D&D 5E What are the Roles now?

[Nergal Pendragon]

Using Create Water to deal damage stopped after 2e. It was specifically disallowed in 3e and later editions. Even doing it in AD&D was cheesy rules lawyering. In fact, it wouldn't even work, because you need line of sight to cast spells in 3e or later and you can't see inside a target in order to create water.

Arcane locking a door is NOT what a defender does. That's not a defender action. That's battlefield control - thus - CONTROLLER.

This conversation would go a lot easier if you folks would stop inventing definitions.

Pick one definition. Post it. Abide by it.

Posting a video where someone uses a supernatural ability to stop an attack and then arguing another supernatural ability that does the exact same thing doesn't count is not a way to make your point.

Keeping attacks focused on yourself, but blocking their attacks? Keeping an enemy focused on you instead of your allies? Preventing an enemy from slipping past you to damage your allies? Every single spell I listed can be used for those purposes with ease. They do not have to be used on multiple enemies for that effect.

Also, let me ask you... would a fighter holding a door shut to prevent mobs from coming through it to attack their allies be a defender action? After all, that's exactly what the wizard is doing.

 

[pemerton]

They're not defender spells to you because you've never used them that way.

And please excuse me for this, but your last question is one that brings up something I have to discuss about the mindsets encourage by 4E.

4E's role designations can encourage the mindset that Item X must be used for Role Y. Which, realistically, is pretty much limited to just 4E from what I've seen. You would be surprised how often I've seen people use Prestidigation as a form of crowd control.

They're not defender spells because they don't involve standing in the middle of a melee scrum, taking on all comers. Which is more-or-less what "defender" means in 4e. (For more elaboration on the 4e roles, see my post above this one.)

Arcane Lock is a defensive spell, in the sense that you can protect the party from attack by use of it. But it doesn't involve being a "defender" in the 4e sense of that role. In 4e Arcane Lock is a ritual, so available to a character of any class (but wizards, among others, start with the feat for free), but not able to be used in combat. There is a design reason for that, but it is orthogonal to the issue of role and rather goes to 4e's approach to scene-framing authority. (TL;DR - in 4e the GM has this, not the players.)

Hold Person, Web and Evard's Black Tentacles are all control effects in D&D parlance, and all appear on the 4e wizard's spell list. A very respectable argument could be made that a 4e defender is really just a species of controller, but for legacy reasons the game draws a distinction between characters who exercise control by putting their own bodies on the line in melee, and those who don't. Hold Person, Web, and EBT don't involve the wizard putting his/her own body on the line.

Wall of Force appears on the wizard's spell list in 4e - it is a control effect, not a defender one, for the same reasons as given in the previous paragraph. It is about degrading the enemy by controlling their position or, if used to surround them or box them in, by denying them actions.

Burning Hands is an odd one. As a straight damage dealer, by default it should be considered a striker effect. But because of the D&D legacy of wizards being both artillery and non-hit point targeting condition-imposers, characters labelled "controller" in 4e also get some straight AoE damage. Burning Hands is an example of this.

In other words, all the spells you named but one (Arcane Lock) appear on the 4e wizard spell list, who is labelled a controller, and all are, in 4e terms, control effects, with the arguable exception of Burning Hands which is grouped into the control category for the legacy reasons I've noted in this post and my post preceding it.

Prestidigitation is also a wizard ability in 4e, so its use for purposes of controlling would be no great surprise to a 4e player.

 

[pemerton]

I will say that, yes, I believe any given character can fulfill any given role in combat, but that if they are not built for that roll it can be extremely difficult.

<snip>

That said, fulfilling a role and being effective at it is an entirely different matter; no, it is not possible for any given character to do that under normal circumstances.

<snip>

If you go back and look at my posts much earlier in this thread, you will see me saying that at any given time characters I played with could fill any given role; this is true, but that's because we as a roleplaying group would often intentionally set up the special circumstances that made it possible for classes like the rogue to play roles like defender.

I don't think any of this is controversial, with one possible exception - I think getting healing out of many PCs is very hard (though maybe you count giving them a backpack full of healing potions as a type of "special circumstance").

But you're right that I'm talking about general effectiveness, not last-ditch-efforts under unusual circumstances.

Because combats in 5e are mechanically shorter in duration than in 4e, it may be easier to achieve minimal effectiveness with last-ditch efforts because they don't have to last as long to count as minimally effective.

I can see several ways to play the 4E wizard as a striker or a defender with ease.

For the reasons given in my post above this one, I don't agree about defender. But striker yes. Post-PHB2 and up until Essentials, a sorcerer was a better AoE striker than a wizard, but Essentials then opened up some options for wizards which allow very effective striking builds.

The invoker in my 4e game plays a leader role as well as controller (not striker, though - his damage output is very low). Every time he uses a non-at-will attack, one of his allies get's free movement. Plus as an encounter power he has Tide of the First Storm, which slows enemies while carrying his allies to where they want to go. And as dailies he has Astral Step (AoE teleport) and Arcane Gate (short-duration gate between two points up to 200' apart).

The sorcerer is a devastating AoE striker who also brings a lot of forced movement control, plus quite a bit of leader-like buffing. (And is probably the most mechanically optimised PC in the group.) He can defend if necessary (using Cloud of Darkness to effectively raise his AC by 5, and close attacks or an at-will powered-up slash with his dagger) but isn't as good at that as he once was: for a while he was a multi-classed monk who would use "drow-jutsu" to lock down enemies within the Cloud and then blast them with close fire attacks; but since then he's given up the life of a ninja-drow for more bardic pursuits.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

They're not defender spells because they don't involve standing in the middle of a melee scrum, taking on all comers. Which is more-or-less what "defender" means in 4e. (For more elaboration on the 4e roles, see my post above this one.)

Arcane Lock is a defensive spell, in the sense that you can protect the party from attack by use of it. But it doesn't involve being a "defender" in the 4e sense of that role. In 4e Arcane Lock is a ritual, so available to a character of any class (but wizards, among others, start with the feat for free), but not able to be used in combat. There is a design reason for that, but it is orthogonal to the issue of role and rather goes to 4e's approach to scene-framing authority. (TL;DR - in 4e the GM has this, not the players.)

Hold Person, Web and Evard's Black Tentacles are all control effects in D&D parlance, and all appear on the 4e wizard's spell list. A very respectable argument could be made that a 4e defender is really just a species of controller, but for legacy reasons the game draws a distinction between characters who exercise control by putting their own bodies on the line in melee, and those who don't. Hold Person, Web, and EBT don't involve the wizard putting his/her own body on the line.

Wall of Force appears on the wizard's spell list in 4e - it is a control effect, not a defender one, for the same reasons as given in the previous paragraph. It is about degrading the enemy by controlling their position or, if used to surround them or box them in, by denying them actions.

Burning Hands is an odd one. As a straight damage dealer, by default it should be considered a striker effect. But because of the D&D legacy of wizards being both artillery and non-hit point targeting condition-imposers, characters labelled "controller" in 4e also get some straight AoE damage. Burning Hands is an example of this.

In other words, all the spells you named but one (Arcane Lock) appear on the 4e wizard spell list, who is labelled a controller, and all are, in 4e terms, control effects, with the arguable exception of Burning Hands which is grouped into the control category for the legacy reasons I've noted in this post and my post preceding it.

Prestidigitation is also a wizard ability in 4e, so its use for purposes of controlling would be no great surprise to a 4e player.

That comes down to limits of imagination. Using a wall of force to block enemy attacks within melee range is perfectly viable (been in a few situations as a wizard player where this was necessary, sadly), while using the other spells to keep enemies focused on my character and useless attacking that wall of force due to inability to get to their other targets due to being continuously slowed.

Burning Hands to draw the attention of anyone who manages to somehow slip behind the wall, combined with Web to slow their movements enough for next spell to be ready. Hold Person to keep them from dealing further damage. Black Tentacles to hopefully grab everyone and stop all of their ability to do damage as soon as the wall falls, then toss the wall back up again.

Repeat until spell slots burned or enemies defeated. Very effective in 3E since there were plenty of ways to keep a number of spell slots, so typically it was the latter. Typically, there wasn't much of a healing potion supply left afterwards, though. In theorycraft, this should result in a dead wizard; in practice and with the DM not pulling any punches, it never did.

5E, it might be a bit more difficult. I'll find out soon enough.

Edit: Note this is one of those special circumstances I mentioned. A 5E defender wizard is currently theorycrafted by my group, but it needs played.

 

[pemerton]

would a fighter holding a door shut to prevent mobs from coming through it to attack their allies be a defender action?

Not in my view. Within the fiction it is defensive, but mechanically in 4e it would be a STR or Athletics check (depending a bit on context and GM fiat). A STR ranger, a brutal scoundrel rogue, or a warlord, might be just as effective at doing that as a fighter. A STR cleric or paladin could also have a go, but will have to spend a feat to get Athletics training unless you are using background rules from books later than the PHB. If the GM rules it a simple STR check than the divine characters are no worse off than the martials.

 

[pemerton]

That comes down to limits of imagination. Using a wall of force to block enemy attacks within melee range is perfectly viable (been in a few situations as a wizard player where this was necessary, sadly), while using the other spells to keep enemies focused on my character and useless attacking that wall of force due to inability to get to their other targets due to being continuously slowed.

Burning Hands to draw the attention of anyone who manages to somehow slip behind the wall, combined with Web to slow their movements enough for next spell to be ready. Hold Person to keep them from dealing further damage. Black Tentacles to hopefully grab everyone and stop all of their ability to do damage as soon as the wall falls, then toss the wall back up again.

Repeat until spell slots burned or enemies defeated. Very effective in 3E since there were plenty of ways to keep a number of spell slots, so typically it was the latter. Typically, there wasn't much of a healing potion supply left afterwards, though. In theorycraft, this should result in a dead wizard; in practice and with the DM not pulling any punches, it never did.

5E, it might be a bit more difficult. I'll find out soon enough.

Edit: Note this is one of those special circumstances I mentioned.

Your edit more-or-less pre-empts my reply. I would add - if the enemies who are trapped via the Wall of Force actually get to attack the wizard, then - absent further special circumstances - s/he is probably in quite a bit of trouble. Using Web, Hold etc to deny those attack actions to my mind reinforces that what we have here is an instance of control (in the form of action denial) rather than defending.

If you've read my post above you'll see that I regard defence as a special case of control that is called out as significant in its own right due to the D&D legacy. My rough-and-ready way of putting it is that if your body is not on the line, you're not defending. In the case you describe, the whole rationale for the Hold, Web etc seems to be to interpose something else between the assailants and the mage's body.

Tenser's Transformation is a way of turning a wizard into some sort of defender/striker hybrid (I don't know it's 3E version very well, and as I posted not far above this, the distinction between defender and melee striker doesn't really exist in AD&D, due to its different melee rules). 4e doesn't have that spell. I don't think 5e does either, does it?

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

I don't think any of this is controversial, with one possible exception - I think getting healing out of many PCs is very hard (though maybe you count giving them a backpack full of healing potions as a type of "special circumstance").

But you're right that I'm talking about general effectiveness, not last-ditch-efforts under unusual circumstances.

Because combats in 5e are mechanically shorter in duration than in 4e, it may be easier to achieve minimal effectiveness with last-ditch efforts because they don't have to last as long to count as minimally effective.

I think it comes down to GM Fiat on the medicine skill for general healing. Or abuse of healing potions.

For the reasons given in my post above this one, I don't agree about defender. But striker yes. Post-PHB2 and up until Essentials, a sorcerer was a better AoE striker than a wizard, but Essentials then opened up some options for wizards which allow very effective striking builds.

The invoker in my 4e game plays a leader role as well as controller (not striker, though - his damage output is very low). Every time he uses a non-at-will attack, one of his allies get's free movement. Plus as an encounter power he has Tide of the First Storm, which slows enemies while carrying his allies to where they want to go. And as dailies he has Astral Step (AoE teleport) and Arcane Gate (short-duration gate between two points up to 200' apart).

The sorcerer is a devastating AoE striker who also brings a lot of forced movement control, plus quite a bit of leader-like buffing. (And is probably the most mechanically optimised PC in the group.) He can defend if necessary (using Cloud of Darkness to effectively raise his AC by 5, and close attacks or an at-will powered-up slash with his dagger) but isn't as good at that as he once was: for a while he was a multi-classed monk who would use "drow-jutsu" to lock down enemies within the Cloud and then blast them with close fire attacks; but since then he's given up the life of a ninja-drow for more bardic pursuits.

I'm going to be honest and say that, for a low-level wizard, you're right on the defender issue.

High-level? Mage Armor for a base AC of 13 + Dex, Shield to be able to bump it up to 18 + Dex as needed, Arcane Lock to prevent enemy damage from striking the wizard if they have to buff, Wall of Force to help limit damage, Web and Burning Hands to draw the attention of anyone who gets past the wizard, spells like Shocking Grasp for up-close damage, Black Tentacles for those moments you need to chug a potion, and praying your Concentration holds out.

Dark Elf for rapiers and rely on your Dex for damage and you will probably do not that bad as long as you keep bumping Dex.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

Not in my view. Within the fiction it is defensive, but mechanically in 4e it would be a STR or Athletics check (depending a bit on context and GM fiat). A STR ranger, a brutal scoundrel rogue, or a warlord, might be just as effective at doing that as a fighter. A STR cleric or paladin could also have a go, but will have to spend a feat to get Athletics training unless you are using background rules from books later than the PHB. If the GM rules it a simple STR check than the divine characters are no worse off than the martials.

That is perfectly fair.

Your edit more-or-less pre-empts my reply. I would add - if the enemies who are trapped via the Wall of Force actually get to attack the wizard, then - absent further special circumstances - s/he is probably in quite a bit of trouble. Using Web, Hold etc to deny those attack actions to my mind reinforces that what we have here is an instance of control (in the form of action denial) rather than defending.

If you've read my post above you'll see that I regard defence as a special case of control that is called out as significant in its own right due to the D&D legacy. My rough-and-ready way of putting it is that if your body is not on the line, you're not defending. In the case you describe, the whole rationale for the Hold, Web etc seems to be to interpose something else between the assailants and the mage's body.

Tenser's Transformation is a way of turning a wizard into some sort of defender/striker hybrid (I don't know it's 3E version very well, and as I posted not far above this, the distinction between defender and melee striker doesn't really exist in AD&D, due to its different melee rules). 4e doesn't have that spell. I don't think 5e does either, does it?

My rational for the idea of interposing something between the enemy and the mage's body is the fact the fighter does the same thing. Difference is, that mage build is using magic instead of armor

Take a look at the 5E theorcraft I posted above. Then note that you probably don't even need some of those spells; you've probably got the basics just with Shield, Mage Armor, and a high Dex. You would be reliant heavily upon magic to do up-close damage and reliant upon magic for your armor, but given you're a wizard you should be using magic to do damage anyway.

Also, I'm going to be a bit blunt: In my experience, prior to 4E, if you were focused on drawing damage to yourself, it didn't matter if you were in melee or not or what class you were... you were probably going to die, so every time it happened was a special circumstance. 4E, at least for those I know, introduced the radical new idea that you could do that and reasonably expect not to die.

 

[pemerton]

High-level? Mage Armor for a base AC of 13 + Dex, Shield to be able to bump it up to 18 + Dex as needed, Arcane Lock to prevent enemy damage from striking the wizard if they have to buff, Wall of Force to help limit damage, Web and Burning Hands to draw the attention of anyone who gets past the wizard, spells like Shocking Grasp for up-close damage, Black Tentacles for those moments you need to chug a potion, and praying your Concentration holds out.

Dark Elf for rapiers and rely on your Dex for damage and you will probably do not that bad as long as you keep bumping Dex.

Isn't it 18th level to get Shield at will? (Or am I reading your "as needed" too literally?)

Even without Shield, Mage Armour and 20 DEX gives base AC 18, which is as good as plate. I don't have a good feel for the level at which dedicating 1 slot per day to Mage Armour is not too onerous. Perhaps by 5th level? When you have 8 other spells, meaning 1 to 2 per encounter (assuming a 6 to 8 encounter day).

The combo you describe uses quite a few spells. Even at quite high levels it looks like it might be relatively hard to replicate very well between rests; but viable as a nova play.

4e, by taking away the nova option, does limit wizards (and to a lesser extent clerics) in a way that 5e doesn't. It will be interesting to see whether the 5-minute day re-emerges as a significant intraparty balance issue for many 5e groups.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

Isn't it 18th level to get Shield at will? (Or am I reading your "as needed" too literally?)

Even without Shield, Mage Armour and 20 DEX gives base AC 18, which is as good as plate. I don't have a good feel for the level at which dedicating 1 slot per day to Mage Armour is not too onerous. Perhaps by 5th level? When you have 8 other spells, meaning 1 to 2 per encounter (assuming a 6 to 8 encounter day).

The combo you describe uses quite a few spells. Even at quite high levels it looks like it might be relatively hard to replicate very well between rests; but viable as a nova play.

4e, by taking away the nova option, does limit wizards (and to a lesser extent clerics) in a way that 5e doesn't. It will be interesting to see whether the 5-minute day re-emerges as a significant intraparty balance issue for many 5e groups.

For Wizards? It can be, if you pick it for that, but it's not necessary for this build due to the already-high Dex and Mage Armor. You can cast Shield as often as you have spell slots for it from level 1, and it's a reaction casting time. They changed the mechanics a bit so that you have two types of spells slots; those you've memorized and those you've cast. And since you can use a higher-level spell slot for a lower-level spell (and some get more powerful if you do), once you get to above level 5 the basics of strategy can become relatively viable. By level 11, you pretty much should have the equivalent of Shield at-will.

I think 5E really varies a lot on length of day by intention; basically, do as many as your group can handle or which you have time for. I know there's a number it's supposed to be, but looking at how it's written hints that the actual number is probably going to vary. Especially since spells like Ray of Frost get more powerful as the wizard levels up, yet are still cantrips.