Role Features... Controller left out?

[burntgerbil]

What I meant was that If you look a many of the higher level fey warlock powers, they begin to literally embody the normal term of controller. Being able to mentally deny your enemy from taking actions and later on, to control them to make the actions you choose is the very definition of control.

The explanation of "Controller" in the phb differs from the general consensus of the term - I am just saying that the wizard's scope could have been a little deeper and more varied than all AOE powers - I have compared the 4e wizard and the 3.5 battlemage, and they seem strikingly similar.

 

[Bhelue]

I have 2 players in my group that play wizards, 1 war and 1 controller. And they dominate the combat in different ways. Last night we played the kobold lair in KoTSF. The war wizard took out 4 minions in the surprise round. And a few rounds later when 2 skirmishers and a wyrmpriest came throught a choke point. The other wizard dropped a freezing cloud in the middle of the narrow passage. All 3 took hits and continued to take hits on their next turn. In the mean time. The ranger proceded to take out the Wyrmpriest before it ever got an attack off. Since the cloud stays the whole encounter. One entrance was blocked leaving only 1 other entrance into the room. So the remaining players were able to handle the rest in an orderly fashion.

Wizards are very much the controlers of the battlefield. The problem is most of us are used to Wizards being the end all to combat. Always doing the most damage and having a spell for every situation. In 4e you have to forget the old notions and embrace the new functions of each class.

 

[Zurai]

Similarly, the ranged ranger is the least 'controller' of the ranger. Most ranger powers that target more than one creature are TWF powers. Neither are much good at it but the TWF has handful of burst 1 effect where he can target everyone around him.

And the ranged ranger has effects where he targets every enemy in line of sight. What's your point? Both have an equal number of multi-target powers... namely almost every multi-attack power they have. The ranged ranger is actually more likely to be able to target more than one creature with his multi-target powers, seeing as he has a 40+ square range rather than a 1 square range.

 

[keterys]

Yep, the key seems to be they're the only one who can do it at-will... but it's still a very odd choice because it means that aspect only comes up when they use their at-wills... which might well only be in the final stages of battles (especially against solos) or purely for minion cleanup...

To be clear, I'd much more expect to see wizards have features like:
Arcane Implement Mastery
Wand - Double the range of all ranged and area spells, add Dex to the damage of ranged spells with wands
Orb - Increase the size of all area spells by 1, may exclude up to Wis allies in area spells with orbs
Staff - Increase the size of all close spells by 1, gain +Con to AC against opportunity attacks with staves

Spell Focus - -1 penalty to saves against your powers, -2 at paragon, -3 at epic

Of course, balancing the class to add that would be tricky, and I'm not trying to make this a discussion about house rules.

Something I could point to and go 'Controllers have more impressive AoE effects and persistent effects due to their class features' and know that multiclassing with one gave you that kind of ability and new controllers should have that. Etc.

Not just 'Controllers are the only ones who have area and close at-will effects, making them the most adept at dealing with minions.'

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

The explanation of "Controller" in the phb differs from the general consensus of the term - I am just saying that the wizard's scope could have been a little deeper and more varied than all AOE powers - I have compared the 4e wizard and the 3.5 battlemage, and they seem strikingly similar.

Communication is hard enough if we don't switch the meaning of words...

Beside, in fantasy, I have yet to read of a character who overpowers the mind of his enemies being called a controller. Usually they are referred to as enchanters or warlocks/witches. (Let's not forget psionics, though they aren't typical outside of D&D).

---

I don't think the wizard's role can be any broader. It would infringe on upcoming classes such as the psionic.

 

[keterys]

And they dominate the combat in different ways.

This is not a discussion about the power level of wizards, but the lack of a focus on their role in their class features. While this shouldn't include their other powers, it does appear I was hasty in not including at-wills in the examination. That said, it worries me that only their at-wills define their control.

I'd rather this didn't devolve into 'wizards suck' 'no they don't', which is certainly the case in a lot of discussions.

If you were designing a new controller class and wanted it to emphasize being a controller, and you were designing its features... does the wizard give any suggestion for what is reasonable for those features? Or for what the multiclass benefit should be to let someone be a 'little controllery' in the way that quarry and sneak attack MCs let you be a little strikery, etc.

 

[Minigiant]

If by creating terrain you mean being able to create zone ; yes, they have a handful of those, more than anyone else. But you could easily reach a high level without a single one of those powers. Rigth at level 1 you could have Icy terrain and Freezing cloud that fit the bill but these powers face stiff competition from the other powers and the wizard in my campaign has no such effect at this point. So I don't see that as being a defining feature.

Simply causing conditions ; All class can do it, one in particular even more routinely than the wizard; The fey warlock causes a condition for just about all his powers, some of them being particularly wicked, even worse than what the wizard can inflict.

But causing conditions on many opponents at once tough, that's less common.

It always comes back to engaging many enemies at once. Area effect. The wizard is really unique in that respect.

The controller is the only role that heavily uses AOE, bad zones, and conditions as part of their role heavily. The other role would not load up on them for it would hurt their ability to fill the role. Defenders and especially strikers can't afford the damage loss and leaders have better things to do.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

And the ranged ranger has effects where he targets every enemy in line of sight. What's your point?

I wouldn't use plural. If you are thinking of hail of arrow, it is not everyone in line of sight but everyone in range. It is pretty cool and clearly meant for minion control, seeing as it is mostly useless for anything else. But I would say that level 27 is pretty late in the game to stake your claim as a controller.

As for my point : It was simply that wizard are far superior to ranger when it comes to engaging several enemies at once. I wonder if you have some sort of personal stake in the ranger to lash back so hard at such an obvious suggestion.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

The controller is the only role that heavily uses AOE, bad zones, and conditions as part of their role heavily.

Well yes. Stop agreeing with me.

It's mostly AoE though the rest is true. Bad zones are very cool but some wizard don't use them and inflicting conditions is great but some classes do it just as good or even better so it's not quite as defining.

So, AoE. Lots and lots of them. I remember a fight where the wizard went the whole 5 round at level 1 using only AoE.

 

[Incenjucar]

The 4E wizard suffers from the history of wizards in D&D. It's a hybrid class. You probably won't see a "pure" controller until they get to makea brand new class. I'm hoping that elementalists will be this class, because they're perfect for it.