# Slayer build sillyness



## Perun (Oct 25, 2010)

I don't know whether this has been covered before, and if it has, I appologise. I just had to share 

A player in our group has made a Slayer to replace his shaman character in our Dark Sun game, now at 2nd level.

In short, he made a human slayer (with a gladiator theme, but that's more or less irrelevant), he made Dex his highest stat (20, after racial modifier), and took Melee Training (Dex) and Master at Arms as his 1st-level feats (Surprising Charge [_Martial Power_] is his 2nd-lvl choice). 

His attack is now +11 vs. AC, and he deals 2d6+8 damage (brutal 1) on a regular, unmodified melee basic attack. Which is better than any Str/Dex combination could achieve. 

Even better, at 8th level, when his Dex increases to 22, his damage automatically increases by 2 points. He also has a good AC (unsurprisingly) and a decent number of hp (Con 14). About the only area where this character "suffers" is his Athletics check.

A character with Str 18 and Dex 16 ends up worse in the attack & damage department -- at 2nd level, such a character would attack at +10, and his damage would be identical to the all-Dex slayer. A Str 20/Dex 14 character could gain the same attack & damage values as the all-Dex slayer, but would have lower hp and AC.

I find it interesting that a single feat (Melee Training [Dex]) can have so great influence on a character class. I wouldn't call this slayer overpowered, but the fact that a character so modified can out-perform the basic, original version of the class (or, in this case, a build) clearly suggests that it wasn't a planned result.


----------



## twilsemail (Oct 25, 2010)

Was this build made accounting for the update to Melee training?  Where is the sum of the +8 coming from? +6 from misc. sources seems pretty hefty at 2nd level.  Then again I'm AFB and forget all of the Slayers cookies.


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 25, 2010)

Does that include the fact that Melee Training now only allows for 1/2 of the non-STR stat in bonus damage?


----------



## Sunseeker (Oct 25, 2010)

IMO, that's because the Fighter was never really designed for fighting.  It was designed for defending with the ability to fight as a secondary.  Even though just about every other class that could be a defender was better at it, fighters never(IMO) got enough offensive-oritented skills to compete with other damage dealers.

Compare the Slayer to any of the other melee striker classes, TWF rangers, avengers, rogues, barbarians ect...  All of these classes do equitable damage, particularly when paired with a Brutal weapon.  Not to mention all of them have AC buffing abilities, a lvl1 Avenger comes out with something like a 17-18 AC(assumingthey stack dex/int), and they don't even get scale.

IMO, I think it's good to see the Slayer out-perform the "base" fighter so much, because that really brings it up to par with other striker classes.  Which the fighter should have been able to do from the get-go.


----------



## Perun (Oct 25, 2010)

twilsemail said:


> Was this build made accounting for the update to Melee training?  Where is the sum of the +8 coming from? +6 from misc. sources seems pretty hefty at 2nd level.  Then again I'm AFB and forget all of the Slayers cookies.






Ryujin said:


> Does that include the fact that Melee Training now only allows for 1/2 of the non-STR stat in bonus damage?




Yes, it does. And that's the brilliant bit. 

Attack bonus breakdown: +5 Dex, +2 proficiency, +1 untyped (slayer bonus), +1 feat, +1 level, +1 enhancement, for a total of +11.

Damage breakdown: +2 one-half Dex modifier (Melee Training [Dex]), +5 Dex (Heroic Slayer class feature), +1 enhancement; total of +8.


----------



## Perun (Oct 25, 2010)

shidaku said:


> IMO, I think it's good to see the Slayer out-perform the "base" fighter so much, because that really brings it up to par with other striker classes.  Which the fighter should have been able to do from the get-go.




It seems you misunderstood. It's not that the slayer outdamages the base fighter, it's that a slayer "build" based on a single feat (Melee Training, which has been "nerfed" since its original appearance in PH2) outperforms the "standard" slayer.


----------



## FadedC (Oct 25, 2010)

It's definitely an interesting idea. I think the fairest thing is to compare it to the 20 strength/14 dex slayer. The damage of the 20 strength slayer scales a little better, though the difference is marginal and doesn't come into play until paragon. He has fewer hp but he has an extra feat so I'd say the advantage is with him on that. But then his AC is 1 point lower as you say which is significant. So yeah I might say that the dex slayer is a little better. Though without the books in front of me, I'd wonder if tanking his strength would limit some of his feat choices too much. But maybe not. The dex slayer could also pull out a bow very effectively.

I suspect that many will play a str/dex race with the slayer though, either a current race of some alternate version of a race with the new rules. 20 strength/16 dex would definitely be superior in damage, though you could still make an argument for 20 dex giving enough utility to still be better.


----------



## Sunseeker (Oct 25, 2010)

Perun said:


> It seems you misunderstood. It's not that the slayer outdamages the base fighter, it's that a slayer "build" based on a single feat (Melee Training, which has been "nerfed" since its original appearance in PH2) outperforms the "standard" slayer.




Haven't we been aware that this "Melee training" feat makes any martial-using class perform much better?  So this shouldn't be a surprise at all?


----------



## Mezzer (Oct 25, 2010)

Since it's my character Perun is talking about, I might as well chime in on this. One detail he got wrong is the attack bonus, which is actually +9 on an MBA, since I'm not actually proficient with the Gouge. 

You'd have to lose either Suprising Charge (which would give you that +11) or ditch Master at Arms (for a +10). That said, those are both really good feats, and it's debatable if it would be worth it to give them up. 

Particularly Master at Arms, since my RBA with a longbow is +11 vs AC, d10+11, which is definitely better than what most slayers can put together. Couple it with Unfettered Fury if you want more damage, or Mobile Blade if you to move around, and you have a very well rounded melee and ranged toolkit, so to speak.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Oct 25, 2010)

> Since it's my character Perun is talking about, I might as well chime in on this. One detail he got wrong is the attack bonus, which is actually +9 on an MBA, since I'm not actually proficient with the Gouge.



Out of curiosity, do you plan becoming proficient with the Gouge?

I gotta say, I think the essentials melee classes that have been released so far do a good of being compatible with Dark Sun.

Anyways, Melee Training has been discussed to death here when the essential fighter builds were first previewed. And the effect, even after the nerf, is amazing. While it bothers some people, now that I'm getting reports from actual play, it still doesn't bother me.


----------



## Pseudonym (Oct 25, 2010)

I did pretty much the same with an elf slayer. Still only 1st level, but having fun so far. The bonus to going all-in on Dex is that your armor class in hide is better than scale, and you have full movement.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Oct 25, 2010)

shidaku said:


> IMO, that's because the Fighter was never really designed for fighting.  It was designed for defending with the ability to fight as a secondary.  Even though just about every other class that could be a defender was better at it, fighters never(IMO) got enough offensive-oritented skills to compete with other damage dealers.
> 
> Compare the Slayer to any of the other melee striker classes, TWF rangers, avengers, rogues, barbarians ect...  All of these classes do equitable damage, particularly when paired with a Brutal weapon.  Not to mention all of them have AC buffing abilities, a lvl1 Avenger comes out with something like a 17-18 AC(assumingthey stack dex/int), and they don't even get scale.
> 
> IMO, I think it's good to see the Slayer out-perform the "base" fighter so much, because that really brings it up to par with other striker classes.  Which the fighter should have been able to do from the get-go.




Huh? 

The fighter is a defender, so why would it be unusual for a striker to do more damage than a defender? Not only that but you're dead wrong about the fighter being less capable as a damage dealer than other defenders, that's nonsense. The baseline PHB1 fighter is VERY close to striker level damage already, AND has the best defending mechanics in the game (well arguably the Knight may now be better, but the jury is still out on that). In any situation where the Fighter can draw mark punishment/OAs he will QUICKLY surpass pretty much any other class in damage output too, including Slayers, Bow Rangers, etc. Build a good punishing GWT fighter and grab fullblade, you're LETHAL and anyone who defies your mark is a fool. Of course you won't do the damage of a Slayer or a Bow Ranger BASELINE and you shouldn't. 

I just can't really understand why anyone would think fighters should be doing striker level damage if they have defender mechanics. Slayer really isn't a good point of comparison with the fighter overall. They are built for different things.


----------



## Saeviomagy (Oct 25, 2010)

First, you spend a feat getting this ability. It's effectively trading a feat for a flat damage bonus that's based on how you arrange your stats.

If that's more than 2, you're better off with melee training than another feat. If it's less, you could have taken something else to end up in the same place. If we built the same character with strength instead of dex as prime, we'd be able to take proficiency in gouge for instance, which would significantly increase his ability to hit things and in turn increase the amount of damage he deals.

It's certainly a good build, and it's cool that you can do it, but it's far from broken.


----------



## Mezzer (Oct 25, 2010)

fanboy2000 said:


> Out of curiosity, do you plan becoming proficient with the Gouge?



I'd say that's the most likely choice for 4th level, yea. It's obviously a huge boost, and it would allow me to use Unfettered Fury more often (at least, more comfortably).



Saeviomagy said:


> It's certainly a good build, and it's cool that you can do it, but it's far from broken.



Yea, that's kind of what I thought of it; something cool I can do with the Slayer, that gives him a bit of variety and still allows him to perform well.


----------



## BobTheNob (Oct 26, 2010)

The other thing to consider in all of this is that to really max out the dex hit, the player needed to start with a Stat of 20 (after racial). Assuming you are using point allocation (and not random rolling) that is a big sacrifice in its own, making this character (at a guess) High Dex, Moderate something else and completely naf the rest.

Its a "one dimensional whacking machine". It might have great numbers in combat, but where are his skills at?  What about NAD's? What are his options for feat picks outside of Dex?

So it had to give up well rounded stats AND a feat pick to get to this point. Maybe the thing to do is consider that comparing characters is more than just comparing basic attacks. (Though I will concede...a slayer is a whacking machine)

It works, but I have been playing this game for a long time and I stopped playing one hit wonders a long time ago. For my tastes, I like well rounded characters.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Oct 26, 2010)

BobTheNob said:


> It works, but I have been playing this game for a long time and I stopped playing one hit wonders a long time ago. For my tastes, I like well rounded characters.




I really agree. In my group, making all characters roll equallyfor skill challenges nuked a lot of this kind of stuff. When one or two guys could win skill  challenges with good rolls while the others jsut stood back, there was less reason to generalize. Now, everyone tries to have some abilities with everything possible. 

Whenever I see a 20 at first level, I just cringe.


----------



## Mezzer (Oct 26, 2010)

Well, as a Slayer your skill choices are fairly limited as it is, so having a high Dex, along with an appropriate background, actually gives you access to a set of (potentially) more useful skills that you would have otherwise.


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 26, 2010)

You can start out with higher damage and widen the gap at higher levels by being a Str/Dex Slayer and picking Half-Orc. The Melee Training slayer isn't the best damage output if that's what you're interested it.


----------



## Perun (Oct 26, 2010)

Mezzer said:


> Since it's my character Perun is talking about, I might as well chime in on this. One detail he got wrong is the attack bonus, which is actually +9 on an MBA, since I'm not actually proficient with the Gouge.




Gah. I missed that bit, but (in my defence) only because I kind-of assumed the gladiator theme gave the free proficiency, when it's in fact the arena fighter build that does that.



> You'd have to lose either Suprising Charge (which would give you that +11) or ditch Master at Arms (for a +10). That said, those are both really good feats, and it's debatable if it would be worth it to give them up.




I'd go with proficiency and Melee Training at level 1, and then take Master at Arms at 2nd level (which would mean a three-point jump in attack bonus in one level  )


----------



## Lord Ernie (Oct 26, 2010)

Check out the Charop boards if you wanna know if this is broken or not. In fact, there already is a Slayer optimization guide being made right here.

Short answer: single stat dependency is nice, but loses out in the long run, what with feats that depend on stats (in the gouge's case, there's Deadly Axe, either critical boost feat (Spear Mastery: Str 19, Dex 19; Axe Mastery: Str 21, Con 17), etc. 

Further, a Half-Orc with 18's in Str and Dex can achieve the same thing, taking Weapon Proficiency(Gouge) at first and Master of Arms at 2nd level gets:
+4 str +2 prof +1 level + 1 enhancement +1 feat +1 slayer = +10 vs AC, and damage (no stances) is 2d6 (brutal 1) + 8. 

What's more, while it costs him 2 more points at character creation, he will have a much better fortitude defense, and can actually qualify for those critical feats at higher levels.

Also, at heroic level, the 1/2 dex modifier does not really matter that much for damage output. Once the full stat modifier starts hitting +7/+8 ranges, however, he will start to fall behind.

Now, all of this might not be relevant to your campaign - in fact, if I was gonna play in a campaign that didn't go beyond heroic levels, I would probably go for single-stat focus too. But if you're at all planning to reach higher levels, it is decidedly not overpowered and even somewhat suboptimal.


----------



## Shin Okada (Oct 26, 2010)

That slayer build does not seem to be broken. It is damping one of the most useful stat for a melee combatant, str. Str is useful for having good enough Athletics skill modifier and also give it a good Fort defense.

Also, this character will eventually become slightly less striky than usual Str/Dex build slayer.

Say, he starts from Dex 20. By level 30, his Dex become 30 (+10) assuming he chooses an epic destiny which can increase dex by 2. Now he gains damage bonus from his Dex mod (+10) plus half of it (+5) =+15

On the other hand, A human slayer who starts from Str 20 and Dex 14 will become Str 30 (+10) and Dex 24 (+7), assuming he chooses an epic destiny which gives him 2 stats boosts. Now he gains damage bonus from his Str (+10) plus Dex (+7) =+17. If he is a half-orc, +18.


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 26, 2010)

The single-stat Slayer does have other advantages though. It makes it possible to have a good, damage dealing character while having higher non traditional Fighter stats, if you want to build a character concept. An acrobatic, sneaky, charismatic swashbuckling fighter becomes a real possibility. Non traditional multiclasses also become possible, with good results.


----------



## Lord Ernie (Oct 26, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> The single-stat Slayer does have other advantages though. It makes it possible to have a good, damage dealing character while having higher non traditional Fighter stats, if you want to build a character concept. An acrobatic, sneaky, charismatic swashbuckling fighter becomes a real possibility. Non traditional multiclasses also become possible, with good results.



Of course the single-stat Slayer offers an answer for a straightforward implementation of certain archetypes. But at least for myself, I was responding to the following statement in the OP:



Perun said:


> I wouldn't call this slayer overpowered, but the fact that a character so modified can out-perform the basic, original version of the class (or, in this case, a build) clearly suggests that it wasn't a planned result.



Now, while the single-stat slayer is viable, and in a mild, non-heavily optimized environment (meaning, most groups) capable of perfectly adequate performance as a Striker. This is especially true in Heroic tier, where the damage deficiency of the nerfed Melee Training is not big enough yet to make much of a difference.

But - unlike the OP claims - it's not at all outperforming the standard Str/Dex approach, and it can't even get near more heavily-optimized variants with Gouge/Rain Of Blows/Reserve Maneuver abuse, which requires either a good Strength score, or Daring Blade shenanigans.


----------



## Pickles JG (Oct 26, 2010)

A halfling slayer seems to work* too. Way better than a halfling barbarian would & I have a great halfling barbarian mini to use ....


*not suck I know it's suboptimal.


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 26, 2010)

Lord Ernie said:


> Of course the single-stat Slayer offers an answer for a straightforward implementation of certain archetypes. But at least for myself, I was responding to the following statement in the OP:
> 
> 
> Now, while the single-stat slayer is viable, and in a mild, non-heavily optimized environment (meaning, most groups) capable of perfectly adequate performance as a Striker. This is especially true in Heroic tier, where the damage deficiency of the nerfed Melee Training is not big enough yet to make much of a difference.
> ...




No, definitely not an out-performer, but it sure looks like a good base for a character theme without losing out much on the damage side of things.


----------



## Perun (Oct 26, 2010)

Lord Ernie said:


> But - unlike the OP claims - it's not at all outperforming the standard Str/Dex approach, and it can't even get near more heavily-optimized variants with Gouge/Rain Of Blows/Reserve Maneuver abuse, which requires either a good Strength score, or Daring Blade shenanigans.




Ah, yes. I haven't had the time to check the OP boards for any optimal builds, and, having no practical experience with high(er)-level play, I missed on the various feat/ability/whatever combinations. My fault. I officially withdraw the part about out-performing the Str/Dex build 

I do still stand by my initial observation (if slightly modified) on how wonderfully effective such a build can be, even if it's now been shown to me how it can be bested by the "standard" (if optimised) slayer builds.

I'll even go so far to say that I _might_ prefer this Dex-focused build, as, in the end, it feels more like a well-rounded character than the standard build (after you maximise your Dexterity, you still have 6 points to play around with; with Str/Dex build you pretty much spend all your points on two ability scores). 

Regards.


----------



## Ryujin (Oct 26, 2010)

Or you can have a 16 attribute, then add racial modifiers, and have even more to work with and create a well-rounded character.


----------



## Prestidigitalis (Oct 26, 2010)

Ryujin said:


> The single-stat Slayer does have other advantages though. It makes it possible to have a good, damage dealing character while having higher non traditional Fighter stats, if you want to build a character concept. An acrobatic, sneaky, charismatic swashbuckling fighter becomes a real possibility. Non traditional multiclasses also become possible, with good results.




It also allows for making Con the secondary ability score.  A dwarf with an array of 13/16/18/8/10/10 can get amazing hit points, surge count and surge value at paragon levels, and the mobility options of the Slayer can make up for the reduced speed.

The Thief has a similar benefit over earlier Rogue builds -- there is no large benefit to any secondary score (even for a high Strength or Charisma Rogue, Feinting Trick is terrible and Tumbling Trick is only mediocre) so unless you really want to max out your Charisma skills you can just as well make Constitution your secondary focus.


----------



## Prestidigitalis (Oct 26, 2010)

Lord Ernie said:


> Check out the Charop boards if you wanna know if this is broken or not. In fact, there already is a Slayer optimization guide being made right here.




Is there a reason why that guide is not indexed here?  Are they only indexed when they are completed or something like that?


----------



## Sunseeker (Oct 26, 2010)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> Huh?
> 
> The fighter is a defender, so why would it be unusual for a striker to do more damage than a defender? Not only that but you're dead wrong about the fighter being less capable as a damage dealer than other defenders, that's nonsense. The baseline PHB1 fighter is VERY close to striker level damage already, AND has the best defending mechanics in the game (well arguably the Knight may now be better, but the jury is still out on that). In any situation where the Fighter can draw mark punishment/OAs he will QUICKLY surpass pretty much any other class in damage output too, including Slayers, Bow Rangers, etc. Build a good punishing GWT fighter and grab fullblade, you're LETHAL and anyone who defies your mark is a fool. Of course you won't do the damage of a Slayer or a Bow Ranger BASELINE and you shouldn't.



You misunderstand.  I'm not saying the fighter should be comprable to a striker while playing defender.  I'm saying that the fighter should have always had the abilitiy to be built as either a striker, or a defender.  The "fighter" is a very generic class, and as such, I have always been annoyed that it could ONLY be built as a defender in 4e.  Same applies to the paladin, but that's another story.  



> I just can't really understand why anyone would think fighters should be doing striker level damage if they have defender mechanics. Slayer really isn't a good point of comparison with the fighter overall. They are built for different things.



Except that the Slayer is drawn from the redone version of the Fighter, therefore it must be compared.  As I said above, the options the fighter always should have had, to either be as their name suggests, a FIGHTer or a defender.


----------



## Lord Ernie (Oct 27, 2010)

Perun said:


> Ah, yes. I haven't had the time to check the OP boards for any optimal builds, and, having no practical experience with high(er)-level play, I missed on the various feat/ability/whatever combinations. My fault. I officially withdraw the part about out-performing the Str/Dex build
> 
> I do still stand by my initial observation (if slightly modified) on how wonderfully effective such a build can be, even if it's now been shown to me how it can be bested by the "standard" (if optimised) slayer builds.
> 
> ...



Good graces on the internet are always appreciated, good sir. 

And I've been thinking about single or off-stat slayers ever since the mechanics behind them were revealed. I think the idea is awesome, and the amount of possible archetypes the class opens up is surprising; it was just the out-performing thing that I disagreed with.

For those fiddling with non-standard ideas for a slayer, Half-elves get to pull off extra shenanigans with their Dilettante ability, which lets you cheat in Eldritch Strike or one of the Seeker ranged basics to use as a basic attack. 



Prestidigitalis said:


> It also allows for making Con the secondary ability score.  A dwarf with an array of 13/16/18/8/10/10 can get amazing hit points, surge count and surge value at paragon levels, and the mobility options of the Slayer can make up for the reduced speed.
> 
> The Thief has a similar benefit over earlier Rogue builds -- there is no large benefit to any secondary score (even for a high Strength or Charisma Rogue, Feinting Trick is terrible and Tumbling Trick is only mediocre) so unless you really want to max out your Charisma skills you can just as well make Constitution your secondary focus.



Yup. It also opens up the archetype of the highly perceptive rogue, who can stalk someone in the dark of night easily, and can spot the knife coming at him from behind his back (Wisdom focus, of course). Again, I like it.



Prestidigitalis said:


> Is there a reason why that guide is not indexed here?  Are they only indexed when they are completed or something like that?



I suspect either the person who keeps that thread up-to-date hasn't indexed the new thread yet (it _is_ less than a week old, after all), or indeed only somewhat complete handbooks are included.

With most of the power choices gone for Slayers, the guide really needs feat and weapon advice, Reserve Maneuver (Rain of Blows) + PP abuse, and a good choice of ED's before it's finished.


----------



## Jack99 (Oct 27, 2010)

shidaku said:


> You misunderstand.  I'm not saying the fighter should be comprable to a striker while playing defender.  I'm saying that the fighter should have always had the abilitiy to be built as either a striker, or a defender.  The "fighter" is a very generic class, and as such, I have always been annoyed that it could ONLY be built as a defender in 4e.  Same applies to the paladin, but that's another story.
> 
> 
> Except that the Slayer is drawn from the redone version of the Fighter, therefore it must be compared.  As I said above, the options the fighter always should have had, to either be as their name suggests, a FIGHTer or a defender.




I am not argue that how your feel is wrong, but you keep saying the fighter could only be built as a defender in 4e. What does it matter what role it has, when it in fact performs just like you want? Because, as has been mentioned before, the greatweapon fighter from core 4e could easily be built to match or even surpass many other strikers.


----------



## CovertOps (Oct 27, 2010)

Jack99 said:


> I am not argue that how your feel is wrong, but you keep saying the fighter could only be built as a defender in 4e. What does it matter what role it has, when it in fact performs just like you want? Because, as has been mentioned before, the greatweapon fighter from core 4e could easily be built to match or even surpass many other strikers.




Having had a Str/Con Fighter with an Urgosh at my table I can attest to the striker level damage AND all the defender abilities in tact.  I'm not really pleased that such a build is possible.  The Slayer OTOH I like because it gets the striker damage at the expense of being a defender (marking or Aura for the Knight).


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Oct 27, 2010)

Prestidigitalis said:


> Is there a reason why that guide is not indexed here? Are they only indexed when they are completed or something like that?




LDB just started it up at the end of last week. I'm going to guess the Wiki guides just haven't caught up to it yet.

Also, I'd throw in my support for Great Weapon fighters being pretty freaking strikery. Getting drilled with 2d6b1 weapons with daily's that reach 3W at 1st level is pretty nice, to say the least.

edit: Dangit, missed LE's post at the top of the page.  Sorry for the retread info.


----------



## Prestidigitalis (Oct 27, 2010)

Mr. Wilson said:


> LDB just started it up at the end of last week. I'm going to guess the Wiki guides just haven't caught up to it yet.




In a way I had a bigger question about that link -- I keep thinking that someone will post an Essentials Thief guide, and it keeps not being there.  Granted, I could do it myself, but I don't have a login, and I need to check the mailbox for the new issue of Procrastination Semi-Quarterly, and it's kind of scary...


----------



## Mr. Wilson (Oct 28, 2010)

Lol, I see.  I don't own the Essentials line, so I'm not capable of making the guide.  I'm sure someone will make one, but given that LDB does most of the melee builds, people seem to stay out of his way when it comes to the guides and await for his word.


----------



## CovertOps (Oct 28, 2010)

I don't remember if this was said or not, but the 20 Dex Slayer does have one advantage that I was reminded of from another thread.  Get a Great bow.  RBA is already based on Dex so you get to add the full amount twice and throw in the stance for 1d12+12 at first level (+13 if you're human and grab W Focus).


----------



## Prestidigitalis (Oct 28, 2010)

CovertOps said:


> I don't remember if this was said or not, but the 20 Dex Slayer does have one advantage that I was reminded of from another thread.  Get a Great bow.  RBA is already based on Dex so you get to add the full amount twice and throw in the stance for 1d12+12 at first level (+13 if you're human and grab W Focus).




Or better, get Bow Expertise.  As the proficiency bonus for bow is only +2, you kind of need it, and your target will be isolated often enough to get the +1 for having no adjacent creatures.

It's a shame that Slayer features like Power Strike are melee-only.  Otherwise you really could do a lot with an RBA-based Slayer.  The Mobile Blade stance, for example, works a lot better at range than in melee.


----------



## Psikus (Oct 28, 2010)

CovertOps said:


> I don't remember if this was said or not, but the 20 Dex Slayer does have one advantage that I was reminded of from another thread.  Get a Great bow.  RBA is already based on Dex so you get to add the full amount twice and throw in the stance for 1d12+12 at first level (+13 if you're human and grab W Focus).




That is a good point, though I think thrown weapons are also relevant to the discussion. If you intend to go all the way and spend feats for ranged proficiency, expertise, and what not, the Dex build is clearly better for ranged attacks. However, if you just play a melee-focused character which sometimes switches to ranged weapons when it gets immobilized or has to fight a flying enemy, you may be better off with a Str-based character and heavy thrown weapons. Handaxes, javelins and throwing hammers have a tiny damage die and mediocre range, but they can also benefit from feats you'd already have for your main weapon (i.e. expertise, focus, maybe even weaponm astery).


----------



## CovertOps (Oct 28, 2010)

Psikus said:


> That is a good point, though I think thrown weapons are also relevant to the discussion. If you intend to go all the way and spend feats for ranged proficiency, expertise, and what not, the Dex build is clearly better for ranged attacks. However, if you just play a melee-focused character which sometimes switches to ranged weapons when it gets immobilized or has to fight a flying enemy, you may be better off with a Str-based character and heavy thrown weapons. Handaxes, javelins and throwing hammers have a tiny damage die and mediocre range, but they can also benefit from feats you'd already have for your main weapon (i.e. expertise, focus, maybe even weaponm astery).




I had to go look...Power Strike is for melee attacks only otherwise....2d12+12 yes please.


----------



## Mezzer (Oct 29, 2010)

Having great RBAs is why I ultimately decided to go with the Dex build, since we kinda needed some more ranged firepower. And my stances are Mobile Blade and Unfettered Fury, both of which are great with the bow as well.

And altough Power Strike on any basic attack would certainly be better, I don't particularly mind it as it is, since odds are you're gonna land at least one melee attack in any given fight.


----------



## ourchair (Oct 31, 2010)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> Huh?
> 
> The fighter is a defender, so why would it be unusual for a striker to do more damage than a defender? Not only that but you're dead wrong about the fighter being less capable as a damage dealer than other defenders, that's nonsense. The baseline PHB1 fighter is VERY close to striker level damage already, AND has the best defending mechanics in the game (well arguably the Knight may now be better, but the jury is still out on that). In any situation where the Fighter can draw mark punishment/OAs he will QUICKLY surpass pretty much any other class in damage output too, including Slayers, Bow Rangers, etc. Build a good punishing GWT fighter and grab fullblade, you're LETHAL and anyone who defies your mark is a fool. Of course you won't do the damage of a Slayer or a Bow Ranger BASELINE and you shouldn't.
> 
> I just can't really understand why anyone would think fighters should be doing striker level damage if they have defender mechanics. Slayer really isn't a good point of comparison with the fighter overall. They are built for different things.



I agree.

The PHB Fighter may not be a Striker, nor may it deal the damage of other Defenders, but the class features that are geared towards how it does its job guarantee that when played right, it can be LETHAL LETHAL LETHAL. Through a combination of favorable dice, and absurd accuracy min-maxing I have NEVER missed with my Dragonborn Great Weapon Fighter through all 8 levels I've played him.

I've played a Warden, a Paladin and a Swordmage and the Fighter is supremely supreme at punishment. With a bit of help from friends and the right min-maxing, flying solos and elites can be rendered helpless by it.


----------



## Gort (Oct 31, 2010)

I found that while fighters tended to keep up in damage with the strikers (especially when you start using _Sweeping Blow_ and _Come and Get It_ in the same round to make effectively about 10 attacks) in Heroic tier, by Paragon they really started to lag. The fighter'll hit for about 17 damage, then the assassin will do 50. Or the sorcerer will do 25 to everyone in the world.

Of course, this was a shield fighter optimised to be as indestructible as possible, so it wasn't like we were trying to out-do the strikers.

What can a greatweapon fighter do to rival striker damage in the paragon tier? I suppose you'd boost your wisdom as high as possible and take Pit Fighter, or do some hybrid cheese.


----------



## Njall (Oct 31, 2010)

Gort said:


> What can a greatweapon fighter do to rival striker damage in the paragon tier? I suppose you'd boost your wisdom as high as possible and take Pit Fighter, or do some hybrid cheese.




Yeah, Pit Fighter + Marked Scourge, and Slashing Storm in epic as well. 
Add a decent Con score and an at-will like Brash Strike to the mix, choose a couple of multi attack powers and you're probably on par with your average striker (rogue/warlock) as far as DPR and nova damage go.
Heck, by the time you're epic you're probably going to deal more damage than the Slayer (3xWis/round beats Dex+8, your average daily stance is better than any at-will stance the Slayer can use and if you run out of daily stances you can always use Battle Fury Stance) , and you retain your defender abilities on top of that...


----------



## CovertOps (Oct 31, 2010)

Gort said:


> I found that while fighters tended to keep up in damage with the strikers (especially when you start using _Sweeping Blow_ and _Come and Get It_ in the same round to make effectively about 10 attacks) in Heroic tier, by Paragon they really started to lag. The fighter'll hit for about 17 damage, then the assassin will do 50. Or the sorcerer will do 25 to everyone in the world.
> 
> Of course, this was a shield fighter optimised to be as indestructible as possible, so it wasn't like we were trying to out-do the strikers.
> 
> What can a greatweapon fighter do to rival striker damage in the paragon tier? I suppose you'd boost your wisdom as high as possible and take Pit Fighter, or do some hybrid cheese.




The fighter in my game took an Urgosh and combined it with every power that added CON to damage for his Warforged.  Some require an Axe and some don't have any requirement, but his static damage bonus was just a few points behind the Sorcerer at level 18 (+26 vs +30 IIRC).


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Oct 31, 2010)

Gort said:


> What can a greatweapon fighter do to rival striker damage in the paragon tier? I suppose you'd boost your wisdom as high as possible and take Pit Fighter, or do some hybrid cheese.




Sure, Pit Fighter, or Kensai. You don't really need hybrid cheese at all. Just pick up a nice Execution Axe, boost wisdom, toss in the challenge and OA boosting feats and the Axe feats. You can easily be doing striker level damage all the way up. You're a VERY good defender still too, anything that gets next to you and gets marked, forget it they won't dare defy that mark and take a hit, you can be 3 points more accurate on OAs/CC without even trying very hard. A couple hits an encounter with an E-Axe will knock your DPR through the stratosphere. At Epic it isn't hard for the wizard or etc to pick up a nice dominate condition and have enemies run through your zone of death, lol. Then you still have Come and Get It + RoS and other such silliness that is every bit as good as any trick your average striker can come up with.

As far as "why wasn't there an  actual striker build of fighter before" the reason is simply to do with 4e design. You want to be a melee striker you take ranger or rogue for a class, not fighter. The only thing that was missing before was a non-barbarian two-weapon striker, and it was harder to refluff the barb. So Slayer fills up that one niche pretty well and it is fine if it is a build of fighter, but it really has little to do with fighters and there's no reason to compare it to the PHB fighters. Compare it to the PHB2 barbarian instead, that's the more valid comparison.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 31, 2010)

Ok, I don´t get the cheese complaints...

Gooing outside your role has always been a nice twist for me... A 2-weapon fighter just defends by beeing strikerish if you ignore him... seems like a goodf concept...

a slayer has much less going for him... you can ignore him usually...

Actually i don´t think you should compare any classes against each other... the only 2 questions you should ask yourself are:

1. Is the character class design flavourful?
2. Does it do its job?

Lets take the warlock example:

1. Yes, i like it
2. Yes it does

Even as a star pact warlock?

Yes, even then...

edit: allowing the choice of charisma or con for dire radiance would not hurt though...


----------



## DracoSuave (Oct 31, 2010)

Perun said:


> I don't know whether this has been covered before, and if it has, I appologise. I just had to share
> 
> A player in our group has made a Slayer to replace his shaman character in our Dark Sun game, now at 2nd level.
> 
> ...




Dex 20:

+5 to hit, +6 to damage.

Str 20 Dex 14:

+5 to hit, +6 to damage.

What does the feat do for you again?  



> Even better, at 8th level, when his Dex increases to 22, his damage automatically increases by 2 points. He also has a good AC (unsurprisingly) and a decent number of hp (Con 14). About the only area where this character "suffers" is his Athletics check.




Str 22, Dex 16.

+6 to hit, +8 to damage.

What does the feat do for you again?



> A character with Str 18 and Dex 16 ends up worse in the attack & damage department -- at 2nd level, such a character would attack at +10, and his damage would be identical to the all-Dex slayer. A Str 20/Dex 14 character could gain the same attack & damage values as the all-Dex slayer, but would have lower hp and AC.




False comparison.  Comparing the damage and attack of a character based on an 18 primary is not as good as comparing to a 20 primary.

And you have a free feat, which you can use to take toughness, if hps are that important to you, or to take an armor feat, if ac is that important to you.

Str 20, Dex 14 + Toughness has more hps than your build can ever achieve.



> I find it interesting that a single feat (Melee Training [Dex]) can have so great influence on a character class. I wouldn't call this slayer overpowered, but the fact that a character so modified can out-perform the basic, original version of the class (or, in this case, a build) clearly suggests that it wasn't a planned result.




It equally performs a min-maxed version of the class.  It costs you a feat to accomplish an exceedingly insignifigant bonus to your hps, and +1 AC.  That's not over performing; that's called 'on par.'


----------



## The Little Raven (Oct 31, 2010)

Perun said:


> His attack is now +11 vs. AC, and he deals 2d6+8 damage (brutal 1) on a regular, unmodified melee basic attack. *Which is better than any Str/Dex combination could achieve.*




This is wrong. At 2nd level, I can have a Str/Dex combo that has a +11 to AC and 2d6+9 damage (brutal 1) on a regular unmodified melee basic attack.

Two slayers, one Half-Orc and one Human, with the same starting array (18,14,11,10,10,8).

Half-Orc Slayer - 20 Str / 16 Dex
1 5/3 = 8
4 5/3 = 8
8 6/4 = 10
11 6/4 = 10
14 7/5 = 12
18 7/5 = 12
21 8/6 = 14 (9/7 = 16; +2 Str/+2 Dex epic destiny)
24 8/6 = 14 (9/7 = 16; +2 Str/+2 Dex epic destiny)
28 9/7 = 16 (10/8 = 18; +2 Str/+2 Dex epic destiny)

Human Slayer - 20 Dex / Melee Training
1 5/2 = 7
4 5/2 = 7
8 6/3 = 9
11 6/3 = 9
14 7/3 = 10
18 7/3 = 10
21 8/4 = 12 (9/4 = 13; +2 Dex/+2 one other epic destiny)
24 8/4 = 12 (9/4 = 13; +2 Dex/+2 one other epic destiny)
28 9/4 = 13 (10/5 = 15; +2 Dex/+2 one other epic destiny)

The slayers have the same attack bonus, but the Half-Orc has higher damage from the getgo, and the gap widens at 14 and 28 (or 21, with the right ED).


----------



## Perun (Nov 1, 2010)

DracoSuave said:


> <snip>






The Little Raven said:


> <snip>




I'm afraid you're a bit late for the parade, guys. If you read the thread past the first couple of posts, you'd have seen that we sorted it all out, and I was shown the errors of my ways 

To sum it all up: my original assumptions were wrong, Str/Dex combo can deal more damage than the Dex-focused build, but it (the Dex-focused slayer) remains a fun and viable character with certain benefits of its own. 

Regards.


----------

