It's funny, at yesterday's RPGA event the "up" table (4 - 7 w/ most at 7 already, experienced and generally older players) had 6 players and no strikers. In the other "up" players usually attending (but we also take turns DMing too) there is a Rogue and a Warlock but that's two out of the 14ish higher level players. There's no shortage of leaders (Warlord, Bard or Cleric) or controllers (Wizards galore).
Out of the 13 players in the lower level games of "newer" or younger players (a couple were "up" playing secondaries who weren't strikers) there were 8 strikers. That's over 60%.
Is there, dare I say, a certain level of maturity needed to not play a striker? It seems many people, especially younger, focus only on damage output and not cohesive unit play or niches/roles. People who show up with leaders or defenders especially in the "down" games are in high demand.
Out of the 13 players in the lower level games of "newer" or younger players (a couple were "up" playing secondaries who weren't strikers) there were 8 strikers. That's over 60%.
Is there, dare I say, a certain level of maturity needed to not play a striker? It seems many people, especially younger, focus only on damage output and not cohesive unit play or niches/roles. People who show up with leaders or defenders especially in the "down" games are in high demand.