Who will "fill in the grid"?

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Grids drive gamers insane. They see a grid, they MUST fill it, no matter the consequences.

Indeed. While seductive, compulsive symmetry is folly. And creatively boring.

 

[Cryptos]

Indeed. While seductive, compulsive symmetry is folly. And creatively boring.

Quite the contrary in the case of a combination that some people say can't be done, or done well.

It's rather different to say "Ok, we need a dragon for Lawful Evil, Deserts, lightning and the color Blue. So we'll have the blue dragon of the desert that breathes lightning and is lawful evil."

That's uncreative and rather sad, I'll agree.

But trying to imagine all the different ways a person with a certain power source might fulfill a given role can and should get very creative, I would think.

Again, no one is proposing "make one of each and then stop, having filled the grid." We're talking about the initial representatives of each power source and role being presented, with full expectation that there will be many more classes occupying the same role and power source, in diverse ways.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Quite the contrary in the case of a combination that some people say can't be done, or done well.

It's rather different to say "Ok, we need a dragon for Lawful Evil, Deserts, lightning and the color Blue. So we'll have the blue dragon of the desert that breathes lightning and is lawful evil."

That's uncreative and rather sad, I'll agree.

But trying to imagine all the different ways a person with a certain power source might fulfill a given role can and should get very creative, I would think.

I'm not so sure. Most of the "power sources" other than "martial" are pretty ill-defined to begin with. Take the Swordmage. He's a guy who defends, but with magic!!! But how does that work as a concept? What are the great "swordmages" in literature or mythology or popular culture that we're emulating (other than Rich Baker's upcoming protagonist)? To me, it sounds pretty vanilla and boring.

Most of the "martial controllers" I've heard are even weirder. Yes, you might be able to finagle an archer into controlling the battlefield - but WHY? It makes so much more sense for an archer to be a striker!

Bard as an arcane leader (which BTW I'm dumb for forgetting) doesn't bug me so much, because it's an example of what I consider the better way of designing a class: come up with a sweet concept and then figure out how to fit it into the right role.

 

[Cryptos]

I'm not so sure. Most of the "power sources" other than "martial" are pretty ill-defined to begin with. Take the Swordmage. He's a guy who defends, but with magic!!! But how does that work as a concept? What are the great "swordmages" in literature or mythology or popular culture that we're emulating (other than Rich Baker's upcoming protagonist)? To me, it sounds pretty vanilla and boring.

Most of the "martial controllers" I've heard are even weirder. Yes, you might be able to finagle an archer into controlling the battlefield - but WHY? It makes so much more sense for an archer to be a striker!

Bard as an arcane leader (which BTW I'm dumb for forgetting) doesn't bug me so much, because it's an example of what I consider the better way of designing a class: come up with a sweet concept and then figure out how to fit it into the right role.

Ok, now I'm confused.

You're not sure that having each role in each power source could be an exercise in creativity. Following you so far.

But then you talk about how something isn't a good idea because there are no existing examples of it. Which is the opposite of creativity, really.

The you talk about certain concepts being weird. Or not being the most logical, obvious use of a source of power. Which again sounds like the opposite of creativity.

So coming up with different ways that a martial character might fill the controller role, or an arcane character a defender, would be uncreative and boring because there are no strong pre-existing examples of it that you can readily think of, it's weird, and not very obvious?

Respectfully, I don't think your issue with the concept has anything to do with creativity.

 

[Rechan]

In the PHB, from what we can tell:

Defender - Fighter, Paladin
Striker - Rogue, Warlock, Ranger
Leader - Warlord, Cleric
Controller - Wizard

I personally dislike there being only one controller. Everyone has more options than 1.

Count me as one who wants a martial controller. I don't think Alchemist, or Engineer/Machinist (Catapults, smoke bombs/bombs in general, trapper, etc) is absurd at all. That sounds enjoyable. A goblin or a kobold who takes the Repeating Crossbow one step further, turning it into an arrow-sprayer, or who carts around Alchemist Fire in a tank on his back with a pump sounds hilariously fun. I would pay money right now to play a Dervish style class, dancing around the battlefield with those curvy blades, slicing foes up.

I also have not seen a Divine Controller idea that satisfies me. Yes, yes, druid - but I don't associate "Volcanos, tangling underbrush, clouds of gnats and bees, etc" to be "Divine"; those are Nature, or Primal, or whatever that source is. And the Cleric writeup in R&C says clerics will be getting Flame-strikey powers.

 

[Rechan]

Instead you'd rather have some contrived class to fill the spot? I mean, an Alchemist? Instant trapsetter? Gaaah. Please, no.

Clearly some people want it. If it comes to that, so be it. And I'm certain a 3rd party is willing to publish it.

So, what's the problem? Don't buy it if you don't like it. But there are those of us who do.

 

[glass]

Never heard of a gatling chain-tripper then, I guess? Spiked Chain wielding and / or mass AoO-provoking battlefield controllers are one of the most popular straight Fighter builds on the Char Op forums over at WotC.

They would be Defenders.


glass.

 

[glass]

Why does it have to be contrived or forced? Why can't it be an awesome class that fills a vacant niche?

Because if it is an awesome class, then whether it fills in some imaginary grid is irrelevant.

And if it is a crappy class the whether it fills in some imaginary grid is still irrelevant


glass.

 

[glass]

Easy. Wizards can blast single opponents with rays as easily as they can fireball groups. Likewise an Archer could have powerful single arrow attacks and also have groups attacks. You could have powers named something like Blot Out the Sun, where the Archer fires so fast he can fill an entire area with arrows and makes a roll against the Ref Defense of everyone in the area. That would be cool.[

Two problems with that. Firstly, it makes no sense for him to be better at that than he is a just firing arrows at targets. Second, one ability does not a Controller make. You'd need to come up with lots more, which would make even less sense.

You could also have all sorts of trick shots like Ranged Pin, or shooting an arrow with a rope to a distant point which allows climbing up or across something.

Cool, but irrelevant to a Controller (well, the pin anyway, the rope trick I'll give you).


glass.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

In the PHB, from what we can tell:

Defender - Fighter, Paladin
Striker - Rogue, Warlock, Ranger
Leader - Warlord, Cleric
Controller - Wizard

I personally dislike there being only one controller. Everyone has more options than 1.

Count me as one who wants a martial controller. I don't think Alchemist, or Engineer/Machinist (Catapults, smoke bombs/bombs in general, trapper, etc) is absurd at all. That sounds enjoyable. A goblin or a kobold who takes the Repeating Crossbow one step further, turning it into an arrow-sprayer, or who carts around Alchemist Fire in a tank on his back with a pump sounds hilariously fun. I would pay money right now to play a Dervish style class, dancing around the battlefield with those curvy blades, slicing foes up.

I also have not seen a Divine Controller idea that satisfies me. Yes, yes, druid - but I don't associate "Volcanos, tangling underbrush, clouds of gnats and bees, etc" to be "Divine"; those are Nature, or Primal, or whatever that source is. And the Cleric writeup in R&C says clerics will be getting Flame-strikey powers.

I'd also like a second controller, too. It could be a Divine Controller (maybe something along the lines of the Cloistered Cleric?), but it could also be a second arcane controller (Sorceror!)


My problem with Engineers or Machinists as "Martial Controller" is that - well, it is not a martial controller. They are using technology, not their pure fighting skills. I think there is room (and a market) for some classes using technology to fulfill their roles, but this still doesn't give us the Martial Controller. My other dislike is that this class would rely on technical items, not on its own powers, even if their powers allow them to build such items or use them effectively. The items are more complex and usually rarer than just a Bow, Staff or Sword. That doesn't mean it can't work, you just have to get over the reliance on "exotic" items.

I still don't see the Derwish or an Archer as a Martial Character. To pull off the controlling as its primary role, the Derwish would need to be supernaturally fast from the start, which would work against the assumptions that "superheroic" abilities are something acceptable for later tiers only. The Archer firing volleys of arrows to create AoE or "Walls of Arrows" is also something in the mythical category, not something that should be available from the start.

From where I see it, such abilities are things that a Martial Defender or Striker might get at higher levels. They are controller-like abilities (like Trip/Disarm/Reach for Defenders), but they are not the main shtick of such a class.
The position on the Grid just describes what a class does best, but it doesn't mean it can't have some abilities that stand out.