D&D 4E A gathering of Martial Controllers - what do you think

[Garthanos]

As for a warlord-like controller, I'm all eyeballs, roll 'er out!

Martial Practices might be one ingredient for it.
It's not a speedy thing though the MP and Martial Artistry were a bit of a distraction from specific Warlordy Control development ...
I do rather think natural feeling zone rules might be an important part of it particularly if we are shooting for the NPC troop management

 

[Tony Vargas]

I do rather think natural feeling zone rules might be an important part of it

I think they would have had to drastically change the structure of the combat rules to make strong 'zones of control' work well.

I'm not sure I'm following what we mean by 'zones of control' - actual Zones with that keyword? Threatened areas?

The control afforded to wizards is really relatively weak and often circumstantial.

Wizards obviously slathered a lot of conditions on their enemies, and could conjure zones, walls, & summon. A more oft-overlooked mode of control for them, though, was area interdiction, being /able/ to drop an AE in an area of a given size imposes tactical considerations on your enemies, sometimes whether you do it (or do it that effectively) or not. If it's an all-creatures AE, rather than an enemy-only, it imposes another dimension to it: closely engaging your allies in melee reduces the danger from the AE. It also increases the danger from your allies, especially if they tend more towards melee.

The 4e wizard could be pretty interesting to play, early on, and it's mutation into the Mage, in-line-with-the-classic-game-errata powering up it's spells, and general Essentials+ power inflation actually took away from that interest, making it less of a challenge to play well.

As for a warlord-like controller, I'm all eyeballs, roll 'er out!

Over on the 5e side of the house, Mearls is demonstrating his design process with another 1/3rd-Warlord Fighter sub-class as an example (at least it's not another witch - some may recall it being used as an example of custom-class creation in more than one edition), and it's set off the usual round of silliness. An off hand 'there aren't enough potential sub-classes' comment initiated a flurry of them - I collected, consolidated, and ended up with 16 that seemed pretty solid. ::shrug::
Anyway, two of them: a 'Marshal' that commands troops, and wrecan's 'Hector' concept would potentially be controllers in 5e, since there's no attempt to keep classes to one role, or even any formal roles. (There are the old informal roles - caster, healer, trap-victim, & meat-shield - of course.)

The Martial Controller Underground had a bunch of martial controllers, a few were Warlord-like. I might have a copy of the "soldier" which centered around formations and powers that keyed off them.

 

[Garthanos]

The Martial Controller Underground had a bunch of martial controllers, a few were Warlord-like. I might have a copy of the "soldier" which centered around formations and powers that keyed off them.

I like that thought.

 

[Garthanos]

Over on the 5e side of the house,

My Son is playing a Princess Build / Lazy Lord .... err Noble Class in 5e on occasion... of course they are also playing with a bunch of 4e isms including flanking and not playing with some things 5e has like inspiration.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I'm not sure I'm following what we mean by 'zones of control' - actual Zones with that keyword? Threatened areas?

Ah, see it really helps to be a truly dyed in the wool wargamer. 'Zone of Control' is originally a term used in military science, and popularized in games by Avalon Hill in its classic hexmap wargames. The rules varied somewhat from game to game, but typically units of say corps, division, or regiment size, operating on 'operational' scale maps (5-50km per hex say) would exert a ZOC in the hexes around them. The effects varied, being anything from automatically halting the movement of enemy units entering a hex in a ZOC to imposing movement penalties or something like 'opportunity attacks'. These also appeared in a more flexible form in games like Panzer Leader/Blitzkrieg which depict combat at a platoon level with scales in the 200 meters per hex range. In those games there was generally more of a 'beaten ground' kind of control with opportunity fire taking place against units moving into the area.

Something like 'threatening reach' as a common controller concept would effectively be the same sort of thing. Anyone entering a somewhat extended zone around the controller would be subject to attack or other sanctions. It would certainly have the potential to create static combat situations, which 4e tends to try to avoid (though they can come up if you choose your terrain poorly).

Wizards obviously slathered a lot of conditions on their enemies, and could conjure zones, walls, & summon. A more oft-overlooked mode of control for them, though, was area interdiction, being /able/ to drop an AE in an area of a given size imposes tactical considerations on your enemies, sometimes whether you do it (or do it that effectively) or not. If it's an all-creatures AE, rather than an enemy-only, it imposes another dimension to it: closely engaging your allies in melee reduces the danger from the AE. It also increases the danger from your allies, especially if they tend more towards melee.

It isn't 'overlooked', at least it never was by me! I think it was the main point of the wizard really, and one argument for a 'blaster' type of build. By saying its overt control was sometimes weak and inconsistent I wasn't really trying to dis the class. PHB1 wizard is actually a very nicely designed class.

The 4e wizard could be pretty interesting to play, early on, and it's mutation into the Mage, in-line-with-the-classic-game-errata powering up it's spells, and general Essentials+ power inflation actually took away from that interest, making it less of a challenge to play well.

Yeah, AP and then the Mage really put the suck on wizards, and the whole game, kinda. It just made running them simplistic. I'm not sure they REALLY got a huge power boost (there was some, but fighters etc. all got stronger over time) but they became a lot easier to run without having to think about it. Party-friendly at-wills was the low point IMHO.

Over on the 5e side of the house, Mearls is demonstrating his design process with another 1/3rd-Warlord Fighter sub-class as an example (at least it's not another witch - some may recall it being used as an example of custom-class creation in more than one edition), and it's set off the usual round of silliness. An off hand 'there aren't enough potential sub-classes' comment initiated a flurry of them - I collected, consolidated, and ended up with 16 that seemed pretty solid. ::shrug::
Anyway, two of them: a 'Marshal' that commands troops, and wrecan's 'Hector' concept would potentially be controllers in 5e, since there's no attempt to keep classes to one role, or even any formal roles. (There are the old informal roles - caster, healer, trap-victim, & meat-shield - of course.)

The Martial Controller Underground had a bunch of martial controllers, a few were Warlord-like. I might have a copy of the "soldier" which centered around formations and powers that keyed off them.

I've come to the conclusion that Mike Mearls is simply insane. I don't understand or agree with ANYTHING that he says or does at this point. His recent comments about 1e for instance were utterly ludicrous. I mean I literally dismiss out of hand anything that comes from that quarter. He's got his wish, the current edition of D&D is a swamp of retrospection and weird Gygax worship strangely mixed with elements of 3e. I have no idea what to make of it.

I've seen a few 'amateur' martial controllers. None of them so far has impressed me, but there are probably 100 more out there I know nothing of. I don't doubt that some of them at least have a couple good ideas. Few and far between were the people with both the talent AND persistence to make a decent 4e class.

 

[Garthanos]

Party-friendly at-wills was the low point IMHO.

In Classic AD&D magic user having to pay attention to the fact their magics were often very not party-friendly was a core flavor of the class

 

[Garthanos]

I've come to the conclusion that Mike Mearls is simply insane. I don't understand or agree with ANYTHING that he says or does at this point. His recent comments about 1e for instance were utterly ludicrous. I mean I literally dismiss out of hand anything that comes from that quarter. He's got his wish, the current edition of D&D is a swamp of retrospection and weird Gygax worship strangely mixed with elements of 3e. I have no idea what to make of it.

LOL well that is a bit over the top... I mean I haven't exactly been following his exploits much recently. I had the impression he was never great as a big picture guy and had nostalgia going on (which at some level I suspect of us all or we would be playing an entirely different game) without always understanding the problems that were in what he was nostalgic over.

 

[Garthanos]

How can one make caltrop use a skill full thing? can we have an act of intimidation or deception push multiple enemy into to a quickly sprayed caltrop field? Ie damage now because they move without knowing the danger is there because it was surrepticiously created ... with subsequent damage being conditional - perhaps moving slower through the zone causes no damage subsequently. (probably a wizard spell with a similar effect).

 

[Garthanos]

A lot of Warlord feats take Inspiring Word or a specific Commanding Presence as a preq. Swap either or both of those, and you cut down on leader feats available. Controller-y feats could take whatever you swap in place of them as preqs.

Are there wizard control enhancing feats? ... there must be, duh, need to examine that class more now that I am getting back to working on the controller warlord.

 

[Tony Vargas]

How can one make caltrop use a skill full thing?

Insight to place it where victims are most likely to step. Stealth to cameoflage it...

can we have an act of intimidation or deception push multiple enemy into to a quickly sprayed caltrop field?

yes.

Also, while a caltrop just sits there the danger presented by similar-level enemies pressing you in combat could make them harder to avoid. Hmm... a level-neutral mechanic might simply be that you can't shift over them. Or they could attack using the bonus of the adjacent enemy you're trying to avoid an OA from...