Auric
Sneak
171 Posts
    
Baltimore, MD
 | | 06/28/2008 12:56 PM |
| A group of my friends have created 4E characters, and I was thinking of getting them all together to play, with me as the DM. Here is what they each have: - human paladin of Bahamut
- dragonborn paladin of Kord
- half-elf ranger
- eladrin wizard Would this work as an effective party? It looks like all the roles are covered (paladins for leader and defender, ranger for striker and wizard for controller). I know there are two paladins, which might seem redundant, but they weren't created at the same time, and it was just a coincedence that they picked the same class. Since each has a different build (the dragonborn is more of a tank than the human), I can see them playing differently. | |
Trade references: http://www.maxminis.com/Forums/tabid/104/forumid/53/postid/801085/view/topic/Default.aspx
Trades on WotC: vandyfry, hothie. Cyriss | |
|
zenthrus
Commander
4908 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 06/29/2008 2:21 AM |
| Seems fine. They'll be somewhat light on the healing and tactical movement (no cleric or warlord) but that's fine. The paladins can either move forward to keep enemies from advancing too close to the squishies or hang back and function as bodyguards. If the ranger has taken the melee build then a paladin/ranger could serve as a mobile flanking unit while the other paladin covers the wizard.
| |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
Loquacious1
Sneak
61 Posts
San Diego, CA
| | 06/30/2008 9:03 AM |
| | Well, some of the leader benefts won't be there, but healing shouldn't be a problem between both paladins, especially if either has the healing hands feat. Personally, I think you'd probably be better off if the ranger was an Archer--that way you have two distance characters and two melee characters. An even split is usually best, so when the harpy's come out of the woodwork, at least someone can shoot 'em down :-) | | | |
|
True_Blue
Underboss
2385 Posts
| | 06/30/2008 9:05 AM |
| I think the Paladins should be able to heal enough overall, but it would probably help to give out a few healing potions here and there.
The Cleric is nice because he does have opportunities to heal without the target having to use a healing surge. He can't do it a lot, but its still available. I think the Warlord has a few things like this also.
I know the Warlock as a Striker can help alleviate it a little because he does have the ability to get Temp HP's whenever he drops a cursed enemy. I think one of my PC's took the feat that adds 3 points to this value, which helped him a lot. It isnt as good as healing, but its a pretty helpful ability.
| |
Champion of a Knight of Takhisis/Knight of Neraka | |
|
Loquacious1
Sneak
61 Posts
San Diego, CA
| | 06/30/2008 9:15 AM |
| Yeah, I'm running with a Warlock that has the Improved dark One's Blessing--it's great! Even at level one, it's like one minion hit is auto-negated.
The paladins actually have better healing w/o surges at low levels, because the lay on hands ability burns one of thiers, not the targets. And since they start with I think 12+ Con mod, they get a bunch per day!
That being said, the Warlord and the Cleric are both useful, especially for ranged healing. Perhaps both of your Paladin's may want to invest in the multi-class feat--one each, Cleric or Warlord? See how they do until 2nd level--if it's working or not. One heaing Word a day isn't bad, and can be extremely useful if the Paladin is immobilized (happened to us a lot in my last campaign that ended in a TPK).
| | | |
|
zenthrus
Commander
4908 Posts
SLC, UT
| | 06/30/2008 2:36 PM |
| I don't see that Paladins blowing their own healing surges to let an ally regain their normal healing surge value is better healing than a cleric or warlord allowing an ally to regain a healing surge +1d6. Also, the paladin can only trigger Lay on Hands x/day where x is equal to the Wisdom modifier. Odds are that will be 2-5 times per day. Clerics/Warlords get their 1st-level healing powers 2/encounter, every encounter. If the number of encounters is low per day they roughly even out, but if you face 3 or more encounters in a day the cleric/warlord trump the paladin completely in terms of healing capability.
I do agree that having at least one paladin in the OP's party take Initiate of the Faith or Student of Battle would be an excellent idea.
If the party wants to dramatically expand their tactical strength (without adding a leader character) have the paladins take the Arcane Initiate feat (both selecting Scorching Burst or go Scorching Burst/Cloud of Daggers) and the ranger and wizard take the Initiate of the Faith (or Student of Battle) feat. At that point the party would have substantial healing (everyone has the capacity to heal themselves or an ally) and substantial battlefield control (you'll never fear minions again). You can always retrain the feats if the party isn't happy at a later level.
| |
Knight Warlord a.k.a. Commander (#32) in only 6 months. Where's my pie?
Champion of Dwarven Thunderlashers
Knight of the Large Dire Chicken
Have/Want List
Trade References | |
|
Loquacious1
Sneak
61 Posts
San Diego, CA
| | 07/01/2008 8:14 AM |
| | Well, what I meant, Zentharus, is that if a character is OUT of healing surges, a Paladin can actually heal them--by and large, a Cleric cannot. That was the advantage I was speaking of. And triggering Healing surges in other people is great--I wasn't knocking the Cleric or Warlord for that. But when Paladin's out number many other classes almost 2-1 for healing surges, the party ends up resting an often the paladin is barely half down on thier Surges--but if they are prolific with their lay on hands, then it's a bit mroe balanced. | | | |
|
XAos
Underboss
2389 Posts
London
| | 07/08/2008 5:57 AM |
| On the plus sides;
Two paladins should provide enough healing without a cleric or warlord.
And working as a pair they can easily block a narrow corridor or blitz an opposing controller.
But the party has a "controller" (wizard) who is likly to need a protective "quaterback pocket" & doesn't have a genuine "defender" (defenders really need the fighters improved AoO)
So if the party is ever overmatched in open terrain, I'd expect the Wizard to be quickly dead.
Not sure thats solveable. From my (admitdely limited) experience of 4e it's quite hard to protect the "controller". I remember one battle on open terrain (kings road) Where the GM failed to get a TPK, only because he avoided attacking the party-controller. There was no way that the rest of the 4-character party could have prevented the controller being killed if the GM had tried.
And if none of those 4 are skilled in Thievery, that may leave the party with no way to solve some common dungeon situations. You might solve the later by persuading one of the players to "waste" a feat on Thievery.
| |
Don't worry about the current metagame. It doesn't matter if it's ugly, bad, or the best ever. In 2 years time, set rotation will ban everything. | |
|
Auric
Sneak
171 Posts
Baltimore, MD
| | 07/08/2008 1:32 PM |
| | It turns out that the ranger has some decent (not compared to a rogue, of course) training in Thievery, so it's better than nothing. | |
Trade references: http://www.maxminis.com/Forums/tabid/104/forumid/53/postid/801085/view/topic/Default.aspx
Trades on WotC: vandyfry, hothie. Cyriss | |
|
Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
7507 Posts
Sector 2814
| | 07/09/2008 9:53 AM |
| Looks like a strong party. Keep us posted.
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
|