10% Controller, 50% Striker, 20% Leader, 20% Defender

[GSHamster]

In my opinion, 50/50 hybrids rarely work out in practice. They just aren't good enough in either direction to really work. A lot of the time, if you take 2 50/50 hybrids, and replace them with 2 100% pures, the pures end up being more effective.

I think a hybrid class needs to be closer to 75/75 in power level. Which is non-intuitive, because on paper it adds up to more power than a pure.

And with multi-classing rules, it's easy to dip into a few levels of hybrid, then go pure, and end up with something that is significantly more powerful than just a pure.

 

[Recidivism]

I have never felt that the classes in 4E were literally unable to perform in their non-specified roles. And there are plenty of people who have interest in building their character into a hybrid role.

Although I suppose there's a point in arguing that someone playing a "Rogue" can't choose to play as primarily a "Leader" "Controller" or "Defender." Although personally I don't have a problem with that.

 

[SensoryThought]

This thread has been rehashed countless times.

I would add that all 4e classes can effectively be strikers and have the potential to excel in at least one other role. With powers, characters are far more customizable in abilities than 2e.

 

[1of3]

What does role mean in the first place: Defenders can mark, leaders have a word. Strikers and controllers don't even have a single mechanism.

tl;dr
There is no roles.

 

[Shroomy]

My sentinel druid has striker encounter powers, two encounter heals, the ability to threaten OAs in 16 squares, a lot of hit points, and an at-will area minion killer. I think later class design shows a lot more willingness to blur the roles, while making sure that each class does have a role.

And there was a lot of angst amongst a certain segment of 4e fans about that blurring. The sentinel is a good example, but the bladesinger even more so.

Personally, I think that 5e will remove explicit roles all together from the game and return to the implicit roles found in earlier editions.

 

[mkill]

I think roles were the alignment of 4e: they only cause problems when they are misunderstood, but it is so, so easy to misunderstand them.

I thought power sources are the alignment of 4E. Ah well. Maybe Power Source is Lawful / Chaotic and Role is Good / Evil.

Anyway, I do think the roles were a good idea. After all, they were always in the game. It's like Newton pointing out gravity - everybody knows the apple falls down, but now someone described it in a formulaic way. Even if 5E goes out of its way to avoid roles, there will still be the mobile damage dealer, the frontline tank, the artillery in the back, the guy who buffs, the guy who heals.

What I would like to see in 5E is that the roles are less strictly defined. For example Defender doesn't necessarily mean mark, it could be some completely different mechanic. It's basicly what we've already seen in later 4E.

You could make a checklist of different role elements, and each build / skill tree / subclass has four or five elements from the whole list. Your role is where you have the most check marks.

(Incomplete) List of Role Elements

Striker
[ ] DPS
[ ] Nova Spike Damage
[ ] Attack on Range
[ ] Mobility
[ ] Dodge / Riposte / Evasion
[ ] Stealth

Defender
[ ] High AC / NADs
[ ] Lots of HP
[ ] Shake off conditions
[ ] Punish attack on ally
[ ] Frontline control / block movement
[ ] Self-healing / temp hp

Leader
[ ] Buff attack
[ ] Buff defense
[ ] Extra attack
[ ] Move / reposition
[ ] Heal
[ ] Remove condition

Controller
[ ] Debuff / prevent attack
[ ] Lower defense
[ ] Immobilize / Slow
[ ] Terrain effects
[ ] Summon ally
[ ] Area damage

You can do this for any character in any RPG / skirmish game. It's not limited to 4E, or D&D.

For example, Slayer Fighters are [X] DPS, [X] Mobility, [X] High AC / NADs, [X] Lots of HP, which makes them Strikers who can stand in as Defenders.

3E Druids check almost everything, that's why they are called CODzilla.

 

[Fanaelialae]

What does role mean in the first place: Defenders can mark, leaders have a word. Strikers and controllers don't even have a single mechanism.

tl;dr
There is no roles.

Actually, strikers have the + damage mechanic.

It's controllers who really don't get much in the way of features to support their roles because, for better or worse, their ability to control is baked into their powers. Orbizard would probably be the best example of a controller feature (extending the duration of your control).

I'm not sure what you mean when you say there are no roles. Of course there are.

Defenders force enemies to attack them. They have the hp and defenses to survive this far better than the other roles.

Leaders buff and heal.

Strikers deal more damage than non-strikers, and often have exceptional movement abilities, for those hard-to-reach people.

Controllers are debuffers, and AoEers. They also act as "ranged defenders", although instead of forcing enemies to attack the controller, they can deny them the ability to make any attacks at all.

If you've ever played 4e, you've no doubt seen the roles in action. Heck, even in earlier editions you could see them in play, they simply weren't as defined.