D&D 4E Is Multi-Attacking Really Control? A different Fireball

[Garthanos]

The more and more I look back at 4E, I feel like "artillery" would have been a better role than controller.

So is artillery just ranged striker AND multi-striker.

 

[Garthanos]

Mechanically if a pure control action only prevented two enemies from effectively acting once you have accelerated the fight if you only prevent one its kind of a stand off. Presumably you need to affect more minions than that - This reminds me of why sleep was based on hit dice, but I make minions affected by sleep after a single roll (and permanently comatose) instead of taking multi-roll. The wicked witch was scary to regular people.

 

[Garthanos]

Attacks with more than 2 enemies affected by melee characters seem rather rarish (with affecting three tied to using ones minor action or dailies and the like). The sword mage even though a defender immediately gets a multi-attack melee at-will as does the striker the monk who has 2 and I am not totally sure why other than the oddity of the special move action to an attack. (grumbles about martial artist being not considered martial and remains grumbling) , That the berserk doesn't have one is downright silly. I will be fixing that in my Martial Power III.

 

[Garthanos]

The fire ball might flavorfully have a nasty guano smell to it as well as the sulfur.

 

[Garthanos]

Lightning bolt, Wizard Attack 7

Brilliant strokes of blue-white lightning erupts from your outstretched hand and bounds from enemy to enemy

Encounter ✦ Arcane, Evocation, Implement, Lightning

Standard Action

Ranged 10

Target: 1, 2 or 3 creatures (1 attack per creature)

Attack: Intelligence vs. Reflex Hit: 2d6 + Intelligence modifier lightning damage, target is dazed till the end of next turn.

Secondary Attack: Intelligence vs. Reflex Hit: 1d6 + Intelligence modifier lightning damage, target may not make opportunity attacks till the end of next turn.

Final Attack: Intelligence vs. Reflex Hit: 1d6 + Intelligence modifier lightning damage, target may not make opportunity actions till the end of next turn.

The original 4e Lightning bolt had no damage on a miss and the reduced damage above I added in the stun effect for the first target only and the "dazzling" which prevents opportunity action.

Does it seem to be too much?

 

[Tony Vargas]

One of the things I wanted to see in a 5e was a refinement of the Wizards tactical role as a controller...
It really really looks like that isn't happening.

A lot of the Controller role was just a rationalization to give the wizard more/better powers than other classes, so that it retained /some/ fraction of the look/feel/versatility it had when LFQW was in full force.

5e has returned to LFQW, the wizard's powers are back to being broader than any 4e-style role could encompass.

I know if enemies know you have big area effects and they spread out or even 1e fashion if the spell is so ubiquitous and ally unfriendly that they know to close quickly so your wizard will be reluctant to use it as it would harm his allies there is sort of nebulous second hand control.

Yeah, I think it's legitimately a form of control, or, at least, something that's been bundled into a controller role that'd still have enough going on without it.

AEs:

• Efficiently reduce minions, while single target options are often 'wasted' against them.
• Deal full (even extra) damage vs Swarms, while melee/range damage is reduced.
• Attack invisible or concealed foes at no penalty, and allow you to make broader guesses about where hidden foes may be.
• Interdict areas of the battlefield. This is the second-hand control you're talking about. If an AE targets all creatures, there are places you can target it without catching your allies, this shapes the battlefield and encourages enemies to engage your allies
• Limit enemy tactics that require closely supporting eachother. AEs that target enemies can even punish flanking by centering them on an ally being mobbed.

I could see breaking out the AE thing to a different, striker-like "Blaster" role, while focusing controllers on imposing conditions.

But without a lot of assumptions about spells gameworld and monster tactics etc. that fireball kind of isnt control...

Now a fireball that pushed enemies away from its center point (or where those who succeed in the saving throw are moved away to represent their own efforts)

I do like the idea of a push and/or knocked prone on a miss to represent moving/diving for cover.

I think Lightning needs to be made more controllerish tool.. Delivering a payload of stunning seems appropriate

I think there's lightning powers that blind, daze, stun or the like.

I've noticed that cold powers tend to slow, restrain, or weaken; fire to do ongoing damage (meh); necrotic to weaken, immobilize, or do ongoing; psychic to daze, or stun, etc...

There's a few little threads of consistency snaking through the wizard's spell list.

The original 4e Lightning bolt had no damage on a miss and the reduced damage above I added in the stun effect for the first target only and the "dazzling" which prevents opportunity action.

Does it seem to be too much?

Yes, the stun, and anything at all on a miss with an Encounter, is too much. The Dazzling is good, though. Actually, I could see a primary & secondary attack that do damage. And then a larger AE attack that just dazzles.

 

[Garthanos]

Yes, the stun, and anything at all on a miss with an Encounter, is too much.

Oh Wow yes I agree... damn bloody essentials

 

[Xeviat]

So is artillery just ranged striker AND multi-striker.

I think so. A melee defender is really just a melee controller who uses their own AC and HP as one of their tools of control. A rogue could conceivably do control through hamstring and other status effects. These effects are baked into powers, there's no good way to build it without giving "better" powers to controllers (as Tony talks about).

 

[Garthanos]

I think so. A melee defender is really just a melee controller who uses their own AC and HP as one of their tools of control. A rogue could conceivably do control through hamstring and other status effects. These effects are baked into powers, there's no good way to build it without giving "better" powers to controllers (as Tony talks about).

Status effects could have a basic form ... which is limited then have a feature which if you take it extends that.

For instance that hamstring might last 1 more round if your rogue is the brutal manipulator build or whatever.

 

[Tony Vargas]

These effects are baked into powers, there's no good way to build it without giving "better" powers to controllers (as Tony talks about).

Oh, I think there could be, especially if Blaster were broken out from Controller, leaving controllers all about conditions.

For instance, implement mastery could have added or upgraded condition riders on powers, using obvious upgrade paths like Slowed>Immobilized>Restrained or Dazed>Stunned>Dominated. Or a "rune of power" could add a specific condition to powers based on keywords (Your encounter powers with the Necrotic Keyword Weaken for a round, Dailies do so Save Ends).

A generic Blaster feature could be into increase the size of Bursts by 1 and Blasts by 2.


I've thought about that before in the context of consolidating powers by Source instead of class.