the relevant info are:
I also picked up a feat from Essentials that increased my attack bonus and gave me a bit more umph to some of my powers.
Bludgeon Expertise: +1 feat bonus to attack rolls with hammers and maces. In addition, any time you push with a weapon attack using a mace or hammer, you gain a +1 feat bonus to that push.
You already know about the Defender Aura that was covered in the Knight preview, but now you can check out the Battle Guardian ability. It's an at-will martial opportunity action that utilizes the knight's aura.
Trigger: An enemy subject to your defender aura either shifts or makes an attack that targets an ally of yours but not you or an ally who has an active defender aura.
Effect: You make a melee basic attack against the triggering enemy. If the attack misses, the enemy still takes damage equal to your Strength modifier.
Chuck (the player playing the knight ndFMP) picked up a cool utility that I saw him use a few times called Defend the Line. It's an at-will that is activated as a minor action.
Effect: You assume the defend the line stance. Until the stance ends, whenever you hit an enemy with a melee basic attack using a weapon, that enemy is slowed until the end of your next turn.
Hargan is a human rogue with the new thief build from Player Essentials: Heroes of the Fallen Lands. snip
One of Chris's coolest at-wills (in my opinion anyway) was his Unbalancing Trick. It's an at-will move action that leads nicely into his awesome thiefy sneak attacking.
Effect: You shift up to 2 squares. The next time you hit an enemy with a melee basic attack this turn, you can knock it prone.
With this Hargan could easily shift into flanking, hit the guy dealing his sneak attack damage, and then knock him prone giving the rest of the melee based party combat advantage against the foe.
Hargan also had a really cool human racial power called Heroic Effort. It's an encounter power that requires no action.
Trigger: You miss with an attack or fail a saving throw.
Effect: You gain a +4 racial bonus to the attack roll or the saving throw.
Yeah, I don't see the Knight crying because it doesn't use Daily powers to churn DPR. And you can stance it up to make it sticky (slowin' the guy).
Effect: You shift up to 2 squares. The next time you hit an enemy with a melee basic attack this turn, you can knock it prone.
DO WANT
human racial power
Not sure if want....
Of course, my want of extra at-wills won't be a problem if I'm playing a martial character it seems, and I do prefer martial characters. Having a unifying racial power could lead to feats that trigger off of that instead of the action point which is something that sounds good to me.
Heroic Effort: As this is a racial power, does it mean that Essentials Humans don't get an extra at-will? Feat?
Otherwise this is some awesome stuff. I'm so excited for all of these books.
Battle Guardian is an Combat-Challengey no-mark OA [Edit: Well, OAction] which works like Reaping Strike and stacks ON TOP OF your stance? WOW.
Yeah, I don't see the Knight crying because it doesn't use Daily powers to churn DPR. And you can stance it up to make it sticky (slowin' the guy).
I'm not sure that stances stack on TOP of each other. So you might have to pick between, say, Cleaving Assault or Reaping Strike and Defend the Line
And yeah, Battle Guardian looks pretty sweet.
Battle Guardian is an Combat-Challengey no-mark OA [Edit: Well, OAction] which works like Reaping Strike and stacks ON TOP OF your stance? WOW.
I'm not sure that stances stack on TOP of each other. So you might have to pick between, say, Cleaving Assault or Reaping Strike and Defend the Line
I phrased it poorly. Mea Culpa. How about a "Combat-Challenge-with-Inevitable-Challenge-built-in no-mark OAction which stacks ON TOP OF your stance?" So, you not only get the STR on a miss, but whatever MBA-happy stance you have up. Hit: Smack 'em and Cleave another mutant. Miss: Still Damage 'em.
Bludgeon Expertise: Welcome to the new form of Weapon Expertise feats. Does not appear to scale(!!), but gives another benefit and is a bit more broad. This makes me wonder if the staff and flail will be friends. Picks and axes? Heavy and light blades? Polearms and spears? What does this mean for Weapon Focus?
indeed they look very nice
Heroic Effort: As this is a racial power, does it mean that Essentials Humans don't get an extra at-will? Feat?
this is my guess
but efutch guess is interesting
I phrased it poorly. Mea Culpa. How about a "Combat-Challenge-with-Inevitable-Challenge-built-in no-mark OAction which stacks ON TOP OF your stance?" So, you not only get the STR on a miss, but whatever MBA-happy stance you have up. Hit: Smack 'em and Cleave another mutant. Miss: Still Damage 'em.
Ah, yes. Then I agree.
And we're still waiting on what Shield Finesse does. And, given bludgeon expertise, I think there's an even bigger chance that "Weapon Talent" might be fairly different from "Fighter Weapon Talent."
Regarding Heroic Effort: there's always the possibility that it's a power acquired via a human racial feat. Or it might be on top of their previously existing abilties. Mearls said most of the changes they made in Essentials are additive.
Given that some of the later races gained a little bit power-wise (and definitely in flexibility) compared to some of the PHB ones, a degree of boosts might be in order. For instance the human's flexible bonus is less useful if the other races all get +2 to one set ability and a choice of 2 others (like the PHB 3 races).
And we're still waiting on what Shield Finesse does. And, given bludgeon expertise, I think there's an even bigger chance that "Weapon Talent" might be fairly different from "Fighter Weapon Talent."
Hmm... if _that_ scaled....
And we're still waiting on what Shield Finesse does. And, given bludgeon expertise, I think there's an even bigger chance that "Weapon Talent" might be fairly different from "Fighter Weapon Talent."
Hmm... if _that_ scaled....
Yeah, begins to boggle the mind doesn't it. Some thoughts I've had for what Weapon Talent might do.
- Provide a bonus to damage rolls as well as attack rolls (likely, but boring).
- Allow you to use a melee basic attack to push.
- Allow you to apply some conditions (like rattled, dazed, stunned, or the like) with a successful melee basic attack.
Exactly what it does probably depends on the weapon you pick. My guess is that weapon talent provides some bonus to a particular group of weapons, which both encourages you to adopt a signature style and makes the fighter's choice of weapons more relevant.
I agree with the human at-will -> racial.
Well, Mearls did say that most of the changes to Essentials were additive in nature (errata and updates to the rules basically). So it's possible that the human racial power has been added to the race to compensate for the other races catching up to humans in versatility (all the secondary A or B stat bonuses).
The other (more likely) possibility is that it's a power the character gained by taking a racial feat. They've started playing more and more in Dragon articles with the idea of powers you can acquire by taking feats. Heritage of the Vistani and others come to mind.
Isn't Defender Aura + Battle Guardian just... better than Combat Challenge, in every way shape and form? Did I miss something there?
Free pseudo-marking of all adjacent.
Melee Basic Attack as an Opportunity Action (instead of Immediate).
MBA is functionally an At-Will equivalent.
Plus Str damage on a miss.
?
And on the Human thing - I, too, assume it'll be either a new option (swap for the at-will), or some kind of feat-based option.
What I'm more interested in is the possibility that they're finally, finally, going to fix the various feat taxes, and return expertise to a straight +1 bonus that's useful, but not ridiculously overpowered/required to function.
I like the Bludgeon expertise... Unfortunately its unlikely they'll get rid of the versatile/weapon/implement expertise feats. Since Bludgeon doesn't scale, once you hit 15, or especially 25, you retrain this out.
The thing to keep in mind is apparently the Knight doesn't mark- he relies on his defender aura- but if an enemy gets out of the aura, then that enemy can attack allies however it wants and you can't do anything. This encourages the Knight to stick to enemies, but also means that he can't just mark enemies and run away- something which has long been a valid, if against-type strategy in the game.
Also, the CC Fighter can mark anyone they attack, such as everyone in a close blast 3, burst 2, anyone within Reach, etc. Without feat support, the Defender's Aura remains a little adjacent ring. Admittedly, CC Fighters can only CC people adjacent to them, but even if the monster escapes, they are still marked when they try their shenanigans against allies. If a monster can escape the Knight, it's free.
This even leaves aside Combat Superiority, which does not appear to be in the cards for Knights. Knights may have more damage output potential, but CC Fighters are a lot stickier.
DM Deviousness question: because of the apparent lack of Combat Superiority, would it be better for a creep to move-charge (or just charge) away from a Knight rather than shift-charge? Sure, there is some feat support for beefing up OAs for some builds, but the alternative is guaranteed damage.
Isn't Defender Aura + Battle Guardian just... better than Combat Challenge, in every way shape and form? Did I miss something there?
Free pseudo-marking of all adjacent.
Melee Basic Attack as an Opportunity Action (instead of Immediate).
MBA is functionally an At-Will equivalent.
Plus Str damage on a miss.
?
They loose combat superiority. Though basicly gain HBO for free. Kinda funny but it's better to move away from a knght then shift away.
They also loose dalies. So i expect their base line features to be stronger.
And, given bludgeon expertise, I think there's an even bigger chance that "Weapon Talent" might be fairly different from "Fighter Weapon Talent."
If that is the case, I think I would personally fly to WotC headquarters, and shoot the designers in the face (with a Nerf Maverick, of course) for not giving the new feature a different name. If they want the new Fighter to have features that are "fairly different" from the old Fighter, they should give the new features names that are "fairly different." I will not look forward to confusion over the difference between Fighter Weapon Talent and a Fighter with Weapon Talent.
DM Deviousness question: because of the apparent lack of Combat Superiority, would it be better for a creep to move-charge (or just charge) away from a Knight rather than shift-charge? Sure, there is some feat support for beefing up OAs for some builds, but the alternative is guaranteed damage.
Better hope he doesn't have Defend the Line, which shuts that down nicely.
DM Deviousness question: because of the apparent lack of Combat Superiority, would it be better for a creep to move-charge (or just charge) away from a Knight rather than shift-charge? Sure, there is some feat support for beefing up OAs for some builds, but the alternative is guaranteed damage.
Better hope he doesn't have Defend the Line, which shuts that down nicely.
Isn't Defend the Line a stance? So, he can shut it down, but only if he's got the actions available to swap stances at the end of his turn.
That's what I dislike the most about the Knight. Everything he does depends on a stance. Whereas previous builds could just choose the attack they want to make and get the appropriate benefits, the Knight has to spend a Minor to switch into the stance, then make an attack. It basically costs a Minor action to choose what type of attack to make, before even making it. I see this as a problem for a class that's supposedly intended to provide simplicity and an easy start for new players. The action economy of 4e, as far as I've seen, has been one of the concepts that new players take the longest to firmly grasp (along with the difference between bursts/blasts/etc). And now, despite that, Knights get mired in the action economy more than most other classes.
as I see it the idea is:
+see the monster/situation
+take the most apropriate stance
+keep hitting the monster
so you are going to chose the stance once or at most twice per encounter not every turn, instead the rogue is going to chose his trick every turn
@VaultDweller
as I see it the idea is:
+see the monster/situation
+take the most apropriate stance
+keep hitting the monster
so you are going to chose the stance once or at most twice per encounter not every turn, instead the rogue is going to chose his trick every turn
The problem being, though, that the situation constantly changes. The monster you're attacking is likely to change numerous times, as well. If adhering to the exact same tactic turn after turn is a viable strategy, then your DM is really pretty terrible at either encounter design or monster tactics.
The problem being, though, that the situation constantly changes. The monster you're attacking is likely to change numerous times, as well. If adhering to the exact same tactic turn after turn is a viable strategy, then your DM is really pretty terrible at either encounter design or monster tactics.
big monster? rage stance (+2 damage)
minions-multiple monsters? cleaving stance (hit 2 monsters)
need to keep enemies away from friends? held the line
and so on, it's a question of battle situation, and if you move trough the battle you have your minor action to change stance
[...] because of the apparent lack of Combat Superiority, would it be better for a creep to move-charge (or just charge) away from a Knight rather than shift-charge? Sure, there is some feat support for beefing up OAs for some builds, but the alternative is guaranteed damage.
Better hope he doesn't have Defend the Line, which shuts that down nicely.
Isn't Defend the Line a stance? So, he can shut it down, but only if he's got the actions available to swap stances at the end of his turn.
[SNIP] The action economy of 4e, as far as I've seen, has been one of the concepts that new players take the longest to firmly grasp (along with the difference between bursts/blasts/etc). And now, despite that, Knights get mired in the action economy more than most other classes.
[FYI, I actually did the top quote, not Kerrus]
Move-charge will still get just about anyone within 5 squares of the monster, even if the monster is slowed. (7 squares if the monster is truly desperate and does a run-charge.) If there are buddies in this radius that need protecting, it's better for the Knight to use a stance that just kills the creep faster.
I agree that the action economy is more subtle than expected in the Knight. You can either:
- Keep any current stance & not worry about it, OR
- Change/Start a stance at the beginning of your turn & then act "like normal" (move-attack or vice-versa), OR
- Change a stance at the end of your turn after acting "like normal", OR
- Change/Start a stance at the beginning of your turn, move or attack, & then change the stance again.
For maximum flexibility, you either aren't moving or aren't attacking.
I still think it's likely that "extra fighter stance" let's you use 2.
I suspect you get a 3rd stance.
And for what it's worth, I don't think Weapon Talent will be much different than what we already have for Fighter Weapon Talent.
I still think it's likely that "extra fighter stance" let's you use 2.
I suspect you get a 3rd stance.
I think you'll get a third stance, but now that it's been mentioned, I wouldn't be shocked if a paragon or epic ability let you use two (or maybe even three at epic) stances at once.