Party of 3: Striker or Controller?

[generalhenry]

AOE when you typically only face 3 targets is silly

 

[James McMurray]

Why would you typically only face 3 targets? If the GM is building encounters to challenge your party, it doesn't matter what classes you pick (within reason).

 

[generalhenry]

a three person party is balanced to fight three monster encounters.

Sure if minions get into the mix there can be more, but most the time there should be one monster per player.

 

[ChupacabraPlus]

Just throw in lots and lots of minions, to give your controller character some fun blowing stuff up.

Or if he does go with a striker, have lots of beefy enemies for him to carve big chunks out of.

The defender and leader should have fun either way.

 

[Nifft]

IMHO Striker, but either is fine. Between the Paladin and the Warlord -- if he's Strength-based -- you've got your Leadership covered.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Minigiant]

AOE when you typically only face 3 targets is silly

4E is is not necessarily set up for equal number on each side. Typically send 2 level-2 or level-3 creatures is the same XP as an equal level one while in the heroic tier. And fluff wise, certain races like goblins, orcs, and drow, use the large number of slightly underleved warriors.

 

[Nifft]

4E is is not necessarily set up for equal number on each side.

Yeah. Particularly: minions.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Starbuck_II]

Yeah. Particularly: minions.

Cheers, -- N

I even used Minion traps.

 

[Khaim]

I even used Minion traps.

...what are those, exactly?

 

[Felon]

I think I'll go with the DMG's recommendation that a striker is the easiest class to compensate for. Of course, the DM has to scale hs encounters down, and how he opts to do so plays a big part. If he cuts down on heavy-hitters, then strikers are easier to do without. If he cuts down on sheer numbers, then there's less need for control.