two levels are going to be poor.  I'd call that a fundamentally negative play experience at the time when it most matters.  And this is why Eyebite needs sprucing up (and Eldritch Blast needs fixing).

Drop a Pact Weapon on the Feylock and things change a lot.  They now have an At Will that actually does damage and can be their main attack power.  And they have something that combos with Eyebite - eyebite and walk up to someone invisibly with the feyblade and they are in a messy situation as attacking you is a mistake and you're threatening them with an opportunity attack if they try to get away.  Eyebite can be effective if you have something decent to combo it with - but there's no point supporting Eldritch Blast (Eldritch Strike is a little better but not in the PHB).  And the Feyblade therefore becomes a feat tax at the levels where you have no feats to spare.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 14, 2011)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> I think the standard interpretation is that an at-will usable 1/encounter (such as dilettante grants) is still an at-will power for rules purposes, you simply only get to use it less often. So I don't think powers like that would count for surge stuff. Still, the whole concept sounds pretty funny. I'm thinking they're going to have to put a 1/encounter limit on that whole feature.




Does anyone know where to find this in the rules compendium or online one? Just curiosity really, because it's been on my mind the last couple days as I build various hybrids.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 14, 2011)

Neonchameleon said:


> So you were playing a high level Warlock with multiple encounter powers and dailies.  Right.  But we're talking about _Eyebite_, not the whole warlock package - Warlocks don't have the whole package for quite a few levels to come.
> 
> To quote myself a few posts up
> 
> ...




Yes, I ultimately took that character to 20th level. I found Pact Weapons insufficient to my character concept, so I took Arcane Implement Proficiency and used a Weapon of Summer.

At lower levels I managed to do reasonably well, despite having a CHA that was 2 points lower than INT, by using things like Eyebite and Witchfire. So what, if I wasn't doing big damage to the BBEG. I was knocking his attacks down by 6 at level 1, so that everyone else could concentrate fire on him for a turn. Once a day I was doing reasonable damage to said BBEG, slamming him into the Defender and melee Striker, then slipping him back in their direction until he made a save. In one case that was for the whole 6 rounds of combat, by a fluke of horrible DM save rolling.

My biggest success, in playing a Deceptive Warlock, was in deceiving the DM into thinking that I wasn't contributing much to the combat. There were quite a few combats in which I took not a single point of damage, either by dint of being ignored or teleporting away from (blinded) danger.

And for at-will suckage, I think that the Bard's Staggering Note is right up there. No damage *roll* so no bonuses, and low fixed damage. Yes, it's a leader, but it's still painful.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jun 14, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> Does anyone know where to find this in the rules compendium or online one? Just curiosity really, because it's been on my mind the last couple days as I build various hybrids.




It is more a matter of the rules never say different. If you are say a half-elf and you pick up Twin Strike usable 1/Encounter the power itself is still a "Ranger at-will Attack 1" and when you use it you are still using an at-will power. The dilettante rule specifies an additional usage constraint, but usage constraints are different from power types even though normally power type does define default usage. It is a bit of a subtle point but it seems to be pretty much clearly RAW. It doesn't come up too often so you don't hear a lot of discussion of it, but for instance you couldn't use a power swap feat to swap your dilettante power for a different encounter power even though you use it 1/Encounter.


----------



## keterys (Jun 14, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> And for at-will suckage, I think that the Bard's Staggering Note is right up there. No damage *roll* so no bonuses, and low fixed damage. Yes, it's a leader, but it's still painful.



The damage in Staggering Note is from the basic attack it grants, not its own damage.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 14, 2011)

keterys said:


> The damage in Staggering Note is from the basic attack it grants, not its own damage.




Right, so it's 'bonus damage' that's only a bonus, if the MBA hits. Otherwise it's just crappy damage, with no possibility of increase to speak of.


----------



## keterys (Jun 14, 2011)

You might want to look at every other at-will basic attack granting power in the game, for comparison. They each have their benefits and penalties, but they're all about on par.

CharOp, for example, considers Staggering Note the bard's best at-will, along with Vicious Mockery, clearly above all other contenders.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 14, 2011)

Depends on the party. If you don't have someone built for a kickin' MBA, then it's no good.


----------



## keterys (Jun 14, 2011)

Yep. In many groups, that's actually _far more_ than the bard could do on their own.

In other groups, you don't take the power.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 14, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> Depends on the party. If you don't have someone built for a kickin' MBA, then it's no good.




Just like my resourceful warlord who gives attacks almost every turn rocks in my party with a battlerager a Druid a slayer and a scout... But would suck with an invoker  swordmage rouge sorcerer set up... 

It all comes down to the group. 

In my group my 2w encounter that adds 2 stats averages the same damage as 2'of my team mates basic attacks, and is far belies either striker basic attack... So if I took a 4w power commander strike could be better under the right circumstance... But my daily is 1w that does massive (since two allies get basics on top of it)


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 14, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> Depends on the party. If you don't have someone built for a kickin' MBA, then it's no good.




Just like my resourceful warlord who gives attacks almost every turn rocks in my party with a battlerager a Druid a slayer and a scout... But would suck with an invoker  swordmage rouge sorcerer set up... 

It all comes down to the group. 

In my group my 2w encounter that adds 2 stats averages the same damage as 2'of my team mates basic attacks, and is far belies either striker basic attack... So if I took a 4w power commander strike could be better under the right circumstance... But my daily is 1w that does massive (since two allies get basics on top of it)


----------



## mneme (Jun 14, 2011)

Indeed re staggering note.  The tricky thing there is that it requires two to-hit rolls, which is normally terrible.  But the fact that it does two cool things on its own (minor damage and a push 2), that it's against will (generally the easiest defense to hit), -and- that it lets an ally make a basic pushes it over the top [assuming you're using it when it's the right power--eg, only when an ally with a good basic is in range].

You want a terrible leader at will?  Talk about Furious Smash.  Fixed damage, against what's often the hardest to hit defense in the game [Fort, though it -is- weapn vs Fort, so not terrible], and grants a power bonus based on a secondary to hit and damage.  It's almost like aiding an attack, except that you have to take a power for it--and might, you know, miss.  Or even Opening Shove -- which is exactly like Staggering Note--except, you know, worse in almost every way (ok, there are two ways it's better; it's Weapon vs Reflex, so it's very accurate, and while you don't want to use it, you've got the giant shift option instead of the attack if an ally needs it).


----------



## Argyle King (Jun 14, 2011)

I actually like Furious Smash.  Yeah, it's against Fort, but it's also a weapon attack.  It's was a nice power for when I was facing things with tough ACs.

However, with the options (i.e. Expertise) which are now available to help characters hit, that benefit of being able to target Fort with a weapon attack probably isn't as good.  When I first start playing 4E, I liked Furious Smash as a fallback option.


----------



## mneme (Jun 14, 2011)

[MENTION=58416]Johnny3D3D[/MENTION]: Making an Inspiring Warlord out of PH1, I took Furious Smash too (I think FS and Wolf Pack Tactics)--as it was situationally strong.  But the Chr warlord out of PH1, with the exception of Wolf Pack Tactics (which is situational) has a choice between at wills that are often worse than making a basic attack.  So while Furious Smash is worthwhile when you're up against a soldier or overlevelled skirmisher, between WPT (often pointless, sometimes very good); and FS (a crapshoot until you know an enemy has an easier to hit Fort than AC -- not necessarily where to bet in MM1), it was often worthwhile to just charge, and get an attack that was universally better than a basic.

More recent warlord options -- between -3- basic attack granting at-wills, paint the bullseye and intuitive strike for better buff options, and good item buffs available for warlords who grant attacks, have really helped to push FS down and out -- although to be fair, it's one of the few stat based to-hit buffs left in the game, and better monster books have improved the chance of a weapon vs fort attack hitting something.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 15, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> At lower levels I managed to do reasonably well, despite having a CHA that was 2 points lower than INT, by using things like Eyebite and Witchfire. So what, if I wasn't doing big damage to the BBEG. I was knocking his attacks down by 6 at level 1, so that everyone else could concentrate fire on him for a turn. Once a day I was doing reasonable damage to said BBEG, slamming him into the Defender and melee Striker, then slipping him back in their direction until he made a save.




Yes.  One attack per encounter you had a seriously nice encounter power that hoses solos.  And once per day you got ... a daily.  The other 75% of the time you sucked.



> My biggest success, in playing a Deceptive Warlock, was in deceiving the DM into thinking that I wasn't contributing much to the combat. There were quite a few combats in which I took not a single point of damage, either by dint of being ignored or teleporting away from (blinded) danger.




So.  You managed to not only convince the DM that you weren't contributing much, but to actively make the defender and leader's job harder by encouraging the DM to focus fire.  W00T!  If you aren't taking damage then you aren't doing your part of the job; unless you are doing something pretty spectacular to make up for it (see: well played wizards), you are dragging the party down.  Taking no damage is nothing to boast about - if anything the reverse.  And deceiving the DM into playing the monsters more dangerously (as you did) is not something to be proud of either.

So to sum up you convinced the DM you weren't contributing much to the combat and this made you contribute even less.



> And for at-will suckage, I think that the Bard's Staggering Note is right up there. No damage *roll* so no bonuses, and low fixed damage. Yes, it's a leader, but it's still painful.




There are two seldom useful types of At Will - the weak and the (normally even weaker) situational.

A weak at will is normally useful - but not very.  As a general rule they are either about equal in power to a normal basic attack based on their stat or lose a little and gain a little.  Good examples of weak at wills are Careful Attack (or whatever the Ranger +2 to hit one is that needs to compete with Twin Strike) and ... Eldritch Blast (most of the RBA powers except Magic Missile fit this - but EB is one of the weakest of these).  The thing about weak at wills is that almost no one takes them because they are weak.  Except the Warlock who has to take Eldritch Blast...  

A situational at will is normally weaker than a weak at will - but when it is good it is very good.  Staggering Note, Magic Missile, and Brash Assault come to mind.  Magic Missile does what it does (autohit).  Brash Assault is only any good if you have nearby allies with basic attacks; otherwise it is _terrible_.  Staggering note likewise.  But with those two powers when they work they are superb - the trick with those is to set them up before you use them, and difficulty varies.  Eyebite is another such power - granting a useful situational boost if you have something to set up.  However balancing this is that it's weak the rest of the time.  And because of the nature of it empowering your _other_ powers, it's not a good power if you're not planning on an Encounter or Daily.  Give the Warlock more encounter powers and even if the opportunities to get high mileage out of it become no more frequent, you can pick them without having to fall back on Eyebite.

This means that (without Hexblade Weapons) the Warlock doesn't have a single workhorse power that does a decent job for routine use at low level.  One at will is weak, the other's situational and therefore even weaker when the right situation can't be set up (which is a lot of the time).


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 15, 2011)

Yes, the other 75% of the time i sucked. Just like everyone else at those levels. 

As the job of the Defender is to keep attackers off my butt I think that I actually aided in that, rather than 'not doing my job.' if they focus fired on me, I'd be down. Focus firing on the Defender is 'operating as designed.' Of course, in later Paragon, I became a far more obvious danger and received a heavy dose of the attacks. The Archer Ranger still received more, which was as it should be.

A situation At-Will is always weak sauce, if the party can't or doesn't have a way to exploit that situation. When I resorted to At-Wills, in Paragon, it was invariably Eyebite even though I then also had Spiteful Glamor. The additional effect was more useful than the minimal damage increase.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 15, 2011)

Ryujin said:


> Yes, the other 75% of the time i sucked. Just like everyone else at those levels.




Um... no.  My Bravura Warlord's Brash Assault was doing scary damage.  My wizard was convincing the DM to tear his hair out with either Storm Pillar or good use of Freezing Burst and tactical positioning (Freezing Burst + mountain paths having I think killed more bad guys in that campaign than every other power from every PC combined).  Vicious Mockery and Guiding Strike both rocked from my Bard (as did Jinx Shot) - and Hand of Radiance is a damn good power even before taking Power of the Moon.  I'd hardly call a first level Monk, slamming people to the ground and with whirlwind attacks sucking.  Slayers and Knights can do their things pretty much without problems.  Rangers are gleefully twin striking - and that's still ahead of the damage curve (but behind the rogue for a while).  _It's just the Warlock_.  Everyone else has a decent At Will selection.



> As the job of the Defender is to keep attackers off my butt




The job of the Defender is to prevent other people being the targets of focus fire - a different thing entirely.  Focus fire on the defender and he still goes down although not quite as quickly as you would.



> A situation At-Will is always weak sauce, if the party can't or doesn't have a way to exploit that situation.




The problem is that Feylocks have nothing but situational at wills or weak at wills.  This is as far as I'm aware a problem exclusive to Warlocks.



> When I resorted to At-Wills, in Paragon, it was invariably Eyebite even though I then also had Spiteful Glamor. The additional effect was more useful than the minimal damage increase.




Honestly, Spiteful Glamour is _terrible_ (and balanced by Darkspiral Aura being superb).  And at Paragon, a single point of damage doesn't matter much compared to a control effect.  But once again the problem is strongest at low levels - both when the At Wills matter most and when single points of damage matter most.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 15, 2011)

I remember when this thread was a cool thread about hybrids and multiclassing. This thread sold out.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Jun 15, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> I remember when this thread was a cool thread about hybrids and multiclassing. This thread sold out.




One of my players asked about stacking defender aura with the rouge at will that lets you attack back if they attack you...


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2011)

Sure, it works - but the target could also just shift a square away and get out of the aura, then attack whoever they wanted


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 15, 2011)

GMforPowergamers said:


> One of my players asked about stacking defender aura with the rouge at will that lets you attack back if they attack you...




Looks like I'm sending another email. I forgot to mention I thought gaining a permanent at-will aura seemed . . . cheesy. I know we discussed it a bit on here and it's not super great, but I just don't like it. If you're a fighter not MC'd into anything already, why not? Added penalties (granted it remains aura 1 forever).


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2011)

My fighter was already MC paladin... I'm actually not sure that gaining the defender aura is better than the divine challenge 1/enc as a minor I have. I suspect it's actually worse for my particular build.

Mostly cause defender aura and marked don't interact at all, ergo combat challenge can't happen, etc.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 15, 2011)

keterys said:


> My fighter was already MC paladin... I'm actually not sure that gaining the defender aura is better than the divine challenge 1/enc as a minor I have. I suspect it's actually worse for my particular build.
> 
> Mostly cause defender aura and marked don't interact at all, ergo combat challenge can't happen, etc.




Well you could always have both. Your multiclassing into Paladin. I mean, yeah, you'd spend another feat, but it's not out of the question.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 15, 2011)

Neonchameleon said:


> The problem is that Feylocks have nothing but situational at wills or weak at wills.  This is as far as I'm aware a problem exclusive to Warlocks.




Remember that you can effectively increase the damage caused by Warlock at-wills by 1d6/2d6/3d6. That means that Eyebite, at level 1, is effectively 2d6+CHA with an 'opponent can't see you' rider.

I would still prefer the Pact Weapon ability though, so I'll be trying a rebuild with that instead. It might even be less feat intensive than the build I've already made.



Neonchameleon said:


> Honestly, Spiteful Glamour is _terrible_ (and balanced by Darkspiral Aura being superb).  And at Paragon, a single point of damage doesn't matter much compared to a control effect.  But once again the problem is strongest at low levels - both when the At Wills matter most and when single points of damage matter most.




Darkspiral Aura is, in my opinion, the best Pact Boon and a great disincentive, to hitting the little guy with the rod.



Neverfate said:


> I remember when this thread was a cool thread about hybrids and multiclassing. This thread sold out.




Hybrids were never cool. Multis are a different story.


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2011)

Neverfate said:


> Well you could always have both. Your multiclassing into Paladin. I mean, yeah, you'd spend another feat, but it's not out of the question.




Depends - at the moment, they have the same name, which doesn't bode well for making that choice.

Assuming they're given different names, I might consider it. Hard to say, as I'm already more feat starved than I want to be.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 15, 2011)

> Remember that you can effectively increase the damage caused by Warlock at-wills by 1d6/2d6/3d6. That means that Eyebite, at level 1, is effectively 2d6+CHA with an 'opponent can't see you' rider.




Ok...this has evaded my notice.  How do you do so?


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2011)

I assume they're counting curse damage... which doesn't actually entirely make sense.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 15, 2011)

Exactly; Curse damage. You can't leave the basic Striker mechanic out of the power's damage, if that's the class's shtick.

And Hybrids wear bow ties.

And fezes.


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2011)

It muddies up any comparison, so you mostly shouldn't. Especially not when it actually still does low damage.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 15, 2011)

keterys said:


> It muddies up any comparison, so you mostly shouldn't. Especially not when it actually still does low damage.




I'd give any Striker the benefit of same. It's the only reasonable way to compare them, to each other, especially given that the Essentials versions seem to be built for a static bonus.


----------



## keterys (Jun 15, 2011)

Gets mighty odd when you're considering what half-elf at-will to take 

Or trying to compare an at-will from a striker to a not-striker. Though even if you think of 2d6 + 4 as the warlock's at-will, it looks mighty odd compared to the 2d6+8 from a fighter or paladin, 1d8+2d6+8 from the rogue, or 2d10+1d6 from the ranger. And it only gets worse from there... at least until epic and with some interesting tricks. You can do _very_ good damage with eyebite at epic, with vulnerability psychic on your curse target, and tricked out curse damage.


----------



## Ryujin (Jun 15, 2011)

At-will as encounter, via Dilettante? If someone can't ignore a class feature, that they don't have, then I can't help 'em. 

I may not be a statistician, but it isn't very hard for me to convert 1d6 to 3.5 static, add the numbers up, and compare them. And weren't we talking about low levels, where the alternatives are limited, not Paragon and Epic? Or did things diverge, somewhere along the way? If I've had a stroke, or something and missed it, I'd like to know


----------



## keterys (Jun 16, 2011)

Yeah... warlock 2d6+4 = 11 < fighter/paladin 15, ranger 14.5 << rogue 19.5 

And, eyebite 1d6+4 = 7.5 also less than holy strike, sly flourish, brash strike, or even ye olde ranged basic with a shortbow.

You don't need to include the warlock curse damage when discussing a power. Compare quarry, sneak attack, and sorcerous power on their own if you want. Or not.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 16, 2011)

If we include striker bonus damage, things look _terrible_ for Eyebite.

Weapon wielders get 1d10 weapons in one hand, 2d6 in two most of the time.  Which means that a non-striker with a two handed weapon is doing the damage of Eyebite.

Moving on, we can assume about a 16 in secondary stat for the damaging classes.

Doing lower than 2d6 + primary stat damage are:

Vampire with Dark Beckoning: D6 + 3 + secondary stat.  But at +2 to hit.
Sorceror with Blazing Starfall (oh wait, Burst 1 with control) and Ensorcelled Blade.
Rogues with Duelists Flurry?  Nope.  That's 2d6 + Primary Stat on the nail.  With forced movement - very useful.  That just leaves rogues without CA - i.e. incompetent rogues.  (Preparatory Shot is in the same league for suckitude, admittedly).
Rangers... always do better damage than Eyebite.  Even on an At Will RBA with a basic crossbow.
Monks: Lowest flurry is 2+Wis.  Lowest damage is d6+stat.  And it knocks the target prone and slides it.  We're leaving the utility of Eyebite in the dust here.
Barbarians: Pressing Strike?  Nope.  That's 2d6+stat damage.  With some serious mobility thrown in (and most barbarians can do 3d6+stat on an at will without trouble).

Ah!  Should have started with the As.  Avenger ranged powers and both Executioner's Noose (2d6 + stat including shroud) and Inescapable Blade.

We're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here - some of the worst strikers using their most situational powers.

Hmm... The Blackguard without combat advantage and with Plate Armour and a Heavy Shield.  But that's a minimum of d8 + stat - meaning they need only two and a half points of static so you need combat advantage only one turn in two or so.  Simple to get that much.

Going back down the other way, an Ardent with a maul and Demoralising Strike is going to kick your ass at DPR from Eyebite straight out of the box.  2d6+stat and -2 to all defences.  (And this is realistic as Ardents get no shield proficiency).

But the reason Strikers don't get their class feature there is you'd have to add in the marks and interrupts from the defenders and the healing from the leaders for general utility comparisons.  Are you going to spread those class features across the at wills?


----------



## Aegeri (Jun 16, 2011)

Eyebite does too low damage dice and is actually quite useless in some cases (tremorsensing enemies for example). Unfortunately Wizards gives implement strikers terrible damage dice, then expects them to compete with strikers with 2d6 brutal 1 gouges (not to mention all the implicit charge cheese that will subsequently come with said gouge), or d12 greatbows they can attack with, or a class that is RIDICULOUSLY accurate and gets +2d6 damage on sneak attack etc.

It just doesn't work and it's no wonder Warlocks struggle hard without heavy optimization to keep par with damage.


----------



## Nemesis Destiny (Jun 16, 2011)

Having started my 4e "career" with an eyebiting feylock, I was a little confused as to why they even called it a striker at all, and still am, to be honest. The warlock, to me, felt more like a bad single target controller with delusions of competence. I would love to see them be fixed _properly_.

Eyebite _needs _more damage, and/or better utility. Dire Radiance _needs _flexible stats. Eldritch Blast could use a little _something_. I'm not saying they need to bring warlocks up to ranger or rogue level, but I'm seriously going to houserule the crap out of them if anyone ever wants to bring one to my game (not likely in their current state of suckitude). I'd rather WotC just fix them right in the firstplace though.

Yes, I've emailed them.


----------



## Neonchameleon (Jun 16, 2011)

Nemesis Destiny said:


> I'd rather WotC just fix them right in the firstplace though.
> 
> Yes, I've emailed them.




You and me both.  And this nitty gritty detail of what doesn't work and why is exactly what playtesting should be about.


----------



## Xris Robin (Jun 17, 2011)

Warlock's can have damage that looks good, if you are a Sorcerer-King Pact with Mind-Bite Scorn and Killing Curse.  Hand of Blight can do 4d8 then.  However, King Warlocks have the worst pact boon, since all Fell Might does is act as a pseudo power point to augment the single Sorcerer King power they get at each level, usually with a leaderish effect.  2d8 curse damage isn't bad, but it costs two feats and requires a specific pact, compared to a Rogue's sneak attack with what, just Backstabber?

As a sidenote, hybrid King'locks are really screwed over.  Hybrids get a Pact, and get riders, but not the Boon.  All Sorcerer King riders are just the ability to use Fell Might on those powers, though, which hybrids can't do.


----------



## Neverfate (Jun 19, 2011)

Here's an odd question:

Practiced Killer (Assassin Multiclass) multis you into Assassin . . . or specifically the Executioner? Or Both?

It specifically limits you to an Executioner skill training, but ends there. There reason I ask is because the Assassin (which hasn't been renamed oddly) is Shadow while the Executioner is Shadow/Martial, which can influence access to feats. 

My interpretation is it means you're going to multi into the Assassin over-class (ie the pure shadow/original one) and just thematically disguises itself as Executioner.


----------



## twilsemail (Jul 14, 2011)

I know the thread's a bit stale, but I can't find the info anywhere else...

Has there been any indication as to when this "playtest" is complete and the actual info is due out?


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jul 14, 2011)

twilsemail said:


> I know the thread's a bit stale, but I can't find the info anywhere else...
> 
> Has there been any indication as to when this "playtest" is complete and the actual info is due out?




...hopefully in a form I can buy in a FLGS?


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Jul 14, 2011)

yeah, doubtful. Anyway 'playtest' can last any arbitrary amount of time. Presumably it indicates that the stuff will eventually go into CB, but there's IIRC still plenty of other stuff needing to go in there already.


----------



## Neverfate (Jul 15, 2011)

twilsemail said:


> I know the thread's a bit stale, but I can't find the info anywhere else...
> 
> Has there been any indication as to when this "playtest" is complete and the actual info is due out?




Fortunately, not being on a proper computer until I get mine fixed I can't check the original article. However, I specifically remember on the Warlock and Rogue playtest articles that there was a deadline for feedback on the article. After that deadline I figure it's gotta take around a month or two to sort all that feedback out and put it up on a whiteboard and decided what they want to do with it. Just a guess. Could be way off. Don't expect the Rogue one to even take that long.


----------



## Estlor (Jul 15, 2011)

I think I heard over on the WotC board the idea was to make it and the Warlock update final for the end of July.  Could be misremembering the part about the hybrids though.

After having a chance to play around with these more, I think the biggest thing the article needs is lots of clarification.  The way some of the abilities - like Assassin Strike (hybrid) and Dread Smite (hybrid) for instance - are worded almost makes it sound like you could _never_ choose that option even though logically you should have to take them at least once.  Likewise, we need some direction on what at-will a hybrid Sentinel gets (do they get to choose between their companion attack or a druid at-will, or just their companion attack and no at-will) and whether the correct interpretation of the hybrid binder is they have to pick from a pact encounter power or if they can pick _any_ warlock encounter power.

This is part of the problem with having powers tied into class traits and then deconstructing that model.

On the other hand, does anyone else thing the problems with the original Assassin and the Executioner as strikers could be fixed by allowing them to hybrid with themselves, making an Assassin|Executioner?


----------



## WalterKovacs (Jul 17, 2011)

Estlor said:


> Likewise, we need some direction on what at-will a hybrid Sentinel gets (do they get to choose between their companion attack or a druid at-will, or just their companion attack and no at-will) and whether the correct interpretation of the hybrid binder is they have to pick from a pact encounter power or if they can pick _any_ warlock encounter power.




Based on the original hybrids:

The warlock does mention you don't get the at-will as part of your eldritch pact choice, but you still get to choose an at-will (even though it doesn't actually say so).

The original druid doesn't get the free 'third' at-will, so if they want a wild shape they need to pick that as their only druid at-will.

Unless a class actually says you get the class feature which locks in your choice and doesn't ammend it (like the warlock), you get to pick. And, like the warlock, you can pick freely, even from options the non-hybrid version may not get. So, the Hybrid Executioner Assassin would be able to grab one of the original Assassin at-wills (admitedly, they would probably never use it). For the sentinel druid, while their animal companion has a 'baked in at-will', which is part of the reason the normal class only gets one at-will, it isn't actually an at-will power. If you didn't get to pick a druid at-will power, the hybrid section would say so or the animal companion section would be hybridized to remove the animal's at-will power, etc).

Similarly, since the hybrid binder doesn't specify, it can pick from any encounter power (if it takes the ones 'assigned' to it, it will get the riders, but they aren't forced to take them). Other classes with the 'only one choice', like the sentinel druid, give the 'you can take combined when picking an encounter power', but still let you get old druid encounter powers if you want those instead.


----------



## Gargoyle (Aug 10, 2011)

Bringing this old post back up because it looks like they are through playtesting and the have the final version up, even though the link is still named 'playtest'

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (New Hybrid and Multiclass Options)


----------



## Neonchameleon (Aug 10, 2011)

Quick changes - they dropped the Warlocks getting Hexblade Weapons.  But kept the loophole in the assassin and the blackguard that allows a Charisma-centric Assassin using Attack Finesse on a charisma-based melee basic attack for extra blackguard damage.  (Or the Warlock/Assassin...)


----------



## Nemesis Destiny (Aug 11, 2011)

Neonchameleon said:


> Quick changes - they dropped the Warlocks getting Hexblade Weapons.



I knew it was too good to be true. I'll still probably try to put this one past the DM in whose game I am playing an original Feylock; she can use all the help she can get. Heck, I would still allow it in my game.


----------



## killswitch (Aug 13, 2011)

Hey all - I just ran across this thread as I have been trying to build a Blackguard for an upcoming LFR game.

Here's the thing - I'm slightly disappointed in the Blackguard class as a whole (mostly, the whole no real encounter powers as well as the lack of customization in building). 

And I know I want to focus on a heavy damage-dealing brute basically, but I'm kind of stuck.

I'll give that I'm not too knowledgeable about the 4e system, but I am learning, mostly I am confused about Hybrid classes.

I thought of multiclassing my Blackguard into a fighter for better paragons and damage output, but I don't know. I thought I might check into hybriding - but I am slightly confused.

I would love to build a Blackguard/Fighter or a Blackguard/Warlock striker hybrid, but I don't know which would work best, hybrid, or simply multiclassing. Could someone please explain the benefits/cons of each one, as well as how best to go about getting the most damage using a Blackguard/Warlock or Blackguard/Fighter hybrid class? Thanks a bunch!


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Aug 13, 2011)

Well, the basic thing you want to do is align your ability scores. 

Here's a concept, Blackguard|Fighter, pick Battlerage Vigor for your hybrid talent and Domination for your Spirit of Vice, then pump up your temp hit points. Use a STR/CHA race ideally (Dragonborn should work). With an 18 STR/18 CHA you should be able to alternately attack using a Fighter invigorating power, sucking up hit points. Then you can sac the hit points as a direct to-hit bonus on your next turn up to CHA bonus (I think this will work with OAs too, the main challenge here is to STILL have temp hit points when you start a turn). I think this will work. It certainly should give you some nasty to-hit bonuses here and there (+4 to-hit, pretty nice). You can mark as a fighter, which is nice too, though maybe not vital for this build. Pick up stuff that grants temp hp. You'll automatically have up to scale proficiency and shields, so no need to burn hybrid talent on armor. There may be better options, but that one sounds kind of fun. You can basically strike as well as any striker and swap into defender mode if you need to. 

Warlocks hybrid pretty effectively. They can also make pretty effective use of weapons with the right tricks, so that is definitely a viable approach. You'd probably go CHA with your lock stuff, but the question there is if you can find enough CHA warlock stuff that is strikery. The general reason for going with it is Eyebite/Eldritch Strike at-wills.


----------



## gyor (Aug 15, 2011)

Just out of curiousity how well do you think a Blackguard/Ardent would work out?

I was thinking arguement ahigh level ardent at-will power, maybe one with 4w damage, tack on dread smite because its still an at will and dark menance and spirit of vice on the Dread smite. Take Elan hertiage for extra power points later on.


----------

