# Best of the Best - Strikers.



## Kzach

This is the one I have been dreading. I just know the poopy-head ranger is going to win. My beloved rouge will probably come third, after the barbarian. Such a cruel, cruel world.

Also, there's 21 options which makes it a pain to organise.


----------



## Flipguarder

No, the ranger doesn't win, because it's just too easy. The Censure of Unity Avenger gets my pick for overall fun and effectiveness.


----------



## Mentat55

I think rogues are awesome, though this is based primarily on a reading of the class and its powers, rather than seeing them in play.  I also like the flavor of warlocks (especially fey and starlocks), and I really like the barbarian's rage powers.  Monks (with their full disciplines) and avengers are cool, too.  I think sorcerers fall kind of flat, though they are insanely good at spreading their striker damage over multiple targets.

But the best striker I've seen in action is a dragonborn ranger with the stormwarden PP, Scimitar Dance, and the Wintertouched/Lasting Frost/frost weapon combo.

I'd probably have to go two-blade ranger, rogue, and warlock (the warlock mainly because of their interesting status effects, mobility, and overall coolness), in that order.


----------



## Mr. Wilson

For pure dpr, I gotta go with the 2 weapon Ranger.

Barbarians are scary sights to behold on the map, but are rather fragile.

That said, if I was playing a striker, I'd choose a Star Lock or Avenger just because I love the flavor.


----------



## ObsidianCrane

How are you defning "Best"?

The different classes do different things well, and DPS is arguable in many cases and often only goes in certain ways because people do not always conceptually understand how some of the classes even work.


----------



## ObsidianCrane

*double post*


----------



## SigmaX0

Barbarians fragile? My Goliath Rageblood is tougher than most defenders, and certainly tougher than any striker!

He does have low defenses, but tons of HP, surges, temp HP and damage resistance.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Cailte said:


> How are you defning "Best"?
> 
> The different classes do different things well, and DPS is arguable in many cases and often only goes in certain ways because people do not always conceptually understand how some of the classes even work.



I don't think it matters how he defines it. What's best to you? 

I love the Warlock for his flavor, but he is not a very "strong" Striker. 
I think the Rogue is one of the best. The Rogues combat style is very appealing to me. Lots of movement on the battlefield, and all that sneaking around...
I also love the Avenger. 

I think I'll pick Rogue overall. But having to decide for one build is... difficult. I like Brutal Scoundrel and Artful Dodger a lot. Ruthless Ruffian less so.


----------



## Blackbrrd

SigmaX0 said:


> Barbarians fragile? My Goliath Rageblood is tougher than most defenders, and certainly tougher than any striker!
> 
> He does have low defenses, but tons of HP, surges, temp HP and damage resistance.




Yeah, or you can do a Half-Orc with 18 starting str/dex.

The barbarian in our party doubles as tank. He gets temp hp every time he kills something, and when he gets bloodied for the first time. He has very good base hp too.

I went for the rageblood barbarian, but that is coloured by the player who has the character, because he rolls a lot of 20's so he goes on a rampage nearly every encounter.


----------



## DracoSuave

It depends.

If all you care about is Moar Damage, then an archery ranger is the Best Striker (TM).  It's also the best defender, leader, and controller, because it does the most Moar Damage (TM).

If you care about mobile destruction of an enemy, that's different.

Personally I like the idea of a Goliath Warlock.

Arcane Implement Proficiency: Staff, Goliath Greatweapon GO!


----------



## Jhaelen

Rangers are boring, something that is boring cannot be called 'best', therefore I voted for the Sorcerer, whis a fun class. I voted for the Dragon build because it's what I'd play if given the chance...

If this vote was supposed to be about best damage, I'd vote for one of the rogue builds, just because


----------



## Eldorian

My level 14 sorcerer has like a +26 to damage, and I didn't even work hard at it.

Ranger and sorcerer are both very nice.


----------



## Camelot

I'd have to say wild sorcerer's are the most interesting and fun to play of not only all the strikers, but all the classes.  I love their randomness!  It makes it so exciting, since not even you know what you'll do next!  And it opens up so many roleplaying opportunities: a wild sorcerer who flips a coin to make any decision; a changeling sorcerer who uses every minor action possible to randomly change into another humanoid.  And I love the Wild Mage paragon path power that is an "area burst 1d4!"

Plus the damage you can do is _incredible._  Automatic +7 to each attack at first level, if not more.  Also, it has a good repertoire of damage types, and powers that target different defenses.  All in all, it's definitely the best class build in my humble opinion!


----------



## Garthanos

Jhaelen said:


> Rangers are boring, something that is boring cannot be called 'best', therefore I voted for the Sorcerer, whis a fun class. I voted for the Dragon build because it's what I'd play if given the chance...



My initial response was just like yours but... 
Designing the ranger might be less challenging but playing the archer rangers can be very non boring ... describing trick shots like archers of legend can be fun. (even if tempted to spam a certain at-will) coming up with interesting ways to visualize attacks hitting more than one opponent can be vivid... 

From All About China hey elf = chinese nobleman is a fun skin.


----------



## babinro

Of all of these polls, Strikers are easily the most difficult to pin down as Best.

I personally consider Archer Ranger to be the Best as it combines high damage with insane mobility and evasion.  It is also an easy class to pick up for first time gamers. These things make it superior to other options, but by no means make it the most fun.

I would say most fun is easily the Fey Warlock as it is constantly jumping around and essentially toying with its enemies.  The damage isn't quite there though when compared to other strikers. If you define best as the most fun, it would be this. 

The Wild Magic Sorc also belongs in the top for fun given the random elements to the character. Unpredictability makes for a fun character as well. 

Rogues require the most tactics/skill to play of the strikers. If you use this a measure of the best, than Rogues deserve consideration.  I like the challenge that playing a rogue brings along with the payoff that is quite likely the most damage of any striker when it works.

I've never seen the other strikers played yet, but on paper the Rageblood with Swift Charge Barbarian seems very fun to play as well. I wish I didn't always have to DM


----------



## Dice4Hire

Well, I went with the dragon sorcerer. I know rangers will probably win, but they will have to do so without my vote.  I like sorcerers as they can get their minimum damage up into the low 20s even at Heroic tier, and it is pretty easy to spread that damage over multiple targets. 

And do that with at-wills, not broken dailies and encounters.


----------



## -Avalon-

I wanted to have the surprise vote: Wizard!

In our group we had 2 rogues, and avenger, a cleric, a fighter, and a wizard.

We keep our DPR milestones on a blackboard and see who can get the most damage in one round.  The rogues are at like 317 and 363, the avenger is at 461, and the wizard is over 800...

Overall, the wizard is the best striker in the game.


----------



## Klaus

babinro said:


> Of all of these polls, Strikers are easily the most difficult to pin down as Best.
> 
> I personally consider Archer Ranger to be the Best as it combines high damage with insane mobility and evasion.  It is also an easy class to pick up for first time gamers. These things make it superior to other options, but by no means make it the most fun.
> 
> I would say most fun is easily the Fey Warlock as it is constantly jumping around and essentially toying with its enemies.  The damage isn't quite there though when compared to other strikers. If you define best as the most fun, it would be this.
> 
> The Wild Magic Sorc also belongs in the top for fun given the random elements to the character. Unpredictability makes for a fun character as well.
> 
> Rogues require the most tactics/skill to play of the strikers. If you use this a measure of the best, than Rogues deserve consideration.  I like the challenge that playing a rogue brings along with the payoff that is quite likely the most damage of any striker when it works.
> 
> I've never seen the other strikers played yet, but on paper the Rageblood with Swift Charge Barbarian seems very fun to play as well. I wish I didn't always have to DM



I've been playing an Artful Dodger rogue for the past 6 levels, and I have a hard time getting combat advantage. Got maybe 3 sneak attacks during last session's combat.


----------



## Garthanos

Klaus said:


> I've been playing an Artful Dodger rogue for the past 6 levels, and I have a hard time getting combat advantage. Got maybe 3 sneak attacks during last session's combat.




Perhaps he should be introduced to some Warlords ... A halfling bravura warlord, I was thinking of...


----------



## Garthanos

-Avalon- said:


> I wanted to have the surprise vote: Wizard!
> 
> In our group we had 2 rogues, and avenger, a cleric, a fighter, and a wizard.
> 
> We keep our DPR milestones on a blackboard and see who can get the most damage in one round.  The rogues are at like 317 and 363, the avenger is at 461, and the wizard is over 800...
> 
> Overall, the wizard is the best striker in the game.




Love it... how does damage dealt to minions count?


----------



## borg286

I would have voted for the feycharger but that wasn't an option.
The highest DPR I've seen was from the sorcerer feycharger coming in at 460 DPR.  Yes that's DPR not nova damage. Some flavors I like are swapping out hybrid swordmage for hybrid ranger and doing MC swordmage so I can use spitting cobra stance with dragonfrost.  Using dragonfrost as often as spitting cobra stance grants and using arcane admixture to get echoes of thunder that dragonfrost gets up to some insane damage.  Another variation on the sorcerer feychargerer is MC rogue for daggermaster for a lovely crit range.  My favorite is currently the divine feycharger for his amazing AC and not having to get reaper's touch while still getting 430 DPR, the 18-20 crit range and great constant damage due to radiant vulnerability and echoes of thunder.  Funny that this striker is based on 3 defender classes(paladin, swordmage, fighter) and the lowest damaging striker(warlock).
Paladin | swordmage MC fighter, warlock / student of ciaphon / sage of ages.


----------



## -Avalon-

Garthanos said:


> Love it... how does damage dealt to minions count?




1 pt per minion...  Our DM barely uses minions as they really do not contribute anything to the fights...  he runs almost like a 3rd edition game, real mobs everytime


----------



## Klaus

Garthanos said:


> Perhaps he should be introduced to some Warlords ... A halfling bravura warlord, I was thinking of...



Not available in the party (paladin, cleric of Bane (non-evil), battlerager, archer ranger, orb wizard and me as a rogue).


----------



## Garthanos

borg286 said:


> I would have voted for the feycharger but that wasn't an option.
> The highest DPR I've seen was from the sorcerer feycharger coming in at 460 DPR.  Yes that's DPR not nova damage.  My favorite is currently the divine feycharger for his amazing AC and not having to get reaper's touch while still getting 430 DPR, the 18-20 crit range and great constant damage due to radiant vulnerability and echoes of thunder.  Funny that this striker is based on 3 defender classes(paladin, swordmage, fighter) and the lowest damaging striker(warlock).
> Paladin | swordmage MC fighter, warlock / student of ciaphon / sage of ages.




That sounds fun because of the mix... I do like reapers touch though... call it my conjurers blade. You have me curious about what each class brings to the table...


----------



## borg286

Would you like me to summarize how each class brings a different twist to the feycharger?  I don't feel this is detracting from the theme of the thread.


----------



## Garthanos

-Avalon- said:


> 1 pt per minion...  Our DM barely uses minions as they really do not contribute anything to the fights...  he runs almost like a 3rd edition game, real mobs everytime




A few minor changes to minions (bloodiable = healable and intimidateable) have made them a solid addition to any fight for me.. but I have a low player count and don't make which bad guys are minions so obvious... mix in ally minions and you can have quite a body count.

Picture a demon portal we are struggling to close while waves of evils sometimes minions sometimes not come out.


----------



## Stalker0

This one to me really depends on how you define best. If I go with the role definition, high mobility and increadible damage....then imo the archer ranger is so far ahead its not even funny.

I've seen warlocks, sorcerors, avengers, and barbarians along with an archer ranger....and right now the archer ranger is way ahead.

But I think he is way more boring than the other classes. It is very easy in open terrain to be untargetable. You just put down your quarry, and pump arrows into badguys for massive damage. Rinse, repeat.


----------



## Garthanos

borg286 said:


> Would you like me to summarize how each class brings a different twist to the feycharger?  I don't feel this is detracting from the theme of the thread.




I would.. but I tend to meander a little on occasion. The definition of best class/build for striker means if you have another defining it makes some sense.


----------



## borg286

For me a striker is defined as a mindset and effectiveness at taking out monsters.

Base fey charger standard stuff:
Eladrin
Belongs to the swordmage class to get eladrin swordmage advance
belongs to the fighter class to get fey charge so he can use his feystep to replace a charge's movement, thus triggereing eladrin swordmage advance
have some at-will power(magic missile, dragonfrost, Virtous strike) that you pile stuff(echoes of thunder, white lotus master riposte) on that can be used as a melee basic attack, typically with reaper's touch(opens up wizard, warlock, sorcerer, invoker as good candidates)
-typically this is an arcane power so you can use white lotus master riposte + aegis of assault for a practically guaranteed extra attack, Arcane admixture(thunder) + echoes of thunder as echoes have exponentially growing damage bonus with the number of attacks (4-5 usually for most fey chargers)
Dancing sword(level 20 light/heavy blade) to get an extra MBA(your power) each round for encounter as a daily power
Often feychargers use windrise ports background(take 2 multi classes) to fit in all the classes they need
Most feychargers go sage of ages for the floating d20 and the possibility for encounter long attack bonus to help the feycharge suceed so as to not loose it.
Most feychargers that have an arcane MBA usually get 300+ DPR

Base fey charger
Wizard | swordmage MC fighter
-Uses wizard's fury and salve of power until epic where dancing sword takes over. You still get the attack wizard's fury gave you for the same action requirement but doesn't use a healing surge to refresh. Wizard's fury is great in heroic and awesome in paragon then obsolete in epic. With a battle harness and tons of orbs of judicious conjuration(level 3 is fine) he can sustain the power for free giving him that extra minor action.
-Only needs one attribute to be good.
-I like to go int/wis and go hybrid talent(orb of imposition) and take blood mage for a great versatile defender/controler/striker

Sorcerer | ranger MC swordmage, fighter / Academy master / sage of ages
-Frostcheesed dragonfrost + arcane admixture(thunder) + echoes of thunder
-Spitting cobra stance to throw those dragonfrosts everywhere even pushing them for control
-Heroic tier can be based on best striker: the ranger then shift to sorcerer in paragon when white lotus master riposte + arcane admixture + fey charge kick in

Sorcerer | swordmage MC rogue, fighter / Daggermaster / sage of ages
-18-20 crit range + bloodiron dagger + 3 attacks / round = ouchie

Paladin(cha) | swordmage MC fighter, warlock / student of ciaphon / sage of ages
-Virtous strike + arcane domain = candidate for arcane admixture and thus echoes of thunder
-Arcane domain has stacking +1 to attack till end of next turn, this combined with AV2's Barrage Bracers doing the same thing, both being untyped.
-White lotus master riposte + aegis of assault still works.
-2 ways to mark(aegis + divine challenge)
-Hybrid talent(paladin armor prof) means we start at level 1 with plate prof w/ no requirement on str, con.
-Font of radiance + punishing radiance(DP) + 18-20 crit range + virtuous strike(radiant) + symbol of divine light(AV2)(increase radiant vulnerability by 5)


----------



## Garthanos

borg286 said:


> Paladin(cha) | swordmage MC fighter, warlock / student of ciaphon / sage of ages
> -Virtous strike + arcane domain = candidate for arcane admixture and thus echoes of thunder
> -Arcane domain has stacking +1 to attack till end of next when you hit, this combined with AV2's Barrage Bracers doing the same thing, both being untyped.
> -Hybrid talent(paladin armor prof) means we start at level 1 with plate prof w/ no requirement on str, con.




That brings up how with all the hybriding and mc'ing do you deal with MAAD effects.


----------



## borg286

Garthanos said:


> That brings up how with all the hybriding and mc'ing do you deal with MAAD effects.



It's not hard at all
Swordmage hybrid works well with eladrin +2 int
cha 16 starting off works well with paladin and easily passes requirements for warlock MC
str 13 for fighter MC
Then just pump int and cha all the way.  The only sucky thing is that all secondary attribute powers (powers that key off secondary attributes) all suck because neither has the other's key attribute as a secondary.  Meh.


----------



## Squizzle

borg286 said:


> Paladin | swordmage MC fighter, warlock / student of ciaphon / sage of ages.




How...how are you mutliclassing so freely? That ain't street-legal, dude.


----------



## borg286

Squizzle said:


> How...how are you mutliclassing so freely? That ain't street-legal, dude.



Dragon 376 p. 48 has a background that lets you take class-specific multiclass feats for 2 classes.  Thus a non-bard can be a member of 4 classes through this and hybridding.


----------



## Garthanos

borg286 said:


> Dragon 376 p. 48 has a background that lets you take class-specific multiclass feats for 2 classes.  Thus a non-bard can be a member of 4 classes through this and hybridding.




Windrise ports or something... 
And multiclass feats are very nice at getting just the right feel for a character without gimping them. (though hybriding for those at-wills is a must).


----------



## Tony Vargas

borg286 said:


> Dragon 376 p. 48 has a background that lets you take class-specific multiclass feats for 2 classes.  Thus a non-bard can be a member of 4 classes through this and hybridding.



Wow.  I can see how that could open up the 3e-style cheese.  Most powers and class-specific feats were doubtless written with restrictive MC'ing in mind.  So not only does adding in more multiclassing options allow for 3e style 'synergies' (or broken combos, depending on how you look at it), but there's presumably been less design effort put into heading them off at the front end.


----------



## Stuntman

Tony Vargas said:


> Wow. I can see how that could open up the 3e-style cheese. Most powers and class-specific feats were doubtless written with restrictive MC'ing in mind. So not only does adding in more multiclassing options allow for 3e style 'synergies' (or broken combos, depending on how you look at it), but there's presumably been less design effort put into heading them off at the front end.




I agree.  This also allows characters from this region take multiple multiclass weapon feats.  It just doesn't feel right that characters from here can learn multiple weapons that require multiclass feats better than characters not from this region.

I'm also upset that this starts to step on the bard's toes.  I tend to not like character options that allow you to gain abilities of other classes or races.  I just like the fact that certain classes and races get options only available to them.


----------



## borg286

Stuntman said:


> I agree.  This also allows characters from this region take multiple multiclass weapon feats.  It just doesn't feel right that characters from here can learn multiple weapons that require multiclass feats better than characters not from this region.
> 
> I'm also upset that this starts to step on the bard's toes.  I tend to not like character options that allow you to gain abilities of other classes or races.  I just like the fact that certain classes and races get options only available to them.



Windrise backgrounds stipulates class-specific multiclass feats, thus carefully discluding weapon multiclass feats.  If I am wrong I'll admit it, but the background does have this stipulation.


----------



## Stuntman

Anyway, back to the original topic, in the groups that I play, there are two brutal rogues, a ranger, two warlocks and a wild sorcerer.  Of these, I find the wild sorcerer the most interesting, so that's where my vote went.  The rogue tends to really need support form an ally, and the warlocks and ranger are limited in target selection for their extra damage feature.  The Sorcerer tends to have the greatest flexibility in terms of where they apply the extra damage.  He also has a feat that does more damage when he runs out of encounter attack powers.  His average damage is greater than my (fighter/wizard) critical damage.


----------



## borg286

Stuntman said:


> Anyway, back to the original topic, in the groups that I play, there are two brutal rogues, a ranger, two warlocks and a wild sorcerer.  Of these, I find the wild sorcerer the most interesting, so that's where my vote went.  The rogue tends to really need support form an ally, and the warlocks and ranger are limited in target selection for their extra damage feature.  The Sorcerer tends to have the greatest flexibility in terms of where they apply the extra damage.  He also has a feat that does more damage when he runs out of encounter attack powers.  His average damage is greater than my (fighter/wizard) critical damage.




While it is true that the warlock and ranger can only curse/quarry the nearest target, this is not the core of how these 2 classes form the polar ends of striker examples.
The ranger has the most multi-attack powers (arguably the core of high DPR) thus if the ranger (assume TWF version) can get bloodclaw, iron armbands of power, weapon focus, and other static damage modifiers they all apply to his multi attacks.  This makes one favor a 2 attacks @ 1[w] + str better than 4[w] + str.
The warlock on the other hand focuses on control and even has a hard time finding spells that target many targets to apply his bonuses, needless to say spells that attack the same target multiple times. even his high damaging powers don't do that much damage.  It's like a weak sauce version of a controler mixed with a weak sauce version of a sorcerer.


----------



## Turtlejay

I'm not on the moar damage bandwagon with strikers.  I play the game to have fun, and to me the most fun looking and still effective Striker looks like the Rageblood Barbarian.  Sure, you can build some horrific bastardization of multiclass feat gone wrong, and get something that does more damage, but you might as well play an mmo at that point.

What d&d has over mmos is the ability to make your character unique.  If you just build something off of a formula to get an optimized result, you have just cut out a large part of the game.  Go play wow.

Jay


----------



## Votan

I am sad that the Fey pact warlock, while fun to play, doesn't seem to really shine as a striker.  I do like that a martial character (ranger, rogue) can be a strong option at all levels.

But I voted on fun (warlock) which is one form of best!


----------



## Holy Bovine

SigmaX0 said:


> Barbarians fragile? My Goliath Rageblood is tougher than most defenders, and certainly tougher than any striker!
> 
> He does have low defenses, but tons of HP, surges, temp HP and damage resistance.




Same here.  Although our defender has a higher Ac by quite a bit the 2 Rageblood Barbs in the group always outlast him (mainly b/c the DMs dice hate the poor guy!  Two 20's in a row last session alone!).  The huge amount of mobility RB Barbs can get (Combat Sprint & Swift Charge) make them battlefield monsters.  I love mine!

And he'd smash the head clean off the shoulders of any Ranger who got within 20 squares.


----------



## Kzach

Wow, this one has gotten the most votes (although I haven't checked the others recently, but last I saw they only got up to 100ish) and I guessed it right, the ranger has all the votes.

Le sigh.

The masses want what the masses want, I guess.

So with all four threads done, that makes the iconic group the following:

Defender - Guardian Fighter
Leader - Tactical Warlord
Controller - Control Wizard
Striker - Archer/TWF Ranger

Now I have to make a poll to determine the races!


----------



## Tony Vargas

I don't get the ranger thing, either.  My regular group has two campaigns going.  One player in each played a ranger, one archer, one TWF.  The former has concluded that '4e sucks,' and the latter has decided to 'focus on his career.'  The archer seems particularly boring to play (though perfectly capable of dishing the damage), and the TWF ranger was most notable for missing both his attacks, using his elven re-roll and missing again (Scimitars & 16 STR to start, maybe not the best idea?) - though that one interrupt power that gives the enemy an attack penalty worked well on a number of occassions.   

As far as the other strikers we've had a chance to try out go, the Warlock has also been classified as boring, and the Rogue was generally awesome.  The rogue does big damage with sneak attack (almost trivially easy for the party to set up), shifts all over, slides enemies around, and hits like crazy (weapon powers vs nACDs w/+3 prof & +1 weapon talent, and Combat Advantage).


----------



## Votan

Kzach said:


> So with all four threads done, that makes the iconic group the following:
> 
> Defender - Guardian Fighter
> Leader - Tactical Warlord
> Controller - Control Wizard
> Striker - Archer/TWF Ranger
> 
> Now I have to make a poll to determine the races!




In a strange twist, all 4 are from the PHB1 (goodbye power creep) and three of the four are martial options (who could have imagined that back in the days of third edition).  

I find this really cool!


----------



## Saeviomagy

Tony Vargas said:


> I don't get the ranger thing, either.  My regular group has two campaigns going.  One player in each played a ranger, one archer, one TWF.
> 
> As far as the other strikers we've had a chance to try out go, the Warlock has also been classified as boring, and the Rogue was generally awesome.  The rogue does big damage with sneak attack (almost trivially easy for the party to set up), shifts all over, slides enemies around, and hits like crazy (weapon powers vs nACDs w/+3 prof & +1 weapon talent, and Combat Advantage).




I'd have to agree that the ranger seems like the most boring character to play in the entire game, and the archer ranger more so.

Rogues are fun - a rogue in the party will force the party to move tactically all the freaking time. Typically groups don't tend to care a lot about CA, but with a rogue screaming "give me CA!" all the time, that changes.

Warlocks seem fine to me, although really difficult to play effectively. To be competitive with at-wills, you need to be able to force foes to either attack you or move towards you.


----------



## Hejdun

Rangers are probably the most powerful, but they are easily the most boring.  All you do in each and every round is roll two dice for your dual strike.

Rogues are interesting because of the tactics they have to figure out.  I think they pale in comparison to a Barbarian though.

I haven't really seen Sorcerors in action, but in theory I'd think they are the best.  Their area attacks mean they can heap on the bonus damage, and they seem to have quite a few controllery powers.


----------



## Kzach

Votan said:


> In a strange twist, all 4 are from the PHB1 (goodbye power creep) and three of the four are martial options (who could have imagined that back in the days of third edition).




Huh, yeah, I didn't realise that until you just pointed it out.

I wonder how much of it is influenced by time? Is the bias towards PHB 1 classes simply because they've been around the longest? Oh well, it's not like this poll is some official WotC marketing decision or anything.

And anyway, popularity works for iconism just as well as 'the best' 




Votan said:


> I find this really cool!



Me too!

I can honestly say that I have enjoyed reading these threads more than anything else I've read here for quite some time.


----------



## Votan

Kzach said:


> I wonder how much of it is influenced by time? Is the bias towards PHB 1 classes simply because they've been around the longest? Oh well, it's not like this poll is some official WotC marketing decision or anything.




While I am sure that this is certainly true (more exposure), if the new options in PHB2 were startlingly better than PHB1 then I would have expected to see it in the polls.  But seeing strong contenders (like Bard) do well but not overwhelmingly well was interesting to see.

It's also worth notping that the fairly new Warlord beats out the more "classic" cleric as leader.   

Thanks for doing these polls.


----------



## Jhaelen

-Avalon- said:


> 1 pt per minion...  Our DM barely uses minions as they really do not contribute anything to the fights...  he runs almost like a 3rd edition game, real mobs everytime



A DPR highscore list and mobs? Doesn't even sound like an rpg to me... but to each their own, I guess.


----------



## d.wartooth

babinro said:


> Of all of these polls, Strikers are easily the most difficult to pin down as Best.
> 
> 
> 
> The Wild Magic Sorc also belongs in the top for fun given the random elements to the character. Unpredictability makes for a fun character as well.




*This*. 

I am currently involved with 3 ongoing games. In 2 of them, I play Strikers. One is a TWF wielding twin bastard swords (made of gory fun since it's a 15th level Eberron campaign. Armor Splinterer, followed by Blade Cascade is made of WIN!) The other is a Wild Sorc. I play him as slightly insane, given to talking to his imaginary friend while negotiating with the Duke. The randomness of his powers is not only mechanically good, but fun to RP as well!


----------



## Then

To me to be the best you have to be awesomesauce from level 1.

The Ranger is not.

That is why I like the rogue, sorc, and barb.


----------



## borg286

Kzach said:


> And anyway, popularity works for iconism just as well as 'the best'



This pole was slightly biased.  You only offered iconic builds w/o offering contenders like the tempest fighter which would have competed with the TWF ranger.  There is an entire class of builds called feychargers that outdamage any ranger.  I'd even go as far as to say that the lowest standard feycharger out damages the best stormwarden.  I know that even the thought of introducing specific builds into a pole is inherintly biased in that selecting the most popular DPR builds would offend other creators.  But only offering iconic class options discludes most of the competators, thus making people choose the best option of those listed.
Other builds that murder the ranger is the 1/2 elf avenger MC rogue / daggermaster, feycharger, supercharger and a few others.  These aren't specific builds but entire catagories with almost as versatile options as, say, a tempest fighter.


----------



## Garthanos

borg286 said:


> These aren't specific builds but entire catagories with almost as versatile options as, say, a tempest fighter.




You might have to put in a lot more work to identify build style which kind of reduces there viability for this purpose ... 

I am happy that they have differing routes to there destination not sure I entirely approve of the goal. 

I am in general anti game hacking because it tends to reduce the imagination element and de-emphasize flavor. I tend to hack together hybrids and mc in order to design a particular flavor of character (and try and keep the character effective) instead of optimising for a narrow form of effectiveness and hope it has some flavor.

Sorry for my prejudices... but charopters have a bad rep where I come from...


----------



## BlueBlackRed

I've not seen all of the classes in action, but those I've seen that stand out are the wild mage, bow ranger, two-weapon ranger, and barbarian.

I've personally run a two-weapon ranger with rogue multi-classing up to level 9 and his damage potential is disgusting in the event of a nova instance and/or criticals.

And I really didn't min/max him as much as I could have.


----------



## MarkB

Having the right support makes a huge difference for rogues. I gave up playing a rogue in a 5th-level game as we lacked co-ordinated melee support, and I hardly ever got to use Sneak Attack.

On the other hand, I played an Inspiring Warlord in an 11th-level game with two rogues, and built him so that almost every round he could use a power or tactic to set up Combat Advantage, and he was great fun. My favourite was the Impetuous Charger feat, combined with a reach weapon and Boots of Adept Charging. It turned what was effectively a basic attack into a superior At-Will.


----------



## SteveC

I'm wondering if the folks who are voting Ranger have actually played one or are rather looking at DPR numbers. We've been playing pretty much from day one, and the class that consistently keeps getting replaced or killed is the melee ranger. Sure you can do Twin Strike, but unless you go with heavy armor you end up with a horrible AC and mediocre HPs. Combine that with not having a suite of "get out of dodge" powers, and you have a recipe for needing a new character.

I'm sure the ranger can do a lot of damage, but if you're on the front lines for any length of time you'll get yourself into a lot of trouble.

So tell me how I'm totally wrong... 

--Steve


----------



## Lucas Blackstone

Earlier in this thread I saw someone mention heroic tier sorcerers with a min damage of low twenties on at wills. Is this easily obtainable or does it require overpowered/ hidden away feats?

I was figuring 10 from stats ( either 22/18 or 20/20 ), 3 from implement, 1 from weapon focus ( though I don't agree with that really ). I saw a few conditional damage feats, but not to the tune of 6-8 more static damage.

So which ones are best? I'm interested in playing a sorc sometime.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

SteveC said:


> I'm wondering if the folks who are voting Ranger have actually played one or are rather looking at DPR numbers. We've been playing pretty much from day one, and the class that consistently keeps getting replaced or killed is the melee ranger. Sure you can do Twin Strike, but unless you go with heavy armor you end up with a horrible AC and mediocre HPs. Combine that with not having a suite of "get out of dodge" powers, and you have a recipe for needing a new character.
> 
> I'm sure the ranger can do a lot of damage, but if you're on the front lines for any length of time you'll get yourself into a lot of trouble.
> 
> So tell me how I'm totally wrong...
> 
> --Steve



All my experience so far suggests the Ranger is just awesome in damage. He deals out a lot, and he takes a lot. 

But he can't really take it. There needs to be a very good Defender and Leader in the party to survive for long. But maybe the people playing him are playing him "wrong" - they need to keep moving. If I ever play a Ranger, I will see what I can do about that.

Maybe there is a good argument for actually playing a Dwarven Ranger. Con Bonus, Minor Action Second Wind...


----------



## Ryujin

Votan said:


> I am sad that the Fey pact warlock, while fun to play, doesn't seem to really shine as a striker.  I do like that a martial character (ranger, rogue) can be a strong option at all levels.
> 
> But I voted on fun (warlock) which is one form of best!




I play a Feylock and while it's fun and I get a great deal of role play opportunities out of it, for a Striker it makes a fair to middlein' Controller. "OK, you 5 guys can't move this round." "Here, kiss the ceiling for a couple of rounds. Done with that? OK, off you go!" "I saw your buddy eyeing your girl last night. I think that you should hit him and teach him a lesson." "You! Get over there. I missed? OK, get SORTA over there." Toss in a few random, "Nyah nyah, you can't hit me" every encounter and it's definitely a fun class.

By comparison our ranged Ranger is a damage making machine. The only time things fall apart from his is when he parks himself in a corner and gets whaled on for a couple of rounds. That's when I save his sorry butt and toss in the "OK, you 5 guys can't move this round" schtick.


----------



## SigmaX0

Last campaign I played a TWF ranger with 7 Con (score not mod, we rolled for stats).  I had to take durable because 5 surges is just not enough, but I have to disagree about rangers not having get out of dodge powers. 

Between Yield Ground, Weave through the fray, Evade the Blow etc there's plenty of ways to avoid damage.  I was boosting Dex for my Stormwarden powers so my AC/Reflex was high, TW Defense feat combined with a good Greatweapon fighter (3 person party and no leader) I found as long as I played smart, I was never in any serious danger. YMMV.


----------



## Klaus

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> All my experience so far suggests the Ranger is just awesome in damage. He deals out a lot, and he takes a lot.
> 
> But he can't really take it. There needs to be a very good Defender and Leader in the party to survive for long. But maybe the people playing him are playing him "wrong" - they need to keep moving. If I ever play a Ranger, I will see what I can do about that.
> 
> Maybe there is a good argument for actually playing a Dwarven Ranger. Con Bonus, Minor Action Second Wind...



Longtooth Shifter, Chainmail Proficiency, and you're set. Maybe Warlord or Cleric multi for Inspiring/Healing Word?


----------



## Samir

I don't like questions like these because they are so vague.

A Striker's job is to deal damage. If a Striker is not dealing competitive damage, you could say it's not doing the job of a Striker.

So the "Best Striker" is the one that does the most DPR. Not necessarily nova, mind you, but sustained DPR.

Keeping that in mind, the best Striker is the two-blade Ranger--particularly Storm Wardens and Pit Fighters--because it does the most damage, even more than its archer cousin. Of course, that's pretty much all that Rangers are capable of doing--damage. They are the purest Striker, and they excel at it.

If by "best" you actually meant "favorite," then Pursuit Avenger, without a doubt. What an awesomely fun class to play. But as it is, this poll is pretty meaningless because everybody voting on it isn't answering the same question.


----------



## tiornys

Samir said:


> I don't like questions like these because they are so vague.
> 
> A Striker's job is to deal damage. If a Striker is not dealing competitive damage, you could say it's not doing the job of a Striker.
> 
> So the "Best Striker" is the one that does the most DPR. Not necessarily nova, mind you, but sustained DPR.
> 
> Keeping that in mind, the best Striker is the two-blade Ranger--particularly Storm Wardens and Pit Fighters--because it does the most damage, even more than its archer cousin. Of course, that's pretty much all that Rangers are capable of doing--damage. They are the purest Striker, and they excel at it.
> 
> If by "best" you actually meant "favorite," then Pursuit Avenger, without a doubt. What an awesomely fun class to play. But as it is, this poll is pretty meaningless because everybody voting on it isn't answering the same question.



People may be answering different questions, but the poll is still effective at discerning a combination of what the community as a whole prefers their striker to excel at, and which class they think best represents those qualities.  Since the ultimate aim of the poll is to help put together a "community approved" party, I think it's doing its job despite the flaws in the method.

On a side note, I disagree with your definition of striker, so even if we were to define "best" as "best at doing the job of a striker", you and I are still voting by different criteria.

t~


----------



## Samir

tiornys said:


> On a side note, I disagree with your definition of striker, so even if we were to define "best" as "best at doing the job of a striker", you and I are still voting by different criteria.
> 
> t~



My definition of the striker is, IMO, just a restatement of WotC's definition of a striker.



> *Striker (Ranger, Rogue, Warlock)*
> Strikers specialize in dealing high amounts of damage to a single target at a time. They have the most concentrated offense of any character in the game. Strikers rely on superior mobility, trickery, or magic to move around tough foes and single out the enemy they want to attack.




Perhaps I should have added "single target" to my previous definition, but the intent was the same.

How do you define a striker?


----------



## tiornys

Samir said:


> My definition of the striker is, IMO, just a restatement of WotC's definition of a striker.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps I should have added "single target" to my previous definition, but the intent was the same.
> 
> How do you define a striker?



I think the PHB definitions of the roles are intentionally simplistic and non-comprehensive, and based on the class/role assignments they've released, I think WotC uses a more complex definition set than their PHB overview.  I have a thread over on WotC's (currently inaccessible) boards that goes into more depth, but my definition of a striker can be summarized as:

_A striker engages and neutralizes priority targets as safely and efficiently as possible._

So, focused high damage is an excellent tool for the neutralization portion of the job (although others exist), but maneuverability and range are important for the ability to access the most important target, and defenses and evasion are important for staying alive and efficiently switching targets.  Different strikers have different strengths and weaknesses within those parameters, but they're all capable of doing the job as a whole better than, say, a Fighter, because even though the Fighter can outdamage several strikers, he lacks maneuverability and evasion.

t~


----------



## Samir

tiornys said:


> I think the PHB definitions of the roles are intentionally simplistic and non-comprehensive, and based on the class/role assignments they've released, I think WotC uses a more complex definition set than their PHB overview.  I have a thread over on WotC's (currently inaccessible) boards that goes into more depth, but my definition of a striker can be summarized as:
> 
> _A striker engages and neutralizes priority targets as safely and efficiently as possible._
> 
> So, focused high damage is an excellent tool for the neutralization portion of the job (although others exist), but maneuverability and range are important for the ability to access the most important target, and defenses and evasion are important for staying alive and efficiently switching targets.  Different strikers have different strengths and weaknesses within those parameters, but they're all capable of doing the job as a whole better than, say, a Fighter, because even though the Fighter can outdamage several strikers, he lacks maneuverability and evasion.
> 
> t~




Arguably, not having the mobility to reach a desired target reduces your DPR against that target, so that could just as easily be folded into the original definition. Along the same lines, a dead striker does 0 DPR, so survivability is of some importance.

But I do see what you're saying. Circumstances are not always ideal, and as such there's more to DPR than the number a damage calculator gives you.


----------



## Holy Bovine

So no surprise that the Ranger wins this one hands down.  What i do find surprising, and more than a little amusing, is the large % of respondents who feel the ranger is boring to play.  While I have never played a ranger I have seen 2 in play so far and they do look dull compared to my Rageblood Barbarian or the elven AD Rogue.


----------



## Kzach

Holy Bovine said:


> So no surprise that the Ranger wins this one hands down.  What i do find surprising, and more than a little amusing, is the large % of respondents who feel the ranger is boring to play.  While I have never played a ranger I have seen 2 in play so far and they do look dull compared to my Rageblood Barbarian or the elven AD Rogue.




One thing I've found that happens with every ranger I've seen in play, and so far that's about six in as many groups, is that inevitably they just end up spamming Twin Strike.

It has so far become a running joke in every single group. "What does your ranger do this turn?" Everybody answering in unison, "TWIN STRIKE!"


----------



## Tony Vargas

It makes sense.  The striker role is the simplest, most straightforward of the four.  Just do damage.  Of course the quintessencial striker would be boring.


----------



## Zinovia

Chaos sorcerers are both fun to play and good at damage.  There's more flavors of strikers out there than anything else, so you are likely to see people voting for their favorites.  I was surprised at how many selected the ranger, but my current main group doesn't have one, so I don't have a chance to see them in play outside RPGA games.


----------



## Garthanos

Kzach said:


> One thing I've found that happens with every ranger I've seen in play, and so far that's about six in as many groups, is that inevitably they just end up spamming Twin Strike.
> 
> It has so far become a running joke in every single group. "What does your ranger do this turn?" Everybody answering in unison, "TWIN STRIKE!"




Heh... hmmm how to make spamming fun ... a drinking game 
If the player can describe the action differently every time 
they use it make a tally every time the talley reaches a 
certain lucky number take a drink...  

I like the Robinhood/William Tell Ranter Archer and twin strike lends itself well to lots of descriptions..


----------



## Minigiant

There are too many aspects of Strikers to simply say which is best.

For a general best striker, iid go for the archer ranger with it's high damage, mobility, and independence.


For more survivabiltty I'd say warlock. I've never seen a warlock die if a TPK wasn't nearby.

Avenger if you need a "slay him now" style striker.

As for pure damage, we all know who...


----------



## Iron Sky

Since we got 4e, we've seen almost all the strikers in play:

Game 1
Halfling brutal Rogue, levels 1-3

Our 1st taste of 4e.  First level or two, he stayed in back throwing daggers.  Did and was dealt little damage.  Later, got riskier, jumping in to get CA.  Did and was dealt alot of damage(dropped every other fight or so).


Game 2
Halfling brutal Rogue, Daggermaster, levels 1-16

The Rogue was pretty much the same as from the first game.  He got better at getting CA without getting attacked as much.  Extreme mobility once he got "Gummy-beary juice", the level 6(?) at-will that lets you jump and exceed your movement.  Cool character, like a little feral bouncy ninja.  He still only rolls a crit every other battle or so - though, he's our wild card since he rolled crits three rounds in a row during one fight and the next didn't roll a single one...

Half-elf warlock, Feytouched(?), levels 1-16

The Warlock was our controller and excelled at avoiding damage, dropping the occasional status effect and dealing moderate damage.  Ended up saving our butts from time to time by "lock-tanking" in fights where the rest of us were getting screwed up.  Almost invariably, she'd have very little damage and would teleport to the front lines and play D for a bit while the cleric patched the rest of us up.

Her Slashing Wake feat(Int damage to enemies on teleport) makes minion-fights trivial.

Elven Ranger, TWF, Stormwarden, levels 1-16

The Ranger was my character and I don't think I ever found him boring.  Being Stormwarden with TWD, he had decent defenses, plus Weave-Through-the-Fray and others to get the heck out of dodge when needed.  I liked how when he started, bow and sword were almost equal and I would switch between as needed.  Closer to paragon, I began phasing out the bow part and once Stormwarden was hit (yes, with frost-cheese) he's the party's main source of steady, consistent damage.


Game 3
Half-orc Barbarian, Rageblood, levels 3-6

The amount of damage he puts out is staggering.  Mordenkrad + Half-orc + Howling Strike + Obsidian Steed + Horned Helm + Boots of Adept Charging = A +1-to-hit, 4d6 + 10-12 damage attack almost every round at 5th level.  

Stir in some Bestial Armor and his Rageblood free charge and, in the last fight, he did a Howling Strike(+Orc Extra Damage) Crit + Free Barb MBA on crit + Bestial armor to do three huge attacks and take an elite goblin from somewhat bloodied to dead in a round.  

His 7 THP on killing something make him decently tanky, despite his slightly-low AC: he has 20 at level 6, about the same as the pacifist cleric's and WAY below the Swordmage's 26.

Drow Wild Sorcerer, levels 3-6

Good damage, decent status effects (especially with a Feyswarm Staff).  He rolls evens several times in a row with remarkable frequency, allowing his Chaos Bolt (he calls it "The Magical Bouncing Ball of Doom") to frequently hit between 2 and 6(!) enemies in a round.  Like the warlock, he's somewhere between controller and striker.


Game 4
Gnome Dragonmagic Sorcerer, levels 3-9

Dragonmagic Sorcerers are sweet.  In one big fight when he dropped 2 dallies, then hit with his at-will burst, any enemy that hit him would take 5 lightning + 5 cold + 3 fire and by pushed 1 square if it hit him.  If he activated his Dragonflame Mantle, add another 1d6 fire to that...  Since our Scales of War group is only 3 of us, he's stepped up and solo'd the second half a couple tough fights while my Avenger and the Cleric lay bleeding out.  His damage isn't as high as the Wild-Mage, but man do enemies have a tough time hurting him.

Elven Pursuit Avenger, levels 3-5
Half-elf Pursuit Avenger, levels 5-9

The first was my first attempt at an Avenger, using a fullblade.  He was kinda fun, with big shifts and teleports, fair-to-good defenses, and moderate damage.  After the first adventure, I decided to switch out to the infamous "Daggavenger" to see how they played at heroic (Half-elf Twin-Strike Daggermaster at Paragon uber-cheese).  As a result, power's dex-based riders are far less exciting, his defenses are much lower, but his damage (Bloodclaw Executioner's Axe until Paragon) is far higher.

Interestingly, I found that Power Attack made for a significant drop in damage, since about once per combat, the -2 made the difference between hitting and missing(and missing out on 1d12+10 to 2d12+16 damage).


Final summary:
TWF ranger is good at single-target smack-downs, with enough evasion/decent defenses to survive to deal it.  The Stormwarden(with rolled stats and Scimitar Dance) mean, at 16, a _minimum_ of 21 damage a round against the Twin-Strike target, average somewhere in the mid-high 30s.  Also managed to pull out the generic Armor Splinter + Blade Cascade to dish out around 200 damage to a solo in one round at level 15, and I didn't even get all my attacks in.

The rogue's daze/blind/stun powers and sneak attack make for a smattering of helpful control and occasional bursts of huge damage.

The fey warlock makes for great control when built that way and Paragon Feylocks trivialize minions.

Barbarians can do sick amounts of damage and usually have enough HP/THP in our experience to survive to dish it out.

The Wild Sorcerer is great at ranged DPS with a smattering of control thrown in, while the Dragon Sorcerer is extremely survivable and can dish out nearly as much.


----------



## Jack99

-Avalon- said:


> I wanted to have the surprise vote: Wizard!
> 
> In our group we had 2 rogues, and avenger, a cleric, a fighter, and a wizard.
> 
> We keep our DPR milestones on a blackboard and see who can get the most damage in one round.  The rogues are at like 317 and 363, the avenger is at 461, and the wizard is over 800...
> 
> Overall, the wizard is the best striker in the game.



That's a lot of damage, what level are ya?


Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> All my experience so far suggests the Ranger is just awesome in damage. He deals out a lot, and he takes a lot.
> 
> But he can't really take it. There needs to be a very good Defender and Leader in the party to survive for long. But maybe the people playing him are playing him "wrong" - they need to keep moving. If I ever play a Ranger, I will see what I can do about that.
> 
> Maybe there is a good argument for actually playing a Dwarven Ranger. Con Bonus, Minor Action Second Wind...



bow-ranger takes almost no damage quite often..


Samir said:


> I don't like questions like these because they are so vague.
> 
> A Striker's job is to deal damage. If a Striker is not dealing competitive damage, you could say it's not doing the job of a Striker.
> 
> So the "Best Striker" is the one that does the most DPR. Not necessarily nova, mind you, but sustained DPR.
> 
> Keeping that in mind, the best Striker is the two-blade Ranger--particularly Storm Wardens and Pit Fighters--because it does the most damage, even more than its archer cousin. Of course, that's pretty much all that Rangers are capable of doing--damage. They are the purest Striker, and they excel at it.
> 
> If by "best" you actually meant "favorite," then Pursuit Avenger, without a doubt. What an awesomely fun class to play. But as it is, this poll is pretty meaningless because everybody voting on it isn't answering the same question.



Well, a dual-weilding ranger indeed has the highest possible dps - unfortunately, as i told my raiders for years in several MMO's a dead (or dying) striker does 0 dps - Which is why the archer is the better striker, going by your definition. He will be stunned/dazed/dead/dying a lot less than the melee one.


----------



## StreamOfTheSky

Votan said:


> In a strange twist, all 4 are from the PHB1 (goodbye power creep) and three of the four are martial options (who could have imagined that back in the days of third edition).
> 
> I find this really cool!




In 3E, nothing ever surpassed the cleric, druid, and wizard in power, with sorcerer close behind.

Any poll of favorite classes to play or which you've played or which you played the most always skewed very heavily towards the core classes.

And if a poll were done for the "roles" of 3E, the only reason a martial/noncaster character couldn't possibly win in more than 2 roles is because the leader/healing thing as a martial aspect is new to 4E.


----------



## auronn88

Say what you want.  All I know is the dual weapon ranger I played with couldn't hit squat.  My brutal scoundrel drow rogue on the other hand dealt more damage than all of the other party members combined.  Booyah.


----------



## Iron Sky

auronn88 said:


> Say what you want.  All I know is the dual weapon ranger I played with couldn't hit squat.  My brutal scoundrel drow rogue on the other hand dealt more damage than all of the other party members combined.  Booyah.




First post on EnWorld is a 1-year threadsurecction?  Welcome to EnWorld.

I think your dual-weapon ranger was rolling poorly or built his ranger non-optimally.  At high paragon my dual-scimitar ranger was doing as much or more damage per fight as our rogue and warlock _combined.*
_*Caveat: assuming the rogue didn't go on a critting spree and get more than 1 crit in a fight - his average


----------



## Festivus

Klaus said:


> I've been playing an Artful Dodger rogue for the past 6 levels, and I have a hard time getting combat advantage. Got maybe 3 sneak attacks during last session's combat.




Perhaps you aren't taking enough risks as an artful dodger then.  With mine, it's running into the fray and attacking from the middle of all the bad guys, and zipping back out.  Almost never missing and hardly ever getting hit thanks to increased AC against opportunity attacks or powers that let him shift 5 squares, etc.  In true glass cannon fashion, he's hits often but unless he's moving he get hit... hard.


----------



## Tony Vargas

Getting combat advantage as a rogue is ultimately up to the player, of course, but the make-up of the party, structure of the encounters, and teamwork from the other players can make a huge difference.  Defenders can be cooperative flanking buddies or not, as can melee-oriented leaders and other melee-oriented strikers.  Leaders can also arbitrarily hand you CA if they take the right powers.  Controllers can daze/stun/blind/knock-prone/etc enemies, giving you CA.  

Aside from that variability, though, the Rogue hits like no other class.  Even the Essentials Rogues and Slayer quite live up to the 4e Rogue's combination of a +3 proficiency weapon, weapon talent, and /weapon attack powers vs non-AC defenses/.


----------



## Klaus

Festivus said:


> Perhaps you aren't taking enough risks as an artful dodger then.  With mine, it's running into the fray and attacking from the middle of all the bad guys, and zipping back out.  Almost never missing and hardly ever getting hit thanks to increased AC against opportunity attacks or powers that let him shift 5 squares, etc.  In true glass cannon fashion, he's hits often but unless he's moving he get hit... hard.



Wow, I haven't played in months!

Past first round, it was hard to find good flanking positions that didn't involve spending an entire round just moving (most of the campaign was outdoors). I had no real "flank buddy" (the PCs were more "individuals" than "party").

In the meantime, the archer ranger remained rooted to a spot and took down creature after creature with her bow.


----------

