The "correct" way to deal with marks

[Nytmare]

The defender is the only role that is specifically built around decieving the monster. You are spending every action attempting to get all the monsters in the area to attack you. If you are simply unable to do your job because everything you fight understands that, and ignores you at every turn, that is a terrible way to play any game.

I've actually found kind of the opposite to be true. When I started running 4th, monsters always flocked towards the players who had marked them. Eventually I noticed that the players who were marking things felt... discontent(?) because they were never seeing the other half of their powers working.

Not attacking the person who marked you isn't preventing the defender from doing their job any more than ALWAYS attacking the person who marked you. The defender is still piling on penalties and doing additional damage to the creature they marked.

 

[mlund]

Here's why:

The defender is the only role that is specifically built around decieving the monster.

I would disagree. The Defender is not built around deception at all. The Defender is built upon threatening enemies, not "deceiving" or "surprising" them.

You are spending every action attempting to get all the monsters in the area to attack you. If you are simply unable to do your job because everything you fight understands that, and ignores you at every turn, that is a terrible way to play any game.

Actually, your job isn't to get all the monsters to attack you. Your job is simply to make it much harder / costlier for monsters to hit any of your allies. If that means giving the enemy -2 to hit and dealing an extra OA every round then so be it.

Every decent defender class (so, basically all the defenders but the Paladin) has a satisfactory build that motivates the enemy to pay attention to said defender. Every if it doesn't always convince the most savvy monster to leave the squishier characters alone all the time, it still makes it harder and more expensive to try and drop the Rogue on the other side of the flank dropping 3d8+7 damage per round with an at-will.

There are two huge player errors I see that create big problems playing Defenders.

1.) Trying to make a Striker because Fighters used to be melee damage hounds in previous editions.

2.) Trying to build an impervious tank under the assumption that monsters will be forced into fruitless attacks against you.

The best way to motivate monsters to attack your Defender is a combination of increased penalties for failing to do so and reduced penalties for doing so. Defenders have a ton of healing surges for a reason - they are supposed to get hit. Even most intelligent monsters will be more motivated to attack a fighter round after round if their attacks are actually dealing damage.

Monsters that can't scratch a tin can with a low threat level are going to turn around and devour the high DPS guy in leather jabbing them from behind. Defenders should plan accordingly.

- Marty Lund

 

[FrozenChrono]

If a marked monster was compelled to attack a defender all the time the defender would have no reason to have all those cool abilities that trigger when their marked target ignores them.

1. Do creatures understand what being marked means (as for the penalty to attacks against others)?
2. Do creatures feel any compulsion or even suggestion that they "should" attack the marker?
3. Does a creatures intelligence have anything to do with how they perceive/react to marks?
4. As a DM is it a legitimate strategy to simply decide that say, orcs ignore the guy with lots of armor and a shield because he seems hard to hit?

1. Yes, it means they have a harder time hitting other targets. A moderately intelligent enemy might realize that it's likely that someone who can mark them will have additional abilities to punish them if they do ignore the mark.
2. No. Any enemy with a burst five who can target 4 pc's vs. just the defender will probably be targeting the 4 pc's. A low int enemy with no specific tactics will target the marking guy. An group of wolfs with low int but pack tactics to take out one enemy and retreat with it for food will attack their first target until "punished" enough.
3. Yep. This is tough to do but a high int enemy will use the best tactics they can based on what they know of their enemies abilities and what they can discern from what they know.
4. Orc's probably wouldn't, they like a fight and are at best as intelligent as average humans. Most enemies would be ill advised to ignore the person marking them. That doesn't mean they're not going to use abilities on other people occasionally, just that the abilities had better be worth it.

 

[lukelightning]

When I DM I normally have my critters "respect the mark" and attack the marking character around 50% of the time (assuming there is another taret right nearby). As a defender, you kind of want the enemy to ignore your mark some of the time, that way you get to use your cool signature moves.

 

[Flipguarder]

If a marked monster was compelled to attack a defender all the time the defender would have no reason to have all those cool abilities that trigger when their marked target ignores them.

Am I the only one who sees a once per round at-will amount of damage to be no that "cool"? Seriously, everyone sees the mark after effects as being EVERYTHING a defender does, but its REALLY not that much damage.

I suppose I just see the defender as being the role most affected by dm mood/whim/opinion. Not too thrilled about that situation. It's not that I don't trust my dm... It's just that I really don't like putting that much of my characters effectiveness into anyone elses hands.

 

[Nytmare]

Am I the only one who sees a once per round at-will amount of damage to be no that "cool"? Seriously, everyone sees the mark after effects as being EVERYTHING a defender does, but its REALLY not that much damage.

Forcing the choice between having to take damage or attacking the defender is everything.

Marking powers do not say "you must attack the person who marked you" and they do not say "you must not attack the person who marked you." They give a choice, and the "right" answer isn't always the same, and it isn't always easy to see.

 

[Nifft]

Forcing the choice between having to take damage or attacking the defender is everything.

Marking powers do not say "you must attack the person who marked you" and they do not say "you must not attack the person who marked you." They give a choice, and the "right" answer isn't always the same, and it isn't always easy to see.

Yep. Good team play is all about giving the opposition a bouquet of choices, and all of them are bad choices.

Defenders aim to give their foe two bad choices: attack me, the tough one who isn't a Striker, or eat a penalty and some kind of rider effect. Area & close attacks can circumvent their power, but that's okay: no strategy should be perfect.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Fifth Element]

PROTIP: When I DM, I enjoy allowing the fighter to kick ass.

Yes. A fighter can kick a prodigious amount of ass, and should be allowed to do so often.

 

[Regicide]

The discussion between dracosuave and dr sage is an interesting one. The addition I would like to add is that from a strictly gameplay pov it would be much less fun for the defender if the majority (or even a large minority) of the things he fights understand the role and abilities of a defender.

If monsters understood anything the game wouldn't work. "Oh look, here's a guy with 5x as many powers as I have... and 5x as many healing surges... AND HE GETS TO ACTUALLY USE THEM... AND a bunch of magic items... and... dear LORD, what are FEATS and why does he have half a dozen of them... *sense motive check to determine level*... I'm a 'level appropriate, i.e. fodder' fight for him... ohhhhh fuuuuuuuuuu.... I'm outta here!!!!!!"

 

[renau1g]

But any intelligent monster will probably avoid the defender after seeing that mark in action. Any DM worth his salt plays intelligent monsters differently than mindless ones. A zombie will most likely just march straight at you, but a vampire will try a different tactic.