If another caster type IS needed..............................Does the fact that the Ardent is a weapon-based psionic leader mean the devs have a bad@$$ Psionic caster-type Defender in store for us???
If another caster type is NOT needed (and there also IS a Psionic defender)................................what does the Ardent leave for a Psionic defender class to do besides mark?? Just the psi-blade/soul knife thing?
When I think about all the previous edition psionic disciplines, random classes like the wilder or cerebremancer, and various psi-character types from fiction in general, I kind of feel like the Psionic power source will be needing another caster type in addition to the Psion. I mean, could we have psionics as the power of the mind yet have three of the classes as melee combat types?? (Yes, I know they don't necessarily have to fill each role, etc., etc.) Does the Psion class really flesh out all the psionic "caster" concepts? What do you think?
If another caster type IS needed..............................Does the fact that the Ardent is a weapon-based psionic leader mean the devs have a bad@$$ Psionic caster-type Defender in store for us???
If another caster type is NOT needed (and there also IS a Psionic defender)................................what does the Ardent leave for a Psionic defender class to do besides mark?? Just the psi-blade/soul knife thing?
Remember the whole thing about how Arcane was more controller orientiated, even though there was only 1 arcane controller. It might be that case with the psionic power source and "caster types".
There could be the Wilder, but I feel it's stepping a bit on the toes of the Sorcerer and Ardent.
Of course there hasn't been a "caster type" defender yet, just like there wasn't a weapon using controller before the Seeker.
However, I do feel that the Psion is not enough to cover all of the ranged, "caster"-like psychic character concepts. Specifically, the Psion, being INT-based, is clearly dependant on training to have unlocked its powers. I'd prefer that there also be a CHA-based psychic class, something to cover the concept of the character who doesn't have to concentrate to use the powers that he worked for but to keep the powers that he never asked for under control. It could easily fill the ranged striker role as opposed to the Monk filling the melee striker role.
However, I doubt that this class will come out in the PHB3, as that would result in five psionic classes. Instead, I'm betting that something like this will be the setting class for Dark Sun, as it has a major emphasis on psionics.
I think that it's possible that the Psion Defender (Battlemind?) will be a caster in the same way that the Monk is a caster.
This.
That said, I think it's likely that the PsiDef will have a good selection of ranged powers, or possibly melee attacks with high reach values, with a focus on telekenetic pulls and slides. As such, it would defend primarily by making it difficult for enemies to get into a position where they can actually attack any of it's allies.
Specifically, the Psion, being INT-based, is clearly dependant on training to have unlocked its powers.
I read this more as having an abundance of power, and needing a mind capable of handling it all in order to focus it onto a specific target.
...a mind capable of handling it all...
Sounds to me like that should be WIS or CHA based, most likely CHA.
...in order to focus it onto a specific target.
Sounds like a striker to me, not a controller.
Not to say that you're wrong or that the Psion isn't capable of covering that concept, but if I were to make an analogy, I feel like that Psion is to the Wizard as what I'm looking for (possibly Wilder?) is to the Sorcerer, and the Psion is capable of covering what I'm looking for the same way that the Wizard is capable of covering the Sorcerer.
I think that it's possible that the Psion Defender (Battlemind?) will be a caster in the same way that the Monk is a caster. I still think that a Defender needs to be melee-oriented in order to work, but the Monk proved that one can be a melee implement-user, so it's not out of the question.
However, I do feel that the Psion is not enough to cover all of the ranged, "caster"-like psychic character concepts. Specifically, the Psion, being INT-based, is clearly dependant on training to have unlocked its powers. I'd prefer that there also be a CHA-based psychic class, something to cover the concept of the character who doesn't have to concentrate to use the powers that he worked for but to keep the powers that he never asked for under control. It could easily fill the ranged striker role as opposed to the Monk filling the melee striker role.
However, I doubt that this class will come out in the PHB3, as that would result in five psionic classes. Instead, I'm betting that something like this will be the setting class for Dark Sun, as it has a major emphasis on psionics.
It'll come, I bet. But not with Dark Sun. Dark Sun isn't giving us a single class, the developers said.
...a mind capable of handling it all...
Sounds to me like that should be WIS or CHA based, most likely CHA.
See, if I was talking about concentration or simple willpower I'd agree, but what I'm talking about is multitasking, and the capability of parsing large amounts of information.
I'll admit I'm biased by my personal view on how Psionics works, but to me the idea of a "trained" psionics user is nonsensical, as the whole point of the power source is that it's innate.
...in order to focus it onto a specific target.
Sounds like a striker to me, not a controller.
Even controllers have to Aim.
Not to say that you're wrong or that the Psion isn't capable of covering that concept, but if I were to make an analogy, I feel like that Psion is to the Wizard as what I'm looking for (possibly Wilder?) is to the Sorcerer, and the Psion is capable of covering what I'm looking for the same way that the Wizard is capable of covering the Sorcerer.
I'm not attacking the concept, just the analogy, as to me Psionics is a power source completely made up of Sorcerers.
...a mind capable of handling it all...
Sounds to me like that should be WIS or CHA based, most likely CHA.
See, if I was talking about concentration or simple willpower I'd agree, but what I'm talking about is multitasking, and the capability of parsing large amounts of information.
I'll admit I'm biased by my personal view on how Psionics works, but to me the idea of a "trained" psionics user is nonsensical, as the whole point of the power source is that it's innate....in order to focus it onto a specific target.
Sounds like a striker to me, not a controller.
Even controllers have to Aim.
Not to say that you're wrong or that the Psion isn't capable of covering that concept, but if I were to make an analogy, I feel like that Psion is to the Wizard as what I'm looking for (possibly Wilder?) is to the Sorcerer, and the Psion is capable of covering what I'm looking for the same way that the Wizard is capable of covering the Sorcerer.
I'm not attacking the concept, just the analogy, as to me Psionics is a power source completely made up of Sorcerers.
To me, Psionics seems to be something that might be innate, but might just as well be honed in a master-student tutelage, as opposed to studying in an academic institution.
Whatever it is, Psionics requires discipline, and whether that discipline comes from training the mind with a teacher, or training it on one's one, it's not simply just spontaneous power. Any psionicist could have raw mental energy. Classed characters require the discipline to shape and hone that power into useable form. That's what makes them Ardents, Battleminds, Monks, Psions and other Psionic classes, rather than just NPC humanoids that have psychic damage-typed powers.
In that regards, there shouldn't be any Sorcerer-like class in Psionic, because even the most wild talent like class, the Ardent (which WotC said often came upon his/her powers accidentally) has the discipline to control OTHERS emotions instead of his/her emotions controlling him/her.
Now I feel a major thing that a primary implement using defender class would need, are at-wills that can be used as basic attacks.
As for the old psionic classes that aren't converted yet, I was never too big on the Wilder, unless they do something to improve on it's concept. I really want to see something of the Soulknife in 4e, but it could be the Battlemind (probably combined with Psychic Warrior), or it could be of a striker class that is combined with the Lurk. It's certainly not the other Monk, since they've certainly implied the other Monk (Stonefist) is Hard/External martial arts styles. And the Divine Mind is pretty much the new Ardent, especially with the way Mantles works like the Divine Mind's auras (and I want to see more Mantle feats for more of those 5+ square bonuses).
I'm hoping unlike the Ardent, the Battlemind actually has some ranged psychic attacks, implanting suggestions with your spear just sounds silly.
I feel the wilder got wrapped up in the ardent, and I like that. My one problem with 3.5 psionics were how each class was just a psionic version of another class (or at least many were). Wilder=Sorcer, Psion=Wizard, PW=Fighter, Soulknife=Rogue, so on and so forth. I like that the concepts are getting rolled up into other charactes. And yes i realize the ardent is suffering badly rom being a psionic warlord (why did wotc point it out it's rather obvious).
And I don't think the ardent is implanting ideas by stabbing things, but rather using the attack (and the emotion behind it) to focus it's powers.
Granted, the Wilder itself was sort of lame last edition, but I still feel like the concept is needed if they could just give it more interesting mechanics, because I don't at all agree with the notion that the Psion already covers it any more than I would have agreed that the Wizard already covered the Sorcerer.
I will second other's feelings towards the Psionic Power Source, it needs more ranged support than just the Psion.
All you'd really need to do as a ranged Implement defender is have a ranged mark that encourages enemies to come close to you, and then having powers that push them, slide them, and teleport around so that you can kite them around the battlefield and draw them away from your allies.
An example would be a power that has an effect which pushes the enemy 1 square and then you make a ranged implement attack that slows them, or dazes them, or something else that would limit their options. Obviously, this defender would have a heavy controller sub-type, and I think that goes perfectly in line with psionic power.
Another option (which I've brought up before) is having a defender that "marks" allies instead, so that any enemy who attacks that ally invokes their wrath. It would allow for a more focused style of defending, and invites a wealth of roleplaying options with how the characters deal with the whole "bodyguard" type relationship.
I don't see why people have so much trouble invisioning a ranged defender. The swordmage and Paladin's Divine Sanction are already pretty close, and both are Implement-using Defenders.
All you'd really need to do as a ranged Implement defender is have a ranged mark that encourages enemies to come close to you, and then having powers that push them, slide them, and teleport around so that you can kite them around the battlefield and draw them away from your allies.
An example would be a power that has an effect which pushes the enemy 1 square and then you make a ranged implement attack that slows them, or dazes them, or something else that would limit their options. Obviously, this defender would have a heavy controller sub-type, and I think that goes perfectly in line with psionic power.
Another option (which I've brought up before) is having a defender that "marks" allies instead, so that any enemy who attacks that ally invokes their wrath. It would allow for a more focused style of defending, and invites a wealth of roleplaying options with how the characters deal with the whole "bodyguard" type relationship.
But both of those are still mostly in melee. They stick to the thick of battle, they have nonweapon options, but both stay in the fray. The swordmage is as close to a ranged defender as I can deal with. Otherwise your looking at a controler with a mark. I don't see how you can defend your team from behind the front line. There is the problem of confined spaces, a ranged defender needs open room to move, and still keep the back line out of range of area attacks from enemies. Also the ranged defender's constant need to move would get a lot of OA, as would anytime it's forced to make an attack too close to an enemy. Also I can't think of one character arch that requires a ranged defender, you've got some mechanic ideas now give me a unique story.
I don't see why people have so much trouble invisioning a ranged defender. The swordmage and Paladin's Divine Sanction are already pretty close, and both are Implement-using Defenders.
All you'd really need to do as a ranged Implement defender is have a ranged mark that encourages enemies to come close to you, and then having powers that push them, slide them, and teleport around so that you can kite them around the battlefield and draw them away from your allies.
An example would be a power that has an effect which pushes the enemy 1 square and then you make a ranged implement attack that slows them, or dazes them, or something else that would limit their options. Obviously, this defender would have a heavy controller sub-type, and I think that goes perfectly in line with psionic power.
Another option (which I've brought up before) is having a defender that "marks" allies instead, so that any enemy who attacks that ally invokes their wrath. It would allow for a more focused style of defending, and invites a wealth of roleplaying options with how the characters deal with the whole "bodyguard" type relationship.
But both of those are still mostly in melee. They stick to the thick of battle, they have nonweapon options, but both stay in the fray. The swordmage is as close to a ranged defender as I can deal with. Otherwise your looking at a controler with a mark. I don't see how you can defend your team from behind the front line. There is the problem of confined spaces, a ranged defender needs open room to move, and still keep the back line out of range of area attacks from enemies. Also the ranged defender's constant need to move would get a lot of OA, as would anytime it's forced to make an attack too close to an enemy. Also I can't think of one character arch that requires a ranged defender, you've got some mechanic ideas now give me a unique story.
Who said a caster has to be behind the front line? As long as it's a high-Con class, they'll have plenty of surges and HP, and if it's Int you'll also have good AC. They've already got options for other casters to get up close and personal (Reaper's Touch, anyone?), it's just that it's always been an incidental build concept rather than the focus of a class.
I would invision a ranged defender as circling around the enemy's flanks and drawing their fire away from the main line, with attacks that immobilize, pull, or prone enemies to prevent them from getting away, and drop zones of compulsion which punish the enemy with psychic damage if they ignore him.
As for the need to keep moving, that could easily be solved by simply shifting (perhaps as a minor), or just give him a feature to allows him to dodge AoOs in certain situations (such as, if he has combat advantage). In close quarters, the need to manuever could be accomplished by giving the character access to Close Blast attacks, or by giving him a few powers (or a feat) which could be used to make ranged attacks without provoking (like the Point Blank Weapon, or the Ranger's Point Blank Shot, or the Seeker's Escaping Shot).
You could also tie it into his mark. For instance, when the enemy triggers the mark, you get to shift a certain number of squares as the enemy's taking their medicine, thus allowing you to reposition yourself for the next turn.
Who said a caster has to be behind the front line? As long as it's a high-Con class, they'll have plenty of surges and HP, and if it's Int you'll also have good AC. They've already got options for other casters to get up close and personal (Reaper's Touch, anyone?), it's just that it's always been an incidental build concept rather than the focus of a class.
I would invision a ranged defender as circling around the enemy's flanks and drawing their fire away from the main line, with attacks that immobilize, pull, or prone enemies to prevent them from getting away, and drop zones of compulsion which punish the enemy with psychic damage if they ignore him.
As for the need to keep moving, that could easily be solved by simply shifting (perhaps as a minor), or just give him a feature to allows him to dodge AoOs in certain situations (such as, if he has combat advantage). In close quarters, the need to manuever could be accomplished by giving the character access to Close Blast attacks, or by giving him a few powers (or a feat) which could be used to make ranged attacks without provoking (like the Point Blank Weapon, or the Ranger's Point Blank Shot, or the Seeker's Escaping Shot).
You could also tie it into his mark. For instance, when the enemy triggers the mark, you get to shift a certain number of squares as the enemy's taking their medicine, thus allowing you to reposition yourself for the next turn.
But you didn't say caster defender (witch I'm fine with), you said ranged defender. Casters up close is kinda cool (like a dagger sourcerer with the chanelling feat).
Your second paragraph sounds like a controller.
Feat is not an option for covering a glaring whole in a class concept. And close burst attacks are helpful but take away from the ranged feeling, then you have a walking nuke (interesting concept for elemental defender).
Also give me an example of a ranged defender. Not mechanics. Tell me what trope, what character, what fantasy mainstay, what whatever is in need of a ranged defender to work? I see no character arch is in need of this playstyle. One of the main problems i have heard people bring up a lot about the seeker is it is just filling a mechanics niche with crappy flavor thrown on. I personally like the seeker class, but can see where they are coming from on this.
Who said a caster has to be behind the front line? As long as it's a high-Con class, they'll have plenty of surges and HP, and if it's Int you'll also have good AC. They've already got options for other casters to get up close and personal (Reaper's Touch, anyone?), it's just that it's always been an incidental build concept rather than the focus of a class.
I would invision a ranged defender as circling around the enemy's flanks and drawing their fire away from the main line, with attacks that immobilize, pull, or prone enemies to prevent them from getting away, and drop zones of compulsion which punish the enemy with psychic damage if they ignore him.
As for the need to keep moving, that could easily be solved by simply shifting (perhaps as a minor), or just give him a feature to allows him to dodge AoOs in certain situations (such as, if he has combat advantage). In close quarters, the need to manuever could be accomplished by giving the character access to Close Blast attacks, or by giving him a few powers (or a feat) which could be used to make ranged attacks without provoking (like the Point Blank Weapon, or the Ranger's Point Blank Shot, or the Seeker's Escaping Shot).
You could also tie it into his mark. For instance, when the enemy triggers the mark, you get to shift a certain number of squares as the enemy's taking their medicine, thus allowing you to reposition yourself for the next turn.
But you didn't say caster defender (witch I'm fine with), you said ranged defender. Casters up close is kinda cool (like a dagger sourcerer with the chanelling feat).
Your second paragraph sounds like a controller.
Feat is not an option for covering a glaring whole in a class concept. And close burst attacks are helpful but take away from the ranged feeling, then you have a walking nuke (interesting concept for elemental defender).
Also give me an example of a ranged defender. Not mechanics. Tell me what trope, what character, what fantasy mainstay, what whatever is in need of a ranged defender to work? I see no character arch is in need of this playstyle. One of the main problems i have heard people bring up a lot about the seeker is it is just filling a mechanics niche with crappy flavor thrown on. I personally like the seeker class, but can see where they are coming from on this.
I've always liked the Seeker since it was unveiled. It resembles the Mythical Hunter archetype, and fits perfectly to a character I've wanted to build for quite some time. He's probably a Spiritbond heavy-thrown weapon Seeker (based on the hints dropped); he's a javelin-hunter defined by his experiences of being hit by lightning multiple times and being bitten by a serpent, and the concurrent near-death experiences, where he had an out of body trip to the realm of the spirits. In his mind, the two events are as intertwined as the Ouroboros – a serpent of lightning that now empowers him to hunt down the enemies of nature; he was chosen because he was about to tred down the wrong path, and had the will to survive the trial of death.
This is something I tried to emulate with the Storm Warden, the Panther Shaman (reflavour the Panther as as Serpent), and with the Ranger, with varying success. The Seeker fits it PERFECTLY.
This isn't just a rogue concept though (not that sort of rogue, you know what I actually mean) – the class reminds me of the shamanic-hunter chieftains of the Ashlanders in Morrowind, and the role the character needs to get into to gain acceptance as leader of the clans. It reminds me of channeler Aiel from Wheel of Time as well.
I really like the class. I really don't see why people dislike it.
That said, I don't see such thing as a ranged defender. I can see a possible concept to it – an archer that holds back the enemies with vollies of arrows, not letting them get to anyone in the party, but that's really a controller zone or *former abjuration* leader shielding effect that belongs elsewhere. The archetype doesn't exist in my mind, unlike the archetype for the Seeker.
I'm not sure where I stand on the ranged caster defender idea in general. It isn't what I had in mind when I said "caster defender," but it's interesting to consider...especially in light of the implement swordmage build pointed out.
Who said a caster has to be behind the front line? As long as it's a high-Con class, they'll have plenty of surges and HP, and if it's Int you'll also have good AC. They've already got options for other casters to get up close and personal (Reaper's Touch, anyone?), it's just that it's always been an incidental build concept rather than the focus of a class.
I would invision a ranged defender as circling around the enemy's flanks and drawing their fire away from the main line, with attacks that immobilize, pull, or prone enemies to prevent them from getting away, and drop zones of compulsion which punish the enemy with psychic damage if they ignore him.
As for the need to keep moving, that could easily be solved by simply shifting (perhaps as a minor), or just give him a feature to allows him to dodge AoOs in certain situations (such as, if he has combat advantage). In close quarters, the need to manuever could be accomplished by giving the character access to Close Blast attacks, or by giving him a few powers (or a feat) which could be used to make ranged attacks without provoking (like the Point Blank Weapon, or the Ranger's Point Blank Shot, or the Seeker's Escaping Shot).
You could also tie it into his mark. For instance, when the enemy triggers the mark, you get to shift a certain number of squares as the enemy's taking their medicine, thus allowing you to reposition yourself for the next turn.
But you didn't say caster defender (witch I'm fine with), you said ranged defender. Casters up close is kinda cool (like a dagger sourcerer with the chanelling feat).
Your second paragraph sounds like a controller.
Feat is not an option for covering a glaring whole in a class concept. And close burst attacks are helpful but take away from the ranged feeling, then you have a walking nuke (interesting concept for elemental defender).
Also give me an example of a ranged defender. Not mechanics. Tell me what trope, what character, what fantasy mainstay, what whatever is in need of a ranged defender to work? I see no character arch is in need of this playstyle. One of the main problems i have heard people bring up a lot about the seeker is it is just filling a mechanics niche with crappy flavor thrown on. I personally like the seeker class, but can see where they are coming from on this.
I've always liked the Seeker since it was unveiled. It resembles the Mythical Hunter archetype, and fits perfectly to a character I've wanted to build for quite some time. He's probably a Spiritbond heavy-thrown weapon Seeker (based on the hints dropped); he's a javelin-hunter defined by his experiences of being hit by lightning multiple times and being bitten by a serpent, and the concurrent near-death experiences, where he had an out of body trip to the realm of the spirits. In his mind, the two events are as intertwined as the Ouroboros – a serpent of lightning that now empowers him to hunt down the enemies of nature; he was chosen because he was about to tred down the wrong path, and had the will to survive the trial of death.
This is something I tried to emulate with the Storm Warden, the Panther Shaman (reflavour the Panther as as Serpent), and with the Ranger, with varying success. The Seeker fits it PERFECTLY.
This isn't just a rogue concept though (not that sort of rogue, you know what I actually mean) – the class reminds me of the shamanic-hunter chieftains of the Ashlanders in Morrowind, and the role the character needs to get into to gain acceptance as leader of the clans. It reminds me of channeler Aiel from Wheel of Time as well.
I really like the class. I really don't see why people dislike it.
That said, I don't see such thing as a ranged defender. I can see a possible concept to it – an archer that holds back the enemies with vollies of arrows, not letting them get to anyone in the party, but that's really a controller zone or *former abjuration* leader shielding effect that belongs elsewhere. The archetype doesn't exist in my mind, unlike the archetype for the Seeker.
I fully agree, I like the idea of the class, but WotC spent a lot of time focusing on it being a weapon controller. I can see some of what people say, but I love the class.
And I'm all for caster defender. I kinda like the idea of a walking nuke. Using a lot of close curst and blast type attacks. In particular my though for this was the elemental power source, explosions of fire and air, and everything and in the center is one man.
For the psionic defender I can see him getting attacks based of the soulknife class and telekentic pushes and pulls. The defender should not have the mind manipulaton abilities of the psion and ardent, his powers should be more about the physical manifestations of the source.
Who said a caster has to be behind the front line? As long as it's a high-Con class, they'll have plenty of surges and HP, and if it's Int you'll also have good AC. They've already got options for other casters to get up close and personal (Reaper's Touch, anyone?), it's just that it's always been an incidental build concept rather than the focus of a class.
I would invision a ranged defender as circling around the enemy's flanks and drawing their fire away from the main line, with attacks that immobilize, pull, or prone enemies to prevent them from getting away, and drop zones of compulsion which punish the enemy with psychic damage if they ignore him.
As for the need to keep moving, that could easily be solved by simply shifting (perhaps as a minor), or just give him a feature to allows him to dodge AoOs in certain situations (such as, if he has combat advantage). In close quarters, the need to manuever could be accomplished by giving the character access to Close Blast attacks, or by giving him a few powers (or a feat) which could be used to make ranged attacks without provoking (like the Point Blank Weapon, or the Ranger's Point Blank Shot, or the Seeker's Escaping Shot).
You could also tie it into his mark. For instance, when the enemy triggers the mark, you get to shift a certain number of squares as the enemy's taking their medicine, thus allowing you to reposition yourself for the next turn.
But you didn't say caster defender (witch I'm fine with), you said ranged defender. Casters up close is kinda cool (like a dagger sourcerer with the chanelling feat).
Your second paragraph sounds like a controller.
Feat is not an option for covering a glaring whole in a class concept. And close burst attacks are helpful but take away from the ranged feeling, then you have a walking nuke (interesting concept for elemental defender).
Also give me an example of a ranged defender. Not mechanics. Tell me what trope, what character, what fantasy mainstay, what whatever is in need of a ranged defender to work? I see no character arch is in need of this playstyle. One of the main problems i have heard people bring up a lot about the seeker is it is just filling a mechanics niche with crappy flavor thrown on. I personally like the seeker class, but can see where they are coming from on this.
I've always liked the Seeker since it was unveiled. It resembles the Mythical Hunter archetype, and fits perfectly to a character I've wanted to build for quite some time. He's probably a Spiritbond heavy-thrown weapon Seeker (based on the hints dropped); he's a javelin-hunter defined by his experiences of being hit by lightning multiple times and being bitten by a serpent, and the concurrent near-death experiences, where he had an out of body trip to the realm of the spirits. In his mind, the two events are as intertwined as the Ouroboros – a serpent of lightning that now empowers him to hunt down the enemies of nature; he was chosen because he was about to tred down the wrong path, and had the will to survive the trial of death.
This is something I tried to emulate with the Storm Warden, the Panther Shaman (reflavour the Panther as as Serpent), and with the Ranger, with varying success. The Seeker fits it PERFECTLY.
This isn't just a rogue concept though (not that sort of rogue, you know what I actually mean) – the class reminds me of the shamanic-hunter chieftains of the Ashlanders in Morrowind, and the role the character needs to get into to gain acceptance as leader of the clans. It reminds me of channeler Aiel from Wheel of Time as well.
I really like the class. I really don't see why people dislike it.
That said, I don't see such thing as a ranged defender. I can see a possible concept to it – an archer that holds back the enemies with vollies of arrows, not letting them get to anyone in the party, but that's really a controller zone or *former abjuration* leader shielding effect that belongs elsewhere. The archetype doesn't exist in my mind, unlike the archetype for the Seeker.
For the psionic defender I can see him getting attacks based of the soulknife class and telekentic pushes and pulls. The defender should not have the mind manipulaton abilities of the psion and ardent, his powers should be more about the physical manifestations of the source.
Personaly I think a mixture of both mental and physcal manifestations would be perfect for a defender. Perhaps the cost for the marked creature attacking someone else could be forcing the marked creature to make a melee basic attack against itself. And its normal attacks could put up barriers to make it harder for them to reach the squishier members of the group.
Who said a caster has to be behind the front line? As long as it's a high-Con class, they'll have plenty of surges and HP, and if it's Int you'll also have good AC. They've already got options for other casters to get up close and personal (Reaper's Touch, anyone?), it's just that it's always been an incidental build concept rather than the focus of a class.
I would invision a ranged defender as circling around the enemy's flanks and drawing their fire away from the main line, with attacks that immobilize, pull, or prone enemies to prevent them from getting away, and drop zones of compulsion which punish the enemy with psychic damage if they ignore him.
As for the need to keep moving, that could easily be solved by simply shifting (perhaps as a minor), or just give him a feature to allows him to dodge AoOs in certain situations (such as, if he has combat advantage). In close quarters, the need to manuever could be accomplished by giving the character access to Close Blast attacks, or by giving him a few powers (or a feat) which could be used to make ranged attacks without provoking (like the Point Blank Weapon, or the Ranger's Point Blank Shot, or the Seeker's Escaping Shot).
You could also tie it into his mark. For instance, when the enemy triggers the mark, you get to shift a certain number of squares as the enemy's taking their medicine, thus allowing you to reposition yourself for the next turn.
But you didn't say caster defender (witch I'm fine with), you said ranged defender. Casters up close is kinda cool (like a dagger sourcerer with the chanelling feat).
Your second paragraph sounds like a controller.
Feat is not an option for covering a glaring whole in a class concept. And close burst attacks are helpful but take away from the ranged feeling, then you have a walking nuke (interesting concept for elemental defender).
Also give me an example of a ranged defender. Not mechanics. Tell me what trope, what character, what fantasy mainstay, what whatever is in need of a ranged defender to work? I see no character arch is in need of this playstyle. One of the main problems i have heard people bring up a lot about the seeker is it is just filling a mechanics niche with crappy flavor thrown on. I personally like the seeker class, but can see where they are coming from on this.
Well, I suppose it depends what you mean by "Caster", then. I was taking caster to mean a guy who uses a lot of ranged and area attacks, usually wears light armor, and uses implements. In that definition, MOST casters are ranged, or at least have some ranged attacks. Now, obviously each of the Casters also have some capability to fight in melee (Swordmage and Druid make it a big part of their schtick), but for most of them, that's a secondary build option.
As for Controller/Defender, you do have a point, but I'd submit that the two roles are often slightly blurred anyway. All of the Defenders have some Controllery abilities like slow, daze, and even stun, and the Swordmage in particular is well-equipped at most levels to dip into Wizard territory (he even can get a spell-book).
The main difference, I'd say, is that the Controller's job is a more general matter of screwing with the DM's plans, and directing the flow of battle, whereas the Defender's role is more specifically to protect his allies. True, a ranged Caster who slows and pulls enemies has shades of Controller (especially if he uses a lot of Bursts and blasts), but if you take a look at most of the Swordmage's controller powers, and the Wizard's controller powers, you'll immediately notice a consistent theme among the former of getting the enemy to next to you and keeping him there. Conversely, for the most part, having a bunch of enemies adjacent to him is the LAST thing a Wizard wants.
As for close attacks, I never said bursts, I said blasts. I agree that a close burst attack takes away from the flavor, but a "I throw out my hand and you dudes all go flying" is fine. Also, the feat was a cursory suggestion. I'd much more prefer a class feature that allows one to fire in melee without drawing AoOs. Hell, you can get that from the Shimmering Armor, so it's not too much of a stretch to give the class a limited version of it that they can use at-will (perhaps, you take a small amount of damage to avoid provoking).
As for archetype, a Jedi who focuses mostly on Force powers and blasters rather than Lightsaber combat (such as Kyle Katarn... at least when I play him) is something like a Ranged Defender. He pushes foes away from allies, pulls them and flings them into walls, shoots force lightning up their skirts, holds them up in the air and riddles them with blaster bolts, and basically just screws with them at a distance, all while fitting the description of a "knight" (i.e. Defender).
For mechanics, I could get on board with the whole "I can mark a bunch of dudes, but need to sustain my concentration" thing. It's pletty fitting for the flavor. At the same time, I'd want a few daileys or PP powers that let you sustain a multi-mark with a single action, since the other Defenders (even the Paladin now that Divine Sanction is around) have little trouble dealing with multiple foes at once. If nothing else, I'd expect an epic level feat that lets you sustain as a free action.
As for the general gist of the class, I'd have one build be a walking nuke, and the other one be a ranged defender. I.e., one uses a lot of blasts and bursts, the other a lot of ranged attacks (you'd probably want to keep the area powers to a minimum to keep it from getting too controllery). That way, the ranged dude could supplement his ranged attacks with close attacks that won't provoke, assuming he didn't get a class feature for it.
Well, I suppose it depends what you mean by "Caster", then. I was taking caster to mean a guy who uses a lot of ranged and area attacks, usually wears light armor, and uses implements. In that definition, MOST casters are ranged, or at least have some ranged attacks. Now, obviously each of the Casters also have some capability to fight in melee (Swordmage and Druid make it a big part of their schtick), but for most of them, that's a secondary build option.
As for Controller/Defender, you do have a point, but I'd submit that the two roles are often slightly blurred anyway. All of the Defenders have some Controllery abilities like slow, daze, and even stun, and the Swordmage in particular is well-equipped at most levels to dip into Wizard territory (he even can get a spell-book).
The main difference, I'd say, is that the Controller's job is a more general matter of screwing with the DM's plans, and directing the flow of battle, whereas the Defender's role is more specifically to protect his allies. True, a ranged Caster who slows and pulls enemies has shades of Controller (especially if he uses a lot of Bursts and blasts), but if you take a look at most of the Swordmage's controller powers, and the Wizard's controller powers, you'll immediately notice a consistent theme among the former of getting the enemy to next to you and keeping him there. Conversely, for the most part, having a bunch of enemies adjacent to him is the LAST thing a Wizard wants.
As for close attacks, I never said bursts, I said blasts. I agree that a close burst attack takes away from the flavor, but a "I throw out my hand and you dudes all go flying" is fine. Also, the feat was a cursory suggestion. I'd much more prefer a class feature that allows one to fire in melee without drawing AoOs. Hell, you can get that from the Shimmering Armor, so it's not too much of a stretch to give the class a limited version of it that they can use at-will (perhaps, you take a small amount of damage to avoid provoking).
As for archetype, a Jedi who focuses mostly on Force powers and blasters rather than Lightsaber combat (such as Kyle Katarn... at least when I play him) is something like a Ranged Defender. He pushes foes away from allies, pulls them and flings them into walls, shoots force lightning up their skirts, holds them up in the air and riddles them with blaster bolts, and basically just screws with them at a distance, all while fitting the description of a "knight" (i.e. Defender).
For mechanics, I could get on board with the whole "I can mark a bunch of dudes, but need to sustain my concentration" thing. It's pletty fitting for the flavor. At the same time, I'd want a few daileys or PP powers that let you sustain a multi-mark with a single action, since the other Defenders (even the Paladin now that Divine Sanction is around) have little trouble dealing with multiple foes at once. If nothing else, I'd expect an epic level feat that lets you sustain as a free action.
As for the general gist of the class, I'd have one build be a walking nuke, and the other one be a ranged defender. I.e., one uses a lot of blasts and bursts, the other a lot of ranged attacks (you'd probably want to keep the area powers to a minimum to keep it from getting too controllery). That way, the ranged dude could supplement his ranged attacks with close attacks that won't provoke, assuming he didn't get a class feature for it.
When I think caster I think someone who uses implements instead of weapons, like a sorcer with the the dagger channeling feat, yeah he attacks with a dagger but he's using it as an implement still. I like melee casters.
I'm thinking of giving the virtous paladin (the mostly caster build) a try to see if it really feels like a defender to me.
Your ideas for covering the holes work, not sure if it's worth using class abilities to cover it, but it would be necessary.
Concerning your Jedi idea, I see jedi more as controllers. Just because they are knights doesn't mean they would be defenders. None of the things you described them doing sound defenderish to me, they sound controller and striker like. THere was no protecting and prevention going on.
TO me a ranged defender would make walls, but thats more of a controller schtik, not impossible to move though. Or in the case of a psionic defender I could see them making "force fields" to protect their allies from marked enemies, but thats in a way what the sheilding swordmage already does.
I suppose a Ranged Defender is a difficult concept mechanically, just as a melee Controller is. Possible, but they wind up overlapping a lot with other roles (ironically, it would seem that they overlap with each other).
Personally, for the Psionic Defender, I hope we get a lightly armored guy who uses psychic powers to protect himself. Perhaps he uses Psychometabolism abilities to make himself have temporary hitpoints or something, or uses Psychokinesis to keep himself from being damaged, or lots of other ideas. We've got plenty of heavyish armor Defenders, so far Swordmage is the only one that isn't. It'd be nice to see another one, especially since Arcane and Psionic seem to overlap to an extent.
Personally, for the Psionic Defender, I hope we get a lightly armored guy... We've got plenty of heavyish armor Defenders...
I have to disagree. Psychic Warriors were all about heavy armor, and the game in general seems to not have enough havier armor using classes at all. I mean, the only class right now with Plate proficiency is the Paladin, and the only one with Scale proficiency is the Fighter.
I know there is more to them than that, but it'd be nice to see something a bit different with Defenders. Of course, I think part of the issue is that there aren't enough of them, same goes for Controllers and Leaders (way to many Strikers, which makes it hard to tell how the other roles could grow), so it's hard to say how they could be different just yet.
Hmm I just had an interesting thought for a psionic defender that would work at range. When this theoretical psionic defender marks a target, the target is able to make melee attacks against the psionic defender as though he were adjacent regardless of where on the field he is. I could see multiple ways of fluffing it such as the monster creating a mental backlash against the psionic defender's mind link or the psionic defender astrally projecting into the creature's mind and the creature attacking the projection(thereby attacking the defender's spirit).
Wow. That would make astral projection a lot more active than I've ever seen it!
I think this could mesh well with the psiblade stuff too. We'd have a character who can construct psionic weapons and manifest him or herself in multiple places on the battlefield at the same time! 
It's not a caster, but it's definitely got the ranged defender thing going. I like! Keep going!Well, I suppose it depends what you mean by "Caster", then. I was taking caster to mean a guy who uses a lot of ranged and area attacks, usually wears light armor, and uses implements. In that definition, MOST casters are ranged, or at least have some ranged attacks. Now, obviously each of the Casters also have some capability to fight in melee (Swordmage and Druid make it a big part of their schtick), but for most of them, that's a secondary build option.
A late response to this, I suppose, but it's a great post. I personally was thinking of "Caster" implying implement (rather than weapon) attacks and "Defender" implying melee and close (rather than ranged) attacks when I asked my question. Important distinctions...thanks for bringing that to my attention.
As for Controller/Defender, you do have a point, but I'd submit that the two roles are often slightly blurred anyway. All of the Defenders have some Controllery abilities like slow, daze, and even stun, and the Swordmage in particular is well-equipped at most levels to dip into Wizard territory (he even can get a spell-book).
The main difference, I'd say, is that the Controller's job is a more general matter of screwing with the DM's plans, and directing the flow of battle, whereas the Defender's role is more specifically to protect his allies. True, a ranged Caster who slows and pulls enemies has shades of Controller (especially if he uses a lot of Bursts and blasts), but if you take a look at most of the Swordmage's controller powers, and the Wizard's controller powers, you'll immediately notice a consistent theme among the former of getting the enemy to next to you and keeping him there. Conversely, for the most part, having a bunch of enemies adjacent to him is the LAST thing a Wizard wants.
...Which is what would make a "psionic defender as a caster" (as I was thinking) a bit different. They would use their powers to purposefully bring enemies adjacent and then blast them (i.e., not using a weapon) point blank.
... For mechanics, I could get on board with the whole "I can mark a bunch of dudes, but need to sustain my concentration" thing. It's pletty fitting for the flavor. At the same time, I'd want a few daileys or PP powers that let you sustain a multi-mark with a single action, since the other Defenders (even the Paladin now that Divine Sanction is around) have little trouble dealing with multiple foes at once. If nothing else, I'd expect an epic level feat that lets you sustain as a free action.
As for the general gist of the class, I'd have one build be a walking nuke, and the other one be a ranged defender. I.e., one uses a lot of blasts and bursts, the other a lot of ranged attacks (you'd probably want to keep the area powers to a minimum to keep it from getting too controllery). That way, the ranged dude could supplement his ranged attacks with close attacks that won't provoke, assuming he didn't get a class feature for it.
Yes, yes, and yes. Also, the ranged attacks would need to be more of the "come here!" type. A class feature to stop provoking for non-weapon up-close attacks is a great idea! (How does the monk deal with that?)
We already have a caster defender. You can currently play a swordmage entirely with implement attacks.
Hmmm...What does this actually look like & how close is it to what's above? Considering a swordmage is a, well, swordmage...isn't this an unusual enough build that there is still conceptual space for a full-on caster defender?
If this isn't the battlemind, I may have to make a topic on the homebrew forum for it. It might be interesting, coming up with a class that uses the Power Point system.
I like the idea of creating multiple 'copies' or 'projections' of yourself.. although this is sounding more shadow powery.. Still, the idea of a defender having using some form of 'copy' or 'extension' of themselves to stick to an oppentent and hinder their movements and attacks... Encounter or Dailies would let you give these projections more and more abilities and powers, or produce more of them. I can think of a few characters that use such abilities, sadly, the most well known one is from an Anime aimed at 13 year old boys.
I should point out that my idea wasn't so much creating multiple copies of yourself(although that could work), but instead it was the defender entering the mind of the pesron he marks. So no one else would be able to see the marking mechanism. Of course I'm sure there are multiple ways you could do the same idea. If you changed it to the shadow power source, you could either create multiple copies of yourself or send your shadow to interfere with his movements.
And there is nothing wrong with stealing rough ideas from shounen mangas/animes. There are a good number of creative fighting styles in them that can certainly be expanded to create interesting class ideas.....just don't base any on creating power point presentations on the moon. x_x
A note about Jedi: Ever notice in the films the moment a Jedi enters a battle half the mobs start attacking him even though he has the best defence against ranged weapons available in the setting, and suddenly can't hit to save thier lives? This says Defender to me.
The trouble with an astral projection based defender is that it only allows a specific character type, where otherwise a PsiDef could simply refluff his mind-control powers as astral projection.
A note about Jedi: Ever notice in the films the moment a Jedi enters a battle half the mobs start attacking him even though he has the best defence against ranged weapons available in the setting, and suddenly can't hit to save thier lives? This says Defender to me.
This would imply they could a shoot to save their lives to begin with. A deathstar full of storm troopers couldn't hit Han Solo, no jedi there. I could buy jedi as a defender when weilding the lightsaber, using push and pull effects to face the enemy they want (although this could be striker as well), but when they are using the for from a far they are usually using it to whipe away a lot of pointless mobs(minions), that says controller to me.
The trouble with an astral projection based defender is that it only allows a specific character type, where otherwise a PsiDef could simply refluff his mind-control powers as astral projection.
But you can pretty much use that argument against any archetype for any class(...except for maybe the ranger because it has three vastly different identies at once). And who says that the psi-defender will be getting mind control powers. I think it make more sense for the psi-defender to be a precog who's mark is him reacting to an oponent's attack before the attack is made. The PsiDef could simply refluff his precog powers as mind control if that is what you wanted to play. :p
...when they are using the for from a far they are usually using it to whipe away a lot of pointless mobs(minions), that says controller to me.
Depends on how the power is couched. Sure, an area damage/push would scream controller, but if we instead have a area or blast that simply knocks enemies prone we suddenly get a sticky defender power. Then we make it a daily and make it so that enemies in the area can't make AoOs and we get a lovely little "Save the surrounded Ally" power.
... you can pretty much use that argument against any archetype for any class(...except for maybe the ranger because it has three vastly different identies at once).
Not really. Take the Druid for example. If I play a druid, I can make myself into a witch, a werewolf, a half-primordial, a dragon, a rakshasa or a tentacled horror from beyond the stars without even thinking about it.
If we have an astral projectionist as given above, whatever I try and turn the class into will have to have some reason why a swordsman 50ft away can put his sword into my thinkmeats. It's almost as bad as Turn Undead was.
And who says that the psi-defender will be getting mind control powers. I think it make more sense for the psi-defender to be a precog who's mark is him reacting to an oponent's attack before the attack is made. The PsiDef could simply refluff his precog powers as mind control if that is what you wanted to play. :p
Go on, refluff Dominate into precognition :D
When I think caster I think someone who uses implements instead of weapons, like a sorcer with the the dagger channeling feat, yeah he attacks with a dagger but he's using it as an implement still. I like melee casters.
I'm thinking of giving the virtous paladin (the mostly caster build) a try to see if it really feels like a defender to me.
Your ideas for covering the holes work, not sure if it's worth using class abilities to cover it, but it would be necessary.
Concerning your Jedi idea, I see jedi more as controllers. Just because they are knights doesn't mean they would be defenders. None of the things you described them doing sound defenderish to me, they sound controller and striker like. THere was no protecting and prevention going on.
TO me a ranged defender would make walls, but thats more of a controller schtik, not impossible to move though. Or in the case of a psionic defender I could see them making "force fields" to protect their allies from marked enemies, but thats in a way what the sheilding swordmage already does.
Yeah, ultimately a "caster" is an Implement-user, but like I said, most casters use light armor and attack at range. Most Implement powers are also ranged powers, so when "caster defender" is brought up, that immediately makes me think "ranged defender".
As for Implement Defenders, I've been playing a Swordmage for almost six months, and of my attacks, two are Close Bursts, one is an Area Burst, one is Ranged, one is Close Blast, and the other three are melee (two of which are At-wills). I can say that I'm still pretty defenderish (I get dog-piled every fight, pretty much, so I'm doing SOMETHING right), even though most of my powers are focused around AoE effects.
Which is why I said before that Defender and Controller have some significant overlap; both of them include getting enemies to go where you want, and attack (or not attack) who you want. Defenders accomplish this by marking enemies, Controllers do it (generally) by dropping zones or using hard control to remove an enemy's options. A ranged defender would probably be very much like a controller, only its powers would be focused around getting enemies to attack him instead of allies at a distance.
As for class features, I think it would be fair to have one of the builds (the one focused mostly on ranged attacks instead of close attacks) give the ability to not provoke AoOs from marked enemies for using ranged or area attacks in melee. Beyond that, a few feats (Like the Swordmage's "Combat Casting") which allow for attacks not to provoke under certain situations, and a few ranged and area powers (such as the Seeker's "Escaping Shot" and the Ranger's "Point Blank shot") specifically not provoking would be plenty for the class to function. As an extra safeguard, powers that allow a free shift before making a ranged or area attack would also cover the hole.
For Jedi, like Atomic Badger pointed out, in the movies the enemies almost always focus on the Jedi over other, lesser enemies. This may be a force-based compulsion, or it may simply be the fact that they're the biggest threat, and thus draw the most attention. Either way, that's a Defender strategy (Great Weapon Fighter and Ardent Paladin in particular are Defenders who do their job by being too dangerous to ignore).
Yeah, bowling over a bunch of minions with a Force Push is controllery, but so is the Swormage's Forceful Dismissal. The point is that they're doing it to protect their allies by getting the rabble out of the way so they can focus on the big guns, and to prevent them from swarming the field.
I could see a ranged defender making walls of force to funnel enemies toward him, or generating a forcefield to protect his allies from attack (that's exactly what the Aegis of Shielding is). I think maybe a wall or zone that placed a compulsion effect on the enemy, and punished them for attacking allies would be defenderish. A wall effect that proned or immobilized enemies would work too, especially if it also marked them.
Yes, yes, and yes. Also, the ranged attacks would need to be more of the "come here!" type. A class feature to stop provoking for non-weapon up-close attacks is a great idea! (How does the monk deal with that?)
Well, I think Monk's Implement attacks are all Melee, so it shouldn't provoke anyway.
Hmmm...What does this actually look like & how close is it to what's above? Considering a swordmage is a, well, swordmage...isn't this an unusual enough build that there is still conceptual space for a full-on caster defender?
I think there is a slot for a purely Implement-using Defender. The Swordmage can indeed take only Implement powers, but most of those powers are still going to be Melee or Close attacks (there's only one Area Burst Swordmage power that I can think of off-hand, and the number of Ranged powers is less than a dozen). So a Caster Defender with more emphasis on ranged and area attacks (or at least, more emphasis on using Implements only), would still be distinct enough from the Swordmage to be a different archetype.
Note on Astral Projection: I think Astral Projection could be a good fluff explanation for a few powers (as can precognition), but I don't think it would be nearly flexible enough to base a whole class around "I slap you with my ego, while my id trips you, and my subconscious gives you a wedgie"
Not really. Take the Druid for example. If I play a druid, I can make myself into a witch, a werewolf, a half-primordial, a dragon, a rakshasa or a tentacled horror from beyond the stars without even thinking about it.
If we have an astral projectionist as given above, whatever I try and turn the class into will have to have some reason why a swordsman 50ft away can put his sword into my thinkmeats. It's almost as bad as Turn Undead was.
With about half of those you are pretty much completely ignoring the fluff of the Druid and just going for the mechanic of shapechaging. Why could you not just do that with my idea? The point of the idea was to create a way to make a ranged defender that makes sense. If you wanted to refluff it as mind controller(the damage representing a psychic backlash against the character), a telepath reading the enemies thoughts and sending them to his allies(once again damage representing psychic backlash), a space time mage bending the distance between two points, a hexer taking feedback from his hex, a shadow manipulator who puts a portion of his spirit into his enemy's shadow, or a person who has reached enlightenment and is able to manipulate any part of existence as his own body(and can be hurt as though it were his body).
Is it really that much worse to have to explain why you can be hurt from a person 50 feet away then it is to explain why a character can heal deadly injuries, summon fireballs, change shape, hit creatures of pure fire with their fists, strangle someone with shadows, or can teleport an enemy whenever the enemy doesn't attack the character?
Yeah, ultimately a "caster" is an Implement-user, but like I said, most casters use light armor and attack at range. Most Implement powers are also ranged powers, so when "caster defender" is brought up, that immediately makes me think "ranged defender".
As for Implement Defenders, I've been playing a Swordmage for almost six months, and of my attacks, two are Close Bursts, one is an Area Burst, one is Ranged, one is Close Blast, and the other three are melee (two of which are At-wills). I can say that I'm still pretty defenderish (I get dog-piled every fight, pretty much, so I'm doing SOMETHING right), even though most of my powers are focused around AoE effects.
Which is why I said before that Defender and Controller have some significant overlap; both of them include getting enemies to go where you want, and attack (or not attack) who you want. Defenders accomplish this by marking enemies, Controllers do it (generally) by dropping zones or using hard control to remove an enemy's options. A ranged defender would probably be very much like a controller, only its powers would be focused around getting enemies to attack him instead of allies at a distance.
As for class features, I think it would be fair to have one of the builds (the one focused mostly on ranged attacks instead of close attacks) give the ability to not provoke AoOs from marked enemies for using ranged or area attacks in melee. Beyond that, a few feats (Like the Swordmage's "Combat Casting") which allow for attacks not to provoke under certain situations, and a few ranged and area powers (such as the Seeker's "Escaping Shot" and the Ranger's "Point Blank shot") specifically not provoking would be plenty for the class to function. As an extra safeguard, powers that allow a free shift before making a ranged or area attack would also cover the hole.
For Jedi, like Atomic Badger pointed out, in the movies the enemies almost always focus on the Jedi over other, lesser enemies. This may be a force-based compulsion, or it may simply be the fact that they're the biggest threat, and thus draw the most attention. Either way, that's a Defender strategy (Great Weapon Fighter and Ardent Paladin in particular are Defenders who do their job by being too dangerous to ignore).
Yeah, bowling over a bunch of minions with a Force Push is controllery, but so is the Swormage's Forceful Dismissal. The point is that they're doing it to protect their allies by getting the rabble out of the way so they can focus on the big guns, and to prevent them from swarming the field.
I could see a ranged defender making walls of force to funnel enemies toward him, or generating a forcefield to protect his allies from attack (that's exactly what the Aegis of Shielding is). I think maybe a wall or zone that placed a compulsion effect on the enemy, and punished them for attacking allies would be defenderish. A wall effect that proned or immobilized enemies would work too, especially if it also marked them.
Your ideas are good, and I'd have to see them in effect to see for sure, but they still feel controllery to me. It feels more like your building a heavy armored controller then a ranged defender. And this likely because of the overlap you mentioned, much like the predator druid feels less like a controller to me then a striker or defender without a mark (want to try one to see if it can still deal with minions as well the other controller concepts seem to be there though). Changing a push to knocked prone doesn't feel like making it a defender, it feels like a controller knocking people prone. Granted a lot of this is my first reaction but I'm seeing this as more of a wizard with a mark then a ranged defender.
With about half of those you are pretty much completely ignoring the fluff of the Druid and just going for the mechanic of shapechaging. Why could you not just do that with my idea?
*Snip*
Is it really that much worse to have to explain why you can be hurt from a person 50 feet away then it is to explain why a character can heal deadly injuries, summon fireballs, change shape, hit creatures of pure fire with their fists, strangle someone with shadows, or can teleport an enemy whenever the enemy doesn't attack the character?
I kinda is. Wildshape is a fantasitic ability because it's so, for lack of a better term, generic. There are thousands of different concepts the druid can become simply because wildshape is so vague in it's description.
Your concept, on the other hand, is pretty specific. Yes, it's possible to refluff it into other abilities, but nowhere near as freely as wildshape.
Changing a push to knocked prone doesn't feel like making it a defender, it feels like a controller knocking people prone. Granted a lot of this is my first reaction but I'm seeing this as more of a wizard with a mark then a ranged defender.
The difference between pushing someone and knocking them prone is quite simple. In the first case, you're making them go away, in the other you're making them stay where they are. Which would controllers want more, and which is more defendery?
In any case, you shouldn't get too hung up on powers. Regardless of how a class is built, it's going to possess potential powers that cover at least two roles, which become the class's secondaries. It's how those powers interact with the class's features that determines which role it occupies.
EDIT--- Grammar. Bit easier to read now.
Your ideas are good, and I'd have to see them in effect to see for sure, but they still feel controllery to me. It feels more like your building a heavy armored controller then a ranged defender. And this likely because of the overlap you mentioned, much like the predator druid feels less like a controller to me then a striker or defender without a mark (want to try one to see if it can still deal with minions as well the other controller concepts seem to be there though). Changing a push to knocked prone doesn't feel like making it a defender, it feels like a controller knocking people prone. Granted a lot of this is my first reaction but I'm seeing this as more of a wizard with a mark then a ranged defender.
I play a Druid too, but I'm mostly focused on the humanoid form attacks (I have a preference for controllers, I guess). The beast form attacks that I do have are close attacks, and I know that those, as well as some of the Predator Druid powers also target multiple creatures, and in that way it's still kind of controllery.
The difference between pushing someone and knocking them prone is quite simple. In the first case, you're making them go away, in the other you're making them stay where they are. Which would controllers want more, and which is more defendery?
In any case, you shouldn't get too hung up on powers. Regardless of how a class is built, it's going to possess potential powers that cover at least two roles, which become the class's secondaries. It's how those powers interact with the class's features that determines which role it occupies.
EDIT--- Grammar. Bit easier to read now.
It depends on what the controller is wanting to do. If a defnder doesn't want to fight someone(say trying to put minnions together or just to leave a target in range for the striker) a push could come in handy. Meanwhile if the controller is wanting to get a way from an enemy but leave the enemy with in range of the defenders mark, the knock pron can be just as useful. Knocking prone can just as easily be used as another movement control method (since they have to expend a move action to stand up.
The difference between pushing someone and knocking them prone is quite simple. In the first case, you're making them go away, in the other you're making them stay where they are. Which would controllers want more, and which is more defendery?
In any case, you shouldn't get too hung up on powers. Regardless of how a class is built, it's going to possess potential powers that cover at least two roles, which become the class's secondaries. It's how those powers interact with the class's features that determines which role it occupies.
EDIT--- Grammar. Bit easier to read now.
It depends on what the controller is wanting to do. If a defnder doesn't want to fight someone(say trying to put minnions together or just to leave a target in range for the striker) a push could come in handy. Meanwhile if the controller is wanting to get a way from an enemy but leave the enemy with in range of the defenders mark, the knock pron can be just as useful. Knocking prone can just as easily be used as another movement control method (since they have to expend a move action to stand up.
That's sort of what I've been saying; Controller powers and Defender powers differ not in mechanics, per say, but in intent. A Defender can have a whole host of forced movement powers and status effects that lock-down enemies, but he can still be a Defender if those powers are designed to keep dangerous enemies on him, and keep the rabble from swarming him or his allies and limiting his effectiveness.
Depending on the situation, dropping a zone of auto-damage to keep minions away from the squishy striker is as much a defensive play-style as multi-marking them with a Warden and unleashing a sweeping blow with an axe to take them all out at once. In each case your intent is to prevent the weaklings from swarming your weaker allies (i.e. Defending), wheras a Controller's primary goal is to obstruct the enemy's plans (dropping a zone around a narrow chamber to deny terrain to the minions, or on the minions themselves to force them to abandon their positions, or daze monsters while they're 1 square away from their target, forcing them to waste a turn moving up).
That's sort of what I've been saying; Controller powers and Defender powers differ not in mechanics, per say, but in intent. A Defender can have a whole host of forced movement powers and status effects that lock-down enemies, but he can still be a Defender if those powers are designed to keep dangerous enemies on him, and keep the rabble from swarming him or his allies and limiting his effectiveness.
Depending on the situation, dropping a zone of auto-damage to keep minions away from the squishy striker is as much a defensive play-style as multi-marking them with a Warden and unleashing a sweeping blow with an axe to take them all out at once. In each case your intent is to prevent the weaklings from swarming your weaker allies (i.e. Defending), wheras a Controller's primary goal is to obstruct the enemy's plans (dropping a zone around a narrow chamber to deny terrain to the minions, or on the minions themselves to force them to abandon their positions, or daze monsters while they're 1 square away from their target, forcing them to waste a turn moving up).
Very true. I still have trouble wrapping my head around a ranged defender, I just see little need for the archetype. I will grant however that it could likely be made to work mechanically. WIth the swordmage and Paladin having the short range builds (most of their powers stay around 5 from what i saw), it is fairly well shown to be workable, but both are still designed to stay relatively in the fray. Anything farther then that and I'm not sure it would still feel like a defender.
That's sort of what I've been saying; Controller powers and Defender powers differ not in mechanics, per say, but in intent. A Defender can have a whole host of forced movement powers and status effects that lock-down enemies, but he can still be a Defender if those powers are designed to keep dangerous enemies on him, and keep the rabble from swarming him or his allies and limiting his effectiveness.
Depending on the situation, dropping a zone of auto-damage to keep minions away from the squishy striker is as much a defensive play-style as multi-marking them with a Warden and unleashing a sweeping blow with an axe to take them all out at once. In each case your intent is to prevent the weaklings from swarming your weaker allies (i.e. Defending), wheras a Controller's primary goal is to obstruct the enemy's plans (dropping a zone around a narrow chamber to deny terrain to the minions, or on the minions themselves to force them to abandon their positions, or daze monsters while they're 1 square away from their target, forcing them to waste a turn moving up).
But it's not quite the same. A lot of people say that defenders are just controllers in melee range, but they're wrong. Defenders focus on taking hits instead of your allies, not just stopping enemies. If your powers focus on disabling enemies more than trying to make them attack you, its not a defender, its a controller.
But it's not quite the same. A lot of people say that defenders are just controllers in melee range, but they're wrong. Defenders focus on taking hits instead of your allies, not just stopping enemies. If your powers focus on disabling enemies more than trying to make them attack you, its not a defender, its a controller.
Then how about a feature that transfers pain? That would be very different from every other defender and might be overpowered to say it that plainly, but i think a ranged defender would be an interesting class. And with psionics, that would be easy to pull off. You could easily give him leader as a secondary role.
But it's not quite the same. A lot of people say that defenders are just controllers in melee range, but they're wrong. Defenders focus on taking hits instead of your allies, not just stopping enemies. If your powers focus on disabling enemies more than trying to make them attack you, its not a defender, its a controller.
Then how about a feature that transfers pain? That would be very different from every other defender and might be overpowered to say it that plainly, but i think a ranged defender would be an interesting class. And with psionics, that would be easy to pull off. You could easily give him leader as a secondary role.
Ooh, that's an idea! A Psionic defender who's mark allows them to divert damage dealt by their enemy to the enemy rather than the ally would fit bothe the psionic flavor, and the defender role.
The way I would see it done is that you (flavor-wise) set up a bio-feedback link between your allies and your marked enemy, so that when that enemy attacks an ally, you channel your ally's pain through yourself and into the enemy. Mechanically, your ally's damage is reduced by some amount (such as half, or [scaling number] + con mod) , and you and your enemy take a share of that damage.
EDIT: As you said, just being all like, "You attack my ally, you take half their damage" might be a little OP, so that's why I added that you take some of the damage too.