Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hopsong" data-source="post: 6858140" data-attributes="member: 6835006">I agree with the OP but instead of blaming randomness I would say that the 5E roles are out of balance.&nbsp; In 5E it is hard to be a Defender/&quot;Tank&quot;&nbsp; (no Combat Challenge OAs) and hard to be a Leader/&quot;Healer&quot; (Little healing except Clerics; Battle Masters pale in comparison to Warlords).&nbsp; Instead of Defenders, I enjoyed the 4E Leaders including doing it by multi-classing/hybrids.&nbsp; Clearly I'm not a power gamer, but I always felt I could perform a role without sacrificing too much.&nbsp; 5E tilts towards Strikers because:&nbsp; 1)Fighers are mostly Strikers, not Defenders; 2)Wizards are mostly Strikers, not Controllers; 3)The Leader role is divided between Cleric/Healers (Paladins somewhat) and Battle Master/Leaders (Bards somewhat); and 4)Every other class is (still) a Striker.To some extent this is intentional in that combat goes faster (winning or losing) if everyone is concentrating on dealing damage. But like many who played 4E, I miss the combat roles that included effective Defenders (Tanks who controlled the battlefield) and well-rounded Leaders (both Healers and battlefield supporters).&nbsp; A word about power gaming.&nbsp; I played with some 4E power gamers who were justifiably proud of their amazing damage-dealing combinations.&nbsp; But they only did one role well and I earned a lot of respect with a Ranger/Cleric nick-named &quot;Doc&quot; and a Shaman with a Spirit Bear that granted HP in key situations.&nbsp; It's hard to make an ineffective character in 4E if you stay within your role.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hopsong, post: 6858140, member: 6835006"] I agree with the OP but instead of blaming randomness I would say that the 5E roles are out of balance. In 5E it is hard to be a Defender/"Tank" (no Combat Challenge OAs) and hard to be a Leader/"Healer" (Little healing except Clerics; Battle Masters pale in comparison to Warlords). Instead of Defenders, I enjoyed the 4E Leaders including doing it by multi-classing/hybrids. Clearly I'm not a power gamer, but I always felt I could perform a role without sacrificing too much. 5E tilts towards Strikers because: 1)Fighers are mostly Strikers, not Defenders; 2)Wizards are mostly Strikers, not Controllers; 3)The Leader role is divided between Cleric/Healers (Paladins somewhat) and Battle Master/Leaders (Bards somewhat); and 4)Every other class is (still) a Striker. To some extent this is intentional in that combat goes faster (winning or losing) if everyone is concentrating on dealing damage. But like many who played 4E, I miss the combat roles that included effective Defenders (Tanks who controlled the battlefield) and well-rounded Leaders (both Healers and battlefield supporters). A word about power gaming. I played with some 4E power gamers who were justifiably proud of their amazing damage-dealing combinations. But they only did one role well and I earned a lot of respect with a Ranger/Cleric nick-named "Doc" and a Shaman with a Spirit Bear that granted HP in key situations. It's hard to make an ineffective character in 4E if you stay within your role. [/QUOTE]

Verification