4e and Hybrid Classes

[Andor]

CH: Have you done any work towards new roles?

MM: Not yet. It’ll be interesting to see if that’s something we ever try. I know there was some talk of trying to make hybrid character classes that span two roles, but in playtests and looking at it, it was just a switch that let you go “OK, now you’re a controller”, flip a switch, and now you’re a striker. At that point, we don’t want to be in a position where the class is not as good in either role, or they’re straddling two roles and they’re just as good with them as everyone else. The trickiest thing is to say if there’s a middle ground there, and if that can ever work. At some level you’re just going to be worse than someone else filling those two roles. You don’t want to be a controller that’s sometimes a crappy striker.

Then you go further than that point: a lot of people have noticed that you have your role, and you have a dash of a second role. Swordmage defender with a dash of controller. That may be enough already. We don’t really need to make multi-role characters. New roles are something I’ve never considered seriously, but I don’t know if in this structure it would be the same as making a new monster role. We don’t see the need yet. I could see in the future someone coming up with a role that’s so iconic that we can’t make an existing role work for it.

You know, thinking about it, the 4e power structure has some real virtues when it comes to approaching hybrid class design.

What the 4e design struture lets one do is control the depth of a classes dip into a different role. It even offers several ways to do it.

To wit: At-will powers.
Encounter powers.
Daily powers.
Powers at certain levels.

A full on controller like the wizard can do something wizardly every round all day long. But if one were to design a hybrid leader/controller then the designer controls how often the class has acess to each of it's roles by the mix of available powers. If the only controllery powers are dailies then the hybrid can only haul out the minion squishing big guns a few times a day. If only encounters he can do it every fight but will run out before the end in any big encounter.

On a similar vein the Fighters gets powers with weapon specific effects at only a few levels. This is because they wanted it to be a present feature of the classs, but not a dominant one. Similar fine control is available for any element they wish to allow a class a splash of.

This fine control of a classes mix of elements appears to be a real virtue of the 4e design paradigm. Will Wotc realize this and take advantage of it?

 

[TwinBahamut]

This fine control of a classes mix of elements appears to be a real virtue of the 4e design paradigm. Will Wotc realize this and take advantage of it?

In a certain sense, they have done so extensively throughout 4E already.

Look at the Warlord. He is a Leader, and his core Class Features like Inspiring Word emphasize that fact. At the same time, he is a fairly tough melee fighter, and has a number of powers like the level 29 Daily Power "Defy Death", which would be a fantastic Defender power. The Warlord is a Leader, but he has many Defender-like elements.

Similarly, look at the Cleric. Again, he is a Leader, and his core Class Features and At-Will Powers emphasize that role, but he has many powerful Controller-like abilities, like "Blade Barrier", "Knights of Unyielding Valor", and "Astral Storm". The Cleric is a Leader, but one that can act like a Controller in a pinch.

Overall, the given role of any class is mainly rooted in the central Class Features and At-Wills of the class. Meanwhile, Encounter and Daily Powers often feature abilities of other roles, making any given class a slight Hybrid. We have a Striker-like Defender (Fighter), a Leader-like Defender (Paladin), a Controller-like Defender (Swordmage), and probably many more slight hybrids like that (I haven't looked through any of the Strikers carefully enough to check them).

 

[Andor]

It's true that the existing character classes have traces of other roles in them. OTOH the 4 roles are so broad they overlap not inconsiderable. I'm not sure you could make a 'pure' defender/striker/leader/controller. Or at least not over a full 30 levels with any real choice of powers.

I'm just saying that that fine control over the depth of the dip into another roles territory is interesting design space, and the only thing I can think of that's unique to the 4e design over other editions. I hope WotC explores that potential.

 

[Corsair]

I'm just saying that that fine control over the depth of the dip into another roles territory is interesting design space, and the only thing I can think of that's unique to the 4e design over other editions.

Unique? Really?


....


Paladin. Hexblade. Duskblade.

Just because they weren't using the word "roles" officially, doesn't mean the same basic effect wasn't there. I picked those three for comparison because their extra abilities are fairly static (relative small spell lists). Just because 4E has different mechanics than previous editions, it doesn't mean everything it does is new.

 

[MichaelSomething]

I hope you consider multi classing too.

Being a Fighter who multi classes into Rogue heavily makes you more strikerish. Conversely, multi classing heavily into Warlord can make your more leadery.

However, no matter how you multi class, your still the same role basically. Or it is a example of doing something crappy part of the time?

 

[Zsig]

Overall, the given role of any class is mainly rooted in the central Class Features and At-Wills of the class.

I agree with that, in fact, I'm not sure there's anything to agree there, it's pretty much a fact.

That being said, I could see 2 possible ways for how an hybrid class could exist/work.

The first one would be a class with "all-in-one" class features/at-wills which would obviously make the class either too good, or too crappy (since there would be the need to balance).

The second one would be inserting the multiple class features into builds, for instance a Defender/Striker hybrid would look like this:

Build A: Defender Feature
Build B: Striker Feature

That means that the class is indeed an hybrid, but the character playing one is not, since he'll have to choose from one of the builds, which sets his role.

This approach is not that good then, since it'd work somewhat like the Ranger and his builds. You can't, for example, make an Archer Ranger and later "multiclass into ranger" to get an animal companion.


Now, if we look at the approach they seem to be taking, spreading it throughout classes, you could be a Controller (ie. Druid) and then later take the Paragon Multiclass into the Defender (ie. Warden) and with the options presented on Martial Power we've seen it's quite possible to achieve some good results (it is possible now for any given class Paragon Multiclassed into Fighter to get Combat Superiority for instance), so who's to say for example a Druid paragon mc into Warden wouldn't be able to get some nasty shapeshifting abilities?

(PS: Disregard the speculations above, just consider it as a ways for me to illustrate my point)