Mearls on Controller design and At-Will balance

[keterys]

Things like
Exclude 1 or more targets from your area/close attacks
Targets take a -1/-2/-3 penalty to saves against your attacks
Auras that slow or weaken enemies
Ability to sustain zones/conjurations more easily

Having powers that exert more control only if you're a wizard (in the same way that a striker power and a non-striker power often deal the same damage, but the striker gets extra dice of damage - this helps with multiclassing), for instance turning slow to immobilize. This would be particularly interesting to do with implement mastery.

 

[Nail]

Going further:

Brainstorming a class feature for a wizard that fills the "controller" role:

• Wizard may swap damage for slides in his powers,
• Wizard may swap damage for slow or immobilized conditions,
• Ranged Bursts gain +1 Atk if no ally is adjacent to burst,
• Wizard may swap out his Daily power (minor action) if he "uses" his spellbook,
• Class Feature Power: a minor action ranged power (encounter) that slides enemies +1/2 Int squares,
• Class Feature Power: a minor action close burst 5 power (encounter) that switches two adjacent allies (or self),
• Class Feature Power: a minor action ranged power that creates difficult terrain in up to +Int squares,
• etc

This ain't hard.

 

[LostSoul]

Playtest these changes:

1) Ray of Frost. Targets one or TWO creatures in range. (choose targets near the rogue if you got one it since a slowed creature grants combat advantage and therefore sneak attack from rogue)

2) Cloud of Daggers. Sustain Minor. (Allowing wizards to keep this single square as an obstacle without re-casting is a good thing. It wold be possible to have 3 up at the same time at the expense of other actions)

3) Magic Missile. Add push 1, Push 2 at paragon, push 3 at epic.

Those seem like really good changes at first glance! I like.

How about:

I like this one too. It's cool.

 

[eprieur]

I thought that reason was covered by the designer saying they were erring on the side of damage. I mean, if you have to ask why in a thread that's started by the answer as to why...

I'm just saying, Arcane Power will probably either fix that, or solidify wizards as the damage arcane controller, while putting sorcerers as the control controller, neither of which is a bad solution.

But then what 'control' is can't be as easily disected into class features as Striker, Leader, and Defender can. Not to mention, Barbarians are -very- capable strikers and they don't have a 'Striker Bonus Damage' feature either. Controller just happens to be a concept that isn't easily encapsulated into class features; That's not a bad thing or a flaw with the implementation, but just a challenge inherent in the role itself. But that doesn't make the -role- bad, but merely means that design has to take that into account.

Barbarians "striker" bonus is kinda built in Howling Strike and the rage mechanism but it's pretty much there. The concept is essentially you deal weapon damage + stats + 1d6.

As for what would define a controller. Nothing really prevent some kind of unified mechanic to work for controllers also even though I tend to agree that it could be "harder" to do then with strikers and healers and marks.

But just something like 2-3 times per encounter the hability to dish out a stun, or an immobilized, or something else would probably be enough to "define" controllers a lot more then how they are currently defined.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Solution, make the base damage for the attack 1d6 with no modifier addition. But add "Special: If you target one creature with this attack, then it deals Int modifier extra damage."

So you can target 2 creatures to deal 1d6 damage and slow them both, or you can target one to deal 1d6 + Int modifier damage and slow that one.

Another idea - make it target two targets but without any effect and add "Special: If you target only one creature with this attack, then the target is slowed."

Instead of increasing its raw power, you add a lot of versatility to it. Cripple one or blast two. It's also a nice counter point to scorching burst - fire kills concentrated minions, ice pinpoints two precisely.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

I disagree.

A "Controller" was supposed to control the battlefield --> and yet the Fighter class features fill this function better. How simple would it be to give the Wizard a class feature that gave battlefield control? Currently, it's not there.

Currently, the Wizard class freature says "Toolbox". Cantrips (and - as you rightly point out - the spellbook for daily powers) scream "utility", not "battlefield control"!

I don't really agree with that. The Fighter exercises "control" only in a limited definition of it. You can just as easily call this "stickiness" or "defending".

As a Fighter, I can't make a guy squares away from me move towards me (as in "forced movement", not just getting his attention) or slow down a group of enemies. Most of my powers deal with locking down or manipulating one target at a time, and then sometimes getting the ability to attack everyone in a burst 1.

The Wizard, with the appropriate powers, can move multiple opponents across the battlefield, slow people at-will or in groups, hand out many status effects, throw powers out with things like burst 3 radii and create hampering terrain in any number of ways.

In short, Marking =/= Wall of Fire when it comes to control.

 

[Sir Brennen]

I think part of the problem is there's still a lot of mental baggage surrounding what defines a wizard from previous editions. Magic Missile and Fireball are still signature spells for the class, but don't necessarily lend themselves to the 4E Wizard's new role of controller. Looking through the power list it seems to me that more focus was given to simply converting a lot of the core Wizard spells of previous editions, and the actual controller concept was squeezed in where it could be.

Also, something that's been a bit overlooked in this thread is the fact that there are two Wizard builds in the PHB - a Control Wizard and a War Wizard.

The War Wizard is defined as the damage guy, much more of an old school blaster. So perhaps we don't need to redo the at wills like Scorching Ray or Magic Missile, as they support this build just fine.

There just seems to be need for more powers which support the Control build, on par with the new Invoker abilities we've seen.

Also, a quick glance through the Wizard's powers, I don't see any which gain a benefit for selecting one build over the other, unlike some other classes. Perhaps making the builds based on a class feature (like Rogue Tactics. Of course, then we'd have to give a name to this feature. Something, like... I dunno... "schools". ). Then add a slight damage kicker to certain spells for the War Wizard build, while push/pull or ongoing conditions kickers could be added to some for the Controller build.

Heck, you could even just have War Wizards add a flat +1 damage to damage spells and Control Wizards get a +1 push on damage spells.

This way, you could have the Wizard with a Controller role, and secondaries of either Striker or Defender depending on build/power selection.

 

[DracoSuave]

Agreed with Doc Proc. A fighter can 'control' in that he forces enemies to stay near him, and controls the area in his immediate vacinity. The wizard does that as well, but is not limited to the square beside him. He can do a lot more to lock down monsters than a fighter.

Sure, they both have powers that knock a guy prone, but knocking an adjacent enemy prone is a totally different thing than knocking an enemy across the battlefield prone. One keeps the monster attacking the closest foe, the other keeps the monster from attacking at all.

 

[eprieur]

Agreed with Doc Proc. A fighter can 'control' in that he forces enemies to stay near him, and controls the area in his immediate vacinity. The wizard does that as well, but is not limited to the square beside him. He can do a lot more to lock down monsters than a fighter.

Sure, they both have powers that knock a guy prone, but knocking an adjacent enemy prone is a totally different thing than knocking an enemy across the battlefield prone. One keeps the monster attacking the closest foe, the other keeps the monster from attacking at all.

As a war wizard their at-will do really bad damage though. They don't have enough feats they can take compared to other classes and they do less then half of the damage strikers do unless they manage to get 2-3 targets. Not exactly great dpr material.

 

[DracoSuave]

2d4 isn't that far off from 1d10. And while they can't add that single point here and there from feats, they CAN add it in from items and such.

And 1d6+int is good enough when multi targets DO apply. War wizards take Cloud of Daggers and Scorching Burst, thus giving them single and multi-target capability in their at-wills. Let's face it, Cloud of Daggers is a as damaging a power as Sly Flourish.