Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9618111" data-attributes="member: 6790260">AFAICT, there isn't a clean analogy (and, it's worth noting, this was the role 4e's designers struggled the most with!), but I believe the closest match would be center defensive midfielders, while leaders would (very loosely) be center attacking midfielders. That is, CDMs are looking to deflect or mitigate enemy attacks before they even reach the defender line, disrupting enemy plays and generally making life hard for the opposing side. CAMs are looking to set up their fellow attacking players, enabling them to make the shot etc.It's also worth noting that the soccer analogy only goes so far. For example, there's two or three clear patterns of how Strikers are designed in 5e: beefy, flighty, and (if it's distinct from flighty) ranged. More or less, each subtype gets some particular means by which they can handle the heat of battle, but in different ways. Barbarian is generally a tanky son of a gun, either having tons of personal health, decent armor, or layers of THP enemies have to burn through; Avenger is an unusual example where divine protection gives them crazy good AC, making them surprisingly tanky in a &quot;dodge tank&quot; kind of way. Conversely, classes like Rogue and Monk are very much flighty, with abilities that let them easily move in and out of the line of fire. Some classes split this by build, e.g. Sorcerer: Dragon and Cosmic make you beefy, while Chaos and Storm make you flighty. Warlock and Ranger are where you see some argument for there being a third type, ranged, where you...avoid harm by simply not being where harm can occur. But that's a bit more complicated and ultimately I think &quot;ranged&quot; is more a modifier on the other two than its own distinct category.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9618111, member: 6790260"] AFAICT, there isn't a clean analogy (and, it's worth noting, this was the role 4e's designers struggled the most with!), but I believe the closest match would be center defensive midfielders, while leaders would (very loosely) be center attacking midfielders. That is, CDMs are looking to deflect or mitigate enemy attacks before they even [I]reach[/I] the defender line, disrupting enemy plays and generally making life hard for the opposing side. CAMs are looking to [I]set up[/I] their fellow attacking players, enabling them to make the shot etc. It's also worth noting that the soccer analogy only goes so far. For example, there's two or three clear patterns of how Strikers are designed in 5e: beefy, flighty, and (if it's distinct from flighty) ranged. More or less, each subtype gets some particular means by which they can handle the heat of battle, but in different ways. Barbarian is generally a tanky son of a gun, either having tons of personal health, decent armor, or layers of THP enemies have to burn through; Avenger is an unusual example where divine protection gives them crazy good AC, making them surprisingly tanky in a "dodge tank" kind of way. Conversely, classes like Rogue and Monk are very much flighty, with abilities that let them easily move in and out of the line of fire. Some classes split this by build, e.g. Sorcerer: Dragon and Cosmic make you beefy, while Chaos and Storm make you flighty. Warlock and Ranger are where you see [I]some[/I] argument for there being a third type, ranged, where you...avoid harm by simply not [I]being[/I] where harm can occur. But that's a bit more complicated and ultimately I think "ranged" is more a modifier on the other two than its own distinct category. [/QUOTE]

Verification