Incenjucar
Legend
Controllers also reshape the battlefield using a variety of walls and zones.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
So, What's the Controller's 'Thing'?
- Thread starter Tequila Sunrise
- Start date
Controllers do two things well, I think.
1) Deal damage to multiple enemies, consistently and often at range.
2) Change the battlefield.
They also do a third thing which is ultimately more vague.
3) Target Action Denial
Target Action Denial tends to happen with lots of powers in all classes, but it would seem most likely in controllers and leaders, since many debuffs are essentially buffs for the party.
The Wizard isn't exactly the best example, but it does so most of that. It has powers that encompass multiple targets, and the ability to conjure zones and change the scape of the battle.
Looking at first level Mage: You an auto-minion killer, Magic missile, then Minion clearers and a little bit of enemy movement with Arc Lightning, Beguiling Strands, and maybe Freezing Burst; Hypnotism, Phantasmal Assault, and Phantom Cage are single target action denial.
Your Encounters have one minion masher; Burning Hands, while the other two are closer to target action denial.
Dailies are where the Mage can actually change the battlefield, with things like Fountain of Flame and Phantom Chasm. These powers change areas of the battlefield for better or worse, while sleep is mass target action denial.
So pretty much a Controller should be able to do those three things, but in my view, a controller should first be able to deal with minions; while fighters and defenders seem like the logical choice against minions, they at best can take out 6 if they have a close burst power; a wizard or hunter has an at-will that will take out 9. Second actually control and shape the battlefield; changing terrain, adding hindering terrain, or damaging effects that sit there. Finally three, Target Action Denial; these are control effects that act like buffs for the party, since debuffed monsters effectively give the party buffs to hit/damage and efficiency.
1) Deal damage to multiple enemies, consistently and often at range.
2) Change the battlefield.
They also do a third thing which is ultimately more vague.
3) Target Action Denial
Target Action Denial tends to happen with lots of powers in all classes, but it would seem most likely in controllers and leaders, since many debuffs are essentially buffs for the party.
The Wizard isn't exactly the best example, but it does so most of that. It has powers that encompass multiple targets, and the ability to conjure zones and change the scape of the battle.
Looking at first level Mage: You an auto-minion killer, Magic missile, then Minion clearers and a little bit of enemy movement with Arc Lightning, Beguiling Strands, and maybe Freezing Burst; Hypnotism, Phantasmal Assault, and Phantom Cage are single target action denial.
Your Encounters have one minion masher; Burning Hands, while the other two are closer to target action denial.
Dailies are where the Mage can actually change the battlefield, with things like Fountain of Flame and Phantom Chasm. These powers change areas of the battlefield for better or worse, while sleep is mass target action denial.
So pretty much a Controller should be able to do those three things, but in my view, a controller should first be able to deal with minions; while fighters and defenders seem like the logical choice against minions, they at best can take out 6 if they have a close burst power; a wizard or hunter has an at-will that will take out 9. Second actually control and shape the battlefield; changing terrain, adding hindering terrain, or damaging effects that sit there. Finally three, Target Action Denial; these are control effects that act like buffs for the party, since debuffed monsters effectively give the party buffs to hit/damage and efficiency.
DracoSuave
First Post
Controllers are kinda interesitng in that there is no one thing they do round in round out. They're a lot more encounter and daily based than strikers or defenders, which require constancy in order to function in their role. A striker is always trying to hit hard, a defender is always trying to reduce attack effectiveness, whereas a controller waits for the right moment and then changes the game.
That makes it hard to simplify. As well, they have a lot of varied effects, generally choosing the one that fits their party the best. For example, you might make them slow all the time, but in a melee-centric simple game with little terrain interraction, that won't really do enough to sell the role to anyone. In a different game tho, it could be very potent as a suppliment to their other tricks.
I'd probably hand them the Hypnotism power from the mage, as well as sleep 1/day. This will teach them the role's main deal, that they are based on powerful bursts of effect, less than consistant damage. Hypnotism is a very potent at-will as well, with two uses, and both forced movement and forced attacks are useful in any party.
That makes it hard to simplify. As well, they have a lot of varied effects, generally choosing the one that fits their party the best. For example, you might make them slow all the time, but in a melee-centric simple game with little terrain interraction, that won't really do enough to sell the role to anyone. In a different game tho, it could be very potent as a suppliment to their other tricks.
I'd probably hand them the Hypnotism power from the mage, as well as sleep 1/day. This will teach them the role's main deal, that they are based on powerful bursts of effect, less than consistant damage. Hypnotism is a very potent at-will as well, with two uses, and both forced movement and forced attacks are useful in any party.
OnlineDM
Adventurer
I'm going to disagree a little bit here. First, a close burst 1 power can theoretically kill 8 minions, not 6 (just theoretically, but it COULD happen).
Second, I agree that "reshaping the battlefield" is on the controller menu, but I wouldn't say that's their "thing". As you said, it tends to happen mostly with daily powers.
Yes, Wizard daily powers are awe-inspiring and impressive, but if they can only do it once a day it's hard to say "that's their thing". I stand by the assertion that a controller's "thing" is dealing area of effect damage and imposing negative conditions on enemies. Awesome zones that reshape the battlefield are on the list, but not at the "simple" level that the OP is looking for, in my opinion.
Actually, reshaping the battlefield is explicitly mentioned as the controller "thing" in the early design docs.
The problem with distilling the controller is that first, that their power is in their powers, not a class feature (ignoring Hunter, which is a second rate controller anyways), second, that the controller is based on the wizard in earlier editions -- who was always about complexity and choice -- and third, that to a large degree, being a controller really is all about adaptability and variety; whatever the bad guys try to do, you have an answer to it.
Solos and other heavily unbalanced encounters get single target lockdown.
Melee characters get locked out of melee range.
Ranged characters get yanked into melee range.
Groups of enemies get split by walls or fogs--or just rendered unable to attack effectively as a group due to wanting to avoid clustering up into easy targets for your burst attacks (or zones, or summons, or conjurations).
And so on.
The defender defends the party.
The striker hits the bad guys and makes them stop moving.
The leader keeps your fighting and makes you fight better.
The controller figures out what the bad guys are trying and makes them do something else instead.
Being a controller reshapes the battlefield. Dropping a daily typically reshapes the battlefield -more-. And it's not like controllers don't have ways to reshape the battlefield without dropping a daily -- wizards can make squares difficult terrain at will at level 2, and lots of encounter powers create 1-turn zones.
The problem with distilling the controller is that first, that their power is in their powers, not a class feature (ignoring Hunter, which is a second rate controller anyways), second, that the controller is based on the wizard in earlier editions -- who was always about complexity and choice -- and third, that to a large degree, being a controller really is all about adaptability and variety; whatever the bad guys try to do, you have an answer to it.
Solos and other heavily unbalanced encounters get single target lockdown.
Melee characters get locked out of melee range.
Ranged characters get yanked into melee range.
Groups of enemies get split by walls or fogs--or just rendered unable to attack effectively as a group due to wanting to avoid clustering up into easy targets for your burst attacks (or zones, or summons, or conjurations).
And so on.
The defender defends the party.
The striker hits the bad guys and makes them stop moving.
The leader keeps your fighting and makes you fight better.
The controller figures out what the bad guys are trying and makes them do something else instead.
Being a controller reshapes the battlefield. Dropping a daily typically reshapes the battlefield -more-. And it's not like controllers don't have ways to reshape the battlefield without dropping a daily -- wizards can make squares difficult terrain at will at level 2, and lots of encounter powers create 1-turn zones.
Yeah, I miss counted the squares on a Close Burst 1.
But otherwise, I think terrain control is or target action denial contend for second most likely ability. The only reason I even rate target action denial as a vague third is because leaders can effectively do the same thing, as can strikers, and even defenders. While the last two roles may not have any many TAD attacks, leaders can have almost as many since enemy debuff = party buff. I think the Bard has a slew of TAD's... but it doesn't often have terrain control. Neither do defenders (save for the auras now), and strikers.
I think a good Controller should have a lot minion mashing, and equal parts TAD and Terrain Control. I recently ran a short dungeon, and the wizard was easily the person who took out the most enemies, with a well placed burst or blast. Which pretty much stops many of the enemy tactics and makes do something they didn't want to do.
If you happen to have DMG2 i'd suggest looking at companion characters (p30 on DMG2) - basically, it bases all the "math" on your level so no feats etc. and instead you pick a race (which gives you a racial power), you pick a role (which gives you a role based power), you pick one atwill, one encounter, and one utility power.
In DMG2 they break companions role down as
Controller: Once per encounter, you can use a free action to extend an effect on an enemy to last until the end of next turn rather than the end of this turn
But another option might be an encounter power that debuffs attack/defense of a target creature
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
So, I played a Pyromancer who only used fire spells and he was apparently still a controller.
He couldn't slow. He couldn't prone. He couldn't stun. He couldn't interfere with action economy directly in any way.
He was still a Controller, even though he couldn't do anything other than damage.
The reason was this:
Persistent Effects
The difference between a Controller and a Striker isn't (necessarily) the amount of targets, it's how long he gets to affect them. Creating zones and imposing statuses are both persistent effects, and a controller gets access to them early, often, and, frequently, at-will.
I controlled my enemies, as a pyromancer, by giving them a reason not to do a certain action. I effectively told the DM: "I am going to do more damage if you do X, Y, or Z."
It's not as direct as a Slow effect, but it's arguably more potent, because the condition you ultimately want to inflict is Dead, and the only way to inflict that is damage.
He couldn't slow. He couldn't prone. He couldn't stun. He couldn't interfere with action economy directly in any way.
He was still a Controller, even though he couldn't do anything other than damage.
The reason was this:
Persistent Effects
The difference between a Controller and a Striker isn't (necessarily) the amount of targets, it's how long he gets to affect them. Creating zones and imposing statuses are both persistent effects, and a controller gets access to them early, often, and, frequently, at-will.
I controlled my enemies, as a pyromancer, by giving them a reason not to do a certain action. I effectively told the DM: "I am going to do more damage if you do X, Y, or Z."
It's not as direct as a Slow effect, but it's arguably more potent, because the condition you ultimately want to inflict is Dead, and the only way to inflict that is damage.
ravenheart
Explorer
Not directly directed at you, but I think the roles could be even clearer. As it is, though, they sort of bleed into each other.
In my mind, there are two variables that define a characters role: a) whether they affect the party (i.e. amplifies) or the enemy (i.e. mitgates), and b) whether they affect said group's efficiency (i.e. damage dealt) or options (i.e. action economy). This would roughly define the roles as follows:
Defender - Mitigates enemy efficiency
Striker - Amplifies party efficiency
Leader - Amplifies party options
Controller - Mitigates enemy options
Would you agree?
EDIT: I know this doesn't translate directly to the roles; it's more of an opinion of how I would like it to be.
EDIT2: Note that this is also true for secondary roles, thus mixing things up further.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
