Classes and Roles: supply and demand

[yesnomu]

Controllers are great when they pick powers that hinder enemies. One level 3 pseudo-nova that's tons of fun is to daze a group of enemies with Color Spray, then knock them prone with Icy Terrain or Orbmaster's. Boom, you basically just stunned a whole bunch of enemies, and you can do that once every two fights. (And both of those spells are useful on their own, too.)

Sustainable dailies are also awesome for Wizards. Slapping a Stinking Cloud over some ranged attackers to make them come to your melee fighters feels great, and it adds up to a pretty sweet amount of damage over time, too. (Not that damage should ever be your focus as a controller, of course.)

Once you get three dailies, you should be dropping one on roughly every moderate-to-difficult encounter, and you will be cleaning up. Much like the Barbarian, you have the most fun when you can spend a daily on each encounter.

Controllers are awesome! Spread the word!

 

[Hereticus]

Sustainable dailies are also awesome for Wizards.

Ha... and they can give DMs headaches.

I had no way to cross a 10 square chasm, so I wanted to create Bigby's Icy Grasp and hold on to a 10 foot pole while it carried me across.

I don't know why... but the DM said no.

 

[Dracomortis]

With all the World of Wacraft comparisons and comments on the lack of controllers, I've come to a realization: I have a very deviant taste in characters. My main on WoW is a druid who's been specced restoration since level 10, and I almost always play a wizard in 4e simply for their ability to mess with things. Big numbers on the damage charts have never appealed to me.

 

[Mephistopheles]

With all the World of Wacraft comparisons and comments on the lack of controllers, I've come to a realization: I have a very deviant taste in characters. My main on WoW is a druid who's been specced restoration since level 10, and I almost always play a wizard in 4e simply for their ability to mess with things. Big numbers on the damage charts have never appealed to me.

I'm the same. My two level eighty characters in WoW were healers: a priest and a shaman. When I quit playing I was in the process of leveling a druid and a warrior and intended them to be a healer and tank respectively. This inclination worked to my advantage in the MMO environment as I rarely had to wait more than five or ten minutes to find a group.

In D&D groups I tend to play what a group lacks, so perhaps it's no surprise that my current 4E characters are a leader and two defenders - it's a good thing I enjoy playing those kinds of roles.

 

[Switchback]

I think Controllers need to be thinking more versatile than straight out control as if often preached, if you want to keep them interesting.

You simply need to have 1 or two decent damage abilities for when fights get too messy to use large zones and area affects or when moving creatures isn't going to be worth much, because the enemies just move back.

A controller's value is always going to be measured against whether it would be more useful to just have a striker piling big damage on someone that round, instead of stopping one enemy from attacking or moving. In knock down, slug it out, simple fights, the striker might just be more preferable no matter if you already have a couple.

Where Controllers get better though is when fights get more complicated and have lots of enemies that work well together or have synergies.

For example, enemies that gain bonuses from standing adjacent, or get powers that let them shift, gain combat advantage, etc, these are the important creatures to break up for a controller, as you are doing more than just denying 1 creature, 1 attack. You are denying a whole group of creatures their synergetic powers or bonuses.

Well composed enemy groups in general are good for controllers because he can often take the strongest link out of the fight for a while, allowing the rest of the group to focus on the weak links or get to places or mobs that were otherwise blocked by brutes and soldiers.

 

[Victim]

I think that the situation is somewhat unstable since new material is coming out faster than people can experience it (one can change characters quickly, but then misses out on experiencing any given character over a wide range of levels).

So assuming people will want to play classes that they haven't played before and/or new classes (ie, that classes that no one has played are more desirable than classes which a player has seen played), then people will be leaning towards strikers by default.

I think, and I am sure this is pretty controversial, that the controller and defender roles are pretty extraneous. In previous editions everyone strived to be the best striker and or a buffer and the best were both (CoDzilla).

Now in 4e the defender is just a weak striker who supposedly can take a beating more than the more true strikers and they give a penalty to those that they mark.

Controllers are um, I play one (wizard), in a class (or role as the case may be) all on their own. I have preferred to play wizards all the way back to 1e and now I play a wizard because that is what I do. But wow, I am underwhelmed and I look to all of the strikers in our group and we have 3 or 4 in a group of 7 with envy. Explain to me why a striker is going to move out of my spells way potentially drawing an OA so I can get my piddle damage spell off that may hit 2 guys if I can even hit? When they can lay more hurt on one of them.

Finally leaders are needed like in previous editions, not as much but I still feel that you need that one leader in the group for the healing. After that you could go straight strikers and have a pretty successful group. In my opinion, the only reason you play a defender or controller is nostalgia.

Those results aren't actually all that surprising. The way a group functions is going to be informed by its members. With 4/7 strikers, the group is essentially revolving around its striker damage and spiking out enemies before they can mess you up too much. It is mostly striker after all. In that sense, your area damage/conditions are less important unless they're setting up or playing off your teammates in some way. Blood Pulse combined with rogue or warlock slide/push powers (plus your own stuff).

But that's not the only way a group can work. Consider a hypothetical group focused on area damage with some support. In this case, the lion's share of the damage being dished via area powers, single target attacks will also be sort of a 5th wheel, appropriate for mop up.

BTW, what level is your group?

 

[Sadrik]

I think that the situation is somewhat unstable since new material is coming out faster than people can experience it (one can change characters quickly, but then misses out on experiencing any given character over a wide range of levels).

So assuming people will want to play classes that they haven't played before and/or new classes (ie, that classes that no one has played are more desirable than classes which a player has seen played), then people will be leaning towards strikers by default.

I agree, a point I have made previously, PHB added 8 new classes, I am wondering how those classes have trickled into games. Do players ask their DM for a switch? Are they allowed to simply morph their character (same guy different class)? Are they switching campaigns more quickly? How is it affecting campaign continuity, something I don't here a lot about anymore.

But that's not the only way a group can work. Consider a hypothetical group focused on area damage with some support. In this case, the lion's share of the damage being dished via area powers, single target attacks will also be sort of a 5th wheel, appropriate for mop up.

Agreed, different combinations of roles play differently. Some are optimal and some are less optimal. This seems to be the pit trap of 4e.

Another quirky thing with roles, this next session my wizard signed up to go into a pit fight tournament. Because my role is not expected to do damage to a single target I really have no hope of winning at this tournament, my AoE powers are absolutely meaningless. Really this goes back to my description of characters, in previous editions classes could stand on their own and now they are interdependent to the group. A wizard could stand on its own in the past, now they cannot. So my wizard is going to be smacked around by pretty much any other role because, I have weakened HP/surges and armor selection for the privilege of doing AoE attacks that drizzle the damage on multiple enemies.

BTW, what level is your group?

6

 

[Hereticus]

I agree, a point I have made previously, PHB added 8 new classes, I am wondering how those classes have trickled into games. Do players ask their DM for a switch? Are they allowed to simply morph their character (same guy different class)? Are they switching campaigns more quickly? How is it affecting campaign continuity, something I don't here a lot about anymore.

The last time I changed a character's race because a new book came out was when the Friend Folio first was published... I turned my deceitful elf into a drow.

When a new book comes out, we allowed a one-shot retraining for feats and powers, but not races or classes.

 

[Victim]

I agree, a point I have made previously, PHB added 8 new classes, I am wondering how those classes have trickled into games. Do players ask their DM for a switch? Are they allowed to simply morph their character (same guy different class)? Are they switching campaigns more quickly? How is it affecting campaign continuity, something I don't here a lot about anymore.

We chose to start a new campaign after the end of our Heroic arc. So everyone got a fresh shot. Of course, we ended up with a cleric, a battlerager fighter, and one player's second dragonborn rogue; the only new classes are my barbarian and our invoker who has been out of town. Talk about a missed opportunity.

Agreed, different combinations of roles play differently. Some are optimal and some are less optimal. This seems to be the pit trap of 4e.

Another quirky thing with roles, this next session my wizard signed up to go into a pit fight tournament. Because my role is not expected to do damage to a single target I really have no hope of winning at this tournament, my AoE powers are absolutely meaningless. Really this goes back to my description of characters, in previous editions classes could stand on their own and now they are interdependent to the group. A wizard could stand on its own in the past, now they cannot. So my wizard is going to be smacked around by pretty much any other role because, I have weakened HP/surges and armor selection for the privilege of doing AoE attacks that drizzle the damage on multiple enemies.

The odd thing there is that normally a group will want a diverse range of abilities. But if the group is already extremely lopsided or running with an unconventional strategy (controller+taclord, ranged+illusionary wall, striker+healer) , then a character bringing a new ability may not ending up rounding out the group as intended.

6

I'm just asking because wizard paragon encounter powers really take off, and they have some great path options. And Heroic level characters often don't have the powers to take advantage of wizard options like Orbing.