PDA

View Full Version : 4e Effectiveness of Controllery Spells



HMS Invincible
2009-12-04, 01:48 PM
How much is controlling the battlefield worth vs just dealing aoe damage or single target damage with debuffs? I mean is slowing them or forcing them around a spell effect worth it compared to straight up damage or status effects?

Sometimes, I feel if I just spamming attacks instead of delaying the enemy, the party wouldn't notice the difference.

tcrudisi
2009-12-04, 01:57 PM
How much is controlling the battlefield worth vs just dealing aoe damage or single target damage with debuffs? I mean is slowing them or forcing them around a spell effect worth it compared to straight up damage or status effects?

Sometimes, I feel if I just spamming attacks instead of delaying the enemy, the party wouldn't notice the difference.

This is a loaded question. You will get answers from both sides. Really, it depends on your party make-up. Here's what I've noticed, though, both as a player and a DM.

The party usually doesn't realize how much the Controller is helping out. Heck, sometimes even the player doesn't. As a DM, I make it a point to tell the player just how his spells impacted the battlefield during that fight. Why? So everyone knows that even though the Controller did a lot less damage, he still out-performed everyone else. And yes, as a DM, I can say that the Controller out-performs everyone else. Why? Well, it's hard to explain, but a well played Controller can easily make it to where the party doesn't need healing, doesn't need a defender, or doesn't need a strikers damage. Seriously. *edit* I edited to make sure the or was italicized. I'm not saying that a Controller can do everything, but that their role is such that they gimp the monsters so much that it makes up for weaknesses in other areas.

As a player? People just don't see it, and that's a pity. The players pay more attention to big numbers and miss the fact that, even though the player only did 8 damage, they locked 3 monsters out of the combat. To me, a Controller is much like playing a Leader in that players don't realize just how much each role contributes. The Barbarian hit with his daily doing 50 points of damage? Awesome! It often gets left out that the only reason he hit was because the Leader gave him a +5 to hit.

You are right, though. The party won't notice a difference, but the difference is huge (if played properly), I can assure you.

*edit* Also, a lot of people will say that you can play without a Controller and be just fine. That's true. I've also played in a game without a Defender and we did fine, likewise without a Leader, and likewise without a Striker. You can always do fine without one role, but to me, a well played Controller is the most beautiful role.

Edge of Dreams
2009-12-04, 02:03 PM
The value of dps versus status effects is an extremely complicated question that heavily depends on exact numbers and the scenario at hand.

For example, would you rather daze an enemy for 1 round, or deal an extra 20 damage to him? The answer depends on all of the following:
-number of rogues in your party that would get more sneak attacks thanks to the CA
-number of allies who are more likely to hit due to CA and the power level of their attacks
-damage output of the monster to be dazed (is it a solo, elite, minion?)
-need for positioning (the dazed monster will likely not move from where it is)
-other status effects that other allies are inflicting / can inflict (daze + prone is nice, since they don't get to stand up this turn if they want to also attack)
-how much hp does the enemy have?

etc. etc.

The essence of being a good controller is knowing when AOE dps is the best option, when a status effect is the best option, and when single-target dps is the best option. And these choices can vary even from turn to turn in a single fight.

*Edit* -
For the case of slowdowns in particular (Slow status, difficult terrain), the prime question is the number, power, and not-having-anything-better-to-do-ness of ranged allies. If the enemy takes an extra round to get to you, that's one more round of plinking away with bows or whatever. On the other hand, when everyone's already in melee range and flanking and what-not, the slowed condition in particular is much weaker.

R. Shackleford
2009-12-04, 02:12 PM
My group notices it, definitely, but we're all magic players in a meta where control is the norm.

At least once a campaign, a controller has done something to the terrain or field to turn encounters grossly in the PC's favor. They've paid dearly for it, too.

We definitely notice the lack of one in our current campaign, for sure.

Hzurr
2009-12-04, 05:35 PM
...snip...

Very well said. I agree 100%. The controller in the party is one of the most effective characters we have; and I don't know how much the party realizes it, because they don't know how much I have to adjust what the enemies do because of what the Controller did.

rayne_dragon
2009-12-04, 06:26 PM
Control can make a huge difference, for either side.

Our DM loves throwing enemy controllers and leaders at us. It usually takes him a while to figure how to best use the powers, but once he does it is extremely brutal for our party. Stinking cloud in particular came close to destroying our party once or twice.

On the PCs side, it can make a huge difference to have a control effect on enemies. The thing is other classes besides controller have access to these effects, so it makes it easier to overlook. However, controllers are the best at applying their effects to more enemies and for longer. For example, the last session I had we got TPKed taking on a much larger force that normally we could have handled. The problem was no controller - my wizard had been called away, so I had to play my secondary character.

The problem is PCs need to be able to work together well to optimize control effects. You can immobize all of the enemy melee fighters, but if your party doesn't attack them from range, you haven't done as much as you could have.

Hashmir
2009-12-04, 06:36 PM
With regard to making the players aware of the controller's impact (and making the controller feel as effective as they are), I try to weave it into the narrative description of the battle. Admittedly, I'm only running a 1-player campaign right now, but the principle should hold.

For instance, if the DM is constantly describing the monsters' frustration at being unable to reach the players through the sudden wall of fire, or saying things like "Blinded by the magical fog, the goblin is unable to land a hit," or "The dragon tries desperately to dodge the blow, but is unable to twist out of the grasping vines." Even if the players don't consciously register that you're tying everything back to the controller, they'll walk away with a general sense that the controller really did a number on those monsters.

Decoy Lockbox
2009-12-04, 08:55 PM
Very well said. I agree 100%. The controller in the party is one of the most effective characters we have; and I don't know how much the party realizes it, because they don't know how much I have to adjust what the enemies do because of what the Controller did.

We had a druid in a the game I run; he was moping and complaining that his character didn't feel control-y enough. I sat him down and explained to him that of all the party members, his character was like a thorn in my side. I gave him some examples of stuff he had done, and he finally got it. I think the DM feels the full force of the controller much more than the party members sometimes!

Thing is, its an often subtle role, and one that requires a lot of skill to play to maximum effect. Compared to more flashy classes like ranger or sorceror, I could see certain types of players not appreciating it fully. But anyone who played wizards in past editions, or who plays magic: the gathering competitively, or who plays dragon age knows that control is totally worth it.

Thajocoth
2009-12-04, 09:45 PM
First char I played was a controller. They leaned very heavy on the damage side though. Cleared 4 encounters with a single Flaming Sphere. (Kicked down doors without a short rest 'cause we didn't need one. Sent the ball in first, nothing came out. Then the DM had us start making endurance checks 'cause I set half the place on fire...) That was a fun character, and everyone saw what I effected without any problem.

In another group, the party's wizard rarely showed up, but when he did, he had a hard time casting anything without hurting half of us too. Again, more damagey build.

In a 3rd group, we had no controller for the longest time. When a Psion joined us, constantly making the enemies hitting one another, moving the battlefield around and giving my Rogue CA... We certainly noticed the difference.

I'm about to try out a Wilden Swarm Druid. It looks like a very interesting build. Not a whole lot of damage, but I'm so mobile and move the enemies around with me. Even if the other players don't notice what I do, they're certainly appreciate the aura 5 of "+2 to saving throws for allies" I'll be giving off, and I've got so many defensive contingencies I can almost double as a second defender. I've got a lot of leaderish things too... I'm really just "not a striker".

So, I think it's noticeable...

YvizztX23
2009-12-04, 09:54 PM
This is something I've wondered about, especially when comparing the Wizard to the Warlock.

A 3rd Level Encounter Power for a Wizard might do about 2d8 plus Intelligence modifier, while an Encounter Power of the same level for a Warlock can do 2d12, plus Charisma. Of course, the Wizard's spells can hit multiple people.

In short, it has to do with strategy (trying to figure out how to deal the most widespread damage against more than one target) versus brute force (dealing massive amounts of damage to a single target).

Does this help?

jmbrown
2009-12-04, 09:55 PM
First 4E game I DM'd the players would always rag on the wizard because his damage output was low. Then I discovered the deliciousness of swarms and nearly killed half the party with the wizard saving the day.

As mentioned already, the role's effectiveness depends entirely on mitigating factors but it's a pretty noticeable hole in a party that lacks one as much as a party without a leader.

Sir_Elderberry
2009-12-04, 11:53 PM
I play a control-focused wizard, and not to sound arrogant, but I save games. At one point we were fighting:

-Multiple minion skeletons that could be resurrected by the MediumBEG
-A four-armed skeleton whose exact name I forget, but he hit like a truck.
-Two blazing skeletons
-The MBEG, who was an undead-Thay-caster-thing.

The battle was set up so the blazings and the MBEG were on top of a tower and nuked us as we tried to get in, with the four-armed guy sitting on the bottom floor of the tower and the minions outside the tower. We barely survived, and survived ONLY because of an Enlarged Stinking Cloud that stopped the casters from being able to see us. (Damn undead, immune to poison AND my shadowfell glove's handy dandy necrotic.)

And that's not even getting into the unholy, encounter breaking monster that is Sleep. There's a reason wizards memorize the coup de grace rules.

Kupi
2009-12-05, 12:29 AM
The thing about Controllers (in general) is that they function on the same principle that makes healing and enchantment spells better attack spells than actual attack spells. The amount of damage you get out of a Fighter who stays healthier longer or who gets extra damage on a per-swing basis piles up. It's the same with Controllers: they do a lot of "implicit damage" and "implicit healing" by causing a lot of awful things to not happen. It's difficult to quantify.

drawingfreak
2009-12-05, 01:57 AM
Controllers: Decimate the Minions, Limit the Standards, Nerf the Boss
Leaders: Kill the Standards, Boost your Allies
Defenders: Protect the Controllers, Kill the Standards
Strikers: Hit the Boss...Hard

Kurald Galain
2009-12-05, 07:08 AM
A well-played controller makes a huge difference in game play, and can on occasion turn a difficult encounter into a cakewalk all by himself. Keeping two or three enemies out of the fight entirely while the party takes down the other monster is very effective. The game runs on action economy, and that makes action denial a good strategy almost by default.

That said, controllers are arguably the least easy classes to play (as opposed to e.g. strikers). But even for a wizard, dropping huge area effects without hitting your allies is very doable with a bit of teamwork.

Artanis
2009-12-05, 11:12 AM
That said, controllers are arguably the least easy classes to play (as opposed to e.g. strikers). But even for a wizard, dropping huge area effects without hitting your allies is very doable with a bit of teamwork.

Shooty Rangers are really bad about this. I'm playing one right now, and most of the time find myself using the "strategy" of:
1) Shoot bad guy
2) Go to step 1

:smalltongue:

Thajocoth
2009-12-05, 11:32 AM
Shooty Rangers are really bad about this. I'm playing one right now, and most of the time find myself using the "strategy" of:
1) Shoot bad guy
2) Go to step 1

:smalltongue:

Yeah... Whenever a Ranger in any group I'm in says something other than "Twin Strike", somebody invariably asks "What's that do?", purely because of the otherwise constant loading of 2 arrows into the bow.

CrazySopher
2009-12-05, 01:24 PM
Controllers like to hurt things as much as the other Not-Strikers (except for 4e's take on the healbot Cleric), but their focus is making the battlefield look like what they want rather than what the DM wants, by moving things around, killing off legions of minions, making threatening monsters pathetic, etc.

Saw Mando say it in another thread, immediately thought of this one. Dude says it better than I ever could. I absolutely love Controllers. I haven't had the opportunity to play one particularly extensively yet, but I find my friend's Wizard particularly invaluable in the party.

Gamerlord
2009-12-05, 01:32 PM
The Controller is the archnemesis of the minions, he AOEs them into hell and back, with minions? Screw status effects, go for AOE. The biggest waste of a turn that a striker can do is target the minions, the biggest waste of a controllers turn is to not attack the minions.

With anything else?

Depends on the situation, and the opponent.

LibraryOgre
2009-12-05, 02:23 PM
Very well said. I agree 100%. The controller in the party is one of the most effective characters we have; and I don't know how much the party realizes it, because they don't know how much I have to adjust what the enemies do because of what the Controller did.

To be fair, we've become a lot more appreciative of Berry since he got an at-will that didn't have multiple targets.

Hzurr
2009-12-05, 06:15 PM
To be fair, we've become a lot more appreciative of Berry since he got an at-will that didn't have multiple targets.

Yeah...and he's finally started caring about his allies enough that he will actually give pause if he'll catch them in an AoE

Jerthanis
2009-12-06, 12:26 AM
The Controller...

Sometimes it's amazing. Sometimes your Invoker pushes three guys onto a flame-trap and dazes them. They take damage from the attack, damage from the trap, and damage from the ally rogue's sneak attack, and in addition they lose a whole turn just moving off the flame trap, possibly taking Opportunity Attacks along the way.

Sometimes it's horrible. Sometimes your Invoker uses Offer Justice on a Chain Devil who has taken some damage, so he gleefully moves over to the Cleric and double-attacks, becomes bloodied from the Offer Justice damage and double attacks a second time, knocking the Cleric to negatives and turning a battle completely around.

The controller seems like the wildcard of the game. Strikers and Defenders and Leaders will all perform as expected in most situations, but the Controller is entirely all over the map even from battle to battle.

Colmarr
2009-12-07, 05:50 PM
I agree with everything above.

Controllers are hidden goodness some of the time, just like Leaders. However, if you sit down a take a list of their benefits for an encounter or two, you'll see just how much of a difference a well-played controller makes.

erikun
2009-12-07, 06:11 PM
I'm currently playing a Druid. The last session I was in, we were facing a large elite with a buffing aura and large area attacks. My turn consisted of walking up to him and throwing Tundra Wind into his and his buddies' faces.

End result was three minions dead, the elite and one regular enemy knocked prone and nearly thrown out of the room. The elite needed to spend its action point just to stand up, get back in range, and blast the party. Probably a wise use for the action point too, as almost everything else was dead next round except for the elite.

And if I wasn't a controller? Most of the party would've been eating that blast twice, and probably would've left everyone bloodied and weakened.

While I'd actually prefer to be playing a Wizard over a Druid, I can throw out Frost Flash, Faerie Fire, and Tundra Wind to pin down groups of enemies and keep them out of the fight for a few rounds. And honestly, that's usually all our group needs most of the time.