Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Sessadore" data-source="post: 4709632" data-attributes="member: 57255">I, personally, am getting a little tired of the viewpoint that fighters are the best defenders because they're 'sticky'. There will likely never be another defender in 4e that can punish enemies for moving away, so if that's your measuring stick, fighters will be gods among defenders forever. Fighters get to try to keep marked enemies from moving away because their mark does pretty much squat unless the enemy is adjacent to them. If you're fighting an enemy with a high AC or who can teleport frequently, fighters are horrible defenders, while most other defenders are orders of magnitude better, because their marks don't depend on being adjacent and/or hitting with an attack.Please don't take this as an attack of any sort. This probably isn't the right place for a defender debate anyway. I just needed to vent that somewhere, and this was convenient. If you disagree (speaking to anyone, not just the post I quoted), then lets agree to disagree and leave it at that. I do have a question though - what exactly is it that makes wardens less efficient at defending than fighters? Is it purely because they aren't 'sticky', or is it something else? I ask because I don't actually know what wardens get to do with their mark.</blockquote>