Forked Thread:Secondary Ability > Cleric and Wizard Controll

[Ahglock]

I blame the lack of wizard control features. If wizards had increased range or size with their powers, the powers could be on par.

It helps a bit once they get Spell Accuracy.

Yeah, this is what I think a big issue is. Built into the basic class should have been control features that enhanced what they do. Not feats later on or a paragon path, but core abilities picked up at level 1. The implement mastery stuff a starting place for what they should of had, but unfortunately its a ending place.

Also unless one of these control features was increased damage with AoE attacks there should not be any powers from classes in other roles that do more AoE damage at the same levels as a wizard.

 

[Mongo1967]

I agree 100%. Wizards are better controllers than Clerics. I said that up above and in the previous thread.

However, Clerics sometimes get as good or better Control powers and that's the real issue, at least for me. It's fine to distinguish them from Warlords this way, but they shouldn't be stepping on the toes of the Wizards to accomplish that. All of the Cleric control powers should be second rate to the Wizard's and that's not always true (it is often true).

I guess we have different definitions of what is or is not damaging to class identity. You see every comparison as being critical, I tend to look at the classes as a whole (at least that's what I'm getting from the above quote).

My question to you is, given that [Cleric Power A] is more "controllery" than [Wizard Power X], how do you measure [Wizard Power Y] and [Wizard Power Z], for which there is no direct parallel? Is there a point at which [Y] and [Z] are powerful enough to erase the "threat" presented by [A]?

 

[KarinsDad]

I guess we have different definitions of what is or is not damaging to class identity. You see every comparison as being critical, I tend to look at the classes as a whole (at least that's what I'm getting from the above quote).

I don't think it is damaging to class identity. The game can be played fine as is.

I think that it should not be the case though. How well can Wizards heal? How well can Wizards buff? How well can Clerics do AoE damage? How well can Clerics do AoE control?

 

[bardolph]

What makes this debate problematic is that "Control" is far too important overall to give any one class a monopoly in this category. The fact that clerics have a few AoE spells that out-damage wizard AoE spells of equal level is a minor issue, when you look at the big picture.

First of all, I think WotC intentionally gave classes some overlap, so that no one class becomes mandatory in all parties. Technically, the Wizard is the only explicit "controller" class, so one would think that the Wizard is a mandatory pick for all parties, right? Well, not exactly. If other classes focus on as many Area and Close attacks as they can get their hands on, they can, as a group, cover the Wizard's "controller" role. Not nearly as well as a Wizard can, but they can manage.

I don't really see this as a problem. Bottom line is, Wizards are not dead weight. They are a very useful class, and they perform as advertised. So what if the lazer cleric can throw down a few big splashy spells? It doesn't render the Wizard obsolete. Fire Storm actually gets better when the wizard throws down Evard's Black Tentacles to hold creatures inside the fire zone, then uses Thunderwave to push people back into the slimy muck.

Wizards are all about the combos. Their effect is more subtle, but also more effective, in the long run.