D&D Optimization
Optimization in 4e: What is needed?
Summary: As with any number-based RPG, having a larger amount of "+1" to your rolls/scores will make you significantly stronger than someone who doesn't, even if it's just one; however, +1 represents all 4e has to offer via optimization.
Before you can optimize, you must first understand the game. Explaining Pun-Pun, for example, necessitates discussing snippets of rules from eight or more books, and this is certainly an optimized character for Dungeons and Dragons, where characters must deal with game-bending effects and situations too wild to list here. Thus, the thought processes for optimization depend on the game. This is a factor with what one sees in 4e, where very little can affect characters-- you usually can't take away their hand weapons in this game, and even the 'rust monster' of 4e doesn't permanently really destroy magic items (rather it dissolves them into magic essence which needs to be reforged back into a magic item.)
Primarily, the only thing you can do to a character is hit point damage and applying temporary inhibitors such as slows, dazes, and stuns, so an optimal character might be concerned about having hit points. Unfortunately, the RAW ('Rules as Written', the only thing an optimizer can use to make judgments) for monster damage is so pathetically low, the healing so jaw-droppingly high, that this isn't much of a consideration.
Similarly, characters primarily, almost exclusively, defeat monsters by dealing hit point damage. The other two methods, exploiting weak saves and abuse of the Intimidate rules (both since fixed) are too easily exploited to necessitate any lengthy discussion.
The primary way characters do damage is by attacking (go figure.) And this leads to our fundamental philosophy of optimization in 4e: +1 to hit is everything. 4e is seemingly an extraordinary narrow game, there's really nothing else that's relevant. All of a character's powers are keyed off scoring hits. If you can't hit, your powers are worthless (again, there is an exception, in the form of the 'pacifist cleric', but let's focus on the other possible characters, some 99.9% of the possibilities).
How bad is it? WoTC created a feat, "Weapon Expertise", that grants, just that, a +1 to hit at low levels (more at high levels, but that's besides the point). This feat, this simple +1 to hit, is so dominatingly powerful that it's considered a 'feat tax', as all characters, even non-optimized ones, MUST take this feat. Many campaigns simply house rule "all characters get weapon expertise for free", because, in fact, all characters must take it at some point, the sooner the better.
Someone ignorant of the system might think +1 matters more at low levels than at high, but, 4e uses a treadmill system. A first level character might have +7 to hit, and will attack monsters with a defense of 18 (i.e., they'll have a 50% chance of hitting). A 20th level character might have a +24 to hit, and this might sound better, but the game is designed to keep characters on a treadmill at all times. A 20th level character will fight monsters with a defense of 35, and so still have a 50% chance of hit.
In other words, "+1 to hit" is just as valuable at first level, as it is at any other level. +1 to hit is EVERYTHING 4e has to offer when it comes to optimization.
Another example: the most powerful Epic destiny is considered Demigod. Why? Because it grants a +1 to hit, in the way of a flat bonus to all attributes. No other epic destiny offers anything as game-breaking as this +1.
Yet another example: a +5 magic weapon is valued, according to WotC, at 225,000 GP. If bonuses were worth less at high levels, a +6 weapon shouldn't cost much more. Of course, a +6 weapon (i.e., granting an additional +1 to hit) is valued at 1,125,000 GP, a 900,000 GP increase, obviously worth MORE than any other plus, even worth more than all other plusses put together.
Even WotC acknowledges: +1 to hit is everything in 4e.
Why must you optimize in 4e?
Summary: If someone in your party is missing a +1 to their attack due to a sub-optimal character design choice, combat can take an unreasonably long time, as many players of the game have noted.
Now that we've established that "+1 to hit" is everything, now we need the motivation for why optimization is important, and critical in 4e:
4e has been designed with optimization assumed, nearly all character abilities are based around combat, and combat is balanced around optimal characters. A typical fight with optimized characters, once you get into paragon, can take 2 hours, more if it's even remotely challenging. Using sub-optimal characters double that time, sometimes more, which is why complaints of 'long fights' are so common on the message boards. Such grindy battles are the results of players falling into stupid traps, such as building half-orc wizards or halfling fighters, or picking +2 proficiency weapons instead of +3, or even picking a cool "+1 Lightning Burst" weapon instead of the dull, but critical to the game, "+2 weapon".
Now, 4rries might claim that any race/class combination is viable, but this is pure rubbish. If you pick something that doesn't have the right attribute bonus (that is to say, a +2 to your attack attribute), then you're permanently gimping your character in a way that can never be fixed. Not taking Weapon Expertise at first level, for example, can be fixed by taking it at 2nd level, and similarly other mistakes, like not picking a high proficiency weapon, can be fixed as the character gains levels. But if you're the wrong race/class combo, it's all over, that character can only be a drag on the rest of the party. So '+1 to hit' needs to be focused on immediately at character generation, and never abandoned as a principle of character building.
So, next time you're caught in a 4 hour long battle in 4e, and the fight is grinding away endlessly, realize this is because someone forgot to grab a +1 to hit. Perhaps there's a halfling fighter or half-orc wizard in the party?
The Poor Human: A Case Study
Summary: Though +1 means everything in 4E, the humans having +1 to all defenses against most of the attacks against them is completely useless and makes the race awful, since defense doesn't matter.
Note that this is prior to D&D essentials, in which humans can exchange their bonus at will for the ability to, once per encounter, apply a +4 to one attack roll, before or AFTER they see the result of said roll. However, Essentials should be viewed as a different game.
Unlike D&D, humans have no real place in 4e, due to poor design. Let's look at humans from a CharOp point of view, to see why this must be the case.
Humanity's main bonus in 4e is their floating +2 attribute, unlike all other races that have a +2 to two fixed attributes. In theory this might seem good since the bonus could go anywhere, but realize the value of this drains away as soon as your character chooses a class (i.e., in a few seconds). As soon as you pick 'fighter', for example, your +2 has to go to strength, so immediately your human is behind every single race that has a +2 to strength and a +2 to some other attribute. Since this happens regardless of what class you pick, the 'floating' benefit is completely nonexistent in practice. Not getting that secondary +2 to an attribute means humans are behind on all secondary attacks and effects, an insurmountable penalty just for being human. Do the other advantages make up for this somehow? Let's take a look.
Humanity's next supposed advantage is a 'free' feat. This is negligible at best. All non-human races receive a built-in feat, such as "Elven Accuracy" or halfling's "Second Chance". Humans get no built-in feat. So this 'bonus' simply makes up for the lack of built-in feat. Granted, this is a floating feat, and if WoTC printed broken feats, this could be an advantage. Unfortunately, there is only one broken feat, Weapon Expertise; as all characters get a feat at first level, the human advantage amounts to nothing. If there were TWO broken feats, then humans would be ahead...until second level, when all characters could pick those two broken feats. Similarly, no matter how many broken feats WotC theoretically creates, humans must fall behind. Even if one considers racial feats, half-elves have access to all human feats, so, once again, humans have no way to get ahead there, either. Recent splatbooks have given more and more powerful racial feats to non-humans, putting them very far behind even if they could catch up.
Humanity's next supposed advantage is a bonus skill. Unfortunately, all non-human races get a +2 bonus to two skills. 4e is designed via the 'treadmill' discussed earlier, so that it's much better to be good at a few things than it is to be mediocre at several things. Thus, humans are mediocre at three skills, while non-humans are good at two skills...this is not an advantage, and is usually a drawback.
Additionally, humans get a bonus at-will power. This, too, is a fairly minimal advantage. This isn't simply because at-will powers are among the weakest powers of the game, or because this 'extra' at-will will be a power that's available to all other races anyway, but also because a character can generally only take one standard action a round. Much like the human 'floating' ability modifier, this 'bonus' ends as soon as the player makes a decision for what to do. The game is designed so that all classes can have a fine number of options with 2 at-wills (the default), humans getting a third at-will, while sometimes, occasionally, is helpful, in very special situations, usually means nothing, and there's no way to 'optimize' around using the weakest powers in the game, powers that any other race could use just as easily.
Humanity's final supposed advantage is a small bonus to NADS, the non-armor defenses. At least 60% of all attacks (arguably more or less, depending on your DM - note that there are no spells that go against AC, and many creatures also ignore the AC defense for their natural abilities) are against armor, so this might seem like a small bonus against 40% of attacks, but it's not nearly this good. Non-humans get an additional +2 to an attribute, which raises one of the NADS. Poor design means all characters will be vulnerable in one NAD, and the +1 bonus won't be of much help here (being hit on a 2 or better, either way). So, arguably, the humans get a bonus that might be a factor 5% of 13% of the time (i.e., 00.65% of the time), soaring all the way up to 1.3% of the time for an extremely defensive build. This is nonetheless an advantage, but pales in comparison to the many ways humans are inferior.
Sub-Optimization: A Case Study of Warhammers
Summary: If you roll a party of Dwarf Fighters, and do not take every +1 available, fighting an encounter one level below you will take 12 hours.
It's often argued by players of the game that you can pick a race that doesn't necessarily have the appropriate +2 bonus to a primary attack attribute, but let's take an example to see what happens in this situation.
Consider someone who falls into a few very common traps (by 'trap' it is meant a flaw in the game design by which a player can be tricked into making a bad decision), and doesn't take Weapon Expertise because it's "just a +1". Keep in mind, there was a time when Weapon Expertise wasn't even an option, and it's quite possible WoTC will add more feats in the future--the end result is still the same, however.
Trap 1: The player chooses Dwarf fighter. This is a common error to make, since the PHB on page 36 says dwarves make good fighters. This starts him with a 16 strength. Recent errata, over a year after the game was released, allows Dwarves to take Strength as one of their ability bonuses, now.
Trap 2: The player picks a +2 proficiency weapon, like a warhammer. This, too, is an easy trap to fall into, as dwarves get bonuses with warhammers, via feats (we'll assume he picks such feats, as well, which up his damage, but not, alas, the all important to-hit).
Trap 3: Instead of picking the highest bonus possible for his magic weapon, the player takes a lower bonus, in exchange for a whiz-bang power. In this case, the cool +2 Lifedrinker weapon (level 10), as opposed to a +3 magic weapon (a level 11 weapon, but possible he could have chosen it).
By level 10, this dwarf fighter would have had a 4 (str) + 2 (prof) + 5 (level) + 1 (fighter bonus) + 2 (magic) = + 15 to hit. He'll be dealing around an expected 15 points of damage a hit, assuming optimal (for his level) magic items.
Now, let's assume we have a whole party of such characters and pit them against a pair of level 11 vampire lords. This is a "level -1" encounter, which should be pretty easy. To keep combat simple, each vampire will simply sit in a corner and only perform basic defense.
Vampires using the defense action have an AC of 29, so back then, dwarves would only hit 35% of the time. Let's just call that 6 points a round, rounding generously. Three dwarves attack one vampire, two attack the other, since they're in corners. Let's focus on the vampire with three dwarves attacking it.
The vampire starts with 186 hit points, but has an action point and can 'second wind' to gain another 46, so that's really 232 hit points. It also regenerates 10 a round, so the three dwarves put together used to effectively deal 8 points of damage a round to it. This means 39 rounds of combat, assuming at-wills. Encounter powers will reduce this somewhat, dealing nearly double damage, so let's call that 36 rounds until the first vampire drops, neglecting the vampire's Dominating Gaze and Blood Drain, either of which could vastly extend combat time. We won't use Dailies, since, after all, Dailies are for 'tough' encounters, and this is a simple one.
A round generally takes 15 minutes, so that's a 9 hour combat, right there...and that's just the first vampire. The second vampire will die around 3 hours later.
So, 12 hours for a 'level -1' fight, with characters that are 'sub-optimal'. Optimal characters would likely end the fight in 2 hours or so.
Party Optimization
Summary: Optimization works better if your party optimizes together, particularly degenerate parties of just one or two classes.
Because character optimization in 4e is limited, the game design lends itself to a fascinating and entirely new form of optimization: optimizing the entire party.
Note that both of the following party builds were somewhat errata'd out of existence, as Orb of Imposition now only lasts for a single round (still enough for the first party). The same is also sort of true of the Solar Enemy divine feat that the second party references.
One example is the "four orb wizard" party. Because orb wizards get spells that can completely debilitate a monster, or even groups of monsters, for two rounds or so, a group of 4 such wizards can completely shut down a typical encounter for many rounds. While the party could be entirely composed of wizards, commonly such parties have one very high damage dealer (eg, two weapon melee ranger), who can 'coup de grace' for extreme damage; by the mid-teens, such a character can deal four hundred or more points of damage to a helpless monster, enough to slay even major dragons in a few rounds.
Another example party is the 'Radiant Whore' party. This includes 4 paladins, and a warlord. The paladins can deal a large amount of radiant damage, and can inflict high levels of 'radiant vulnerability' on a chosen monster. The warlord can multiclass and take a path that allows it to exploit this vulnerability, as well as several powerful abilities that work best with melee characters. The end result is a party, with no 'striker' characters, that nonetheless deal 'striker' level damage consistently, even with their basic attacks, with all the benefits of being a party full of defenders and a leader.
Complications with this Optimization Method
Summary: Someone who doesn't understand what 'optimization' means gives an unfocused and generally incorrect counter-argument (sic) to the optimization ideas presented above. Particularly egregious violations are marked with a WTF, parenthesized, sometimes with clarifications.
There are, however, predictable issues with simply focusing on accumulating +1 to Hit in a 4e game (WTF, read the above). In 4e, AC, Fortitude, Reflex, and Will are all static numbers rather than rolled, meaning that defenses, too, can be stacked with +1 bonuses in order to effectively counter the benefit of a character focused on attacks. This makes it rather easy for a GM who is weary of the hit-stacker's antics to simply raise one or more of the monster's defenses in exchange for lowering its hit points, effectively evening out the situation again by making the hit-ratio less in the favor of the players, but also requiring them to do less damage (WTF, the GM is supposed to be a jerk?). Unfortunately however, so much devotion to a hit bonus might have limited feat and item choices that could have allowed the party more survivability in the encounter, or more ability to resist negative effects placed on them. Stacking +1 to Hit is a simple and shallow optimization principle that is very risky to dedicate a character to, with low pay off, (WTF? The payoff is huge, as anyone reading a few paragraphs above can tell. Is this guy actually advocating jerk GMs?).
Worse, by stacking hit, you limit your damage output severely by using weapons with smaller hit dice - daily and encounter powers generally multiply a weapon's dice but not the ability modifier, so stacking Strength for Hit doesn't benefit damage when using such powers as much as using a weapon with a better damage dice (WTF? Any examples of this? Of course not, it's flat out wrong). Not only that, but as you get higher up in levels, dice multiply further for higher level powers which you replace your old powers with, and your At-Wills even being hitting for twice the dice, but not twice the modifier. Thus, in the long run, worrying too much about Hit and sacrificing high damage weapons can be a doubled-edged blade resulting in consistent but low damage hit. Not to mention a prime complaint among 4E critics is the high amount of HP that monsters have; you will NEED that damage (WTF...if you can't hit in the first place, damage means nothing.).
And worst of all, you miss out on one of the most important part of 4E combat - tactics (WTF, all tactics for winning encounters are centered around hiting). By focusing too much on +1 to Hit, you miss out on raising the other ability necessary to boost your powers. For example, a Shielding Swordmage can absorb damage dealt to allies by applying his Constitution modifier as a damage soak. A Swordmage who has left his Constitution weak in favor of Intelligence for more accurate attacks might not be able to properly defend his party, and this could result in a TPK. Another example would be with classes that move enemy targets by using push/pull/slide mechanics - they almost ALWAYS rely upon an ability modifier unrelated to your attack stat. The ability to maneuver targets into your teammate's area effects, or into difficult/hindering terrain (or say, off a cliff or into a Fighter's threatened square) is amazingly rewarding in 4E, but you miss out on it if you focus on a hit-fisher.
Same goes for magic items - you miss out on many items that do extra damage, apply Ongoing Damage, grant you saves and temporary hit points, and all kinds of other goodies simply by focusing on getting that extra +1 Magic Weapon. Not to mention it's not fun just worrying about numbers. No party survives on +1 Hit alone (WTF, read above), unless their GM is willing to pit them only against enemies with high defenses, low HP, and offensive capability.
So what is one left to do if their +to Hit is behind? Well, you could look to your party, many of them can grant you Combat Advantage or power bonuses that will help you hit your enemies; the game is, after all, balanced around the principle that your allies will be providing you with attack bonuses. Additionally, you could look for more accurate powers, like daily powers that can't miss, at-wills that grant a +2 bonus to Hit, or area powers that hit more foes and therefore are more likely to hit someone (WTF, all of these tactics are EVEN BETTER if the initial character is already well designed). That said, ignoring any source of +1 you can muster isn't always the best strategy, either. If you see a feat that will benefit you in this way, take it - but don't limit your design to simple accuracy or you'll be impotent in battle (WTF). All in all, focusing on +to Hit lacks the versatility necessary to survive in 4E's often complex encounters, and shouldn't be over-emphasized. Balance is the key.
(WTF, why does anyone care about 4e anyway? It's dead. Essentials ftw!)
Optimization in 3.5
ROGUES: Use Two-Weapon Fighting and Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Quick Draw, Rapid Shot, and Haste, and get Alchemist's Fire, Acid, or Holy Water (for against fiends). You should be able to get a massive amount of touch attacks every round, able to hit on a 2+, and be able to multiply your sneak attack damage by 6 or so consistently. Alternately, get a wizard to polymorph you into a Hydra -- enjoy having 7 to 15 sneak attacks per round. Avoid constructs, undead, and dark spaces -- a true rogue knows that shadowy alleyways and misty-filled corridors will prevent him from sneak attacking due to concealment, so restrict your operations to brightly lit rooms and meadows.
WIZARDS: The market price of a golem is increased by 5000 GP per additional HD and 50,000 GP per a size increase. With the Craft Construct feat, you only have to pay half cost, and as a result, you can create a 54 hit dice iron golem for 195,000 gold pieces; it will have 337 HP, keep its immunity to magic, have a BAB of +36 and have a DC 37 poison breath weapon. For reference, a level 20 character can be expected to have 760,000 gold pieces, easily letting you afford 3 of these bad boys, along with a headband of intellect +6 and a few miscellaneous items. Lower level characters can triple advance weaker constructs, to similar results. Also pay attention to Forcecage, a level 7 spell which costs 1500 gp to cast (and also allows NO saving throw and NO spell resistance, imprisoning any creature of 20x20 size or less in an indestructable force barrier. Leave an Acid Fog and Dimensional Anchor spell on it and teleport away, kills nearly anything with no save allowed, but that's beside the point).
SORCERERS: Not exactly the most optimized caster class, being a Sorcerer nonetheless lets you use your Charisma to maximize the benefit of Leadership as well as Planar Binding series. A lack of utility magic is compensated by the ease you'll have in amassing sexy marilith hordes.