Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kzach" data-source="post: 5901944" data-attributes="member: 56189">I think the mark mechanic in 4e was very clunky and tiresome to track. I also don't think it made much sense given that the 'tank' is rarely the greatest threat in a combat. I think the efforts made to compensate for this were somewhat weak and very confused. I also think that the entire concept of the mechanic has done more to ruin immersion than any other mechanic has before, or since.BUT......having said that, I also think there is a need for such a mechanic in D&D. I just don't feel the marking method is the best way to go about it. One way to go about this is threat reduction instead of threat increase. The mark mechanic worked by increasing the amount of threat that the tank represented. Another mechanic, however, could REDUCE the amount of threat that other classes created.One of the limitations of D&D, in this regard, is AC. In D&D the tank is generally considered the one who should have the highest AC. And yet, within a threat management system, this is actually a downside. Instead of high AC, tanks should have damage mitigation and reduction abilities. This makes them a much more attractive target because the PERCEPTION of an enemy is that they're easier to hit. By the time they figure out that they're shrugging off the blows, well it's hopefully too late.Strikers, healers and controllers (assuming those roles are all present in D&DN), should have some form of reducing the threat they represent. High AC is one method. Redirecting attacks? Making it look like the tank is causing the damage/effect? Concealing your ability or power? I'm not sure of the exact answer, but it seems like it would be a far easier mechanic for players and DM's to track and incorporate into combat sessions.</blockquote>

Verification