Mearls on Controller design and At-Will balance

[Mengu]

1) Ray of Frost. Targets one or TWO creatures in range. (choose targets near the rogue if you got one it since a slowed creature grants combat advantage and therefore sneak attack from rogue)

Slowed creatures do not grant combat advantage.

 

[Milambus]

Not to mention he bumped Charisma rather than simply take Skill Training in Diplomacy.

Also, Staff+Leather+18 Int = Scale Mail armor. Buddy's sporting Fighter-sized AC here.

You can also add in the Staff Fighting feat from the Gladiator article in dragon. Which makes Quarterstaves a double weapon, and double weapons are defensive. So you can gain another +1AC* .

* Note: This is only applicable if your DM believes that a Staff Implement and a Quarterstaff are in fact the same thing.

 

[deleteme123456]

Playtest these changes:

1) Ray of Frost. Targets one or TWO creatures in range. (choose targets near the rogue if you got one it since a slowed creature grants combat advantage and therefore sneak attack from rogue)

2) Cloud of Daggers. Sustain Minor. (Allowing wizards to keep this single square as an obstacle without re-casting is a good thing. It wold be possible to have 3 up at the same time at the expense of other actions)

3) Magic Missile. Add push 1, Push 2 at paragon, push 3 at epic.

Slowed does not grant CA. PHB 280.

 

[eprieur]

Slowed does not grant CA. PHB 280.

Even if it doesn't his idea is still good. In fact I was thinking about that lately. Possibly in another thread but here is a quick rundown of the "problem".

In short the whole system is balanced between roles. Everyone is able to do a base attack that use their stats and they all have something.

-Strikers have their 1D6 they add to damage.
-Healers have their heals twice per encounter as minor actions.
-Defenders have their mark with their own flavor.

To be of that "role", you need to do have these features. So what do controllers have? Nothing really special at least for the ones I saw (didn't check the druid yet).

I'm sure the dev toyed with the ideas but overall, if you think striker you could have something like a minor status effect each time you connect with a spell at least one per round. Say a wizard could "knock" someone over once per round.

So basically in this version a controller would replace the 1d6 striker effect once per round with a "control" effect. It could be a push. It could have more flavor, be more detailed, etc.

Another option would be to have a "strong" status effect as a minor action, twice per encounter (similar to heals). So a controller could try to immobilize (root) or stun a target twice per encounter with a minor action.

You can combine the 2, have the minor knock back on hit with any spell once per round and twice per encounter you can "upgrade" that effect to a stun or immobilize, etc.

If controller had something like that they would probably at least feel a bit like that they are actually controlling something.

I think it's a problem in class design that they don't have anything special while all the other roles do. And that was why the dev originally touched on in his posts I think.

 

[Milambus]

Playtest these changes:

1) Ray of Frost. Targets one or TWO creatures in range. (choose targets near the rogue if you got one it since a slowed creature grants combat advantage and therefore sneak attack from rogue)

Compared to Twin Strike or Dual Strike this seems overpowered to me. Both of those powers target two creatures as well, but they only deal [w] damage, no modifier and no effect.

Solution, make the base damage for the attack 1d6 with no modifier addition. But add "Special: If you target one creature with this attack, then it deals Int modifier extra damage."

So you can target 2 creatures to deal 1d6 damage and slow them both, or you can target one to deal 1d6 + Int modifier damage and slow that one.

 

[Nail]

In short the whole system is balanced between roles. Everyone is able to do a base attack that use their stats and they all have something.

-Strikers have their 1D6 they add to damage.
-Healers have their heals twice per encounter as minor actions.
-Defenders have their mark with their own flavor.

That's an interesting summary.

Wizards -- our controler class (discounting the unpublished classes) -- have their cantrips as their "extra something". So potentially instead of "controller", a wizard should be called a "toolbox".

Or a "tool". Take your pick.

 

[DracoSuave]

No, wizard's special something is the spell book, allowing them to choose their power based on what impact they expect it to have. Druids have their flexibility a different way.

The cantrips are just handy bonuses. But you don't need class features to do your job well, if you're a power-based role like a Controller.

 

[eprieur]

No, wizard's special something is the spell book, allowing them to choose their power based on what impact they expect it to have. Druids have their flexibility a different way.

The cantrips are just handy bonuses. But you don't need class features to do your job well, if you're a power-based role like a Controller.

I didn't exactly say that wizard in particular don't have anything special but that controllers don't.

If you look at the invokers they don't seem to have any flexibilty or spellbook or anything that would lead us to believe it's a "feature" of controllers. But honestly if we have to look for it it's because it's simply not there. Compare that to the strikers, healers and defenders and they each have a power very clearly defined for their roles while the controllers have none.

As for the double ray of frost, minus the slow effect that's exactly what the new invoker power is:

Divine Bolts
Target: One or two creatures
Hit: 1d6 + Wisdom modifier lightning damage.

This spell alone will make sure that invokers will outdamage wizards are long as there are 2 targets within range (10). And not even counting the fact the invokers got the best "control" at will yet with grasping hands. I mean the whole point of this thread is not that wizards "sucks" in general but more that the at-wills of wizards are crap compared to the at-wills invokers have to the point that you can ask yourself why do wizards have suck bad at wills compared to them?

 

[DracoSuave]

I thought that reason was covered by the designer saying they were erring on the side of damage. I mean, if you have to ask why in a thread that's started by the answer as to why...

I'm just saying, Arcane Power will probably either fix that, or solidify wizards as the damage arcane controller, while putting sorcerers as the control controller, neither of which is a bad solution.

But then what 'control' is can't be as easily disected into class features as Striker, Leader, and Defender can. Not to mention, Barbarians are -very- capable strikers and they don't have a 'Striker Bonus Damage' feature either. Controller just happens to be a concept that isn't easily encapsulated into class features; That's not a bad thing or a flaw with the implementation, but just a challenge inherent in the role itself. But that doesn't make the -role- bad, but merely means that design has to take that into account.

 

[Nail]

But then what 'control' is can't be as easily disected into class features as Striker, Leader, and Defender can.

I disagree.

A "Controller" was supposed to control the battlefield --> and yet the Fighter class features fill this function better. How simple would it be to give the Wizard a class feature that gave battlefield control? Currently, it's not there.

Currently, the Wizard class freature says "Toolbox". Cantrips (and - as you rightly point out - the spellbook for daily powers) scream "utility", not "battlefield control"!