Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Schmoe" data-source="post: 4380522" data-attributes="member: 913">Seriously, I think people are trying to make the defender role into more than it is.&nbsp; In previous versions of D&amp;D, the fighter/paladin/knight/cavalier/whatever would assume a &quot;defender&quot; role front and center while trying to occupy the opponents and dish out some damage.&nbsp; In the current version of D&amp;D, the fighter/paladin will still do the same.&nbsp; The only difference is that the fighter/paladin in 4e has been given a few extra tools to make his job easier.Arguments about the defender isn't &quot;sticky&quot;, there's no &quot;threat&quot; mechanic in 4e, etc, are irrelevant.&nbsp; The defender is better at his job in 4e than he was in earlier editions.&nbsp; When push comes to shove and, heaven forbid, combat erupts, the fighter/paladin will, as he always has, assume a position front and center and try to occupy the opponents and dish out some damage.&nbsp; He will, in effect, be &quot;defending&quot; the party.&nbsp; 4e just happened to recognize this and give him some additional tools to make his life easier.&nbsp; Honestly, expecting a paladin to have a foolproof means to keep an opponent off of an ally is like expecting a rogue to have a foolproof means to do the most damage to an opponent.&nbsp; Sure, the tools are there to make it more likely, but it's not foolproof.&nbsp; Sometimes the opponents avoid the paladin.&nbsp; Sometimes the opponents avoid the rogue.&nbsp; And, true to the philosophy behind 4e, group tactics will help to influence the success of either of these roles.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Schmoe, post: 4380522, member: 913"] Seriously, I think people are trying to make the defender role into more than it is. In previous versions of D&D, the fighter/paladin/knight/cavalier/whatever would assume a "defender" role front and center while trying to occupy the opponents and dish out some damage. In the current version of D&D, the fighter/paladin will still do the same. The only difference is that the fighter/paladin in 4e has been given a few extra tools to make his job easier. Arguments about the defender isn't "sticky", there's no "threat" mechanic in 4e, etc, are irrelevant. The defender is better at his job in 4e than he was in earlier editions. When push comes to shove and, heaven forbid, combat erupts, the fighter/paladin will, as he always has, assume a position front and center and try to occupy the opponents and dish out some damage. He will, in effect, be "defending" the party. 4e just happened to recognize this and give him some additional tools to make his life easier. Honestly, expecting a paladin to have a foolproof means to keep an opponent off of an ally is like expecting a rogue to have a foolproof means to do the most damage to an opponent. Sure, the tools are there to make it more likely, but it's not foolproof. Sometimes the opponents avoid the paladin. Sometimes the opponents avoid the rogue. And, true to the philosophy behind 4e, group tactics will help to influence the success of either of these roles. [/QUOTE]

Verification