Post new topic   Reply to topic    MASC Forum Index -> Dungeons and Dragons
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Trizzel
Trizzel
Initiate
Veteran Poster

user avatar

Joined: 17 May 2008
Posts: 210

Send private message
Reply with quote

re: Are sorcs really that bad?

0
Well i spent a good deal last night on the character builder and reading posts, and have drawn my own conclusion.

They are simply not as good as other strikers. Rogues, rangers, warlocks all have an added damage class feature, sorcs don't aside from adding another attribute to the damage, making them at the bottom of the totem pole.

They also dont get the option to use a high damaging die weapon, i.e. 1d10 1d12, making them behind in damage. Also they dont get to use their weapon proficiency bonus to attack rolls like weapon based strikers do.

They also have to spend a feat to get combat advantage. They have to spend a feat to use an acceptable melee basic attack for things like a given attack of opportunity.

I just can't see how they can compete with other strikers. I made a lvl 5 storm sorc and went a thunder build. Then made a lvl 5 artful dodger rogue build. Was really no contest. Then compared it to a lvl 5 bow ranger, still lacking.

Meh seem kinda half-assed to me.
Crimson Death
Satsujinma
Warlord
Veteran Poster

user avatar

Joined: 04 Jul 2008
Posts: 253

Send private message
Reply with quote

re: Re: Are sorcs really that bad?

0
Trizzel wrote:
Well i spent a good deal last night on the character builder and reading posts, and have drawn my own conclusion.

They are simply not as good as other strikers. Rogues, rangers, warlocks all have an added damage class feature, sorcs don't aside from adding another attribute to the damage, making them at the bottom of the totem pole.

They also dont get the option to use a high damaging die weapon, i.e. 1d10 1d12, making them behind in damage. Also they dont get to use their weapon proficiency bonus to attack rolls like weapon based strikers do.

They also have to spend a feat to get combat advantage. They have to spend a feat to use an acceptable melee basic attack for things like a given attack of opportunity.

I just can't see how they can compete with other strikers. I made a lvl 5 storm sorc and went a thunder build. Then made a lvl 5 artful dodger rogue build. Was really no contest. Then compared it to a lvl 5 bow ranger, still lacking.

Meh seem kinda half-assed to me.


JP should re-roll to whatever he wants but I'd prefer either a Fighter or Rogue. A Fighter would be nice since Will can't play as late as us and a Rogue would work because we need a trap monkey. Also a thing to note is 2handed Fighters can do Striker DPS.


_________________
Purple Storm
Draecon
Warlord
Jedi Librarian

user avatar

Joined: 06 Oct 2007
Posts: 864

Send private message
Reply with quote

re: Are sorcs really that bad?

0
well that is a shame. sorcs were my fav 3rd 3d class. so no ae that balances the loss of single target damage? ac bonus to make them more durable?


_________________

Trizzel
Trizzel
Initiate
Veteran Poster

user avatar

Joined: 17 May 2008
Posts: 210

Send private message
Reply with quote

re: Are sorcs really that bad?

0
They get some ae's but a few I read were close burst and/or blast. Which means you need to be in melee range. The dragon/cosmic path leans more towards melee casting, close spell and str as the second stat desired. They get to add their str mod to their damage and get to use str instead of dex or int for their ac. Storm (my fav one prolly) gets the option to drop a resistance buff for a +4 to all defenses buff till the end of next turn. And cosmic gets some kool defense options depending on what phase and other factors, but it's still meh seeing as how their damage lacks. Honestly i wouldnt want my sorc to be more durable i'd want it to melt faces, with a few escape maneuvers if needed. Rogues have acrobatic shifts. Rangers have wisdom based shifts and interrupts. Warlocks can get concealment just by moving 3 spaces.


Theres also 2 really big problems with ae.

1) mobs kinda need to be bunched, at least 3-4 together minimum to be on par with single target. With only having what like 2 at-wills 2 encounters and 2 dailys your kinda fuked if your fighting a single target or the mobs are bunched.

2) we dont play aes right. Technically if in the description of the ability's target it says "creatures" then you do damage to allies if they are in the ae. For example if Will is tanking 3 adjacent mobs and you drop an area burst 1 on him, the mobs and Will take damage. Kinda makes aes dumb. The storm sorc build has some ae spells that when you drop it on area you can choose to not hit the origin space, obviously it's there to not hurt allies. But still friendly fire is just stupid.
Purple Storm
Draecon
Warlord
Jedi Librarian

user avatar

Joined: 06 Oct 2007
Posts: 864

Send private message
Reply with quote

re: Are sorcs really that bad?

0
we usually do play ae's right if they say all creatures. but im gonna mess around on the character builder some more and see what i can come up with.


_________________

Crimson Death
Satsujinma
Warlord
Veteran Poster

user avatar

Joined: 04 Jul 2008
Posts: 253

Send private message
Reply with quote

re: Are sorcs really that bad?

0
They don't suck but they don't do their main job of dealing damage as good as other strikers.


_________________
Posts from:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    MASC Forum Index -> Dungeons and Dragons All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum