Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="T. Foster" data-source="post: 4572554" data-attributes="member: 16574">I haven't played 4E, have only briefly skimmed the initial 3 core books and haven't seen anything that's come out since, so I may be completely off-base, but what turns me off about the Roles in 4E is that they all seem to be group-dependant: Defenders' job is to protect the Strikers and Controllers long enough for them to do their jobs, while Leaders help everyone do their job better. But are any of these roles self-sufficient? If a Defender doesn't have Strikers, Controllers, and Leaders backing him up will he be able to deal out sufficient damage to drop the bad guys before they eventually overwhelm his defenses? Are Strikers and Controllers too fragile to survive without Defenders to defend them and Leaders to buff them? And is a Leader able to do much of anything without anyone to lead? I want to play a character with the offensive hitting-power of a Striker but who's sturdy enough to stand in the front-line -- not for the sake of protecting others (like a Defender), but just enough that I don't need to worry about anyone defending me. Is there room for such a character (the barbarian perhaps?) or would that be considered "broken" because it doesn't fit the group-interdependancy paradigm? Am I a selfish bastard for wanting a character that can survive and thrive on his own and isn't dependant on 3 other guys?</blockquote>