Hybrid classes - lazy design?

[hamishspence]

Druid hybrid roles

Given that we have been told the elemental theme has been way downplayed (and the scary companions theme) that leaves shapeshifting and weather.
I can see how shapeshifting could give a mix of options (hard hitting, damage taking bear, swift moving, striking wolf) but will weather lead to a hybrid role? At the moment I can see a controller schtick (winds pushing enemies back, ice making ground slippery, hail doing mild area damage) but not any other role. Should the two main forms of the druid class be shifter and weatherwitch? and if so, what will give the weatherwitch some punch, and something else to do?

 

[Voss]

I'd much rather they pick a role a stick with it. Even if the class can't do both roles simultaneously, it is better than a class stuck with one.

If they want to make a shapeshifter defender, than they should do that. And just that.
Like the rest of the classes there can be some useful and intersting powers, but they shouldn't be 'respecing' between tanking, blasting and healing.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I don't know about you but I will think twice before allowing a hybrid into my game. I hope designers will have the determination to steer clear of this potentially game breaking design choice.

I think it depends upon how they do 'hybrids'

If a druid character is both a defender and a controller, then I think it is a mistake.

However, if the druid has a couple of sub-class options (as per other classes we have seen)

Druid
- shifter variant (defender)
- forestmaster variant (controller)

Then I wouldn't have a problem with it - as any given PC is either a defender or a controller in his core concept, and the fact that the druid class can enable the two different role concepts isn't a problem.

I'm hoping that is the way that they've handled the druid, as it makes most sense to me that way.

edit - just noticed that Darth Cyric had basically the same idea

Cheers

 

[pawsplay]

My view: "roles" are a laudable goal in that they make sure the character is good at something and prop the rest of the party up. That in no way means a hybrid class has to stick with the big four. I think it's okay to blend roles, so long as the druid, by design, does something valuable and leaves few holes.

The problem with the 3e bard was not that it was a hybrid, but that it was balanced as though it would be using all its powers at once, but in actuality could only employ a limited set at a time. For instance, if you have longsword proficiency, mirror image, and a song that inspires confidence, one of those is just not going to get used before round 3 or 4 at the earliest. CoDzilla is the opposite; they are pretty good fighters, good casters, and they heal. Net result: they destroy Tokyo.

 

[Cadfan]

There's a couple of good ways a hybrid could work.

1. You can be A, or B, but a particular character cannot be A and B. Hypothetical example- a druid who can wildshape into a bear (defender) and another druid who can wildshape into a puma (striker), but neither druid can wildshape into both a bear and a puma.

2. You do a pinch of stuff from another role, without meaningfully diluting your real role. Hypothetical example- a wizard controller casts a spell that throws 10 guys across a room. A fighter with a dash of controller uses his strength to throw one guy across a room.

3. You have the full powers of another role, but only for limited use abilities. Hypothetical example- a Hexblade who fights like a defender with his at-will abilities, but who has per encounter curses that match the power of a controller's debuffs.

4. You have the full powers of a different role, but only for one thing that role does. Hypothetical example- a SpellThief who's magical buffs are just as powerful as a wizard's, but who hasn't got any nonbuff spells.

I'd avoid flat out mixing roles completely. Because then you fall into the old trap of having to weaken each role to justify the diversity of ability, and end up with a character who sucks at everything.

 

[Baka no Hentai]

The problem that I have with any class that is designed to be less apt at their particular role with a trade-off of versatility is that for the most part, enemy npcs are designed around the most effective party members. If a low defense monster would get absolutely destroyed by the barbarian and the figher in the group, then you raise the defense of the monster.

Unfortunately this leaves the hybrids out in the cold... the monk is a great example. On paper they look great, in practice they cant hit anything because the monsters they are going up against simply arent designed with them in mind.

And of course as others have mentioned, if you over-correct for this in the design process you end up with a class that is as good or better at multiple roles than the classes designed for a single role.

The only valid solution (IMO) then is to make a hybrid class that can do one role, or another role effectively, but they have to choose between them. A Druid that specializes in nature spells would be able to contend with Wizards for Controller viability, but would not perform very well if they decide to go Striker mode and shift to a wolf.

 

[SmilingPiePlate]

That's why the idea of hybrids sacrificing effectiveness for versatility doesn't work out.

The idea that a hybrid class can be, say, a defender or a striker, but in exchange is not as good at either job as a dedicated defender or striker, will lead to them not having a place in the party. If they can't defend like a fighter, they aren't going to be wanted as defenders, and if they're a poor substitute for a rogue, people will prefer playing rogues. Even being able to switch roles mid-combat doesn't make up for being bad at both compared to pure classes.

The way you need to do it is as Baka no Hentai said. The "hybrid" aspect of the class needs to be reflected in class features you can take. If the druid is meant to be a defender/striker for example, they need to be made to choose which way they want to go through feats, class features, and the like. They should never, ever be able to change roles mid-combat.

This is one case where WoW offers a very, very good example (*gasp*). Previous to patch 2.0 or so, most of the "hybrid" classes in WoW were wanted only as healers. Druids had a tanking and physical damage talent tree and a spellcasting damage tree, paladins could build their talents around being able to heal, tank, or do damage, but the problem was that Blizzard had approached theese classes with the logic 3e jack of all trades were built around. In exchange for being able to fill any role in the game, they weren't as good as "pure" tanks or damage dealers. And, of course, nobody wanted paladins or druids that did damage or tanked, because other classes did those jobs much better.

Since then, Blizzard has changed their attitude, and (for example) tanking paladins and druids are equal to tanking warriors. To the point that paladins and druids have successfully tanked every high end raid boss in the game with a couple exceptions; some bosses have abilities that make a particular class impractical as a tank for it. They're all about equally good, with small advantages in specific situations.

Effectiveness being an acceptable trade off for flexibility is a fallacy, in other words. If a class is meant to be able to do a job, it must do that job as well as other classes that do it. And the choice of role to fill must be fairly definitive and changing it needs to be non-trivial or difficult. A druid being able to retrain their feats, unlearn powers, etc and switch roles would be alright, since they give up the old role to fill the new one. Being able to switch roles from fight to fight, or mid-combat, would be too strong.

 

[Flynn]

I think my greatest issue with the existence of Hybrid Classes is simply that it invalidates the Roles paradigm that apparently is supposed to be a meta-rule for 4E game design. It's hard to lend credence to a design philosophy based on the concept of roles when there will be classes that violate that concept. It begs the question "why have roles at all?"

However, once that issue is put aside, the next one becomes a matter of balance. It would probably be difficult to balance such classes, simply because you never know if you are making the hybrid too strong in one area (or both), or if you are making them too weak. As a player and a GM, I prefer to err in those cases on the side of weaker design, to avoid the whole "power creep" scenario, but there is a lot of evidence that suggests gamers prefer to buy products with "power creep", so long as it doesn't invalidate or overshadow their current gaming experiences.

I assume that as hybrid classes probably do not have the same level of guidelines and comparative power examples as role-based classes, this will be the first area we're likely to see power creep in the new edition.

Okay, that, or in the first splatbook after the PHB1. (Just kiddin'.)

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Ximenes088]

This is one case where WoW offers a very, very good example (*gasp*). Previous to patch 2.0 or so, most of the "hybrid" classes in WoW were wanted only as healers.

I find that there's a very substantial difference between WoW hybrids and tabletop hybrids. Namely, in WoW, the party leader decides what classes everyone else in the group might bring. If he decides that there will be no shammies, there will be no shammies. In tabletop, the players decide what classes to bring. Barring some DM quirk, there's never a situation of some player being forced to drop a hybrid PC they want to play because their healing coefficient is suboptimal. Hybrids can afford to be mechanically inferior in a way that they can't when there are 450 other people looking for a group. So long as they can colorably fill a party need, there's no compelling issue of optimization.

 

[DreamChaser]

I actually agree with the idea of hybridization only so far as a primary / secondary breakdown.

Thinking about the current classes, fighter (defender), warlord (leader), ranger / rogue (striker), and wizard (controller) seem to be pretty singular. Cleric seems to be leader sub controller (leader with some controller powers through turn undead and cause fear). Warlock seems to be striker sub controller (as others have mentioned). Paladin seems to be defender sub leader (shielding and healing).

This is as far as it should go. Otherwise, you end up with archivist (too weak to do any of the things it was designed to do) or beguiler (which did most things that the illusionist and the rogue were supposed to do but did them better).

DC