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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6532896" data-attributes="member: 42582">In the absence of context, sure. But by the time a person is responding to post 1000 of a thread, I think it's a fair to assume some sort of engagement with what's gone before.In the context of 4e, would anyone deny that a ranged striker plays differently from a melee striker, and that the decision not to break them out as separate roles (say "sniper" and "skirmisher") is a decision as much of economy as of principle?And to give a reverse example, what is a defender but a controller who controls by putting his/her body on the line in melee? Here the decision to break them out as separate roles is an abandonment of economy in the service of principle, namely, upholding D&D's traditional distinction between fighters and wizards - which goes back at least as far as Gygax's remark (which I quoted upthread) that martial training is the antithesis of magic-use.And then there is the ambiguity over whether AoE damage is best conceived of as striking (see the sorcerer) or control (see the wizard).In my 4e game, in a climactic combat in which all the stops are pulled out, it is not uncommon to have the following three dailies all operating simultaneously: Swords of the Marilith (20th level sorcerer paragon path power), Fire Storm (19th level cleric power) and Righteous Inferno (19th level paladin power). All of them are zones of auto-damage. The paladin power also makes enemies grant combat advantage. The sorcerer power also grants allies an AC bonus.Now this is a particularly strong example of role overlap, chosen by me to prove the point. But here we have a so-called striker acting as controller and leader; a so-called defender acting as controller and leader; and a so-called leader acting as a pure controller. And in each case the power begins by dealing AoE damage at range, which is a striker function.In discussions around roles in 4e, especially by the thousandth post, I expect the discussion to actually engage with the reality of 4e's class design, not conjectures about what certain classes must look like, or how they must play, because the designers slapped a certain role label onto them.</blockquote>

Verification