Herschel
I actually did do a lot of effective defending, using DC to mark enemies I wasn't adjacent to and thus turning a hit into a miss many, many times. My AC was on par with the dex classes, because the DM didn't believe in masterwork armor, further favoring light-armor wearers with maxed out dex or ints. Actually, from 6th to 10th I didn't even have scale prof, because we were stuck in a dungeon and there was no scale armor to be had anyway, so I wore chain. I understand how my abrasive tone might rub you the wrong way (and has in the past), but that's OK. I mean, I play in several games and get along well with most gamers IRL.
There were some issues with the last campaign, which I no longer play in, but I refused to rejoin that game after they reinvited me for paragon. I got sick of playing a 1/2 defender when it was silly to do so, since as I said, most of the other "squishy" classes were practically as tough except in HP and we already had a warden in the group so I was an off-tank who would quite often override my mark. I mean, from my POV, a mark is better when it's triggered than not, because you are effectively giving a +2 to all defenses to your allies, who, when they have higher/on-par AC/HP than you, "defending" them at the cost of your own surges (mine always went down too fast due to the feat starvation I had endured when I lost my plate prof due to hybriing and doing for TWF style). I even thought of picking up paladin armor prof and using a double-axe or an axe and a fighting shield in the offhand, but none of these items were available, and illiciting further groans from the group about me always trying to tweak my character so my multi-role would fit in better with the rest of the party playstyle and class make-up.
It was often a thankless task defending team mates who were, frankly, playing sadistic and greedy "kill-em-all even our allies and take their loot" childish playstyle, where I thought, hey, why would a paladin even BE in this group? I decided to come back into the game as a pure ranger who wouldn't have so many qualms about their plundering playstyle (and opportunistic / unfair loot distribution). But when I re-rolled a pure ranger with a 20 starting str, the DM said it's too powerful. Hey, that's PHB-1 standard point buy you're messing with there, you've just houseruled yourself out of a player. Not to mention he tells me this over the phone 5 minutes before I left for his place on game day, and I had sent him a legal character sheet a week earlier to look over and bring up any issues. I picked very bland items, and even said I don't care about any of the magic items, but you cannot house rule the PHB1 ranger 5 minutes before the game day started, and start up an argument in front of everyone looking over the builder. It's my character, I built it legally, that's IT. I wanted to end level 30 with 30 str, and the other players in the group agreed. There was even a wizard with a maxed int and the same AC as my scale-wearing phb-1 ranger guy. It was just so asinine and unfair I said screw this. I expressly didn't pick any of the cheese feats like frost or anything, because that would start to outshine everyone else a bit too much IMO.
The DM, who I've known since we were kids, has a REAL hard time with 4e, and gets frustrated by the warden more than anything. He even tried to house rule opportunity attacks to be more like 3rd ed, to depend on your Dex mod, even unbalancing melee more in favor of the dex builds (my AC should have been two higher, but NO, masterwork is too rare or costs twice as much...bla bla bla).
If anything, I kept my cool for way too long, playing this 4th ed heroic game for two years. I didn't want to do another two in paragon and not play the character I wanted to play. The other striker, a rogue, is not unoptimized, but frankly I'm way more tactical than he is (not to mention reading the char op boards religiously, because it's fun. I'm a computer programmer and it tickles my fancy). Who wants to play in a game where they are constantly penalized for playing better, picking better feats / powers / classes (few would argue that rangers aren't the most powerful striker, but that's not my fault is it?). Why should I endure mockery for playing perfectly legal characters with no special items, favoritism, or any other such thing? I am not a munchkin gamer, all I wanted was to play by the rules, or if there are house rules, that they not favour V classes or Dex builds or stuff I don't play. You also really don't need to tell me what a defender is, man, the game system is broken. A ranger | sorcerer has the same HP and better overall stats than a ranger | paladin, and with the right debuffing on his twin strike and powers like Disruptive Strike are way better at "actually" defending others from being hit, than a paladin hybrid is. Reason I switched is because, frankly, paladins are dull as door knobs to play. I know, I played one for a year and it got boring, fast, especially when the warden joined us. Two defenders and a badly played striker meant combat was droning on and on and on. There are real reasons why people want to switch classes, if you use your imagination and don't just assume the worst in people. I recently made a ranger | sorcerer on a whim, who could give an at-will -4 debuff, which is more effective than a mark that doesn't go off, since it protects you as well, and on top of that you get to kill the enemy faster. By level 30 he was way better overall defenses, could fly at-will thanks to favored soul as of level 16 and being in light armor. The game heavily favors light armor wearers, it's not even funny. This p*sses me off. Light armor guys get more mobility, less penalties, same AC, and better NADs, not to mention they can fly. This is EXTREMELY bad design. Why should epic flying boots not work with plate armor? It has no rational purpose. There is no weight requirement. It's a game where all the benefits are lavished on one type of build, and if you happen to like the other, you are rewarded with nerfs like no flying mounts for paladins. WTF is wrong here. I hate this game. In my pathfinder game, I can fly 4 times a day as a cleric at 5th level, in heavy armor. Yes, it's fun!
D&D should be fun, shouldn't it?
My opinion is, the game is broken and playing a 4e defender is dull as a rusty nails. Besides, why defend allies and take hits for them when they grab all the loot for themselves and give away our party gold to NPCs without consulting first? There were a lot of reasons I don't play in that game any more, primarily because the DM didn't put his foot down and avoid these types of idiotic arguments by being fair-minded. There's only so much BS a person can take before you say, you know what? This edition isn't worth the frustration and headaches and errata and Essentials idiocy. Life is too short.
And ps, if I were in your game and you told me, after I said I was unhappy playing an off-defender for TWO YEARS that I wanted to switch my class to have more fun and make the group work better to boot, and you said NO...I would say screw you buddy. I've read a number of your posts and can tell I would not get along with you in person, at all. But that's okay too. Who cares, right? I certainly don't. Man, a 4th ed game without a ranger is just...sad IMO. It's the best striker and if only so combats don't go on and on and on and on it's practically a necessity. There were 6 players in the game when I left. 2 strikers is not overkill, at all. When they nerfed Celestial Steed that was the last straw for paladins in 4th ed for me. Actually, since it's rumoured they are going to be nerfing Twin Strike, I will be burning my 4th ed books and never looking back. I play Pathfinder now and I'm way, way happier, thank you very much. 4th ed was so grindy and annoying, esp when you play with an obtuse DM who makes every play session a huge battle about rules (which he's basically almost always wrong about). 4th ed in a game where the DM house rules on the fly to foil your powers, is an exercise in frustration and I'd rather slice my eyeballs open with razor blades that read useless rulebooks since 1/2 the stuff in it has been errataed into oblivion for often very dubious purposes (i.e. in order to sell new Essentials garbage splatbooks).
aside : What right do you think you have, as a DM, to tell a player what class they can play? you have got to be kidding me. I think this belongs in one of those threads "what DMs do to alienate people and lose friends"
