Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Primitive Screwhead" data-source="post: 5904871" data-attributes="member: 20805"><p>Steely_Dan, I should have clarified that 700 points of damage is from the entire encounter, usually 25 to 30 points at a time. The character will go toe to toe with whatever BBG is in his way, and survives because he is focused on resistances and invigorating strikes. Temp hit points are his freind! It also doesn't help me that we have 3.5 leaders in the group which tend to be able to stay out of the way of whatever threat the fighter is pinning to the ground.</p><p></p><p> Back to the OP, I think 4e's use of roles for classes is an excellent, altho oft misunderstood, improvement. For new players the roles stood for categories of character types. You play striker to be a high damage guy, you play leader to support others, etc... That in no way 'forces' roles as [MENTION=6687937]paladinm[/MENTION] suggests.</p><p> Even poorly supported classes can be altered away from their primary role. I have a Seeker character that is more striker/lurker than he is controller.</p><p></p><p> The teamwork part is also something I really like about 4e. In other editions you could build characters that were totally self-focused and not at all interested in 'helping' another party member. I have seen games that looked alot like the first half of the new avengers movie, disintegrating over PC1 using thier best ability that conflicted with PC2s best ability. Nothing like casting Silence near a Bard!</p><p> Adding teamwork as a viable and easily usable option for characters make it easier to have a group of heroes instead of a group of super-powered egos.</p><p></p><p></p><p>YMMV, of course.</p><p></p><p>I think 5e should retain the concept of 'Roles' as shorthand for what sort of character you want to play. Ideally you should be able to describe the basic concept of a character using just the names of the themes, race, class and role. </p><p></p><p>For example, my Seeker character could be described as a Stealthy Elvish Archer {Striker} with a wilderness warrior background.</p><p></p><p> I bet that is pretty easy to understand what that character can do in the game world and a bit about how he would play out at the table. Actually you can probably guess his main tactics and estimate how lethal his combat abilities are.</p><p></p><p> *that* is what 'roles' are for. Not a straight jacket provided by the man to keep your character concept in check... just shorthand for how your character ticks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Primitive Screwhead, post: 5904871, member: 20805"] Steely_Dan, I should have clarified that 700 points of damage is from the entire encounter, usually 25 to 30 points at a time. The character will go toe to toe with whatever BBG is in his way, and survives because he is focused on resistances and invigorating strikes. Temp hit points are his freind! It also doesn't help me that we have 3.5 leaders in the group which tend to be able to stay out of the way of whatever threat the fighter is pinning to the ground. Back to the OP, I think 4e's use of roles for classes is an excellent, altho oft misunderstood, improvement. For new players the roles stood for categories of character types. You play striker to be a high damage guy, you play leader to support others, etc... That in no way 'forces' roles as [MENTION=6687937]paladinm[/MENTION] suggests. Even poorly supported classes can be altered away from their primary role. I have a Seeker character that is more striker/lurker than he is controller. The teamwork part is also something I really like about 4e. In other editions you could build characters that were totally self-focused and not at all interested in 'helping' another party member. I have seen games that looked alot like the first half of the new avengers movie, disintegrating over PC1 using thier best ability that conflicted with PC2s best ability. Nothing like casting Silence near a Bard! Adding teamwork as a viable and easily usable option for characters make it easier to have a group of heroes instead of a group of super-powered egos. YMMV, of course. I think 5e should retain the concept of 'Roles' as shorthand for what sort of character you want to play. Ideally you should be able to describe the basic concept of a character using just the names of the themes, race, class and role. For example, my Seeker character could be described as a Stealthy Elvish Archer {Striker} with a wilderness warrior background. I bet that is pretty easy to understand what that character can do in the game world and a bit about how he would play out at the table. Actually you can probably guess his main tactics and estimate how lethal his combat abilities are. *that* is what 'roles' are for. Not a straight jacket provided by the man to keep your character concept in check... just shorthand for how your character ticks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
When did the Fighter become "defender"?
Top