Defenders that actually defend

[Victim]

I'm not sure what the deal with all of the incredulity. The fighter's combat challenge can hose the bad guys up, but all it takes is a 4-square wide passage to bypass oppies. Divine challenge is just a weak deterrent (5 points of damage can't be ignored?).

5 damage is a 14 CHA - it's not unreasonable for a paladin to do 7 damage instead at heroic. A paladin who can't run with CHA attacks should probably pick up that Mighty Challenge feat in DP. STR/CHA split pallies can actually get a ridiculous amount of damage that way.

Plus the damage is automatic, so it should be compared to combat challenge damage after hit chance is taken into account. If the fighter hits about half the time, then 5 auto damage is worth roughly the same as a 10 damage avg combat challenge.

 

[Victim]

So, what happens when a soldier engages the tank and they're in mutual lockdown? All the other monsters skirt the tank.

Most monster marks aren't as good as fighter/pally ones so the lockdown isn't entirely even. Besides, if it's worth it for monsters to ignore PC marks, then why shouldn't PCs ignore monster marks?

Also, they use Bursts type effects, to tie up other enemies near them. But yeah, you can't really expect the fighter to lock down every enemy on the board.

 

[Felon]

But yeah, you can't really expect the fighter to lock down every enemy on the board.

So the question comes to how best to use a defender (any, not just fighters and paladins) to lock down the biggest area. Really, that's of much more interest than dealing with all the contention over whether or not a monster can ignore divine challenge.

 

[LostSoul]

I would rate the defenders I have seen in my game, in terms of "defenderiness", for top to bottom:

Fighter
Paladin
Warden

The Fighter's mark was awesome; I would ignore it at times, but coupled with Shield Push it really messed me up. He really stuck in there and grabbed guys to him.

The Paladin's mark was decent. I would ignore it from time to time and the damage really adds up - even though he was a hybrid Paladin.

The Warden's mark I tend to ignore and I don't think it's that big of a deal. I can get around him and beat on the other guys. However, while there's been a Warden in play we've gone from 5 PCs to 4. That might make a difference.

I think the value of each class also depends on how the DM runs things. Fighters mess me up, but another DM might not feel the same way.

 

[Saeviomagy]

There are a number of things that make for a more effective defender:

1. Reduce your armor class and improve that of other party members OR make your combat challenge really, really nasty. These are both ways to make monsters respect your marks more.

2. Stand in the way. There is no more effective way to block a passage than by standing in it. While it IS true that a 4-wide passage cannot be wholely blocked by you, you can make it significantly harder to get where they want. Potentially you can turn a 4 square move into an 8 square move, which is enough to demote an at-will into a charge if nothing else.

4. Shift, shift, shift. Most monsters cannot prevent you from shifting away and charging another target. Also, if your armor is so good that things are ignoring you, you can feel safe to provoke AoOs. Get where you are needed (which is almost never a long way away from the party).

 

[Meeble]

As a DM, I find that defenders who are used well can be a great asset. They certainly can't be expected to control everything, but they can certainly find ways to severely punish some of the creatures that choose to ignore them.

Strangely enough, I find that the Fighter ability Rain of Steel actually reduces their ability to control the battlefield. Where some enemies might be content to wail away on the fighter normally, taking automatic damage every single round can make getting the hell away seem much more attractive. Suddenly, the potential of taking an OA when moving away pales in comparison to certainly taking an OA if they don't try to move.

 

[Uruush]

1. Reduce your armor class and improve that of other party members OR make your combat challenge really, really nasty. These are both ways to make monsters respect your marks more.

This. Some people fall in love with being unhittable. Dependent on a couple of other factors, a defender that has an AC 3+ above most of the characters in their party doesn't know what the heck they're doing.

 

[Skallgrim]

A couple of thoughts and observations:

First, I played a very brash and preening Dragonborn who specialized in fighter Close Burst exploits (Come and Get it, Action Point, Thicket of Blades?), and he also took Potent Challenge. Marking massive groups of people (thank you, Dread Reaper) and giving them -3 to hit anyone else is Defending, no matter what you might think of it. If I was a Leader and gave you +3 to all your defenses except vs area attacks, you'd think that was a pretty good defense boost, no?


Second, I think the Warden is getting sold a bit short here. His mark, admittedly, is not the greatest. However, look at Warden Powers and Feats. There are Warden powers which make the entire area around the Warden difficult terrain (no shifting, for most enemies). This means that you HAVE to move to get away from him. There's a warden feat which makes his opportunity attacks Slow the person they hit. You've got a huge ring of people who struggle to get away from you (Hey, you're slowed in Difficult Terrain! You get to move 1!). There are plenty of Warden powers which immoblize in a burst, or knock prone in a burst. In addition, there are Warden powers which give out healing whenever someone attacks the Warden. All of these things work as a defender, but NOT in the same way that a fighter's mark/CC/CS do. In addition, the effortless marking of Wardens (while limited in range) is much, much easier to accomplish than that of a fighter or paladin.

Finally, the case might be that your problem is with your group, and not your defender. If the wizard specializes in area attacks, and everyone else closes with the enemy in melee, is that the wizard not being effective, or the tactics of the party not being compatible with the wizard? Some groups, to my mind, don't "need" a defender. They don't have a particularly vulnerable member (or have one who is highly mobile). They don't use a lot of ranged attacks, but prefer melee and close ones. They would prefer a short fight (4-8 rounds) and a bunch of healing afterwards to a long fight where they take less damage. Those groups aren't wrong, but they might not be rewarding for a 'traditional defender'. A striker-oriented Great Weapon Fighter might be a better match, or a Ardent Vow Paladin, or an aggressive Tempest fighter.

 

[sfedi]

As a DM, I'm almost always ignoring defenders, going straight for the squishies (Strikers and Leaders for the most part).

As people already said, these are the factors that make the enemies worth ignoring the defender:
- very high defender AC
- high damage/conditions for ignoring defender's mark/challenge/aegis/etc.
- exposed squishies

Party dynamics are *very* important to a defender efficiency.
Also, some Leaders,specially the tactical warlord, can boost teh efficiency of the defender.

Also, note that whether the enemy ignore you or not is not much of an issue, the issue is that you either lock them down, or they pay the price of ignoring you.

You fail as a Defender when the enemy attack your softer party memebers almost with no penalty, or with just a -2 to hit.

 

[KarinsDad]

This. Some people fall in love with being unhittable. Dependent on a couple of other factors, a defender that has an AC 3+ above most of the characters in their party doesn't know what the heck they're doing.

This is a common fallacy.

Defenders should have the best AC they can get. They should then take powers like Come and Get It, and Feats like Daunting Challenge, and Mark as many foes as possible, and try to keep as many foes attacking them as possible.

The foe should not know the AC of any PC. If they do, then the DM is metagaming. A PC in Hide can have an AC as good as a PC in Plate. That's the physics of the game world. Throw an additional 2 or 3 to defense due to being marked and most foes should not automatically ignore the Fighter.

The foe should only know that they are marked and at a disadvantage to hit anyone else.

Course, if the DM plays monster decision making based on the actual ACs of the players and calculates that a player with AC 24 plus 2 for the mark is easier to hit than the Fighter in AC 27 and then ignores the Fighter, than I can understand the players rational of keeping the Fighter's AC lower in order to encourage the DM to metagame and attack the Fighter instead. But, a good DM shouldn't be playing the numbers like this.