I’ve played the Avenger during dungeon delves and more recently I’ve been playing one in Living Forgotten Realms (LFR). After giving the Avenger a thorough shake-down I’ve come to realize that Avengers suck. They are the worst, most underpowered class in the striker family. I’d go so far as to say that the Avenger is quite possibly the worst classes in 4e D&D.
The striker’s purpose is to dish out damage. What makes the striker special is that when he hits it should hurt… a lot. All strikers get a little something extra to enhance their damage output. Admittedly in many cases the extra damage is circumstantial and if the appropriate criterion isn’t met then they don’t get the extra damage. The Avenger is the only Striker class that gets nothing extra.
Here’s a quick summary of the extra damamge striekrs can deal.
- Rogue: +2d6 sneak dice (combat advantage required)
- Ranger: +1d6 hunter’s quarry
- Assassin: +1d6 assassin’s shroud
- Warlock: +1d6 warlock’s curse
- Monk: 2+Str or 3+Wis Flurry of Blows
- Sorcerer: +second ability modifier
- Barbarian: +1d6 or +1d8 from at-will power
- Avenger: no additional damage
This is certainly a simplified way to compare the classes, I’ll admit that. Each striker class does have other abilities or powers beyond just the extra dice damage. The Avenger’s big ability is that, in some circumstances, he gets two attack rolls. As awesome as that sounds it’s really not that great. It certainly does not make up for the lack of extra dice damage.
In order for the avenger to get two attack rolls he needs to meet some very specific criteria. First he needs to designate one target as his Oath of Enmity target. This works just like a Warlock’s curse or the Ranger’s hunter’s quarry. But unlike these other classes, the Avenger cannot change targets during combat. The Avengers can select powers that allows him to change his Oath target, but who wants to give up a potentially awesome offensive power just for that luxury?
As long as the Avenger is attacking his Oath of Enmity target then things look good. Every time he attacks he gets two attack rolls. However, there are two other important caveats. The attack must be a melee attack and there cannot be any other enemies adjacent to the Avenger.
There are going to be battles where it’s incredibly easy to meet these criteria. In these cases then the Avenger looks pretty powerful. He’s going to hit a lot more often (statistically speaking) then anyone else. And because he’s rolling two attack rolls he’s also more likely to score a critical hit. If the two attack die ability was just a blanket rule that applied to all attacks against the Oath of Enmity target I’d take back all the bad things I’ve said about the Avenger. But it doesn’t so I won’t.
As a class that uses the divine power source, the Avenger can use the holy symbol as an implement. That means that that many of the class powers are implement-based, and as such are ranged attacks. Oh, guess what, none of them get the benefit of getting to roll two attack dice (except for a very select few that specifically say so). This is like a dual-class Rogue not getting sneak dice with powers from his other class. Except in this case they are all powers from your class.
It is possible to build an Avenger that doesn’t have any ranged or implement-based powers, so you can make a character that doesn’t have to worry about this issue. But the other requirement is not nearly as easy to ensure.
The easiest and probably best way to avoid having any other creatures adjacent to you (and thereby negate your best class feature) is to partner up with a really competent controller. If the controller can keep other monsters away from you, then you’ll see just how powerful the Avenger can be in the right circumstances. However, my experience is that the player running the controller wants to do more than just keep monsters off your back (assuming that he has enough powers with forced movement in the first place).
Even if you do manage to get a controller to be your best friend and you develop a great one-two punch where he keeps the bad guys away as often as possible, you then have to worry about the DM.
As I mentioned my experience playing the Avenger has been through LFR play. This means that I’ve have numerous DMs run combat encounter for me. In every adventure I’ve played with the Avenger, the DM has used his knowledge as the DM to negate my class ability. He’s intentionally swarmed me with monster to ensure that I’m never able to go one-on-one with the biggest opponents. During one home game where I was using the Avenger the DM used creatures that are immune to forced movement, eliminating any help I might get from the party’s controller.
This situation presents a real dilemma for me as the player. I hate to be critical of the DM, but this kind of action just doesn’t seem fair to the poor guy playing the Avenger. Although it may not seem like a big deal when the DM swarms the Avenger with monsters that are immune to forced movement (for no good reason other than the DM knows how to negate your best class ability) it really is. It’s like the DM always using monsters that don’t grant combat advantage when flanked for no reason other than because there’s a Rogue in the party. Without a good in-game reason for taking this action the DM is severely weakening the Avenger class.
Before the Avenger lovers try to lynch me for not giving the Avenger an even shake, I should admit that I actually really like the class concept. In fact, I find divine characters extremely interesting. I’m fascinated with the idea of a rogue loner who acts in the best interests of the church but can (and often does) blur the lines of the church’s dogma to accomplish goals for the great good. The whole time the Avenger himself sees his actions as necessary and justifiable.
From a role-playing perspective Avengers have tremendous potential. But as much as I like this side of the character, the weaknesses the class possesses on the combat side of things just to balance the scales for me.
I was willing to play the Avenger for a few levels before giving up on the class. After my recent experiences I decided that the Avenger class is the class I’ve enjoyed playing the least in 4e D&D. It’s a sub-par striker and a sub-par class. The Avenger just doesn’t excel in enough areas to be in the same arena as the other strikers or even the other classes.
Which striker class do you think is the worst? I’d appreciate hearing from anyone who’s played an Avenger at higher levels. If you agree that the Avenger is the worst striker do you think they’re the worst class in 4e D&D? If not which class do you think deserves that distinction?
Related reading:
View Comments (45)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1 2 3 … 5 Next »Very interesting analysis. One of my players just last night decided he would be playing a Shadar-Kai Avenger, and his decision was based a lot more on the awesome role-playing potential of the class, rather than the mechanics, most of which he is pretty ignorant of, as far as the bigger picture is concerned. Any suggestions on how to beef him up to make him more on par with other strikers? I think extra damage vs the Oath of Enmity target might be acceptable, and probably wouldn't break the game.
Could not disagree more. I have a player who adores the Avenger and the Warlord adores having an Avenger as well.
First. The Avenger crits almost twice as often, at higher tiers rolling two dice is big. Second, he hits ~25% more often, which is guarantees a better average damage output.
In our group, the Avenger either keeps taking out small threats quickly. Selecting new oath targets as the old ones dies OR the rest of the team enable him to get to the guy they want down NOW.
I can see why you feel distasteful about the Avenger after what you've described. I've DM'd for a few avengers and I think both seemed relatively satisfied with the class. But then, I'm a relatively indulgent DM and I certainly didn't go out of my way to negate their bread and butter class ability. With me DMing, I think playing an avenger was more about getting the right positioning, similar to how the rogue needs to work at getting combat advantage.
Avengers tend to acquire enough movement powers and have a good enough set of defenses that they can effectively move around the field. I remember one of the avengers I played with focused specifically on teleportation powers and didn't particularly have a problem getting into position to get his two rolls.
It's not a class for people who like to see huge damage numbers. And it's easier to gimp its special abilities than other classes. And come to think of it, I realize that I dislike Avengers' mechanics compared to all the other striker classes, but it stacks up as balanced from my perspective.
First, let me say, I love your article. However, opposingly, I love my Avenger.
I looked for great ways to offset the disadvantages you've reviewed.
I chose a maul as my weapon (2d6 damage). I selected a feat for Avengers that allowed me to treat rolls of 1-2 as 3 on the dice (Avengeing Resolution). Since I knew I'd be rolling 2d in every attack, that bottomed out my minimum at 6+MOD per hit.
As a Censure of Unity Avenger, I could get allies to pin down my Oath target, then add damage to my strikes against that foe.
I multiclassed into Invoker to be my own controller instead of constantly relying on the Wizard. This allowed him to work for the party.
For a time, I kept the feat Distant Vengeance, but later decided to retrain it. It helped for several levels when I had a hard time getting into the thick of melee without taking up a square that the Rogue or Barbarian wanted to have.
I took the utility power that llowed me to change my Oath target during combat. It is a very useful power and as an encounter power was nearly always available. It helped that I could soften a target before allies got close; then I could switch and move ahead.
I took several powers and a Paragon Path that served up lots of flight and other mobility perks. I remained highly mobile during every combat.
I took a few items and powers to keep myself on my feet even when far away from the Warlord or Cleric.
I had the Maul of Oaths Fulfilled so that after dropping one Oath target I could dish out more damage. With the Rod of Divinity, I could double dip into Channel Divinity on occassion. The very last item I received was the Golden Lion figurine so that I had an extra ally if needed.
So, really enjoying the Avenger takes work and tactics, but I found it more enjoyable than Assassin, Rogue, Barbarian, Ranger, or Warlock; because the striker feature is a 'baked in' feature similar to Sorcerer and Monk. As long as I'm watching for the right opportunities, I can deliver.
In addition, the divine class was much more fun to play out than so many others. I had a connection with a deity and a church. It gave me access to contacts, information, food and shelter, rituals, and so much more which I never had access to when playing an Assassin, Rogue, Ranger, or Warlock.
and don't forget Iron Armbands of Power.
I have never played an Avenger, so I cannot agree or disagree with your comments of the class, but I do agree with your frustration as a player when a DM goes out of his way to negate a players powers. A DM should not play dumb, but to personally penalize a player is never the correct way to DM, in my opinion.
Honestly I find the Avenger a bit underwhelming. Doubt the crit chance and a 25% bonus chance to hit doesn't help when the DM is actively screwing with your one class feature. If the DM is nice and lets you get away with your class feature more then 50% of the time, then it's awesome. But I tend to find that accuracy isn't always a problem for players, after a fact, they get like 80% chance to hit anyways.
Over all, it's a very DM dependent class and bad DM's tend to love to screw with class features they have some control over. When you're a Warlock and you can curse anything you want and then will ALWAYS do damage to that target, it's hard for the DM to say, no. When you have restrictions on your power that the Dm can screw with, well. Guess what.
Sentack
A player in my group had a similar discovery. We've seen what you're talking about in our combats. One thing I'll challenge, though, is whether the DM is "out to get" the Avenger. The class design depends heavily on circumstance. As a DM, I found about half of my normal encounters unintentionally screwed up those circumstances. It happened often enough that I found even the simplest challenges were frustrating because they prevented the Avenger from setting up his combos. Normal encounters were enough to shut him down (a single enemy controller). The class mechanics almost require that you specifically design encounters to allow them to shine.
you have to build a paragon multiclass ranger/eternal seeker and not use any avenger powers but the oath but you can make an avenger worth playing
I'm playing both an avenger and two-blade ranger in two different campaigns, and I find they both deal excellent damage.
The subtle difference is that avengers naturally are more accurate with their Oath of Enmity - that's their "extra damage" in my view.
Meanwhile, other strikers, like my ranger, will always miss more often because they're rolling twice to attack!
So avenger is more steady and reliable striker damage, while other strikers are more bursty, missing more often.
And flavor-wise, it's hard to beat avengers! Their concept and style is very engaging and enjoyable to roleplay. So says my revenant avenger, who "just won't die!" ;)