Defenders aren't very good at defending?

[James McMurray]

If the defender is too hard to hit, it becomes worthwhile for the enemies to flee, not fight someone else. If they have any hope of living through the combat they'll have to kill the defender eventually too. Therefore the best way for the defender to do their job is to be unhitable while still posing a threat to the enemy.

That's very logical, and makes a lot of sense, but doesn't fit the stereotypical "fight until slaughtered" monster mentality.

 

[Nail]

If the defender is too hard to hit....

Alright, we've heard this enough times. Time for a counter point:

A high AC Defender is a good thing.

Sure, the enemies can't hit the fighter. But that doesn't mean the enemies can't be locked down by the Ftr! That combat challenge (+combat superiority) means battlefield control + opponent lock-down. Just *try* to get away from the Ftr........

 

[Regicide]

That's very logical, and makes a lot of sense, but doesn't fit the stereotypical "fight until slaughtered" monster mentality.

When I DM, if the creature is too stupid to flee, I play it as almost always attacking the closest target anyway. So again, a good AC helps the defender. If they're too stupid to flee, they're too stupid to be able to compare AC values of a couple points difference.

 

[Starfox]

I recognize the OPs concerns. Not sure if its a problem tough; except for the very high damage of our archer Ranger, the Defender does not seem damage-challenged. On the other hand, our ranger is the party member most often in trouble. One way to put it is that the fighter and paladin are less "defenderish" than the ranger is "strikerish".

What IS true is that the Defender is very leader-dependent. I was the team cleric in this game, and most of my heals went to the fighter.

 

[Ximenes088]

I don't really see the problem with high AC on defenders. Do you tell all the PCs the defense scores of each of their enemies? The monsters have no reason to know that Joe has a worse AC than Jack, and thanks to Int bonii to AC, the guy in a dress in the back row is very probably as hard to hit as the plate-armored tank. They can make educated guesses, but unless the PCs are fighting some sort of tactical genius, they shouldn't have a map of PC armor classes to go by.

I think it's also worth pointing out that paladin marking, while inferior to fighters in some regards, is unbeatable against minions. A paladin-marked minion _must_ engage the paladin if he's going to engage anything, or he's going to fall over dead. Even against fighters, is a minion really going to decide to risk his life swinging at someone else rather than taking worse odds to hit the fighter?

 

[Stalker0]

I think it's also worth pointing out that paladin marking, while inferior to fighters in some regards, is unbeatable against minions.

IMO, if the paladin is using his mark on the minions, the minions have already won

As far as the paladin's mark goes, I think the problem is the change between the playtest of 4e and the full game. In the original playtest rules (DDXP and the like), the paladin could mark from range with no problems. That allowed a paladin to engage one opponent and mark another, give him the ability to hold two targets (one through OA's, one through the mark). Further it allowed him to put the whammy on a monster who had broken through the front lines and had engaged the squishier guys in back.

However, there was an abuse present with this. Paladin's could mark a target and run away like a girly man, which was both a little hokey and completely out of the normal paladin flavor.

But I think they went too far with the mark. My group has houseruled it that the paladin's mark fades only when the paladin moves farther away from his mark. Problem solved, the paladin can still mark at range, he can't run away like a coward. Paladin becomes a better defender, the flavor is maintained, everyone is happy.

 

[direkobold]

But I think they went too far with the mark. My group has houseruled it that the paladin's mark fades only when the paladin moves farther away from his mark. Problem solved, the paladin can still mark at range, he can't run away like a coward. Paladin becomes a better defender, the flavor is maintained, everyone is happy.

Now that's what I'm talking about. I had lost hope of having any worthwhile feedback, but this is actually a good idea. I'm going to try it out the next time I run.

Thanks!

 

[Ahglock]

I don't really see the problem with high AC on defenders. Do you tell all the PCs the defense scores of each of their enemies? The monsters have no reason to know that Joe has a worse AC than Jack, and thanks to Int bonii to AC, the guy in a dress in the back row is very probably as hard to hit as the plate-armored tank. They can make educated guesses, but unless the PCs are fighting some sort of tactical genius, they shouldn't have a map of PC armor classes to go by.

Yeah that is how i look at it as well. A high AC helps the fighter do there job in my game.

 

[HealingAura]

Lets see, what makes a fighter a good defender?
- The ability to absorb attacks. A fighter has a lot of HP and a lot of healing surges to use per a day. To improve the fighter's ability to absorb attacks, he gain access to powers like Boundless Endurance, Iron Warrior and No Surrender.
- The ability to draw enemies near him and away from his allies. A fighter gets Combat Challenge and Combat Superiority class features. To improve his ability to draw enemies near him, he gains access to powers like Come and Get It, Harrying Assault and Warrior's Urging.

If you improve only one of those, you'll end up with either a character that is hard to kill but doesn't defend his allies, or a character that attracts all the enemies to him but is killed easily.

In our game, we have a fighter, a ranger, a rogue and a wizard. I have noticed that the fighter neither kills enemies as easily as the strikers, nor does he deal with the many minions better than the wizard. So I think way to make a fighter really shine is to make him a good defender, and then take advantage of the fact that your character is going to be surrounded by enemies to use power like Sweeping Blow, Unyielding Avalanche and Cruel Reaper.

Notice that in order to be a good defender you don't have to have the best AC in the party.

I haven't seen a Paladin character being played in 4E, but I can see that he gets more healing powers than the fighter, in exchange for being worse at drawing enemies to him.

 

[Narshal]

But I think they went too far with the mark. My group has houseruled it that the paladin's mark fades only when the paladin moves farther away from his mark. Problem solved, the paladin can still mark at range, he can't run away like a coward. Paladin becomes a better defender, the flavor is maintained, everyone is happy.

That's how it is in the rules. By the end of his turn, the paladin must be adjacent or engage (i.e. attack) his target marked by divine challenge. The paladin must do that every round otherwise the mark is gone and the paladin can't divine challenge next round.

The interesting part of that would be making a archer paladin. We would need to create new powers. The paladin could still divine challenge his target, make a ranged attack and then move away. As long as he maintains making ranged attacks against that target every round, his mark stays.