i dont know why ive been such a 'tard but i noticed today that wizards are the only controller type... when do you think we will see more? and when we do what do you think they will be?
Well, "Controller" is the most ill-defined and oddest of the Combat Roles. I barely have a grasp on what they are actually meant to do as-is. I mean, the others are self explainitory. But what do Controllers do? Every class has abilities to "control" to some degree. Is it just their AoE attacks, the fact that they can hit multiple people with their powers that makes thme more "controlling"?
I have no idea what the next Controller will be, but I can tell you that I wouldn't expect many to be made.
i imagine monks will be strikers
do you think Sorcerers might be controllers like wizards?
Ty
It was mentioned recently, I think in the Minotaur article as one of the preferred classes of Minotaurs.
Haven't seen the article (no DDI subscription), but it seems to me that it's quite possible they just used a different word for fighter. But I could be wrong. Happens all the time.
"Warder" as a class just seems a little flavorless. Fighters fight. Paladins are holy knights. Sword mages are, well, self explanatory. Warder? It could be used to describe any of the other three classes.
I am, however, quite miffed that they keep releasing spoilers for the non-controllers in the book. I understand not wanting to let a totally new class out of the bag, but couldn't we have at least gotten the Sorcerer or Druid as a preview instead of either the Barbarian and Bard? I really, really would like to have more of a choice than just... wizard.
Well, "Controller" is the most ill-defined and oddest of the Combat Roles. I barely have a grasp on what they are actually meant to do as-is. I mean, the others are self explainitory. But what do Controllers do? Every class has abilities to "control" to some degree. Is it just their AoE attacks, the fact that they can hit multiple people with their powers that makes thme more "controlling"?
I have no idea what the next Controller will be, but I can tell you that I wouldn't expect many to be made.
As best as I can figure, the purpose of controllers is to debuff enemies and impede their tactics. It's kind of the polar opposite of leaders, who buff allies and enable their tactics. It's kind of like the Defender and Striker are polar opposites: one takes hits while the other dishes them out.
The Wizard controls though area attacks, which hinder enemy formations and movement (Cloud of Daggers, Scorching Burst, Thunderwave, Burning Hands, Force Orb, Flaming Sphere, etc.), and by inflicting status effects and penalties (Ray of Frost, Chill Strike, Ray of Enfeeblement, etc.). Some of their best powers even do both (Icy Terrain, Acid Arrow, Freezing Cloud, Sleep, etc.). I think it'd be more obvious if they had a standard class feature like all the other roles get, though (a.k.a. Defender mark, Striker bonus damage, Leader healing).
. . . Anyways, I started up a thread about this same thing over on the controller board some time ago. It bothers me that we started with 3 strikers, 2 defenders, 2 leaders, and only a single controller, and that since then we've gotten another defender and previews only for a striker and two leaders. I would have thought that they should have given us some kind of alternate controller at some point early on...
Well, "Controller" is the most ill-defined and oddest of the Combat Roles. I barely have a grasp on what they are actually meant to do as-is. I mean, the others are self explainitory. But what do Controllers do? Every class has abilities to "control" to some degree. Is it just their AoE attacks, the fact that they can hit multiple people with their powers that makes thme more "controlling"?
I have no idea what the next Controller will be, but I can tell you that I wouldn't expect many to be made.
For the role: I want you to do one thing, there's a Wizard PP with a non damaging utility cloud based AOE (I think the PP is called the Stormmage or such).
Why would a Controller have a non-damaging AOE?
If you can think of ways to use this spell as a form of control, your path to Controller enlightenment will begin.
I have little faith that the incanter/theurge (divine controller) and the sorcerer are going to be anything but reskinned wizards. We will probably see more controllers as the years drag on, and I'd expect the implementation to get better as the concept ages like a fine wine. Wizards needs an opportunity to get to know the structure they have devised.
I have little faith that the... sorcerer are going to be anything but reskinned wizards.
Okay, why in the world do people keep saying this? It's completely ridiculous. There is nothing to suggest that the sorcerer will just be a slightly altered Wizard, and I would like to have a long talk with whoever started this rumor.
The Sorcerer and Wizard are both Arcane Controllers, yes, but so what?
The Ranger and Rogue are both Martial Strikers. Do you think they are the same?
The Artificer and Bard are both Arcane Leaders. Do you think they are the same?
And about your theurge problem, that's tantamount to saying that the Barbarian came out the same as the Ranger, Rogue, or Warlock. I mean, I hope we can all agree that the Swordmage is definitely very different from the Fighter and Paladin, right? And I will again bring up the Artificer and Bard; not only are they different from each other, but I've never seen anybody suggest that they are the same as the Cleric or Warlord...
I just don't get where all of this pessimism is coming from...
woah wheres the warder info, hadnt even heard of them
Ty
Warden, not warder. Leave the Wheel of Time out of this ;)
Okay, why in the world do people keep saying this? It's completely ridiculous. There is nothing to suggest that the sorcerer will just be a slightly altered Wizard, and I would like to have a long talk with whoever started this rumor.
It's not even a rumor, as far as I know. I never made a claim that my opinion was based in any kind of rational logic. It's just a dread I have, kindled by how slowly Wizards has rolled out controllers. Five months, three defenders, four strikers, three leaders, one controller. That's all. Just the disparity.
I mean, given the lack of representation for the role, wouldn't you have expected to see the sorcerer in Dragon before the artificer? Again, nothing concrete. Just... thoughts.
Plenty of people have difficulty grasping why a Wizard is good, I doubt another controller would change their minds.
Well, "Controller" is the most ill-defined and oddest of the Combat Roles. I barely have a grasp on what they are actually meant to do as-is. I mean, the others are self explainitory. But what do Controllers do? Every class has abilities to "control" to some degree. Is it just their AoE attacks, the fact that they can hit multiple people with their powers that makes thme more "controlling"?
I'd considered it principally and more completely as 'crowd controller'... They specialise in dealing with large numbers of enemies, whether through burning through them with area damage, or neutralising their effectiveness through immobilising, stunning, etc.
In concrete terms, in your typical encounter the Defender absorbs the damage, the Strikers concentrate on taking down the big guys, the Leader keeps everyone optimised, while the controller makes sure the minions (or sometimes brutes and soldiers) are not a problem for anyone.
Controllers are more focused on altering the nature of the field of combat and nuking large groups of enemies more than they are singling out individual units. The wizard is actually a poor view of a controller since it has a lot of striker bleed in its powers.
I think we've not seen more controllers because WotC didn't even have a clear idea on how to do the role themselves so with feedback from wizards they're working on a controller that is more distinctly a controller.
Debuffing is for leaders, MP has some debuff powers for warlords and the bard preview shows debuff powers for them.
I think the problem was the choice of controller as the role name causing confusion about what it's supposed to do. The other roles bring pretty clear images of what they do just with their name (defender protects the others, strikers deal damage to enemies, leader coordinates his allies and affects morale of boths sides with his actions).
The sorceror is supposed to be a second arcane controller and we're led to believe there will be a divine and primal controller in PHB2 as well.
It is confirmed that there will be at least two controllers in Player's Handbook II, but possibly as many as three:
[indent]- Sorcerer (Arcane Controller)
- An as-yet-unrevealed Divine Controller ("Theurge" is one of the speculated names.)
AND POSSIBLY
- A Primal Controller, speculated to be the Druid.[/indent]
The evidence is this:
[indent]-It is confirmed that PH2 will present eight classes.
- The names of those eight classes being with the letters B, B, D, I, S, S, T, and W, respectively.
- We know that PH2 will present classes from each of the Arcane, Divine, and Primal power sources.
- Sorcerer will be an Arcane Controller. (That's an S.)
- Bard will be an Arcane Leader. (There's a B.)
- Barbarian is a Primal Striker. (Another B.)
- Shaman is a Primal Leader. (Another S.)
- Druid is confirmed as a Primal class. (That's D.)
- Warden is confirmed as a class. (That's W.)
- One of the classes in PH2 is a "more spellcaster-y Cleric". (Read: Divine Controller.)
- One of the PH2 classes is a Defender.
- Finally, despite early reports to the contrary, the latest news is that the Druid will NOT be a "hybrid role" class.
From the above evidence, we can infer:
- There are at least two Arcane classes: a Controller (Sorcerer) and a Leader (Bard).
- There are at least three Primal classes: a Leader (Shaman), a Striker (Barbarian), and one class whose role hasn't been confirmed (Druid).
- There is at least one Divine class in PH2: a "more spellcaster-y Cleric" (again, read as "Divine Controller").
- The Warden class is one of either Arcane, Divine, or Primal.
- The classes whose names begin with "I" and "T" are each one of either Arcane, Divine, or Primal.
- At least one of either Druid, Warden, "I", or "T" will be a Defender.
Lastly, from the above inferences, the following conclusions are commonly speculated:
(Note: I've used "might be" rather than "will be" to reinforce the fact that these only educated guesses at this point!)
- PH2 might divide its eight classes among its power sources thusly: two Arcane classes, two Divine classes, and four Primal classes
- The Warden might be a Primal Defender.
- The Druid might be either a Primal Controller or a wildshape-based melee class (a Primal Defender or a Primal Striker).
- "I" and "T" might both be Divine classes.
- "I" might be "Inquisitor", a Divine Striker, or "Invoker", a Divine Controller.
- "T" might be "Theurge", a Divine Controller.[/indent]
Anyway, I hope someone has found this enlightening!
(Also, check out Ranadiel's stickied compilation thread in the Future Releases forum for more info!)Oh, and FWIW, word on the Sorcerer indicates that while it shares a role and power source with the Wizard, it will give the distinct impression of being a caster "barely in control of the forces he or she commands". This might be achieved by attaching "kicker" buffs to himself when he uses an attack power, and by a limited use of wild-magic-type mechanics. (An attack power might do a random type of damage or afflict targets with a random condition, for example.)
****! Sorry, I put a "R" instead of a "N", it is Warden, not Warder. Warden would make quite a lot of sense as a Primal Defender considering how a Warden protects/looks after a area of land.
A warden will most likely be site specific and more like the old ranger.
-Sorcerer (arcane controller) – confirmed.
-Theurge/Incanter (divine controller) – speculated
-Druid (primal controller) – speculated
I have two more speculations:
-Illusionist (shadow controller)
-Wu-Jen (elemental controller)
Okay, why in the world do people keep saying this? It's completely ridiculous. There is nothing to suggest that the sorcerer will just be a slightly altered Wizard, and I would like to have a long talk with whoever started this rumor.
I just don't get where all of this pessimism is coming from...
It started in 3e, and people go off what they know. I think that WotC has learned their lesson, and will make the Sorcerer have its own feel, even if it's the same roll as the Wizard.
So far we have:
-Sorcerer (arcane controller) – confirmed.
-Theurge/Incanter (divine controller) – speculated
-Druid (primal controller) – speculated
I have two more speculations:
-Illusionist (shadow controller)
-Wu-Jen (elemental controller)
Might I suggest adding Necromancer as a shadow controller under the speculated list?
Illusionist got powers in pone of the past dragon issues, it branches off from the wizard class
Except that they have said that they are holding back on illusion powers for a possible future shadow power source illusionist. There might be some illusion powers for wizards already out there, but there are a lot more elemental powers for them and we are getting an entire power source dedicated to elemental powers. Wizards dabble in illusions, illusionists, assuming they are made, will master them.
-Wu-Jen (elemental controller)
But the wu-jen is asian. It has to be ki-powered.
But the wu-jen is asian. It has to be ki-powered.
Nonsense... Who ever said that? I don't think I have seen a single person ever say that "all Asian classes should be Ki-based". I have seen several people say that certain Asian classes should be Ki-based, but never that there should be a coherent pattern of such.
Naw, the Wu-Jen was always very explicitly elementalist, although it was an odd, to the western mind, set of elements. Wood, for instance, was an element to the Wu-Jen.
The five traditional elements in Chinese thought (particularly Taoist thought) are Fire, Water, Wood, Metal, and Earth.
If anything, I think the inclusion of Wood is nowhere near as strange as the lack of Air as an element.
Nonsense... Who ever said that? I don't think I have seen a single person ever say that "all Asian classes should be Ki-based". I have seen several people say that certain Asian classes should be Ki-based, but never that there should be a coherent pattern of such.
The five traditional elements in Chinese thought (particularly Taoist thought) are Fire, Water, Wood, Metal, and Earth.
If anything, I think the inclusion of Wood is nowhere near as strange as the lack of Air as an element.
I believe I actually have seen some people seriously suggest that Wu-Jen should be Ki. It has been a while though so I can't remember for sure, althogh that is certainly a giant fear that some people have about the Ki power source.
The five traditional elements in Chinese thought (particularly Taoist thought) are Fire, Water, Wood, Metal, and Earth.
If anything, I think the inclusion of Wood is nowhere near as strange as the lack of Air as an element.
Metal and air are the same thing....that will take about 300 pages of explanation.
The Chinese didn't include air because originally they only included items that were visible. It's not really that strange if you think about it. Breathing was refreshing the spirit so air is more or less the spirit (which is how we get at least 10 different spiritualist religions from that area that believe the body's relationship to breathing is more important than its relationship to the rest of the world. They understood that cutting off one's soul killed one and that most methods of death eventually led to some type of suffocation, so therefore, air is life.
A few centuries later doctors noticed that air fill sacks in your lungs that float on water, resist fire, earth and wood so they therefore assumed that air and metal were the same becomes metal cuts through air...
Wait until you find out what they thought pee was.
I have heard people say that all asian attacks should be ki based. After I scratched my head I wondered if they knew what a thuggie was. Definitely not a ki based attack there.
In general it seems that they want to make thematic assumptions about attack. It is a unilateral direction towards a more movie-like theme, archetypal roles that play into peoples bias. That seems reasonable based on the explanation of what they are trying to do with 4e, so I expect every asian-flavor to hold to the same power source because the movies do, and I would also assume that Native American flavored and African flavored classes would hold to that same standard. Whether or not I agree with it is moot since I don't really get a say.
I know some people might say that this is overexaggeration, but the idea is to get a feel for distinct archetypes within a role which is really a narrow scope so there will be some static characterizations of class. You really can't help it. That's why Paladin is supposed to cover all of the moralist church minded fighters of the crusades, rogues cover a broad topic field including cutthroats, brigands, swashbucklers(not for long I hope) swindles, pinches, hoots, montebanks, hoodlums, sneaks, cutpurses, thugs, spies and the like while fighter probably covers the broadest range. When you introduce a class distinctly called monk mirrored after 12th century martial artists you'll have static characterization. But by broadening the scope to include French kickboxers, German brawlers, and Arab wrestlers by just using a more generic term it might offend people who want the term monk back for sentimentality and because it does evoke imagery of the Kung Fu Streetfighter.
Anyways this is about Wu Jen which I do hope will have their own power source which is neither ki or arcane. Shaman types have their power in spirits, and hedge wizards or witch doctors or eastern wizards had their's tied to elements. Hopefully that is considered when creating new power sources and classes
As for controllers I already pointed out we have more on the way and the devs have pretty much stated part of the reason there was only one in PHB is because it was the role they had the most trouble deciding exactly what it was they did and how.
In an attempt to dispel the ki = asian fears. We already have an Asian paragon path that isn't tied to a ki power source. The fighter paragon path Kensai is a martial based paragon path that is Asian in 'theme' as well as name.
I need to go back and read the D&D4 description of the kensai, but across previous editions of D&D and AD&D, the kensai has been stripped of all asian flavor for many, many years (excepting, of course, use of the word "ki"). The vast majority of the artwork showing kensai in D&D3 was in no way asian, and in AD&D2, the kensai was universal throughout Faerun with few or no ties to Kara-Tur. The name doesn't even have translational relevance anymore.
I was joking about the wu-jen needing to be of the ki power source. Even with the Western/Eastern elemental split, elemental is still the obvious better choice. But it will not surprise me one iota if Wizards goes the ki route.
Infact, if we see T as a Transmuter Arcane Leader, WOTC might try and demonstrate why the Wizard isn't the same as a 3E wizard. I.E. some of the spell schools had spells better suited to rolls other than controller.
This may seem unlikely but it is possible.
Other than that, I will throw in the word Incantrix as a possibility for I.
Oh and surely it'd be Theurgist, not Theurge.
And it could be Templar.
Random speculation:
Is the Sorceror going to be called the Sorceror, or will be see a new Arcane Controller with the right thematic components but with a different name?
That would have made PHB 1 balanced at 2 of each role.
Just throwing this out there: I don't know how true it is, but I seem to recall hearing/reading somewhere that Ranger's were originally intended to be a controller. However, because the role wasn't entirely fleshed out yet or some other reason, they went with Striker for it's role.
That would have made PHB 1 balanced at 2 of each role.
I can't confirm that, but it sounds likely. Out of all of the martial controllers people keep trying to make, the only one that actually makes any sense would be some kind of archer.
Just throwing this out there: I don't know how true it is, but I seem to recall hearing/reading somewhere that Ranger's were originally intended to be a controller. However, because the role wasn't entirely fleshed out yet or some other reason, they went with Striker for it's role.
That is exactly true, the designers stated that they didn't have a good enough bead on what the controller role entailed, so the ranger was originally a Controller, but slid into Striker territory during later development.
So the lesson for all of those clamouring for a Martial Controller: just play the Archer Ranger build, that's probably as close as you'll ever get.
…Which could be a good thing, as every idea I have seen for a Martial Controller so far has been really contrived (this alchemist/engineer/dragoon etc business is doing my head in).
I.E. some of the spell schools had spells better suited to rolls other than controller.
Depends on how you define controller. I agree with you, but Wizards seems to define controller as "wizard." Theurge = divine wizard. Druid = primal wizard. Illusionist = shadow wizard. Psion = psi wizard. Elementalist = elemental wizard. Wu jen = ki wizard. Sorcerer = second arcane wizard. If they were open to other possibilities, there'd be a martial controller by now. There'd be ANY OTHER controller by now. It's not that difficult a prospect.
I'm a little concerned that they're going to fall into this trap for all of the roles, but it is still too early to tell. Strikers and leaders seem to have good variety so far.
Other than that, I will throw in the word Incantrix as a possibility for I.
Incanter. Incantrix is gender-locked.
Oh and surely it'd be Theurgist, not Theurge.
Well, I'd hope not. Although the OED doesn't officially recognize either usage as far as I know, the Greek word is 'theurge.' 'Theurgist' is a redundant Anglicization. '-urge' and '-ist' mean virtually the same thing: "worker in [blank]." If 'theurgist' were correct, the field of study wouldn't be 'theurgy,' it would be 'theurgism.'
And just try saying that at a table of gamers without getting a reaction.
And it could be Templar.
More Dark Sun canon! It certainly could be!
So the lesson for all of those clamouring for a Martial Controller: just play the Archer Ranger build, that's probably as close as you'll ever get.
I hate seeing people admit defeat on the martial controller front. Ignoring for a moment that I think it is completely possible to write up such a class given the time, every other class in D&D4 has powers that make no logical sense, and most fans agree that this is not a weakness of the system. So why is everyone so hung up on the "impossibility" of a martial controller?
I hate seeing people admit defeat on the martial controller front.
I didn't admit crap, stop doing whatever it is you’re doing (dull), I said "probably" and "so far".
Man, does anyone actually think before they post these days?
I didn't admit crap, stop doing whatever it is you’re doing (dull), I said "probably" and "so far".
Man, does anyone actually think before they post these days?
I don't know, but people definitely don't consider etiquette before they post, that's for damn sure.
I don't know, but people definitely don't consider etiquette before they post, that's for damn sure.
Dan: Please forgive me for apologizing for you.
Nemo: Please forgive Dan. He's been irritable lately on account of having to explain how reality works in every second thread.
Perhaps it's just a matter of perspective, but I think your name suggests your nature: "Nemo the Lost (cause)". Personally, I have a lot of trouble envisioning how a genuine Martial Controller would operate, and for that reason I think it's functionally impossible. Part of the problem is that we've only got one example of how a PC Controller is supposed to operate, and so our definition of "Controller" is antithetic to how the Martial power source operates. Time may yet prove you correct, Nemo, but for the time being I hope your gills are working, because you shouldn't be holding your breath.
Depends on how you define controller. I agree with you, but Wizards seems to define controller as "wizard."
I think they have defined them, its in the PHB. I've almost come to think of them as Ranged Defenders.
As an example of what I mean by "spells not suited to the Controller role" Bulls Strength wasn't really a Controling power, its the sort of thing a Leader would cast (like the Bard class might). Similarly, See Invisible could be used as a Leader Utility power. Polymorph is effectively a buff, etc.
A Martial controller has to achieve a lot to compare with the full extent of what a Wizard can do (and that's just the powers), but Martial characters can do a crap load of weird things (Master Infiltrators being my favourite: "I killed him, and now i'm invisible").
A martial controller is going to be fairly OTT.
Nemo: Please forgive Dan. He's been irritable lately on account of having to explain how reality works in every second thread.
I'm actually irrationally fond of Dan; you don't have to apologize for him.
Perhaps it's just a matter of perspective, but I think your name suggests your nature: "Nemo the Lost (cause)".
::chuckle:: That's fair.
I'm actually irrationally fond of Dan; you don't have to apologize for him.
::chuckle:: That's fair.
I'm glad that've resolved this amicably! Thanks for being a good sport, Nemo!(Why can't every thread be this friendly?)
Classes
Avenger(Divine(?) Striker(?))
Barbarian(Primal Striker)
Bard(Arcane Leader)
Druid(Primal Controller(?))
Invoker(Divine(?) Controller(?))
Shaman(Primal(?) Leader)
Sorcerer(Arcane Controller)
Warden(Primal(?) Defender(?))
P.S. - I've been on another forum where people were discussing what they like about 4th when it got hijacked by a few anti-4th repliers. It actually amased me that this didn't turn into 5 pages of flaming and such. Congrats to all parties for acting like civil human beings.:D
I'm actually irrationally fond of Dan; you don't have to apologize for him.
I'm fond of you too, I look out for your posts, sorry about being a little snippy the other day, but you know, how these boards can be soul deadening sometimes, what with a lot of the clientele.
I'm not 100%, but I am pretty sure this breakdown is as accurate we can get until we see the actual book:
Classes
Avenger(Divine(?) Striker(?))
Barbarian(Primal Striker)
Bard(Arcane Leader)
Druid(Primal Controller(?))
Invoker(Divine(?) Controller(?))
Shaman(Primal(?) Leader)
Sorcerer(Arcane Controller)
Warden(Primal(?) Defender(?))
P.S. - I've been on another forum where people were discussing what they like about 4th when it got hijacked by a few anti-4th repliers. It actually amased me that this didn't turn into 5 pages of flaming and such. Congrats to all parties for acting like civil human beings.:D
Avenger and Invoker are confirmed as divine and the Shaman and Warden are confirmed as primal thanks to the full list of classes in Divine Power. In short, by knowing that Divine Power includes Avengers, Clerics, Invokers, and Paladins and by knowing that Arcane Power includes Bards, Sorcerers, Swordmages, Warlocks and Wizards and by knowing that PHB2 only has characters from the Arcane, Divine, and Primal power sources we know that the Warden and the Shaman cannot be Arcane (or else it would be in Arcane Power) and cannot be Divine (or else it would be in Divine Power) and therefore by deduction must be Primal. Which brings the list to...
Avenger(Divine Striker(?))
Barbarian(Primal Striker)
Bard(Arcane Leader)
Druid(Primal Controller(?))
Invoker(Divine Controller(?))
Shaman(Primal Leader)
Sorcerer(Arcane Controller)
Warden(Primal Defender(?))
With the ?'s being the unconfirmed but speculated pieces.
Avenger and Invoker are confirmed as divine and the Shaman and Warden are confirmed as primal thanks to the full list of classes in Divine Power. In short, by knowing that Divine Power includes Avengers, Clerics, Invokers, and Paladins and by knowing that Arcane Power includes Bards, Sorcerers, Swordmages, Warlocks and Wizards and by knowing that PHB2 only has characters from the Arcane, Divine, and Primal power sources we know that the Warden and the Shaman cannot be Arcane (or else it would be in Arcane Power) and cannot be Divine (or else it would be in Divine Power) and therefore by deduction must be Primal. Which brings the list to...
Avenger(Divine Striker(?))
Barbarian(Primal Striker)
Bard(Arcane Leader)
Druid(Primal Controller(?))
Invoker(Divine Controller(?))
Shaman(Primal Leader)
Sorcerer(Arcane Controller)
Warden(Primal Defender(?))
With the ?'s being the unconfirmed but speculated pieces.
Ah but you are assuming that the Shaman has been confirmed for PHBII, which it hasn't.:P