Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4210512" data-attributes="member: 2067">Actually, tying up foes and mobility aren't really the exclusive purview of any role, because roles are defined by the effect you have in combat, not specifically by how you achieve that effect.Does tying up foes help you concentrate their attention on you? Does flying make you a better target? You're a defender (probably like the fighter)Does tying up foes help you to directly damage them? Does flying help you get to an enemy to hurt them? You're probably a striker (kind of like the warlock).Does tying up foes help you to dictate what actions they can take? Does flying make your targets unable to perform their most powerful manuevers? You're probably a controller (walls of vines and the like).Does tying up foes help you enhance what your allies can do to them? Does flying help inspire your party to keep fighting? You're probably a leader.This isn't accurate. I'm sure there are MANY archetypes that can perform the role of a controller. I can probably think of a half-dozen just sitting here. They just didn't conciously choose to give us a second choice like they did with the leader.I highly doubt that this is accurate, too. The game is designed around a 5-person party with the 4 roles filled. What that 5th person does doesn't enter into the equasion, unless the 4e team WANTED to repeat 3e's mistake of a "required baseline" that ended up hosing characters who didn't conform. Since 4e has a stated goal of having less accidental suck, I'm sure they wouldn't too tightly design around what roles are filled. Heck, I'm sure a party can get on okay without a controller at all, but the absence will be notable (like a cleric-less party in 3e).I thought they were getting rid of "rules mastery" elements in 4e, too? Specifically because they increase the "LOL Newb!" factor.</blockquote>

Verification