Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what a Martial Controller would look like?

[TwinBahamut]

However, I do disagree that the Martial power source has to imply PHYSICAL training. MENTAL training that nonetheless involves perfecting an aspect of one's self in the interests of maximizing one's martial prowess, without necessarily drawing upon supernatural effects, should, IMO, also be considered part of the Martial power source. Sun-Tsu considered strategy a part of the martial arts, for example.

I've got no problem with this. At the same time though, a character with no magical or physical skills, but only wits, is not terribly suited to being a PC class. Thus, a character with mental training needs to also have either physical training (Martial) or magical training (Arcane/Divine) in order to function in actual combat.

However, keep in mind that the class you are talking about, a Strategist, is already in the game and is called the Warlord. I can't really see a difference between them in concept myself, and I think it belongs where it is in the Leader role.

 

[Gloombunny]

However, I do disagree that the Martial power source has to imply PHYSICAL training. MENTAL training that nonetheless involves perfecting an aspect of one's self in the interests of maximizing one's martial prowess, without necessarily drawing upon supernatural effects, should, IMO, also be considered part of the Martial power source. Sun-Tsu considered strategy a part of the martial arts, for example.

Yeah, but to the extent strategy can be a shtick for a D&D PC, it's already covered by the warlord. That's, like, what they do. Because devising the optimal strategy for your forces to follow is thoroughly a leader thing.

 

[Khaalis]

I haven't seen this posted yet...

As quoted by Michele (WotC_Miko) here

"Meanwhile, a controller can affect not only multiple opponents on the battlefield, but the battlefield itself. Fogs and walls? Controller. Reshaping the terrain? Controller."

With this role definition, I would say that you would be seriously hard pressed to make a true "Martial" controller. However, a HYBRID class, something akin to the Swordmage concept (as an Arcane Defender) might work. I wouldn't expect to see one before PHB2 though.

 

[jasin]

If you (the general you, for any to whom it applies) have trouble wrapping your head around the concept of a martial controller, maybe a martial controller isn't necessary?

I hope WotC doesn't feel compelled to fill out the grid with strained concepts merely for completeness sake, but rather that they use roles and power sources as descriptors for concepts that can stand on their own.

That said, I agree with the people who said something along the lines of the Setting Sun discipline from Book of Nine Swords would fit.

 

[WhatGravitas]

"Meanwhile, a controller can affect not only multiple opponents on the battlefield, but the battlefield itself. Fogs and walls? Controller. Reshaping the terrain? Controller."

But we don't have to take that literally, we should rather look at the game effect!

Fogs and walls:
Fogs: Hinder attack ability of enemies.
Archer equivalent: Cover fire to hinder attacks of enemies.

Walls: Preventing movement in a certain direction.
Archer equivalent: Manoeuvres pinning an enemy, area arrows over time, so certain movement is punished with damage (as with wall of fire).

Reshaping the terrain: Getting terrain benefits.
Archer equivalent: Shoot arrows to cover the ground with difficult terrain, hitting stuff to make it fall down, changing the terrain.

This way, a martial controller can fulfil the same game effects. Sure, without the sustaining effect of magic, he probably cannot set up "fire-and-forget" effects, like wall of force, that keep going independently - but if you balance with the ability to get faster actions (for some manoeuvres) and make him less squishy than the arcane controller, I think we can get the same role covered - and have a very different feel, flavour-wise.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Kintara]

I can picture a "Monk" controller with a lot of mobility and the ability to affect multiple opponents with his attacks. It seems to me that it's just a matter of building the abilities right. It might feel strange in play, but that's not the same as non-viable from a mechanical perspective.

I like the idea of a sort of Mad Alchemist angle, but that doesn't strike me as especially "martial." Still, if I were to go that route, I think a Charlatan class might be cool. A performing character, the Charlatan is basically a stage magician. But what elevates him to useful status is his uncanny ability to capture people's attention. Ooh, call them Mesmerists if you wish.

What about a Monster Scholar/Master Tactician that knows how to manipulate the enemy's disposition and exploit inherent weaknesses with actions directed at the enemies? Add in some Iron Heroes Hunter flavor with the ability to enhance, and sometimes mitigate, environmental effects, and I think it might work pretty well.

 

[Green Knight]

If you (the general you, for any to whom it applies) have trouble wrapping your head around the concept of a martial controller, maybe a martial controller isn't necessary?

I hope WotC doesn't feel compelled to fill out the grid with strained concepts merely for completeness sake, but rather that they use roles and power sources as descriptors for concepts that can stand on their own.

That said, I agree with the people who said something along the lines of the Setting Sun discipline from Book of Nine Swords would fit.

Well, the reason I'd like to see a Martial Controller is so that there's a Martial character to cover every role. And the reason that's important is for when you want to run a non-magic campaign. Do you know how awesome it'd be to have a wellrounded D&D party, with characters who fill the role of the Cleric and the Wizard, without actually having any magic? That'd be fantastic.

The same goes for Arcane characters. Let's say they release the Swordmage and the Bard in the PHB1, an Arcane Defender and Arcane Leader, along with the Warlock and the Wizard. That'd give you a wellrounded party of nothing but arcane based characters. That'd be an amazing party in a Forgotten Realms game in which all of the players are worshippers of Mystra, and are being sent on missions on behalf of the church.

So that's pretty much why I want a class for every role + power source. It allows for a player group to create thematic parties like that, while still having a nice, wellrounded party. It also provides more options for homebrew campaigns with little or no magic.

 

[vagabundo]

I think some combintations of powers/roles will not have a solid concept that would work. Some, possibly, like the martial controller, just should never be done.

We don't need to be completists. Still a Monk designed as a Martial controller/striker sounds interesting.

 

[Bagpuss]

I'd go for a new class call it something like Man-at-Arms

It's talent trees would contain aspects of the Knight's abilities and an Archers rain of arrows. So he could control the area immediately around him (his threatened area) like a Knight, or he could effect large areas with a bow. He could issue challenges to opponents like the Knight's Test of Mettle or the Goad feat. Strike fear into them like the Intimidating Strike feat, or force them to hesitate (daze like effect) with a battle cry. Rather than specialising as the Fighter, he should be able to pick up any weapon and put it to some use it with his talents.

 

[Green Knight]

Man-At-Arms?