D&D 5E What are the Roles now?

[Paraxis]

4e roles covered one aspect or pillar of the game, combat. Things like party face or front man is a role in most adventuring groups and it is independent of your combat role, the paladin defender could be the face, so could the striker sorcerer, or leader bard. Scout is high stealth/perception character and usually best served by rangers and a few other dex/wis classes. But those are explicit non combat roles one for the social pillar and one for the exploration pillar.

I think you guys have beaten a whole herd of dead horses in this conversation, roles both narrow combat defined (4e) and broad overall (most every rpg) have and will continue to exist. Back in the day well before MMO's we had "Meat Shield" "Healer" and "Trap Spotter" at pretty much every game I ever ran or played. When we all got together we wanted to make sure we didn't step on each others toes and compete for spotlight time.

In 4e terms you can't make some classes in 5e fit every role, but there is cross over, but there was crossover in 4e. It all depends on how you think about your character builds and the terms you use at your table, does that need 27+ pages of going back and forth.

 

[Imaro]

4e roles covered one aspect or pillar of the game, combat. Things like party face or front man is a role in most adventuring groups and it is independent of your combat role, the paladin defender could be the face, so could the striker sorcerer, or leader bard. Scout is high stealth/perception character and usually best served by rangers and a few other dex/wis classes. But those are explicit non combat roles one for the social pillar and one for the exploration pillar.

I think you guys have beaten a whole herd of dead horses in this conversation, roles both narrow combat defined (4e) and broad overall (most every rpg) have and will continue to exist. Back in the day well before MMO's we had "Meat Shield" "Healer" and "Trap Spotter" at pretty much every game I ever ran or played. When we all got together we wanted to make sure we didn't step on each others toes and compete for spotlight time.

In 4e terms you can't make some classes in 5e fit every role, but there is cross over, but there was crossover in 4e. It all depends on how you think about your character builds and the terms you use at your table, does that need 27+ pages of going back and forth.

Yes... yes it does...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Okay, I have four questions, and I agree with Imaro and Joe Liker that it's really impossible to continue this conversation without clear answers:

if you really want to discuse the roles, and my insight to them... I will, but please if this is some trick or game to "PROVE SOMEONE WRONG" please let it go. I am going to in good faith again try this, because I really do feel there is benfit to the game by talking about this.

2 offensive roles 2 defensive roles no one of witch is 100% solitary, and there is a lot of over lap once a class is fit in.

1. What is the definition of "striker?"

Strikers as a class are offensive as primary. They are mobile damage dealers. Damage can come in many forms, some classes are slightly higher single target but constant damage (avenger, and slayer) some are able to do spike damage but not every round (rogue) some are very spike glass cannon (Assasin) and some are aoe high damage (sorcerer).

In the role you are the one who is going to find the target and put him down... a well placed backstab and disintegrate can both be examples of this. It is the combat part of the rogue class from 3e (witch is based on the 2e idea of backstab),

2. What is the definition of "defender?"

Defenders as a class are defensive primary. They need to have a way to lock down targets or persuade them to attack them(by hook or by crook). The Mark was the go to way to do this with 4e, but you can often walk into a real problem with it. ((((In my personal experience High Defense defender make sense in style and rp but in play if it is impssoble to hit or hurt the defender it weakens the mark...))))

In the role they are jumping up and screaming for attention. A kender (man I HATE using them as a positive example) taunting, a 3e knight with a challenge, and 4e marks all are examples of this. The trick with this is that you need to be a threat (so can't be too low damage) and be targetable, but also sturdy.

This was supposed to represent the fighter as the front line taking the hit so the wizard doesn't... I'm not sure that it is really did that, and to be honest it is not the strongest of the roles to work with.

3. What is the definition of "leader?"

Leader as a role(Damn I hate that name almost as much as I hate kenders) is defensive in nature. they buff and heal. It is by far the eaiseist to pick out. The Cleric is and most likely always will be the perfect example. Now 4e gave a minor action heal 2/encounter. In 3e they gave the cleric the ability to swap out for healing spells. It is also the easiest to track back and forth through all editions... I mean people who bearly know d&D know "Some one has to be a healer."

4. What is the definition of "controller?" (Good luck with this one.)

luck to be sure...it in 4e is also the closest to being that straight jacket people complained about. Wizard is the most versatile class pre4e, longest spell list and the ability to switch spells. The idea of limiting the wizard to the controller role came from the idea that SoD and battlefield control was the most powerful/fun in 3e.
It is about debuffing and laying conditions on enemies (including denying actions) it is about creating and summoning to change the field.




now lets talk intent and tools. The creaters of the basic game (any edition) ment to have some base line to challenge the PCs... that baseline has changed over the years. These titles are not the first used, and they also were not exclusive (again 2 different strikers could be very diffren out of combat)

classes have tools, and primary and secondary (and in the case of spell casters tertiaty) roles, and you can with work (or sometimes by mistake) push toward one or the other.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

See this is one of those statements that illustrates why I need a clearer definition... I don't think 5e is hiding anything... I think 5e's design is not based on classes and their mechanics being defined by an explicit role like 4e was. IMO, that's not hiding anything, that's not having 4e type roles and thus there is no reason to state any class is a particular role because they don't exist in that sense...

ok, so lets start again. We have so many classes, and WAY more tropes or archtypes to fit in them. there are parts of classes that are hard coded to work one way and only one way. So the designers had a reason to put that hard codeing in there. I can find very few reasons why they do.

1) niche protection
2) to make the game flow better by giving this force bit to every member of the class
3) it just makes sense every member of the class has it because all (or at least most) tropes and archtypes have it.

1 and two are things that lables like roles help people see.

so now we go back to backstab/sneak attack.

why do all rogue/thief get precise damage that scales. It doesn't make sense that all thief/rogue archtypes and tropes know how to hit in ways that trained soldiers do not (aka fighters don't have it)

so again the point of the roles is to give information and share information. I am fine with new names if that is what you are looking for. what I want is to have it spelled out to new players, and be keyworded that sneak attack is burst damage and that there is a reason for it to be there...

 

[Joe Liker]

So if I understand the direction the discussion is now heading ...

You're about to say, "Here's what I want my character to be able to do well, now how do we make that happen in 5e?"

Is that not the very definition of a CharOp forum?

 

[Imaro]

ok, so lets start again. We have so many classes, and WAY more tropes or archtypes to fit in them. there are parts of classes that are hard coded to work one way and only one way. So the designers had a reason to put that hard codeing in there. I can find very few reasons why they do.

1) niche protection
2) to make the game flow better by giving this force bit to every member of the class
3) it just makes sense every member of the class has it because all (or at least most) tropes and archtypes have it.

1 and two are things that lables like roles help people see.

I think you're missing a really big piece here... that would be #4... Basic Competency in the game. that is why I asked earlier for a minimum and maximum (though really I only need the minimum) that a striker can do. It sets a baseline so we know whether a feature, ability, etc. is actually designed for baseline competency or something else. In all honesty I think this is what the base features for the classes, including sneak attack, in 5e are for, to make sure a basic competency level for classes is met.

so now we go back to backstab/sneak attack.

why do all rogue/thief get precise damage that scales. It doesn't make sense that all thief/rogue archtypes and tropes know how to hit in ways that trained soldiers do not (aka fighters don't have it)

See above for my answer to this question... it sets a basic competency level for every rogue that is needed for the game and thematically fits a rogue type well enough in a general sense that it can be applied to all subclasses.

so again the point of the roles is to give information and share information. I am fine with new names if that is what you are looking for. what I want is to have it spelled out to new players, and be keyworded that sneak attack is burst damage and that there is a reason for it to be there...

Sneak attack in 5e isn't really burst damage though, with the ease that you can get advantage or a companion within 5 feet of an enemy it's more like guaranteed damage, and thus sets a base competency level for the rogue. Again I think you are trying to apply a 4e paradigm to 5e when it comes to roles and classes that just isn't there... subclasses and feats are where you can determine a specialization for your character if that's what you want, but even then I don't know if you have the same focus on one role that 4e's mechanics create (but I think it's also easy to build a more generalized character as well that doesn't necessarily conform to any type of "role").

 

[Sacrosanct]

spike damage, burst damage, aoe damage, buffing?

Blech. Get your peanut butter video game terms out of my chocolate TTRPGs.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

spike damage, burst damage, aoe damage, buffing?

Blech. Get your peanut butter video game terms out of my chocolate TTRPGs.

um... I don't play video games and I find it insulting to think that because someone uses terms from paper and dice RPGs, it is easy to be dismissive "Dumb video game terms" but try to look at what they are...

I own a Wii and a PS2, and both are used by my 8 year old nephew, and for occasional Netflix/DVD watching... I have never played in an MMO, nore will I entertain the idea of playing one. The last game I cared about was skylanders...before that Grand theft VIce City, so don't be too quick to lump people

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I think you're missing a really big piece here... that would be #4... Basic Competency in the game.

so you belive that you need +xd6 damage to keep up with who? I mean I can't find this basic in play anywhere else...

that is why I asked earlier for a minimum and maximum (though really I only need the minimum) that a striker can do.

did you read my reply?

In all honesty I think this is what the base features for the classes, including sneak attack, in 5e are for, to make sure a basic competency level for classes is met.

so what is this basic competency... what is the rogue supposed to do with it?

Sneak attack in 5e isn't really burst damage though, with the ease that you can get advantage or a companion within 5 feet of an enemy it's more like guaranteed damage, and thus sets a base competency level for the rogue.

wait... so rogues in 3e can almost never flank, but in 5e are guaranteed.

Again I think you are trying to apply a 4e paradigm to 5e when it comes to roles and classes that just isn't there...

and I think you are not seeing it...

subclasses and feats are where you can determine a specialization for your character if that's what you want, but even then I don't know if you have the same focus on one role that 4e's mechanics create (but I think it's also easy to build a more generalized character as well that doesn't necessarily conform to any type of "role").

See the fact that you understand that the player CAN make a choice to fill the roles, but nobody is guideing that with any focus doesn't bother you... the word role seems to be hot button with you so lets try it this way... how about keywords to help people see what does what...

 

[Imaro]

so you belive that you need +xd6 damage to keep up with who? I mean I can't find this basic in play anywhere else...

I don't understand your point... it helps his lower damage weapons keep up with the cantrips and base features of caster classes, the higher damage weapons of other martial classes, the range of hp's for the monsters deemed appropriate in the book at his level, etc...

did you read my reply?

Are you understanding what I am pointing out? Your reply didn't answer it.

so what is this basic competency... what is the rogue supposed to do with it?

I'm talking about the math behind the game... there has to be a baseline of expected values at a particular level for to hit, AC, damage, etc. in order for the game to function. Do I know what that range is...no, am I going to spend the time trying to figure it out... no but it's a given.

wait... so rogues in 3e can almost never flank, but in 5e are guaranteed.

You do realize it's not just flanking that gives him the sneak attack in 5e right... it's any source of advantage and you don't have to flank (in 3e that meant being in a specific position relative to the other character) all you need is for a character to be within 5' of the enemy you are attacking so it's easier than 3e flanking... and ranged combat applies as well.

and I think you are not seeing it...
See the fact that you understand that the player CAN make a choice to fill the roles, but nobody is guideing that with any focus doesn't bother you... the word role seems to be hot button with you so lets try it this way... how about keywords to help people see what does what...

What roles? That's what you are missing there are no inherent roles in 5e so how do you add keywords and/or give advice for something that doesn't exist in the game? Those that believe roles have always existed in D&D all have their own concept of what those roles are, this thread is evidence of that, so whose roles should they use when giving you this information since 5e doesn't have any roles? And what are they removing to make space for CharOps in the book?