How do you RP marking?

[Doctor Proctor]

Because you're letting the other guy take over.

Pretty much. For guys so concerned with fluff, I'm surprised you're treating this like it's taking place in a vacuum. The players at the table should both be talking to each other to determine who's gonna mark the guy if they're both engaged. Overriding the mark is merely the mechanical way of showing one player (and by extension his character) saying "No, I got this guy..." and taking over.

If your players are just constantly overriding each other marks willy-nilly without ever talking to each other, then there are larger problems than "what's the fluff behind our Defender's complete lack of communication?"

 

[ExploderWizard]

Pretty much. For guys so concerned with fluff, I'm surprised you're treating this like it's taking place in a vacuum. The players at the table should both be talking to each other to determine who's gonna mark the guy if they're both engaged. Overriding the mark is merely the mechanical way of showing one player (and by extension his character) saying "No, I got this guy..." and taking over.

If your players are just constantly overriding each other marks willy-nilly without ever talking to each other, then there are larger problems than "what's the fluff behind our Defender's complete lack of communication?"

Most certainly. It means some noob wasn't in vent when the fight was explained so the OT keeps taunting the boss away from the MT instead of picking up the adds. We have all been there.

 

[ourchair]

No offense to the guys who mentioned aggro, but as someone who NEVER played in any MMORPGs EVER, mention of aggro doesn't really work as a convenient shorthand to understand the mechanics and philosophy of the mark. (Besides, I think I understand it well enough).

I still try to read posts and articles that attempt to link aggro and marking together, but by and large, the intent of most people discussing such a link is to 'demystify' marking and it that sense it doesn't work for me.

Now, I don't get the problem here.

Is your DM applying the -2 attack penalty AND you get a free attack. If so, doesn't this more than make up for the monster attacking a squishy? If it doesn't make up for hit, you don't hit enough, do enough damage or haven't got enough effects on your attack.

No. Every player in the table remembers the -2 penalty. (If you're squishy, you'd do best to remember if an attacking monster is marked!) My problem isn't that the mechanics aren't enforced or that we're not benefiting from marks. My problem is that an artificer near death and a bloodied striker reflect poorly on my function as a defender, and I'm pretty sure it's not MY fault since I'm playing the role to the hilt. (I'm the only player - DM included - not carrying any 3.5e baggage with him, if that explains anything.)

If you are a shield using fighter you can take the shield-push ability that can possibly push the monster away from your squishy, wasting the attack for the monster.

That's awesome. What are the prereqs for that. If my Warforged Earthstrength Warden qualifies then I'm ditching my attempts to develop a reach build.

 

[ExploderWizard]

No. Every player in the table remembers the -2 penalty. (If you're squishy, you'd do best to remember if an attacking monster is marked!) My problem isn't that the mechanics aren't enforced or that we're not benefiting from marks. My problem is that an artificer near death and a bloodied striker reflect poorly on my function as a defender, and I'm pretty sure it's not MY fault since I'm playing the role to the hilt. (I'm the only player - DM included - not carrying any 3.5e baggage with him, if that explains anything.)

If all of the mechanical effects are in play and not being glossed over or forgotten then your defender is doing his job. Unlike a pure aggro mechanism, marking does not in any way compel a given opponent to attack the defender. The monsters may still go after other party members that they feel are a bigger threat but there are penalties and consequences for doing so.

Since the game features a battle effectiveness meter (bloodied) that is broadcast to and perceived by all combatants it often makes sense for a foe to quickly take out softer high damage dealing targets instead of dying while pounding on the tough turtle. Fewer foes beating on you is a win/win situation.

The DM here is most likely trying to inflict as much damage as possible with the doomed monsters. Striking at a clothy even with a -2 penalty is probably easier to get a solid hit against than your defender. The extra attack you get might help finish it off faster but not fast enough to make a difference to severely impact the monster's number of available actions before it dies.

If marking is to be more effective as a deterrent to attacking another target then the effects need to have more power to deny actions against other targets rather than inflict damage and penalties. If you mark a target and it decides to ignore you and your combat challenge attack actually stopped the attack against your companion if you hit then more monsters would be beating down doors and getting in line to take a swing at you.

4E practically designed monsters around the action economy as disposable fodder. Marking should have been designed to take advantage of this.

 

[UltimaGabe]

My problem isn't that the mechanics aren't enforced or that we're not benefiting from marks. My problem is that an artificer near death and a bloodied striker reflect poorly on my function as a defender, and I'm pretty sure it's not MY fault since I'm playing the role to the hilt.

Plain and simple- the game is working as intended. It's not your fault (necessarily), it's not your DM's fault (necessarily), it's not the other players' fault (necessarily). If the DM is having the monsters attack squishies and your penalties & attacks aren't enough to deter that, well, that's just how the game works. Sure, some things could be different- you could switch to a different class to make better use of your marks (such as a Fighter), your DM could try to be less aggressive, and your allies could try to be more defensive and use more ranged attacks. But none of those are necessary, and it doesn't sound like anything is wrong with your playstyle. Sometimes strikers don't deal much damage, sometimes leaders don't turn the tide of battle, and sometimes defenders don't take all the hits. If everything happened exactly as it was supposed to every time, this wouldn't really be a game, would it?

That's awesome. What are the prereqs for that. If my Warforged Earthstrength Warden qualifies then I'm ditching my attempts to develop a reach build.

I'm afraid not. It's a Fighter-only feat, as is triggers off the Fighter's Combat Challenge.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

No. Every player in the table remembers the -2 penalty. (If you're squishy, you'd do best to remember if an attacking monster is marked!) My problem isn't that the mechanics aren't enforced or that we're not benefiting from marks. My problem is that an artificer near death and a bloodied striker reflect poorly on my function as a defender, and I'm pretty sure it's not MY fault since I'm playing the role to the hilt. (I'm the only player - DM included - not carrying any 3.5e baggage with him, if that explains anything.)

That's awesome. What are the prereqs for that. If my Warforged Earthstrength Warden qualifies then I'm ditching my attempts to develop a reach build.

As another poster pointed out, shield push is a Fighter Feat that keys off the Combat Challenge feature, which you don't have. However, as a Warden there are several things you can do to help your allies, and making a reach build probably isn't one of them. Using reach weapons is usually something more offensive in nature, or something relying on Polearm Momentum type tricks, which probably won't save your buddies.

If I were you, I would probably drop the reach weapon and switch to an Axe or Hammer. Preferably a big one with high damage, like a Waraxe. A two-hander would work too (like an Execution Axe), as it would lower your defense and make you a more attractive target, but don't Warforged get a penalty for two-handed weapons?

Regardless of what weapon you use though, pay attention to what power you're using for your attacks on enemies violating your mark. Warden's Fury is an Immediate Interrupt, and thus it can invalidate an attack if you kill the enemy with it. This works particularly well if your DM is sending weakened monsters at the back row for a last ditch attempt to get in some damage, since now your bigger and badder will have a decent chance of killing them. Warden's Grasp, on the other hand, is an Immediate Reaction power, which means it goes off after the attack. It also does no damage, so it's not really a good disincentive to get the DM to stop attacking. What Warden's Grasp is good for is for when an enemy is out of range of Warden's Fury, or when you want to allow an ally a chance to escape. The slide 1 means that you can pull the enemy away from your ally so that they're no longer adjacent, which means now your ally can move away at full speed with no fear of taking an OA. The enemy you hit with it is also slowed and can't shift, which pretty much means he can't catch up to your ally now if they move their full move distance away.

Powers like Hungry Earth and Form of Winter's Herald are also great to bring with you. While they're not as damaging as some of the other powers, they create difficult terrain for your enemies (and the attack on Winter's Herald grants an immobilize effect). This will slow them down when they're trying to get past you into the back row, thus giving your allies time to pile on some ranged damage. Additionally, if the DM realizes that there's no way he'll reach the back row this turn, he might start attacking you.

Speak to your allies also, as they can try and take powers that grant slow and immobilize effects as well. If you had a Wizard, for example, he could take Ray of Frost. While generally a sub-par At-Will, it slows enemies, which in the type of game you're in is much more valuable. This way, you can create a sort of running battle where your party is constantly in a controlled retreat to keep their distance from the monsters.

Lastly, pick up the feat Sudden Roots (enemies hit by your OA are slowed) and look for ways to maximize your OA's. The level 3 Encounter power Burst of Earth's Fury is great for this. I know you might think "Oh, they can't shift, big whoop", but if they can't shift, they have to move (or charge, which is still partially a full move action), and that means that they provoke OA's. While you can't only do one Immediate reaction per turn, you can do one OA per enemy's turn. So, if you hit 3 enemies with that power, and all three decide to move away on their turns, then you get 3 OA's. Each OA that hits slows the enemies, buying your party more time.

There's also some other feats that will help you to hit those OA's, as well as avoid OA's when you're trying to get past enemies in order to get to the back row. And remember, using an At-Will like the one that grants you a +1 to AC will stack with the feat that grants +2 to OA's, which will give you a total of +3 to AC when an enemy tries to OA you.

I'm sure that you can figure out a few other nasty tricks to pull on your DM in order to get him to pay attention to where he needs to. Killing enemies or just plain denying them their moves/actions when he ignores you will tend to have that effect.

Edit: I wanted to add a couple other suggestions, so I dumped them into an sblock below.

[sblock]Using a +3 proficiency weapon might help, since you'll actually connect with more of those OA's and Warden attacks reacting to your mark being violated.

Second, you might want to look into MCing Fighter for some feats and Paragon Paths that could help your issue, especially if you want to keep a shield. Phalanx Warrior (+1 AC to allies adjacent to you with shield) is a great feat to spread some protection around, while Stalwart Guard (level 10 daily utility stance to add +2 to AC and Ref for allies when using a shield) is a great power to use when facing a lot of hard hitting enemies.

And don't underestimate Paragon Paths like Knight Protector and Shield Adept (found in Martial Power). Knight Protector has a lot of ways to give you extra options for your mark, and only the level 16 feature keys off the actual Combat Challenge feature (it also keys off OA's though, so you can still use it). The encounter and daily powers for that PP are also very nasty when used against enemies violating your marks, and might help to keep the attention on you.

As for Shield Adept, while it might not seem like a strong PP, it does allow for some interesting tactics. Namely, it will allow you to bunch up the party more and rely on effects that require people to be adjacent (things like Phalanx Warrior, or having everyone sit next to the Shaman's pet to gain bonuses, beneficial zones, etc..) due to the ability to grant cover to ranged and area attacks. Plus, it gives you three ways to get back at enemies who are attacking allies, one of which is an actual stun power that you can use when an enemy shifts away, which is normally something that Wardens can't punish.[/sblock]

 

[Thatwackyned]

Lastly, pick up the feat Sudden Roots (enemies hit by your OA are slowed) and look for ways to maximize your OA's. The level 3 Encounter power Burst of Earth's Fury is great for this. I know you might think "Oh, they can't shift, big whoop", but if they can't shift, they have to move (or charge, which is still partially a full move action), and that means that they provoke OA's. While you can't only do one Immediate reaction per turn, you can do one OA per enemy's turn. So, if you hit 3 enemies with that power, and all three decide to move away on their turns, then you get 3 OA's. Each OA that hits slows the enemies, buying your party more time.

There's also some other feats that will help you to hit those OA's, as well as avoid OA's when you're trying to get past enemies in order to get to the back row. And remember, using an At-Will like the one that grants you a +1 to AC will stack with the feat that grants +2 to OA's, which will give you a total of +3 to AC when an enemy tries to OA you.

Wait. Let me see if I understand you. If they can't shift, so need to move, they provoke OA's. But what if they just circle you, move around you, but not leave your side? Do they provoke OA's then?

 

[Zaran]

Wait. Let me see if I understand you. If they can't shift, so need to move, they provoke OA's. But what if they just circle you, move around you, but not leave your side? Do they provoke OA's then?

You provoke an OA when you Move out of a threatened square no matter the direction you go. A foe threatens any square adjacent to them.

 

[KarinsDad]

Personally, I think they should not have added the rule that mark #2 overrides mark #1.

I understand why they did it, so that two defenders couldn't gang up on someone and constantly get extra damage in.

But to me, marking a foe means that foe is being harassed by that defender. There should be no concept of "the other defender harasses him more because he does it later".

So, I think the rule should be that both defenders mark the foe, the foe attacks one defender, he gets a -2 for the other defender and the other defender gets a chance at free damage. If the foe is marked by two defenders and he attacks a third PC, then the foe is still only at -2 (it doesn't stack), but both defenders get the mark consequence for that foe.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

You provoke an OA when you Move out of a threatened square no matter the direction you go. A foe threatens any square adjacent to them.

Exactly. That's why this would work so well for a Warden with a DM that likes to ignore marks. Wardens don't punish shifts anyway, unlike Fighters, but eliminating them entirely forces the enemy to stay put or suffer an OA...and consequently, be slowed on a hit.

Personally, I think they should not have added the rule that mark #2 overrides mark #1.

I understand why they did it, so that two defenders couldn't gang up on someone and constantly get extra damage in.

But to me, marking a foe means that foe is being harassed by that defender. There should be no concept of "the other defender harasses him more because he does it later".

So, I think the rule should be that both defenders mark the foe, the foe attacks one defender, he gets a -2 for the other defender and the other defender gets a chance at free damage. If the foe is marked by two defenders and he attacks a third PC, then the foe is still only at -2 (it doesn't stack), but both defenders get the mark consequence for that foe.

The problem with that though is that there's simply no good choice. Additionally, it's ripe for abuse...I mean, why stop at two Defenders? Why not get 5? All of them Pally's too, that way the damage is automatic, doesn't cost an action and they can't miss the target!

See the issue? Against a single target they might dishing out 4 instances of DC damage if it makes an attack, which will add up quick (especially assuming high CHA builds and feats to optimize this damage). With the new rules in Divine Power it's now even easier to do this to multiple opponents at a time by using your minor to DC and then using your attack to Divine Sanction one or more enemies.

Plus, in the case of Fighters, who are Martial PC's and therefore don't rely on any sort of magical effect for these marks and their resulting punishments, you have to explain how 5 PC's are able to harry and distract an opponent with equal effectiveness.

The system just works a lot better as is, with only Defender marking an opponent at a time. Yes, there can occasionally be some fluff issues between things like Combat Challenge and Divine Challenge, but on the whole I'd rather have that whole parties of Defenders arguing over which of the 4 Immediate Interrupt attacks went first when the monster violated 4 marks at once. Plus, the actual mechanic can be resolved by something infinitely simpler, which is party communication. "You mind if I mark this guy instead?" makes mark overrides easier to explain, and just plain tends to work better.