Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5545455" data-attributes="member: 996">Nod.&nbsp; With the monsters played that way, the Knight ends up strikerish, doing more damage as monsters constantly eat OAs to move away from from him, while the Fighter ends up more controllerish, by degrading the effectiveness of their actions rather than doing much damage to them.&nbsp; (actually, since the Knight will probably be doing damage to several monsters - any he can end up next to - that's also a tad controllerish... hmmm....)That style really de-emphasizes the Defender role, though, since monsters will rarely attack the defender, himself, they'll concentrate on bringing down the squishies, and all the defender can do is try to bring them down faster with mark punishment (might as well be another striker), and/or make them a little less effective at bringing down the squishies (might as well be another controller).The point of the Defender role, the MMO 'tank, and the iconic Fighter that they're both based on is to be a frontliner who sucks up some damage for the party and is generally the tough guy.&nbsp; In the olden days, if a DM didn't go along with that, there was little to support it.&nbsp; Now, there are consequences, but they still don't keep the defender a defender, rather they make it into a striker or controller when the enemy declines to cooperate with the defender paradigm.&nbsp; Maybe at some point we will have defenders so coercive that they aren't so subject to DM style or whim.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5545455, member: 996"] Nod. With the monsters played that way, the Knight ends up strikerish, doing more damage as monsters constantly eat OAs to move away from from him, while the Fighter ends up more controllerish, by degrading the effectiveness of their actions rather than doing much damage to them. (actually, since the Knight will probably be doing damage to several monsters - any he can end up next to - that's also a tad controllerish... hmmm....) That style really de-emphasizes the Defender role, though, since monsters will rarely attack the defender, himself, they'll concentrate on bringing down the squishies, and all the defender can do is try to bring them down faster with mark punishment (might as well be another striker), and/or make them a little less effective at bringing down the squishies (might as well be another controller). The point of the Defender role, the MMO 'tank, and the iconic Fighter that they're both based on is to be a frontliner who sucks up some damage for the party and is generally the tough guy. In the olden days, if a DM didn't go along with that, there was little to support it. Now, there are consequences, but they still don't keep the defender a defender, rather they make it into a striker or controller when the enemy declines to cooperate with the defender paradigm. Maybe at some point we will have defenders so coercive that they aren't so subject to DM style or whim. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification