Puck Robin wrote:
Puck Robin wrote:
Also, what exactly is wrong with Twin Strike?
You're kidding, right?
The most overpowered at-will in the game, according to charop and everyone else.
The at-will that, if a Ranger doesn't take it, you'll likely get laughed out of town?
No. There's nothing wrong with it. It's perfectly balanced and is in no way overpowered.
So if they made it an encounter or daily you would'v been OK with it then?
The only snark in my post is the very last line. the others are (somewhat) serious.
Not me. Everyone who's done and/or read the math. I'll try to find a link for you later.
In short: you get to apply all of your static bonuses to each damage roll. This isn't much at low heroic, but, here's a (really short) list of things that get applied on each hit: Magic Weapon Enhancement, Weapon Focus, Damage enhancements from Iron Armbands of Power, etc.
IF they errataed it to function as a single [2W] damage roll if both attacks hit, it'd be a lot more balanced, and it would make the other Ranger at-wills viable. It'd still be (Likely) the best, but it wouldn't be so overwhelmingly powerful. It would merely be a good choice as opposed to a choice so good you're nerfing yourself if you don't take it.
Light armor is NOT a balancing feature, as a Ranger can ignore WIS completely with no actual consequences. A STR/DEX Ranger has a strong AC.
EDIT: just saw Bot's Post.
Ardent Strike IS good, but it's not overwhelmingly better than (most, there's one or two complete crap ones) the other Paladin At-Wills. So while it's likely that a Paladin will take it, he can be a good defender without it.
EDIT 2: The only reason twin strike is "better" for archers is because they only have to purchase one weapon.