Appeal of the defender?

[Spatula]

Very easy. Run a few games that end in TPK. Remark how they may have survived the encounter if they'd had a decent defender.

Or in other words, railroad them into doing something that they don't want to do while playing a game. Doesn't really sound like a good idea to me, especially if you're playing with your friends.

I imagine having a defender in the group is not 100% necessary. We've gotten along fine with only half-assed defenders for 30 years now. You might have to tailor encounters to them, or they might need to engage in more hit-and-run type fighting, but it won't be impossible. Let them play what they enjoy.

This whole thing made me immeadiately think of World of Warcraft, where defenders (tanks) are hard to find, especially good ones, but where striker-types are a dime a dozen. Most people want to be the showboat, while far far fewer want the non-flashy job of keeping everyone else alive, even though it's more important. The difference is, in WoW you need a tank to take on most any group-level monster. In D&D, the DM can make adjustments to compensate for the lack of a defender. But still, I hope that "defender" isn't the new "healer" for D&D. "It's your turn play the fighter!" "Ugh, alright..."

 

[That One Guy]

Now that I think about it, it's because of Anime. My players like Anime.

Anime protagonists are never defenders. They are always lean, wiry strikers or wizards. With inferior, muscular defender sidekicks.

While Western protagonists are defenders. With sneaky rogues and crafty wizards as sidekicks.

Actually... I think there's always that anime dude (or lady) who gets the crap kicked out of them but gets back up and still kicks some serious [Grandma says butt]. Also, the Challenge the Unjust is so BA. Who is more awesome than the person who challenges every enemy on the field of battle and can take them?

...which is the clincher, I think. In third edition, that person would lose. Hands down, that guy would not be cool. He'd... uhh... be teleported into the air and then sent to Hell. In 4e... it'd just be frickin' sweet.

Make them watch animes with tough guys who keep fighting and don't give up. I haven't been much into anime for the past few years, but that's still an anime-tastic thing, right?

 

[Mirtek]

Very easy. Run a few games that end in TPK. Remark how they may have survived the encounter if they'd had a decent defender.

Doesn't change the problem. Better ndying while playing a class that brings you fun instead of surviving while playing a class you hate to play.

I don't say why a long unfun game experience should be better for them than a short and fun experience (or a short and unfun experience if they don't like the TPK).

 

[Gloombunny]

Make them watch animes with tough guys who keep fighting and don't give up. I haven't been much into anime for the past few years, but that's still an anime-tastic thing, right?

The title character in Naruto is frequently noted for his incredible endurance under severe beatings, refusal to give up especially when his friends are in danger, and powerful direct offense but somewhat clumsy sense of subtlety.

He's not all big and burly, though.

 

[That One Guy]

The title character in Naruto is frequently noted for his incredible endurance under severe beatings, refusal to give up especially when his friends are in danger, and powerful direct offense but somewhat clumsy sense of subtlety.

He's not all big and burly, though.

I don't think the defender has to be big and burly. But, yeah... that pretty much sounds like a defender.

(RPGmaker icon? Nice, either way.)

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don´t think a defender is needed, but then of course those strikers have all to sacrifice attack power to defenes (multiclass feats maybe)

Our striker in 3rd edition learned it the hard way (ranger1 /fighter4 /woodland stalker 2 optmized with bows). After having reached his zenit, he was continously engaged in melee, his bow smashed by a hook horror, impaled by a huge lance on a spirited charge etc... got an intelligent longsword...

he now is a Level 6 ranger/4 fighter/2 woodland stalker has decided to raise const from 13 to 14 before raising dex to 18, does TWF wih speciaized longswords and can now participate in dmension door melee hit and runs and fight next to an elvish bladesinger, toe to toe with his enemies.
But of course, his damage potential didn´t raise a bit since Level 7.

Conclusion: no real defender is Ok, but everyone has to contribute to stand their ground.

 

[neceros]

First, let's make clear that being a defender does not mean you want to get hit. You just make the monsters try to hit you. There is plenty room for sly, nimble defenders in the world.

Defenders are said to be full out damage against the monsters it traps toe to toe. Strikers do more, yes, but they have to move around and get positioned. Defenders walk up, say hey and go to town. I'm not sure I could think anyone would dislike that sort of play. It's total control.

Don't railroad people into playing something they don't want to. Your game could very well not require a defender at all. If everyone's a wizard, they'll have to think up tactics and strategies to survive. That's up to them.

However, if they continue to die and lose battles, than it might be time for them to open their eyes and expand their view on gaming. In my experience everyone has one or two characters they play. They use different names, races and maybe even classes, but they will play the same character over and over. It's an issue of nature.

If that's the problem, force them out of their box, but do it with grace.

 

[katahn]

I wouldn't try to TPK them, but I do very much like the idea of making ample use of NPC defenders working with the monsters the party is fighting. Let them see how powerful/effective/freaking useful a defender can be and they'll either figure it out or they won't. The one thing I wouldn't do is give them an NPC defender, at least not "for free". If they want to hire one as a retainer or find one as a follower then they can RP that out and work for it in that sense.

I would suggest incorporating a house-rule that says that if any player wants to reroll a character of an archetype that no one is playing, they can do so and begin with exactly the same amount of experience earned and all comparable equipment converted. Make it for any archetype and it has to be an archetype that isn't being regularly played - so no rerolling a leader just because Bob who plays a cleric doesn't happen to arrive at this particular session. It would be because after 2 or 3 sessions the group's lack of whatever archetype is clearly becoming painful for them and one of them is willing to reroll.

 

[hong]

1. There is nothing wrong with making a defender NPC if nobody wants to play one. This is a game. It's meant to be enjoyable, not a character-building experience.

2. That said, defenders in 4E can dish out damage. Fighters and paladins aren't WoW tanks who just soak damage without dealing it. A better comparison may be to warriors in Guild Wars not only have the best armour, but also have the best sustained DPS of any class.

3. There can be plenty of fun in a concept that revolves around being unkillable. The knight in my old campaign was basically a defender. At 17th level he had AC of about 40, going up to 50 when turtling. The player had a great time being a rock in the middle of combat, with all my juiced-up monsters madly swinging at him and not doing any damage at all. I had a great time watching the character fulfilling his schtick. This is, however, a rather different way of grabbing the spotlight to what your guys may be accustomed to.

 

[Leatherhead]

Heh meatshields, I remember when that was considered a compliment.

But I am not seeing a problem here, in 4th edition you are supposed to be able to get by without having all of the roles filled. That should mean that if nobody wants to be a defender then the party is going to not have a defender.

And for a 3.5 game might I recommend a Crusader or Warblade?