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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cryptos" data-source="post: 3989990" data-attributes="member: 58439">No, I don't think it has to be universal to controllers.As I said on the Wizards boards a while back, your role describes what you do in combat, your power source just describes how you are able to do it, and your class describes how you execute it, other flavor, and non-combat functionality.It's like "car" - something used to move people around (role), petroleum-based fuel (power source), black sports car with leather interior, small and lightweight, go-faster stripes, built-in satellite radio, climate control, etc, etc (class.)However, a natural gas-powered (power source) bus - something used to move people around (role) - is not small or lightweight.  Nor is an airplane, a cruise ship, or a train (classes.)Until we get strong evidence to the contrary, I look at role as specifically dealing with the effect that a character has in combat - not how they do it.  This sums it up:Defender:  "Hey!  You're not going anywhere!  Ignore them.  Come back here and face me!"Controller:  "Hey!  None of you are going over there.  Or over there.  Or doing that.  Or... oops, now you're dead."Leader:  "Hey!  Here's something to help you out, friends!"Striker:  "Die!"That's about it, the way I see it.  Whether they need a lot of hitpoints, or a weapon, or magic to do it is all a function of class.When you look at a rogue, a ranger and a warlock, the only commonality is that they all seek to do damage.  I think people are overreacting to the idea of roles and reading too much into what a role means.  There are varying degrees of sturdy, squishy, stealthy, not stealthy, magical, not magical there.Which is why it's especially frustrating when you get arguments that X idea can't be a martial controller because of this, or Y idea can't be an divine striker because of that, and so on.  And frustrating that people object to the idea of finding ways to fulfill roles in all the power sources.  I think people go to red alert when you start discussing roles because they're afraid they're some how going to take over class flavor or dominate everything a class does.  They're not.  Still, it would be nice to see a non-magic character do some controller-type things, for non-magical parties and concepts.  And so on.I also think that you're not necessarily right on defenders needing to be sturdy.  All that's required is someone that can keep foes occupied and nailed down while avoiding or mitigating their ability to do damage.  Consider an enchantress-type character that does this by being alluring and sexy.  Seriously.  She says "Hey you, stop attacking my wizard friend and come over here."  Now she only has to hold his attention while he drools on himself because of her amazing powers of arcane hotness.  She doesn't have to absorb all his attacks directly, she's mitigating them in another way.  She's defending the wizard by holding down one foe that was attacking while resisting his ability to damage to her.  Instead of armor, shield, and hitpoints, she's just got to keep shaking that fine magical booty.  She's a defender.See?  You can really have a lot of fun with this, and generate interesting classes.  A beguiler or enchanter as a defender seems counter-intuitive the way a lot of people are thinking, but they're not really controllers because if they could walk in and Dominate the entire battlefield, or large areas of it, there wouldn't be much challenge, would there?  They hold down or take over one or a few foes.   Nor are they necessarily leaders because the benefits of mind control don't go directly to their allies."Grid-filling" roles only seems unimaginative and limited or mechanical because I think people's concept of the roles is a bit too rigid.I think everyone's defintions of these roles are a bit too narrow, which is a truly frustrating aspect to these discussions, although a necessary one.</blockquote>

Verification