PDA

View Full Version : 4e Controllers



Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 04:26 PM
Actively avoid discussion of 4e vs. other editions.

So a couple of friends of mine and I are playing a 4e game, and the general consensus of the group is that controllers are all but useless. They don't deal damage as well as strikers, even in an area - We've got a sorcerer in the party handling that. They don't heal people or protect them, unlike our bard or shaman. Finally, all of their "status effects" seem to do nothing more than make the enemy use his move actions that he doesn't need anyway.

So the question I pose to you, playground, is this: Are controllers as useless as we're making them out to be, or is there something we're not seeing?

tcrudisi
2010-10-16, 04:40 PM
Actively avoid discussion of 4e vs. other editions.

So a couple of friends of mine and I are playing a 4e game, and the general consensus of the group is that controllers are all but useless. They don't deal damage as well as strikers, even in an area - We've got a sorcerer in the party handling that. They don't heal people or protect them, unlike our bard or swordmage. Finally, all of their "status effects" seem to do nothing more than make the enemy use his move actions that he doesn't need anyway.

So the question I pose to you, playground, is this: Are controllers as useless as we're making them out to be, or is there something we're not seeing?

I pose the following questions, in all seriousness, without trying to sound rude: are you experienced with 4e? Does your group understand group tactics? Is your group really good at working together?

If the answer to any of those questions is "no", then that's the problem. Seriously.

Controllers are the hardest to play. BUT - when one is played well, the group might not even realize it but the DM sure will. When the striker is doing well, the group will see lots of big damage numbers. When the leader is doing well, everyone will see no one going down and a boost to productivity. When the defender is doing well, he keeps most of the monsters on him. When the controller is doing well? The group will see the DM getting red in the face from frustration. That's about it.

It's harder to see what the Controller does. He moves the bad guys around to put them into sub-optimal positioning. He causes them to miss with a lot of attacks. He forces them to lose actions. Basically, he makes the DMs job (of controlling the monsters effectively) very, very tough.

A poorly played Controller is of little benefit to the group. A well played Controller is indispensable. An example:

I have a friend who loves playing Wizards. Back in 3.5 he was always an Evoker. When he first started 4e, I knew he would want to play a Wizard and he would want to blast things. Luckily, the Wizard has the spellbook, so for each level I gave him one spell that blasts and one that controls. I explained to him what every spell did and he chose all the ones that blasted, like I expected. After a few sessions, I went to him and said, "Okay, you've seen what you do blasting. Now - just go with me on this, but for this session, use your other spells."

He did. The turnaround was absolutely amazing. He was decimating the encounters almost single-handedly. The entire group was celebrating his new-found awesomeness. He loved it. (Since then he's not used a blasting spell, he's been all control spells).

After a few sessions I decided to give the group a real challenge. They were level 6, so I gave them a standard level 8 encounter and then threw a level 8 dragon on top of it. Two encounters in one. The Wizard stepped up to the plate and did such a beautiful job controlling the battlefield that, despite me thinking that they would wipe, they had a tough, but no-deaths victory. It ... was beautiful.

My point is this: the Controller is not needed in a typical group, but when the Controller really knows what he is doing, combats become almost boring. Controllers can be amazingly effective or distraughtly ineffective. I, personally, always want a Controller in my group if they know what they are doing. If they don't? Bah, give me anything else.

I guess I'm trying to say that the high's are higher than any other role and the low's are lower than any other role.

WitchSlayer
2010-10-16, 05:07 PM
Pretty much the above post, learn to controller, I guess. My Warforged Wizard pisses off the DM to quite a large extent, like the time I destroyed an encounter that nearly killed us just by one use of the Sleep spell.

Lunix Vandal
2010-10-16, 05:20 PM
I would argue that the point of the Controller is not to piss off the DM, actually. Of course, I'm mostly saying this because the DMPC in the campaign I'm currently running with my RL group is himself a controller. Knowing exactly what he's capable of -- that my Telepath Psion can drop penalty after penalty on the monsters with a fair amount of reliability -- gives me quite a bit of leeway in designing encounters for the party. Heck, I find the mental exercise of hitting the sweet spot where my Psion promises to be useful-but-not-overwhelmingly-so quite enjoyable. But I'm a freak who loves his 5x5x5 Rubik's Cube, so YMMV.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 05:40 PM
Heck, I find the mental exercise of hitting the sweet spot where my Psion promises to be useful-but-not-overwhelmingly-so quite enjoyable.Isn't that like playing chess with yourself? :smalltongue:

Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 07:43 PM
Thank you, tcrudisi. While I'd like to say I'm experienced with 4e, the party is very new to it, myself included. Our DM and myself are much more experienced with 3.5, while one is more used to freeform roleplay, one is a newbie, and the other two have varying levels. Needless to say, 4e is new to most of us.

That said: The group seems to work together well. We've got a shaman with watchful spirit, a cunning bard, a fighter, a dark pact warlock, and myself, a cosmic sorcerer. The fighter is the weakest link in the chain; she's being played by the more roleplay oriented one. She's an eladrin fighter, and she has a tendency to walk into a room and immediately hit 0 hp. The Bard and Shaman are mostly buffing; the shaman's spirit helps the warlock immensely and the bard can hold his own in combat, when they're not healing the party. The warlock and I are the real damage dealers in the party. Warlock is using darkspiral aura very effectively, and I'm using blazing starfall along with focused spellfury to deal ridiculous amounts of damage. The party currently works well together, but I don't have much experience to compare to.

I think I have a decent grasp of group tactics, as we've beaten encounters meant for a six person party pretty regularly. (the DM was expecting another player that never met with us.) Again, though, I must say that the fighter did nothing more than soak up damage, and not especially effectively. (She hit 0 twice.)

I'd like to show these players why controllers are good and useful; I love Druids myself and the movement powers are ridiculous, especially when paired with anybody with area attacks. At the same time, the only one in the party with decent area attacks, myself, is the main damage dealer, so the rest of the party is very adverse to this idea.

Basically, we're good at dealing damage. Taking it, not so much, and we're not having any luck with any controllers helping us with that. I completely agree with you all in the power of controllers, this was more to see if I was correct in my thinking of controllers not being outwardly helpful to players, but rather in frustrating to DMs. Thanks!

tcrudisi
2010-10-16, 08:10 PM
We've got a shaman with watchful spirit, a cunning bard, a fighter, a dark pact warlock, and myself, a cosmic sorcerer.
... She's an eladrin fighter, and she has a tendency to walk into a room and immediately hit 0 hp. The Bard and Shaman are mostly buffing; the shaman's spirit helps the warlock immensely and the bard can hold his own in combat, when they're not healing the party. The warlock and I are the real damage dealers in the party. Warlock is using darkspiral aura very effectively, and I'm using blazing starfall along with focused spellfury to deal ridiculous amounts of damage. The party currently works well together, but I don't have much experience to compare to.

I wanted to address the above quote. "When they're not healing the party" really confuses me. It only takes a minor action to heal so the Shaman and Bard will not have to forgo their combat effectiveness (standard actions) in order to keep the party (and Fighter) alive. And since you have 2 healers... I'm really surprised they are having a problem keeping the Fighter up. Unless something a bit abnormal is going on.

Blazing Starfall is one of the top at-wills for damage in the game. It's not surprising that you are dealing ridiculous amounts of damage - so good choice for an at-will. I'm a huge fan of Sorc's so I'm glad to hear that yours is doing well.

Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 09:00 PM
I wanted to address the above quote. "When they're not healing the party" really confuses me. It only takes a minor action to heal so the Shaman and Bard will not have to forgo their combat effectiveness (standard actions) in order to keep the party (and Fighter) alive. And since you have 2 healers... I'm really surprised they are having a problem keeping the Fighter up. Unless something a bit abnormal is going on.

Blazing Starfall is one of the top at-wills for damage in the game. It's not surprising that you are dealing ridiculous amounts of damage - so good choice for an at-will. I'm a huge fan of Sorc's so I'm glad to hear that yours is doing well.
You are correct! Like I said, I'm more used to 3.5, so when my mind looks back to encounters I just assume that healing is a standard action. They are dealing damage; it's just overshadowed by the warlock and I. As for the fighter... The main problem with her is that she gets hit often and her HP is in the mid 30s. A few good rolls from the DM and she's gone.

As for the sorcerer, yes. Blazing starfall is already good, and Focusing spellfury only makes it better. Cosmic Sorcerer adds strength to damage rolls, which is just gravy for dragonborn like myself. Astral fire and destructive spellcasting (Wizard multiclass! :D) in later levels makes me happy.

tcrudisi
2010-10-16, 09:12 PM
You are correct! Like I said, I'm more used to 3.5, so when my mind looks back to encounters I just assume that healing is a standard action. They are dealing damage; it's just overshadowed by the warlock and I. As for the fighter... The main problem with her is that she gets hit often and her HP is in the mid 30s. A few good rolls from the DM and she's gone.

That's just the main difference between roles. You are a striker - your job is to do damage. To do that, you sacrifice a lot of other things. You don't heal, you don't hinder the bad guys much (status effects, push/pull/slide, etc), you don't protect your allies. The Leaders? They do bleh damage, but they keep their allies alive and give their allies bonuses (to hit, to damage, to skills, extra attacks) or sometimes give the monsters small penalties (to defenses or what-not).

The Warlock, depending on how he was built, is one of the quasi-exceptions. It's possible to build a warlock that's high damage. It's also possible to build a Warlock that's good damage (but not great) but does a lot of Controllery type things.

As for the Fighter, do you have access to that character sheet? I would be interested in taking a look at it to see what choices were made. I just do not believe the Fighter should be struggling with 2 leaders in the party.

valadil
2010-10-16, 09:14 PM
Depends on the controller IMO. I've seen a lot that were underwhelming. I've also seen a wizard who does sorcerer damage (albeit it at the expense of controller-ness). Check out Invokers. They get some amazing powers, even at low levels (Silent Malediction, anyone?)

From the people I've talked to, defenders are the most useless role. Reason being that good groups kill stuff fast. When combats are only 1-2 rounds long, there just isn't enough damage to soak up. Among my friends who play hardcore LFR, the ideal parter is 3 strikers, 2 leaders, and 1 controller.

Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 09:47 PM
Yeah, I understand that. As for the fighter, I don't believe I do. If you have specific questions, I should be able to answer them, though.

On valadil's points: Actually, we had an invoker before the warlock; he mainly used Vanguard's Lightning and summon Fire Angel. It didn't go well. I do agree so far on the defenders thought, though, if only because ours just hits 0 far too fast.

tcrudisi
2010-10-16, 10:16 PM
Yeah, I understand that. As for the fighter, I don't believe I do. If you have specific questions, I should be able to answer them, though.

On valadil's points: Actually, we had an invoker before the warlock; he mainly used Vanguard's Lightning and summon Fire Angel. It didn't go well. I do agree so far on the defenders thought, though, if only because ours just hits 0 far too fast.

Assuming normal encounters, if your Fighter is hitting 0 that quickly, then something is amiss. Does the DM target the Fighter with everything or does the Fighter just lock up most of the foes (or just the strongest)? Is the Fighter wearing Scale Armor and using a shield, or is he using a 2-handed weapon (ie - is he trying to defend or do damage)? Or... is he a Tempest Fighter? Do the Leaders give him healing?

If your Fighter is a "defense-first" Fighter and he's getting hit 50% of the time (or more), then something is wrong. Really, the Fighter should be getting hit quite a bit less than 50% of the time, especially against any monster that can do real damage (Brutes). Also, and I always hate asking this: does your DM roll out in the open? (I'm not implying the DM fudges rolls, merely that it's one possible reason why the Fighter is having problems).

DiscipleofBob
2010-10-16, 10:27 PM
The Defender keeps the enemies from hurting his allies.
The Striker is the primary damage-dealer.
The Leader supports the group through bonuses and heals.
The Controller wins the battle.

The party I'm in right now is called among the group the "DM's Nightmare" because there isn't an encounter he can throw at us that we don't absolutely dominate, even when he makes up some overpowered homebrewed monsters.

The party consists of a Seeker (primary controller), a Psion (primary controller), myself the Warden (secondary controller), a Warlord multiclass-Wizard who's getting very ample use out of his Wizard powers (secondary controller) and a Rogue (striker). He doesn't even bother with solos anymore, because not a turn goes by when the solo isn't immobilized, prone, slowed, dazed, etc. Minions he might as well not even bother getting out because they are going down in the first turn. He tried using Skirmishers that shift a bunch as their shtick; our group has no less than three shticks to consistently shut down enemy shifting. Our MVP is constantly the Warlord's once-per-encounter, since the controllers basically just toss the enemies around the Storm Pillar until they fall down.

Another thing to point out is that the party you mentioned included a bard, swordmage, and sorcerer, all who (possibly) have secondary roles as Controllers depending on how they're built. You might see little use for a Controller because the other members of your party can pull off Controller stuff of their own already.

Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 10:27 PM
Assuming normal encounters, if your Fighter is hitting 0 that quickly, then something is amiss. Does the DM target the Fighter with everything or does the Fighter just lock up most of the foes (or just the strongest)? Is the Fighter wearing Scale Armor and using a shield, or is he using a 2-handed weapon (ie - is he trying to defend or do damage)? Or... is he a Tempest Fighter? Do the Leaders give him healing?

If your Fighter is a "defense-first" Fighter and he's getting hit 50% of the time (or more), then something is wrong. Really, the Fighter should be getting hit quite a bit less than 50% of the time, especially against any monster that can do real damage (Brutes). Also, and I always hate asking this: does your DM roll out in the open? (I'm not implying the DM fudges rolls, merely that it's one possible reason why the Fighter is having problems).

I think the main problem is that the fighter is barely playing attention in game. However, she's at the front of the party and I believe she's wielding a greatsword (I could be wrong). She's trying towards dealing damage, but the rest of our party works at a range - Sorcerer, Bard, and Warlock all use primarily ranged attacks, while our shaman uses her spirit. The fighter, however, is built for melee. She becomes our line of not being killed by enemies, so that might be why she's hitting 0 so often. The leaders are giving her healing, but all too often she's back down to 0 within a round.

Our DM does roll behind a screen, but I highly doubt he's fudging rolls. He typically announces rolls - "Does a 17 hit your AC?", and his rolls seem to make sense.

EDIT: Oh derp, Disciple. We don't have a swordmage; my typo. In response to you: I know that the sorcerer and the bard definitely have secondary controller roles.

DragonBaneDM
2010-10-16, 10:42 PM
Ask her to play a swordmage! Hahaha, she'd have a lot of fun, and it would be interesting roleplay wise.

And you said invoker, eh? Well, I can see how biased you are towards controllers! Invokers...invokers are terrible. I'm sure I can build a decent one, as could anyone else with experience, but at that point he'd be multiclassed heavily and just be "playable".

Wizards and Psions are the top-tier controllers. A Wizard targetting multiple people, and the Psion being the best at making one single target absoutely pitiful, from my experience at least.

A Druid's neat too, the best build I've seen is the summoner type, but the Wildshape's a bit of a trap, but whatevs. Zip to nada experience with Seekers.

Invoker just...doesn't work. It's a bad example of a great role. It's like building a poorly optimized shaman (they're decent if well played, I'm not insulting your friend), and having that be the example of a leader.

tcrudisi
2010-10-16, 10:55 PM
I think the main problem is that the fighter is barely playing attention in game. However, she's at the front of the party and I believe she's wielding a greatsword (I could be wrong). She's trying towards dealing damage, but the rest of our party works at a range - Sorcerer, Bard, and Warlock all use primarily ranged attacks, while our shaman uses her spirit. The fighter, however, is built for melee. She becomes our line of not being killed by enemies, so that might be why she's hitting 0 so often. The leaders are giving her healing, but all too often she's back down to 0 within a round.

Our DM does roll behind a screen, but I highly doubt he's fudging rolls. He typically announces rolls - "Does a 17 hit your AC?", and his rolls seem to make sense.

EDIT: Oh derp, Disciple. We don't have a swordmage; my typo.

Well, I doubt your DM is fudging rolls since your Defender isn't a primary Defender. Here's what I mean by that:

When it comes to Defenders, some focus on protecting the party first and foremost. Those are "primary Defenders". Others play the Defender class, but focus more on trying to do other things. That's really a "secondary Defender." The secondary Defenders are wonderful when you already have a primary Defender to lock down the biggest and baddest. The secondary can then go and lock down the weaker stuff. The problem? Your group has a secondary Defender without a primary Defender.

By choosing to use a Greatsword, he has chosen to do more damage at the expense of defenses. Without taking into consideration... pretty much anything else, here's the difference:

Greatsword: 1d10 damage.
Longsword: 1d10 damage, +2 AC and Reflex (from a heavy shield)

Missing out on that +2 AC is absolutely friggin' huge when you are the only melee character. He runs up front and then needs the better defenses to survive... only he doesn't have them. Instead of having AC 19 at level 1, he'll have AC 17.

For your party make-up, it's not the optimal choice (and group dynamics are huge in 4e, as DiscipleOfBob's example states). Don't get the wrong impression about Defenders though. If you were to see a primary Defender in action, you'd be thinking, "Wow, that's one tough S.O.B." What you have is a Fighter who, at least by his choice of weapons, is trying to be a Striker and not a Defender. (Side note: Fighters can make excellent Strikers when done properly.)

Also, I'll second what DiscipleOfBob said. I'm currently running for a group that has a Psion (primary controller), Wizard (primary controller), Warlock (secondary controller), Bard (secondary controller) and a Fighter (secondary controller) as their members. It's... sick. Exactly like DiscipleOfBob's party, the Wizard (Warlord MC Wizard in his case) throws down Storm Pillar and the rest of the party starts pushing/pulling/sliding the monsters through it. They don't stand a chance. There's so much control that my monsters never get to do anything.

As for DragonBane, I'm not sure a Swordmage would be best suited for this party since the SM would have all of the attention anyway and SM's prefer the enemy to attack their allies. Actually, never mind. It might, considering the top-flight AC and strong powers. Yep, yep, I'd go Swordmage if I had to play a Defender in that party.

Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 11:07 PM
Alright. I'll see if I can get her to buy a heavy shield; I think that will help a lot. We've already talked to her about playing a swordmage, but she'd prefer to stay a fighter. As for the whole Storm pillar Idea, that's the power I'm taking with Arcane Initiate when I multiclass. I'm looking forward to doing exactly what you are.

tcrudisi
2010-10-16, 11:17 PM
Alright. I'll see if I can get her to buy a heavy shield; I think that will help a lot. We've already talked to her about playing a swordmage, but she'd prefer to stay a fighter. As for the whole Storm pillar Idea, that's the power I'm taking with Arcane Initiate when I multiclass. I'm looking forward to doing exactly what you are.

If she's invested in the greatsword, she may not want to switch. For instance: Weapon Expertise (greatsword), Weapon Focus (greatsword)... wait, Eladrin, right? She should (well, maybe not at level 1, but very soon) have Eladrin Soldier and use a longsword. Strictly speaking, early on, it is equal to a greatsword with weapon focus. Although, if she took "2h weapon talent" then there's probably no way to get her to switch without begging the DM to let her change it to "1h weapon talent".

But if the DM allows her to change the character to 1h weapon talent and she doesn't have a magical greatsword, I'd switch to a longsword + heavy shield in a heartbeat. It would certainly help her survivability.

/edit About Storm Pillar -- it is really good only if your party has a lot of forced movement powers. If they don't, that power typically goes to waste. In probably 90-95% of groups, it's not that good of a power. For the right group, though? It's amazing.

Katana_Geldar
2010-10-16, 11:19 PM
Defenders, particularly primary defenders, usually TAKE damage to save the other party members. That's why they need good armour, good defeces and quite a bit of beef.
In the ToH group I am running the dragonborn pally has an AC of 30 at level 10. The amount of times she has taken damage are so few that they're notable. Yes, meatshields are cliche but they have their uses. Sounds as if you need one.
And FTR, swordmagi don't make very good tanks and are considered the toughest class to play.

Rauthiss
2010-10-16, 11:28 PM
Checked with the Dm, he's fine with it. Now to convince the swordmage's player. As for Storm Pillar, I'm using it mainly because my int is horrid, and it doesn't require any attack roll - I have a tendency to roll just as horrid on those. In addition, our Bard is making good use of Cutting words.

huttj509
2010-10-16, 11:36 PM
So controllers, such as wizards, are subtle? Are they quick to anger? Should we meddle in their affairs?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

WitchSlayer
2010-10-17, 12:31 AM
You want a crazy good defender whose easy to get the hang of?

Warden. Definitely. You can mark any enemy adjacent to you, and if they hit another ally, depending on how far they are, you can do a VARIETY of things to them.

Kurald Galain
2010-10-17, 04:16 AM
Actively avoid discussion of 4e vs. other editions.
5E is better :smallbiggrin:

Anyway. Controllers are probably the hardest class to play, and a poorly played controller won't contribute all that much to the party. A well-played controller, however, will make strategy a nightmare for the DM. And no, that's not an exaggeration.

For instance, suppose the DM has a line of archers on a cliff, about to go pincushion on us. Then the wizard drops a Stinking Cloud on them. Suddenly they can't see us any more; they're going to shoot us how?
Or consider a group of lurker monsters that use minor action attacks, move into the walls, and/or use opportunity attacks a lot. A color spray shuts that down hard, on three or four monsters at once.
And of course, pushing orcs off a cliff with a push-3 power is sooo much fun. Really, if you've never seen a controller be the MVP for an encounter, then you've never seen a well-played one.

Aside from that, a well-built wizard will actually outdamage a sorcerer; but this is a design flaw in the sorcerer.

WitchSlayer
2010-10-17, 05:44 AM
5E is better :smallbiggrin:

Anyway. Controllers are probably the hardest class to play, and a poorly played controller won't contribute all that much to the party. A well-played controller, however, will make strategy a nightmare for the DM. And no, that's not an exaggeration.

For instance, suppose the DM has a line of archers on a cliff, about to go pincushion on us. Then the wizard drops a Stinking Cloud on them. Suddenly they can't see us any more; they're going to shoot us how?
Or consider a group of lurker monsters that use minor action attacks, move into the walls, and/or use opportunity attacks a lot. A color spray shuts that down hard, on three or four monsters at once.
And of course, pushing orcs off a cliff with a push-3 power is sooo much fun. Really, if you've never seen a controller be the MVP for an encounter, then you've never seen a well-played one.

Aside from that, a well-built wizard will actually outdamage a sorcerer; but this is a design flaw in the sorcerer.

I once annihilated a good third of the encounter thanks to push. We were on a staircase suspended above the astral sea. So I cast a nice big burst spell and combined with explosive power, I pushed three giants into the astral sea. It felt great.

Mordokai
2010-10-17, 06:19 AM
And you said invoker, eh? Well, I can see how biased you are towards controllers! Invokers...invokers are terrible. I'm sure I can build a decent one, as could anyone else with experience, but at that point he'd be multiclassed heavily and just be "playable".

I beg to differ. My level 24 (shush :smalltongue:) invoker can deal some really crazy stuff to the enemies. Ok, so he went into the Morninglord PP and is teamed up with a paladin with Pervasive Light and has a heck a lot of radiant dealing powers and feats that improve his radiant powers (Torm's Radiance anybody?), but he's one crazy sumofabitch.

tcrudisi
2010-10-17, 10:45 AM
Aside from that, a well-built wizard will actually outdamage a sorcerer; but this is a design flaw in the sorcerer.

A well-built, highly-specific, must-be-a-Genasi Wizard can come close to matching a Sorcerer. Some argue that they can beat the Sorcerer for damage. Yet that Wizard must pick specific powers which aren't as good as the typical Wizard powers of that level and they don't really function as a Controller any more.

I don't think it's a fair comparison, really. I'm okay with a class giving up everything good about their class to be able to do another role. Heck, I remember back when Paladin's used to be one of the top strikers when built properly (maybe they still are? I don't know, I never play Paladins.)

The Sorcerer is fine. The Wizard is fine since their Orb nerf.

Kurald Galain
2010-10-17, 12:09 PM
A well-built, highly-specific, must-be-a-Genasi Wizard can come close to matching a Sorcerer.
Actually, all he needs is Enlarge Spell. The sorcerer does area damage, generally in a burst-1. The wizard does slightly less area damage, but in a burst-2. In terms of total damage, the wizard will generally win this. Elemental Empowerment is just icing on the cake.

Plus, the wizard has numerous autohitting effects that last the entire encounter, such as Flaming Sphere and Stinking Cloud. The sorcerer... not so much. A wiz with a Cloud up basically does 1d6 + 2d10 + 3x int + 3x item/feat modifiers with an at-will attack like Thunderwave. The sorc simply cannot compete with that.

That said, yes, the wizard is fine since the Orb nerf. The sorc, however, lost a lot in recent nerfs (Enlarge + Frostcheese + Daggermaster, for starters) and hasn't gotten much compensation lately.

(edit) I am not aware of the paladin ever having been a top-tier striker, though; how does that work? Radiant Mafia build?

tcrudisi
2010-10-17, 12:48 PM
(edit) I am not aware of the paladin ever having been a top-tier striker, though; how does that work? Radiant Mafia build?

It was back when Divine Power first came out, so there wasn't as much competition. I have no idea what the exact build was since I tend to ignore Paladin's. I think the previous editions broke me of them. haha. Anyway - I remember seeing some builds where the Paladin was leading the dpr challenges on the char-op boards.

Also, while yes, the Wizard can achieve bigger bursts... actually, this isn't the right topic for this debate. Let's just agree to disagree. :smallsmile:

mikau013
2010-10-17, 06:03 PM
<snip>
As for the fighter... The main problem with her is that she gets hit often and her HP is in the mid 30s. A few good rolls from the DM and she's gone.

<snip>

What lvl are you playing at? And how high is her con score?

A common mistake I see players who played previous edition make is that they add their con mod to their hp instead of their con score.

For example a fighter with 14 con at lvl 2 should have
15 (start lvl) + 14 (con) + 6 hp for a total of 35 hp.

- Edit: editted hp into con score

holywhippet
2010-10-17, 09:47 PM
I think the main problem is that the fighter is barely playing attention in game. However, she's at the front of the party and I believe she's wielding a greatsword (I could be wrong). She's trying towards dealing damage, but the rest of our party works at a range - Sorcerer, Bard, and Warlock all use primarily ranged attacks, while our shaman uses her spirit. The fighter, however, is built for melee. She becomes our line of not being killed by enemies, so that might be why she's hitting 0 so often. The leaders are giving her healing, but all too often she's back down to 0 within a round.



Does the phrase "combat advantage" or "flanking" ring a bell? If the fighter is standing out by themself the enemy is most likely flanking them and reaping nice +2 bonuses to hit (IIRC).

mobdrazhar
2010-10-17, 10:20 PM
why isn't the shaman using his spirit compaion to help the fighter flank and stop being flanked?

Blackfang108
2010-10-17, 10:24 PM
why isn't the shaman using his spirit compaion to help the fighter flank and stop being flanked?

Probably because the spirit Companion can't flank, without the usage of specific powers.

Although it can help keep the fighter from becoming flanked.

mobdrazhar
2010-10-17, 10:41 PM
i was under the impression that spirits and summons could flank.

Zaydos
2010-10-17, 10:43 PM
Spirit Companions cannot unless they use one of the shaman's at-wills (Stalker's Strike) or certain other powers.

Blackfang108
2010-10-17, 10:48 PM
i was under the impression that spirits and summons could flank.

You'll need to reread the rules for the "Conjuration" keyword in PHB II.

Jaidu
2010-10-18, 12:54 AM
Not long ago, I played in an LFR game at H3 (Levels 7-10) with some friends. Our group had three controllers (a druid and two invokers), one defender (paladin), one pure striker (a horrible barbarian) and my hybrid barbarian/warlord, about 2/3 warlord with charging boosts for DPR. I didn't have to use a single heal the entire night. Our paladin, who was more focused on dealing damage than locking down enemies, never had to lay on hands or even second wind. The controllers so thoroughly destroyed enemy actions and tactics that we waltzed through every fight with ease. Well played, well built controllers can really dominate encounters.

Sipex
2010-10-18, 01:10 PM
I would also recommend that you get your fighter friend to invest in a feat to use plate armor instead of scale. (note: This is only if your fighter friend wants to play a defender. If she wants damage then she won't agree to the changes)

I'd also be interested in the following:
- What level are you guys?
- What are the fighter's stats ala STR, CON, DEX, INT, WIS, CHA?
- What magic items does the fighter have?

Doug Lampert
2010-10-18, 01:41 PM
The party I'm in right now is called among the group the "DM's Nightmare" because there isn't an encounter he can throw at us that we don't absolutely dominate, even when he makes up some overpowered homebrewed monsters.

Then he's doing it wrong. Only one side has limited resources, so it's only POSSIBLE, even in theory, for the side with limited resources to be able to dominate the side with infinite resources unless the one with infinite resources wants you to.

Munchkinbane Level 40 Solo Artillery
HP 2100
Immune (everything it's possible to be immune to)
Resist 500 all
Initiative 85, 75, 65, 55, 45, 35, 25, 15, 5 (Special: The Munchkinbane doesn't roll initiative, instead it gets a full turn at each listed initiative)
Perception +70, truesight, darkvision
Saves +20 (The Munchkinbane saves against all effects at the start of each of its turns, even effects a save can't normally end)
Resist 50
Move fly 1000 (hover), Teleport 1000
all ability scores 100

Powers: Instant kill. (Minor action, at will) Close Blast 1000, targets enemies. +45 vs. weakest defense. Does 1000d6 damage (crit 6000+2d6), and dazes, stuns, petrifies, and knocks unconcious the target (no save, all conditions permanent until removed by appropriate rituals).
Half damage on a miss. All conditions still apply but all except petrification end at the end of the munkinbane's next turn.

Add more stuff to suit. Throw 20 or thirty of these per PC at the party and it should about do it. Of course that assumes a level 1 party, by level 2 you may have to ramp it up some.