4e 1st Level Character Optimization

[Korgan0]

So, the girlfriend of a friend of mine (who doesn't post here) is about to start playing in her first DnD game. Sadly, it's fourth edition, with everything that entails. Since she wouldn't know a character sheet if it leapt up and bit her, it falls to her boyfriend (who is fairly experienced) to make the character. He, having no knowledge of 4e, hit me up for some help in making a sufficiently awesome character that she doesn't feel small in the pants the entire time. Sadly, I know even less about 4e than he does. So, I find myself coming to the fine people of the Den, since some of you know something about 4e, to help me make him make her a decent character. I don't think she has a good idea of what specifically she wants to play, although it supposedly has to be awesome, and she loathes the idea of playing a buffer. There's apparently also a defender and some kind of archer guy, so I guess she can't really overlap with them. I have really no idea what I'm doing when it comes to 4e, so any help you guys could give in terms of what kinds of builds are effective and what kinds of builds aren't would be great.

Also, I guess we can totally discuss general 4e CharOp in here, if there's a call for it.

[Avoraciopoctules]

The first thing that needs to be clarified is what version of 4e is being used.

1. What books are being used? ("Core" could mean several different things in 4e)
2. What errata to these books is being used?
3. Digital character builder, or is it all on paper?

If it's just the Player's Handbook as-written, this should be simple. Otherwise, maybe not.

[Josh_Kablack]

Regardless of 4e version and errata there are a couple overriding principles:

1. Take an 18 in your primary attribute. (The primary attribute is the one that's used for your to-hit bonuses, regardless of what the fluff may say, or trap options presented in your class)

2. Take a race that gives you a +2 to that attribute

3. Make sure every last power which requires a to-hit roll uses that attribute.

4. Hoard any and all possible bonuses to hit that you can stack. (Class, Proficiency, Power, Item, Feat, Race)

5. only worry about anything else (damage, HP, defenses, saves, skills, etc) after you do those.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Don't worry. 1st-4th level in 4E D&D is so unspeakably lame that it's very hard to make a character that doesn't fail as long as you stick to a few rules.

- Unless you're using a specific weapon that requires you to have two hands (such as a greatspear or two bastard swords), you want to go with a shield. There's no strength or anything bonus from using a weapon two-handed in 4E D&D and the extra AC is very worthwhile.
- It is very advisable that you pick a class with a secondary or primary stat in constitution but the other one isn't strength, unless you go with the normal-ass book. If you're just using the normal-ass book disregard this.
- As far as feat selection goes, in rough descending order you want to prioritize:

* Weapon and Armor usage. If your character build doesn't come with a favorable armor or weapon payout, you want to pick weapon proficiency. Hell, you'll probably want to pick weapon proficiency anyway unless you're going with the bare-ass PHB. Only pick up a weapon or armor feat above the latter ones if you're playing a class who has a stat payout that doesn't go with their armor proficiencies (such as a STR/WIS ranger) or if you're using a power scheme in which you'd have to pick up a nonstandard weapon proficiency to use. Which probably won't apply to you.
* Feats that patch holes in class features or expand them. If you're playing with the bare-ass book there aren't any of them; you'll just be consigned to suck.
* To-hit boosters. The bare-ass book doesn't have any of these.
* Damage boosters.

Frankly, if you're playing with the basic book and you don't want to be a fighter, a ranger archer, a level 11+ melee ranger, a level 9+ wizard (where available), a cleric, or a warlord you're completely SOL. So that pretty much excludes everything, since there's already a defender, an archer, you don't want buffers, and you're low level.

A STR/WIS/CON paladin is a decent enough option for a low-level game. I do not recommend CHA/WIS/CON because even though in the long run they're better than the STR/WIS/CON counterpart (under no circumstance do you want to be STR/CHA/WIS, even though there are literally no usable STR-paladin powers at level 9) at low levels being out a melee basic attack really really sucks. Of course there aren't any fucking classes in the basic book that boost both strength and wisdom. 4E D&D sucks like that.

Frankly, for a noob just using the basic book I would go with this setup.

In descending order of racial choice: Bugbear / Shifter (if you don't want to be an ugly bugbear) / Elf (if you're not allowed to use non-PHB classes). Regardless, though, you have a post-racial adjusment in strength of 18 and a dexterity of at least 16. Wisdom would be a secondary option if it was not for the fact that you're starting at level 1 and I've never seen or ran a game of 4E D&D that went on for more than five levels. The strength bonus lets you qualify for a fighter multiclass feat. The feat sucks and the multiclass hot swap feats also suck, but the basic feats suck too so it all works out.

You are a ranger. You pick the Two-Blade Fighting style. Your advancement scheme is this:
Powers:

Level 1: You pick up Twin Strike and Nimble Strike as your 1st-level At-Will powers. 99.5% of the time you will be using Twin Strike. Nimble Strike are for those occasions in which you get ambushed while sniping someone.

Your 1st-level encounter power will be Fox's Cunning. You're a low-level 4E character that's just using the basic book so this is sadly the best power you'll have in awhile. But the basic idea behind DPR awesomeness in 4E D&D is action advantage. Any powers that give you this have top priority over everything else. You use Twin Strike for your freed-up actions.

For your first-level Daily Power, pick Jaws of the Wolf or Sudden Strike. If the DM likes to use solo monsters pick Sudden Strike.

Level 2 Utility Power: You can pick up Crucial Advice if your DM has people using a lot of skill checks (and if you're using skill challenges as-written, this is EXTRAORDINARILY helpful). Otherwise pick Yield Ground.

Level 3 Encounter Power: Disruptive Strike. This power is so good that people still use it even to this day. Especially if you're using the 4E D&D book, you'll never want to get rid of it. Yes, that's how 4E D&D rolls. You're a 10th of the way into the game and over a third of your powers you'll never want to replace.

Level 5 Daily Power: Pick Frenzied Skirmish or Two-Wolf Pounce. I prefer Frenzied Skirmish, personally, though it's a wash.

Level 6 Utility Power: If your DM is still buttfucking you with skill challenges, get Skilled Companion. Otherwise, get Weave through the Fray. It helps out a lot.

Level 7 Encounter Power: All of these powers will be worse than what you have already. But they're not worse than your At-Will. Get Claws of the Griffon if you didn't multiclass into fighter. If you DID multiclass into fighter pick up Novice Power and tag in Rain of Blows. Rain of Blows is exactly why you're specializing in a rapier. If you're using up-to-date errata though (which will make a core-only game damn near unplayable) then you'll lose out on an attack and some damage -- Rain of Blows is supposed to give you up to 4 attacks due to how Secondary Attack works -- but even the nerfed version is still fucking better than all of your ranger powers you'll get for the next 16 levels. Goddammit, 4E.

Level 9 Daily Power: Attacks on the Run. This is again one of those 'you are never going to replace this' power.

Level 10 Utility Power: Yes, a higher-level daily power that is only marginally superior to a level 6 utility power that you already have is an option here. Just... pick whatever, I'm not mentally prepared to deal with this bullshit.

On the bright sight, you do gain access to the Adept Power feat. Pick of Rain of Steel and replace your 5th level power with it. Awww yeah boy.

Level 13 Encounter Power: Absolutely nothing. There's an argument to be made for Armor Splinter (especially in 4E core) but you don't really have the wisdom to take advantage of it.

Level 15 Daily: You get Blade Cascade. Even with the errata'd nerf it's one of the best powers ever. Back when it was just core 4E D&D with maybe Adventurer's Vault people would seriously build their entire characters on the expectation of using this power.

Level 16 Utility: Longstrider. Not that it's really any GOOD but it's better than nothing. Unless your DM does one-encounter workdays. If they do, pick Evade the Blow.

Level 17 Encounter Power: Once again, you're not going to be picking up anything. Because once again, powers that are 14 friggin' levels out of date are better than what's available to you know.

Level 19 Daily Power: Cruel Cage of Steel. There's no substitute for it. It's no Blade Cascade, but nothing is. Replace Attacks on the Run with this one. If you weren't fighter multiclassing you'd be replacing your leftover 1st or 5th level daily power with it instead.

Level 22 Utility Power: If you were going STR/WIS Master of the Hunt would be a no-brainer. Unfortunately for you, you're starting out as a first-level character in a 4E D&D game. Don't worry, though, Forest Ghost is still really damn good.

Level 23 Encounter Power: Fucking FINALLY there is a reason to replace a power. And it only took 20 goddamn levels! Of course Blade Ward is still worse than your 3rd level power Disruptive Strike but at least it's fucking better than your 1st level encounter attack power.

Cloak of Thorns is also an extremely competitive option. Unfortunately, I find that it requires too much DM cooperation if you only have core materials to be usable.

Level 25 Daily Attack Power: Replace Cruel Cage of Steel with Tiger's Reflex. Or Rain of Steel (remember that?) with Reaper's Stance. The next level, hotswap what you didn't.

Level 27 Encounter Attack Power: Even though Death Rend puts you behind on action advantage, stun is a very powerful (for 4E) status effect to pack in an encounter attack power. If you do decide to go with it replace Cloak of Thorns/Disruptive Strike with it.

Level 29 Daily Attack Power: If your DM is using the errata (which prevents more than one free-action attack per round) then don't swap anything. If they aren't, replace Tiger's Reflex with Follow-up Blow.

Okay, enough of that shit. 4E D&D depresses me. Let's talk about feats. Or rather, since so many 4E D&D feats suck let's talk about what I'm telling you to get.

You know, how many times have I used some variant of 'lame', 'you don't have a better option', or 'sucks' when I'm talking about optimizing a 4E D&D character? Way too fucking often. But that's what happens, man.

Feats:

Level 1: Nimble Blade. Let's be clear; as a core-only 4E D&D character even if you have combat advantage, a +4 to your attack stat (+5 if your DM will let you be a Bugbear), and a +3 weapon proficiency weapon is going to leave you whiffing a shitload of attacks. The average AC of monsters is a whopping 15 + level. And this is without asshole abilities like darkness clouds and goblin hexer hexes. Even though you're going to be plinking away with 1d6 shortswords for the level, it beats the hell out of missing.

Level 2: Weapon Proficiency: Rapier. Get a damage die upgrade before the DM starts handing out weapons.

Level 4: Weapon Focus: Light Blades.

Level 6: Two-Weapon Fighting or Defense. Retrain to a Fighter Multiclass Feat at level 8, Student of the Sword.

Level 8: Novice Power (hotswap Claws of the Griffin with Rain of Blows)

Level 10: Adept Power. Hotswap your level 5 power with Rain of Steel.

Level 11: Lasting Frost. No question. It's an OMG huge upgraydde to your damage. And it combos well with the bonus from your next level.

Level 12: Wintertouched. Check it.

Level 14: Two-Weapon Defense or Two-Weapon Fighting.

Level 16: Whatever you didn't pick for level 14.

Level 18: Lethal Hunter. Yes, every single feat you've gotten for the past 7 levels is not worth one Lasting Frost, why do you ask?

Level 20: Blood Thirst. No, I'm not fooling. On the bright side, this gets retrained into Epic Resurgence at level 21.

Level 21: Light Blade Mastery. This is the highest damage boosting feat you'll get in the game.

Level 22: Triumphant Attack. Yes, the text fucking contradicts itself. Why do you ask?

All right, once again, I can't take anymore. Magic items.

As a low level character, it doesn't matter what you get. 4E D&D magical items suck cock. Just take what gives you the higest bonus. HOWEVER at around level 8 or so you'll want to get TWO frost weapons. Even if this requires you having to give up dibs on treasure for here and then on you'll want to do whatever you can to ensure that this happens.

You have a decent ranged attack stat, so there's no reason not to have a backup bow and arrow. You're going to be missing like 50-60% of attacks but that's better than not even being able to hit anything. 4E D&D really fucks people over who don't use ranged attacks as a primary attack mode.

Trollskin Armor is pretty boss but you'll never get that high in level. If you ever get that far in the game, everyone should fucking grab as many of them as possible. But seriously, the armor you get for half of the game doesn't matter, because there are hardly any hide armors at all and if it wasn't that there were so few magical items in 4E D&D they certainly wouldn't be worth wasting your dailies on. Except for Trollskin Armor.

Arms Slot Items: Bracers of Mighty Striking. They're a tiny damage bonus but due to how stupidly magical item prices and slots interact it's better than nothing.

For boots, you'll want either Acrobat boots or Boots of Striding.

Hand Slot Items? Gauntlets of Destruction.

Head Slot Item: Someone needs to have the Helm of Battle if it's available, so it might as well be you. You don't want to be the primary spotter in your party (though that's all but guaranteed due to how retarded 4E's skill/stat system works) so a Diadem of Acuity is worth it.

Neck Slot Items: Pick whatever gets you the highest bonus. The Cloak of Survival, Elven Cloak, and Amulet of False Life are nice items to snag if they're available, but you still want what gives you the highest bonus.

Rings: There are some okay rings, but they're stupidly high level. The only one you'll plausibly ever get or use starting from level 1 is the Iron Ring of the Dwarf Lords. It's pretty good, though.

Belt: Belt of Vigor or Belt of Sacrifice. Ironskin Belt isn't bad if you have magic item dailies to burn.

Paragon Path: Stormwarden or Pathfinder. Since you have access to the Fighter Multiclass feat Pit Fighter and Swordmaster would be an option but this guide was written on the assumption that you'd never get to level 16. Hell, just getting from level 1 to 11 is a huge fucking accomplishment in tedium as far as 4E D&D is concerned.

Epic Destiny: Demigod. There's no arguing this point. If you were a wizard with enough attack-boosting geegaw you could make a vigorous case for Archmage. If you had the unerrata'd Adventurer's Vault and access to a couple more classbooks you could make a case for Eternal Seeker. Even so, 99% off the time it's going to be fucking Demigod. Yes, there are only three fucking Epic Destinies in the game and one of them is only available to 1/8th of the classes in the basic book.

And that's pretty much it. 4E D&D character optimization, especially by the basic book, is a pretty grim and fruitless affair. Especially ESPECIALLY if you're starting at low levels.

[gardengnome]

Ok so I am the boyfriend and also have never posted here.

Anyways, for clarification all books are allowed. No errata is being used. It is on paper.

So yeah there is that. And thanks for the information.

[Orion]

Okay, so first thing you want a minimum standard of confidence. Starting with a 20 in your prime stat basically assures that at level one, and in fact a lot of classes that eventually get screwed by weird stat requirements don't care yet. That gives you more race choices too. Once you've cleared that threshold, it's a question of priorities. In my experience, what you want to sell new players on D&D is Efficacy, Clarity, and Identity. In other words--being generally effective and able to kill shit on your own is good; having straightforward mechanics and scripting is good; having "cool" abilities, interesting choices, and a distinct visual idiom is good. Unfortunately, These goals pull against each other. The most optimal build is probably not the simplest, and very often what makes a class feel "cool" is a unique mechanic that adds complexity. And of course "cool" and "good" may or may not overlap.

If you want to emphasize efficacy, I'd recommend the following as characters with game-changing moves at level 1

• Strength Clerics have good melee damage and hand out insane +to hit with Righteous Brand.
• Rangers do massive damage with repeated Twin Strikes.
• Wizards have some really powerful spells in fucking web supplements and shit, ask someone else for details.
• Avengers are actually quite good at level 1, because their Accuracy bonuses are massive and their lack of any good powers doesn't matter yet.

If you want to emphasize clarity, I dunno, maybe

• Greatsword Fighter. Good DPS without making multiple attack rolls, decent zone control, strong defense.

If you want to emphasize Imagery maybe go with

• Druid, because Shapeshifting
• Feylock, because teleport
• Beastmaster Ranger, because pets.
• Tactical Warlord, because Tactician Strike.

That's the best I can do off the top of my head.

[Username17]

With all books in play and no errata you can be things like a Dwarven Battlerager and bring "nigh invulnerability" to the table. Also you could be a Warlord and have the entire party skullfuck the RNG.

A big problem with 4th edition is that characters don't really do anything other than have names and be able to participate in magical teaparty. While there are literally thousands of pages of "options" to sort through, those options really come down to whether you'd like to do more damage to one target, even more damage distributed across a couple of targets, heal damage done to your allies, or personally be harder to get rid of.

-Username17

[Lago PARANOIA]

Anyways, for clarification all books are allowed. No errata is being used. It is on paper.

Okay, that opens up more options. And will require a pretty large rejiggering of feats. Let me ask you this, then.

1.) Most importantly, how long is the campaign going to last? I'm going to assume that it's not going to get any higher than level 4 unless told otherwise.

2.) If you were going to rank the things which were most important out of this list, what would you pick? Note that some of these aren't mutually exclusive. Wizards are good at multi-target AND repeated damage. But anyway.

[*] Single-target damage.
[*] Status effects/crowd control.
[*] Durability.
[*] Multi-target damage.
[*] Force multiplication (granting allies extra attacks, bonuses to their power use, etc.)
[*] Having extra tokens on the board.
[*] Not being gimped on skills and out-of-combat crap.
[*] Healing. This usually but not always overlaps with force multiplication and durability.

[Whipstitch]

There's apparently also a defender and some kind of archer guy, so I guess she can't really overlap with them.

One thing I'd mention is that the drawbacks of overlapping with someone in 4e are almost purely conceptual and mostly related to RP and lacking breadth in skill challenges--and those are fucking broken anyway. In terms of raw efficacy it'd be totally fine to handle combat by throwing moar bow rangers at any given problem--there's more synergy between two tanks penalizing or tekken juggling someone together or two archers kiting together than there is with a tank "taking hits" for the archer who would have been staying out of range of the critter's grasp anyway. In many cases you're better off if the group commits to either the pain train or the firing line and then sticks to that strategy whenever possible, so having multiples of the same class is really only a problem if some people must feel like special snowflakes.

[DSMatticus]

If you really have no idea what you want, the safest thing you can possibly do is play a leader role class like a warlord or a cleric. Any leader class whose primary shtick is buffing people. Because buffs kick ass in 4e, and they kick ass in a way that makes you feel like you're always contributing but without making other people feel like you're hogging the spotlight. They also stack very well with other leaders mechanically and conceptually, so even if someone else rolls up a leader it's not that big a deal. They're also pretty easy to play; at their simplest, they're just melee fighters who buff other dudes off their attacks.

[Whipstitch]

op said she loathes the idea of playing a buffer


granted, this is 4e so the entire game is piling up bullshit bonuses nobody would care about if the miss rate wasn't so stupid, but generally it's still a good idea to avoid the classes that result in saying "Now, I know you said..."

[DSMatticus]

I totally have no idea how I missed that, actually. My bad.

Well, nevermind that. I'm gonna second (third?) the TWF ranger, then. You can build a very competitive TWF ranger out of just PHB1, which makes it a great place to get started for someone trying to make an effective character but having zero 4e experience. Anything you drag in from another book to improve the build is just cherries on top.

[Krusk]

I've played way more 4e than I should admit in public. I'll throw out my advice on the subject.

- 20 in your starting stat is mandatory.
- A race with a bonus in your secondary stat is strongly recommended. Yes this means there are only like 4 viable races per class.
- Multitarget attacks are amazing. The "Math" of 4e was written so you miss ~50% of the time. Rolling attacks vs 2+ enemies helps that. It also sucks a lot less for a new person who has spent 20 minutes waiting for their turn to come around. Maybe you hit on 1/3 instead of 0/1 and get to do Something. 4e combat is slow, and saying "I miss, done" is awful.
- Being DND there are very few good classes. If you don't play one of those, it will be painful.
- Any "Math Fix" feat is mandatory. The one that gives +1/tier to hit, and the one that does similar for saves.
- Actually anything that gives +X to hit is pretty mandatory. Because remember, you are supposed to miss 50% of the time.
- I tend to stick to utilities that are minor actions or reactions. Then I get to do multiple powers a round, and can use them. I also stick to encounter or at will utilities. Gives me more to do.
- Always picked a ranged class over a non ranged one. If your DM ever does anything more interesting than a fight with a bunch of dudes in a room, you will be glad. Many/most 4e DMs will not.
- Multiclass - Always multiclass. You get a class feature from someone else, which can be cool sometimes. But you also get to cherry pick powers that clearly weren't for your class and use them. Generally everyone should grab striker powers. Strikers should consider defender powers, or another classes striker powers. Avenger, Rogue, and Ranger are good multiclass choices.

Class wise. A comprehensive list of viable classes. Orb Wizard, Twin Strike Ranger, Battlerager Fighter, Lazy Warlord, and Strong Barbarian.

Orb Wizard - Ask your group what a controller does. You won't get a consistent definition. This doesn't change if your group has Collins, Heinsoo, and Wyatt in it. An orbizard is pretty much THE class of 4e. Remember how 3.X save or dies were the worst and 4e fixed them? No they didn't. You point at the main boss dude of every encounter and say "You die". Then you throw out striker level damage to everyone else until it ends. You probably want to play a deva from PHB3. You are reincarnated or something, and have wings maybe.

Twin Strike Ranger - Basically what Largo said. I'd recommend bows over rapiers, because then you get to play when the enemy has wings.

Battlerager Fighter - Striker level damage, but also effectively infinite HP. Especially without errata. Play a dwarf. Pretty hard to optimize wrong.

Lazy Warlord - Your entire character just gives the others actions. Every power. Usually the striker. Super boring, and buffing which you said was out.

Strong Barbarian - You are a striker with defender HP and toughness. I like Dragonborn in case you want to grab some of the cha powers.

4e combat is super slow. Loading up on Strikers does a lot to help that.

*Fixed a word

[Lago PARANOIA]

- 20 in your starting stat is mandatory.

This I do not agree with for melee characters that don't use heavy armor and don't use dex or int for their primary stat unless you can bump up your AC stat to 16. I've tried to swing something like a 20 STR / 14 DEX light armor character a couple of times and it's never worked out in the low levels.

Low levels are the most dangerous in 4E by a long shot. Your budget of healing surges per encounter pretty much determine how difficult the game is going to be. This number is of course determined by how many encounters between extended rests you're going to be in, but it's also determined by how many healing-surge activation powers the party collectively has. Even if you're doing a 3-encounter workday and everyone has constitution or strength as a secondary, if you only have one leader for your group (who typically only has two healing-surge activation powers per encounter) your healing surge budget for a 5-person group is not looking very good.


And I have played in 5-person groups that only have 1 leader (which was always me; I never play a non-healer character if there aren't already two leaders per five people in a group) and it's utter hell. Of course since you don't want to play a buffer, your healing surge budget is going to be low and you're going to have to rely somewhat on defense.

- Always picked a ranged class over a non ranged one. If your DM ever does anything more interesting than a fight with a bunch of dudes in a room, you will be glad. Many/most 4e DMs will not.

Bad advice for much the same reason as above. Unless you have a high healing surge budget per encounter doing a mix of ranged and melee puts unneeded stress on the melee frontliners. Especially at low levels where you need to be able to spread the damage around.

Not that there aren't reasons to do a mix of ranged and melee. Being screwed by flying or out of range enemies sucks, of course. And there are some classes that are so good that what they bring to the table is worth being out on party hit points like a mid-level wizard or mid-level archer ranger or mid-level warlock.

But for the most part, if you have any melee dudes at all in a low-level game and/or less than two healers (a paladin with the right feat and item setup can compensate despite not needing to be a leader) per five-person group then pretty much everyone has to be melee. The only exception to this rule is the Divine Power laser cleric, since they heal and block much more than they would have throwing an extra body at the frontlines.

[Josh_Kablack]

Class wise. A comprehensive list of viable classes. Orb Wizard, Twin Strike Ranger, Battlerager Fighter, Lazy Warlord, and Strong Barbarian.

In a non-errata everything goes game, Righteous Brand Strength cleric belongs on that list (at least pre paragon) as does the Astral Seal cleric and his ability. The player isn't interested in buff characters, so the Astral Seal cleric is right out.

However the Righteous Brand cleric can be built as a pretty decent melee tank,(human, str 20, feats are SWP:Fullblade + Weapon Expertise:Fullblade, powers are Righteous Brand, 2 other at wills you will never use, Healing Strike and Weapon of Astral Flame) If there are at least two other melee characters in your game, you really really want someone playing a Righteous Brand cleric in a pre-errata game.

I'd consider trying to sell boyfriend and girlfriend on entering the game with one of them as a Righteous Brand Cleric and the other as either twin-striking melee ranger damage engine or nigh-invulnerable Dwarven Battlerager.

[Lago PARANOIA]

1.) Do you have access to Dragon material at all?

2.) Are you using Themes? They're a new thing introduced in Dark Sun, expanded upon in Dragon, and had one last final hurrah in Heroes of Elemental Chaos.

Themes are all-good. They're free power for no reason. And some of the free power is very good, like the Sohei getting an additional minor action encounter attack power at first level as one of its many bennies.

3.) Same for Backgrounds. They were introduced in the Player's Handbook II. Not as vital as Themes, but it's still free power.

One last thing:

Lazy Warlord - Your entire character just gives the others actions. Every power. Usually the striker. Super boring, and buffing which you said was out.

The Lazy Warlord is just a theoretical edge-case hash. You're almost always better off with a Warlord that, you know, actually uses STR-based power. It's amusing in that the No Self Buffs paradigm in 4E D&D is so broken that someone who doesn't take any actions at all is still at a net advantage compared to the average 4E D&D character, but it's still not an optimal way of building a Warlord.

If you want real Warlord power you need to go with a dedicated STR/INT (which will be Tactical) or STR/CHA (which will be Bravura) or a hybrid-classed Warlord build (Runepriest and Cleric combo ridiculously well with Warlord despite causing you to be out a heal at higher levels).

[John Magnum]

Is there somewhere I can check out a full writeup of the Lazy Warlord? I get the basic idea, but I'd like to see it fleshed out.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Oh, yeah. One other thing. The Lazy Warlord is also an eminently splashable Hybrid Talent build that works with almost any combination of stats. So if you're doing a class that has a couple of really good tricks but has some massive gaps in their power list (such as a Battlemind or a Druid) they're a great way to quickly spackle over weaknesses.

But Hybrid Talenting is way beyond the scope of this thread. Since you have all books allowed that includes the PHB3 so that's technically allowed, but I don't recommend them to people new to the game unless you're a total sperg or have someone telling you how to build your character. In an even more control-freaky way than I did with the PHB-only ranger writeup.

Is there somewhere I can check out a full writeup of the Lazy Warlord? I get the basic idea, but I'd like to see it fleshed out.

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/ ... tain.?pg=1

As mentioned, it's suboptimal. The Warlord does have some very boss 'don't make an attack roll yourself' powers, but they're rarely the best powers of their level.

If you want to be Belle of the Ball for a low-level game that is unerrata'd, I can give a low-level writeup of such a Warlord. An unerrata'd INT-Warlord rocks socks-covered cocks in a box with a lox-eating fox. But it is definitely of the 'buff your friends and family' type. I find the allure of being guaranteed to be the MVP for every combat henceforth too much to resist, personally.

[Krusk]

Lazy warlords are great, because you let your actual damage dealers go twice instead of doing less damage yourself. Then you can heal between fights or as needed.

Ranged v non-ranged. If you are debating between two equal classes ranged wins. Didn't mean playing melee is for suckers. A melee battle rager is fine. But on a ranger, go bows every time. "I shoot from over here" is always better than "I move next to him and hit". Simply on the basis of "he has to move to get near me".

Its all about action management. You spend actions to go near them as a melee. They then have move actions to do whatever. As an archer, they spend them to get near you, and you have them for whatever. Even if whatever means getting away from them, you are at the same place as if you were a melee guy. Plus, you aren't screwed if the DM puts the enemy across a chasm, flying, or in a tree.

[shau]

Low level 4E is a pretty grim existence, especially if you are just getting started. Generally, you want your character to fit into one of three categories.

My at will ability is better than your whole class.


At level one, you get one encounter power and one daily power. You will never actually use your daily power because you only have one and you will never know if you need it later, so just go ahead and ignore that. Your encounter power gets thrown out first thing, and then you have your at will. This means about 80 percent of your life is going to be using your at will, and whether or not you are accomplishing fuck all will be determined by how good that actually is.

Strikers with two hits skills are the obvious choice, because two hits are better than one. Plus Strikers usually get some bullshit extra damage upgrade. That's usually enough to put you in a good place, relatively speaking. The Melee ranger Lago posted works well. The first game I played was dominated by two bugbear rangers with bloodblade or whatever the hell they were called weapons. Just be aware of your healing surges. Any at will with weapon damage plus two stats is also pretty acceptable, although it quickly falls behind a double attack. There are other options you can find if you dumpster dive enough. I am little more ambivalent towards righteous brand than the rest of the den, but the cleric's unnerfed astral seal is absolutely batshit, especially at first level. Be aware it makes the game even slower, however. They are also some classes that have crazy charge powers that fit here, but I never really used one.

My special ability is to win the game.

While your options are limited at first level, many classes have they own special abilities that can really add some versatility and power to your character. The best example of this I think is the Dwarven Battlerager, who can show up at first level with ten points of automatic healing every time he gets hit, which is about eight more than the game can withstand. It basically like being allowed to play a character with DR:Go fuck yourself.

Leader, with their word powers, also fit into this category, and they have not been nerfed yet. It does not seem like a lot, but two minor action heals make a huge difference in 4e. You can pretty much justify your presence at the table with only that. Which is good, because every time you use one of your shitty at wills (anything that is not Astral Seal) you will feel small in the pants, and you use an at will every single round. Warlords are supposed to have additional game breaking powers, but I never played one myself.

Provisional choice: The tank

Defending does not work in 4e. Like at all. Even is your DM doesn't realize that marking someone is only a mild inconvenience, at most you are going to force one guy to attack you, which is exactly the same number of guys who would attack if your DM just threw all strategy out the window and decided to do everything through anime pair fighting. Some DMs, however, feel obligated to let you be the party tank. If they do, every step you take towards invulnerability brings the party closer to victory. At the extreme ends, you can be the party MVP by doing nothing but getting punched in the face. The Dwarven Battlerager in an obvious choice, cause they can seriously tank an almost infinite number of first level enemies. Otherwise you are going to want take a something with a shitload of AC and try to dumpster dive for even more. The Strength Paladin has a decent start, with full armor proficiency and a weapon plus two stats at will. Unfortunately, the STR paladin really has no future at all, unless they released some books that gave him nonshitty powers recently.

If you want an easy answer, a Dwarven Battlerager fits into all of these categories. They came out during a time of massive powercreep, when fighters were amped up to the point they were better strikers than strikers and still the best defender.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Lazy warlords are great, because you let your actual damage dealers go twice instead of doing less damage yourself. Then you can heal between fights or as needed.

The thing is that non-lazy warlords can do better than letting damage dealers go twice.

It's not a bad variant at all, don't get me wrong. It's still better than 90% of other builds. But the thing is that pretty much every other warlord arrangement can do the job better.

If you are debating between two equal classes ranged wins.

No.

1.) One concern is force multiplication. If you have a warlord or a sufficiently cheesed/savvy cleric in your party oftentimes another melee attacker is a better choice.

2.) But the bigger concern, especially at low levels, is spreading out damage. Most parties do two off-action heals per combat. This is often not enough to keep someone from dropping if there's focus firing or a disadvantageous tactical setup. Second winds do not cut the mustard.

Your best insurance not to lose anyone at low levels is:

[*] Everyone in the party puts together a sufficiently cheesed-out in build and tactics party so you can take out monsters quickly. This is actually surprisingly hard to do at low level, even with the better builds.
[*] Only do short workdays AND have enough healers to cover the spread. Even if you're able to muster 5 off-action heals per combat, the two melee people are going to burn through their surges too quickly.
[*] Make everyone melee and spread out the damage and healing surge budget. This is the preferred option by far, since it's what you have most control over as a player who doesn't want to heal or buff. This requirement can be waived if you have a fuck-off tactic that breaks the damage-received curve like Astral Seal or Moment of Glory or a handful of Wizard dailies or an extra token on the board.

[Krusk]

If you can find a warlord who dishes out more than your striker go at it. I assume your striker will be from my listed viable classes, and so won't suck. Not many in my group ever played warlords, so I may have missed some awesome non lazy builds.

Yeah second wind sucks, but you can spend as many surges as you want between fights out of battles. Your limit is 1 per 5 min with no leader, and if you've got a leader you can seriously make him use his encounter/minor action healing twice every 5 min. You should be going into every 4e fight at full or near full HP, and should be able to make it through all but the hardest with a single leaders healing. I do usually recommend someone take healing multiclass or paladin or dwarf though. Some sort of secondary healing. (Dwarves can second wind as a minor action, meaning its worth doing during combat)

your ideal party composition is leader, defender/leader (a str-aladin or dwarf battlerager), striker, striker, striker. One of those last strikers should probably be an orbizard even if you have the errata nerf.

Ideal party IMO is Lazy-Warlord, Dwarven Battlerager, Bow Ranger, Barbarian, Orb wizard. Thats 3 ranged dudes, and the dwarf and barbarian are melee. The warlord should carry thrown weapons like spears that can go to melee if needed. You can swap the dwarven battlerager for a dwarven paladin if you want. His durability goes down, but others goes up. If you do, I'd consider bringing the warlord into melee range so he can take Opportunity attacks and be a target for your foes.

[Doom]

Without errata, Dwarven Battlerager is pretty much the go-to class at low level. Keeping track of marks and all that temp hp is a pain in the butt, though, and no fun for a beginner.

If you're going for "easiest to play" (a real issue with someone new to RPGs, especially 4e which is actually quite hard on the non-tactically minded noob), go with Elf twinstrike bow ranger. No, it's not min-maxxed all to hell like most of the other suggestions...but playing it is easy: Move away from monsters, mark monster you don't like, point at monster you don't like, roll to hit twice (usually), using encounter power on the first round. Get the feat that lets you use the better bow when you get around to it (eg, level 2, can't seem to recall the feat you normally get at level 1, focus on get dex and wis to 18 via elven bonuses, which keeps other stats high enough that you won't be particularly weak in other areas). The elven accuracy is a fun ability, and again, much easier to figure out how to use best (reroll encounter power if it misses, otherwise whenever you feel like it).

The elf ranger is fun and simple, and not vulnerable to errata. I suspect your GM will use errata after he sees how stupid invulnerable a battlerager is. That might take as long as two fights.


Min-maxxing is fun, and a major theme at the Den, but you might want to consider pointing her to "easy to play", giving up the 2% or so improvement by taking something optimized in every conceivable way.

[shau]

Being a lazy warlord isn't that great and I don't know why Krusk keeps recommending it. Being a lazy warlord is like being a pacifist cleric. You can do it, and even do well because the underlying class is strong, but you will always be weaker than someone playing the same class and just picking the best powers as they come along. Many times the normal warlord or cleric will be even better than you at the things you excel at, like healing or buffing. Look at the CharOp page Lago linked to. It all but admits it is gimmick build, all it looks like he needed to raid Dragon magazine just to have enough powers. Now, being a warlord who focuses on powers that makes his allies attack is a good thing, but trying to never attack yourself just complicates things. Which is a shame, because I have wanted that since I first heard about the warlord.

As for range versus melee, I prefer ranged. Lago has a point about spreading the damage between multiple party members, but that only works if you DM agrees to let it work. When you only have two front liners, which happens frequently, there is nothing really stopping team monster from gang banging the weakest member. With three people, you stand slightly better chance of preventing a full surround, but a determined team monster should still be able to pull it off. With four belle members you can actually protect people, but that rarely happens, and you are screwed whenever flying enemies or narrow hallways appearing. Ranged fighting lets you focus fire, which is pretty the dominate e strategy, at least when I played it.

Bow ranger is very, very good but very, very boring. Seriously, you will have great damage output and actually better defenses than a melee ranger without even considering your range advantage, but being 20 spaces back is basically like being on the moon in 4e terms. I can tolerate boredom pretty well, but it is very hard to feel connected to combat when everything happened to other people. Every combat you are in will feeling exactly like firing at archery targets. Still, a bow ranger really is effective and welcome in almost any party.

[Krusk]

Being a lazy warlord isn't that great and I don't know why Krusk keeps recommending it.

Keeps recommending is not the same as recommended it once, and defended the choice.