Martial Controllers

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

I'm thinking about 4E and its design. I'm thinking about the heroic-tier class/role system.

And I realize all over again:
There are no Martial Controllers in 4E.

Herp derp derp.

This topic hasn't been brought up--that I've seen--since at least Spring '09.

So, on the precipice of Essentials doing away with "classic" 4E:

What would a martial controller look like now?


[sblock]
I think the Ranger should have been a martial controller. Shh! Don't tell the Ranger fans I said it!
[/sblock]

 

[Old Gumphrey]

I actually think it should've been the rogue. It's already half a controller as it is, what with the AoE blinds, dazing, stunning, sliding...it's really not a stretch. You can even take feats to trade your striker damage for debuffs & conditions, or just add more debuffs & conditions to your attacks.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Y'know...that's actually a pretty good idea.

 

[LuckyAdrastus]

This topic hasn't been brought up--that I've seen--since at least Spring '09.

Yer kidding, right? Right? This is one of those issues that gets brought up over and over and over again (like katanas vs. longswords). What new is there to say?

Here's the entire martial controller conversation:

Proponent: There should be a martial controller. It could be a ranger/rogue/scout/archer with trick arrows/alchemist with science gizmos/guy leading a squad/fellow who yells at monster really well/dude with a polearm/non-magical monk.

Opponent: We don't need to fill every spot on the grid. Also, I think your ideas are stupid.

Proponent: Yer worse than Hitler.

Opponent: No you are.

Congratulations, you've now read all that has been said in every one of these threads ever.

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Congratulations, I've summarized every one of these threads ever.

But what about the rumored martial controller in Essentials?

 

[LuckyAdrastus]

But what about the rumored martial controller in Essentials?

OK, now I'm about 95% sure you are joking. Since it seems that all of the martial classes in Essentials will be Basic Attack based (not that we know for sure), it'd be hilarious to see a basic-attack-only controller.

...

[Also, for the record, TikkchikFenTikktikk correctly quoted me in his post above, and but I later edited what I wrote. There isn't any real difference other than clarity, but I just thought I should note that the quote was accurate even though the text has changed.]

 

[Riastlin]

Honestly, the whole notion of roles is pretty murky now anyway -- particularly controller which seems to have undergone a number of changes along the way.

That being said, I actually saw the martial controller as fairly similar to the Seeker -- one reason why I'm not convinced there will be one. Really, most of what the Seeker does could be reflavored from Primal to Martial with relative ease.

This is a big reason why I thought the notion of providing "power sources" to each class was a bit silly. After all, we already know that a fighter gets his power from practicing with his sword, hammer, axe, etc.

 

[Ryujin]

Wardens, with the right build, seem to do a passable job as a Primary Defender/Secondary Controller. Same with a well designed polearm Fighter. They seem to work quite well at denying the enemy access to areas of the grid and funneling attackers.

Others may disagree.

 

[Klaus]

A "de-buffer" rogue wouldn't be a controller, he'd be a Leader. The Leader helps the party by either improving the PCs or applying de-buffs/penalties on single opponents.

An archer or a rider would be good controllers, one at range, the other in close combat.

 

[TerraDave]

You know that the ranger was originally supposed to be a martial controller, but they just didn't quite get there. You know that, right?