Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 sumec Jun 07, 2010 13:12:25	Hello, I am currently playing the Keep on the Shadowfell adventure with some friends of mine, there are five of us, and one is DMing, so there are four players. We had a Raven Queen worshipping Revenant Assassin, a Dwarven Cleric, a Human Wizard, and I was initially a Deva Swordmage multiclassed as a Wizard for that Enlarge spell build, thing. So after a couple of encounters, I wasn't feeling the Swordmage, and rerolled a Paladin, which was fun enough, my defenses were beastly, and I multiclassed bard at Level 2 for Majestic Word, I was pretty resilient. Anyway, marks have never ever come up in the game, ever. This irritated me, because my encounter and daily abilities were Majestic Halo, and Valorous Smite. People reassured me that this was a good thing, it meant I was serving my purpose, everything was attacking me instead of the party. Well, the DM got a bit better about this in the last encounter (Once all the squares adjacent to me were full, the mobs would range attack random party members.) but it was the Kobold Lair encounter, and we had some really sorry luck. There were some rounds where all of us but the Cleric missed (With Astral Seal), and the Assassin rolled 1-2 three times in a row, as well as on his big four shroud Chosen for Death Nova deal. Long story short, my Paladin died, and then failed 3 death saving throws in a row. On the third roll, the DM knocked the die over and said I rolled a 17. But I wanted to use this as an opportunity, since I honestly don't care about character death. I hate being a Defender, at least under this DM. My damage as a sword and board paladin was pretty... eh. I didn't have any flashy effects that ever came into play. I may as well be there to spam a Melee Basic Attack with a longsword, and take all the hits. I was considering making an Avenger, or that fighter build that uses Invigorating for Temporary HP, but my party seems very worried that without one of each role, we're ****ed, particularly without a 'tank'. My party is composed of MMO players who are convinced that Defender = Tank, and 'partying' without a tank is suicidal and impossible. Can anyone help me out here? I'm thinking about digging out the old Swordmage just so we have a defender, and I don't have to bother making a new one.
#2 CCS Jun 07, 2010 13:54:50	It's a silly assumption that all the roles must be played in order to succeed.  Ok, so let's say that you wind up with a party containing zero defenders.  Why is that? Well, you didn't want to play one for whatever reason. And apparently the other players didn't want to play one either.... Most often when someones complaing about the lack of a certain role?  If you ask them if they're happy with the character they made they say "Yes".  They want to play what they enjoy, yet expect someone else to be willing to fill in what's "missing" - regardless of wether that someone else will enjoy doing so....  So screw it.  If playing defenders isn't fun for you?  Don't play one.
#3 Bandikoot Jun 07, 2010 14:29:26	Remind them that DnD isn't a MMO, then inform them that you don't actually need to fill all roles in order to succeed.  Sure, it's nice to have a defender, but if you don't want to play one then dont.  OTOH, you could create a defender that is designed entirely to do damage while neglecting their defenses just to show them that defenders aren't necessarily tanks.
#4 sumec Jun 07, 2010 14:30:33	It's a silly assumption that all the roles must be played in order to succeed.  Ok, so let's say that you wind up with a party containing zero defenders.  Why is that? Well, you didn't want to play one for whatever reason. And apparently the other players didn't want to play one either.... Most often when someones complaing about the lack of a certain role?  If you ask them if they're happy with the character they made they say "Yes".  They want to play what they enjoy, yet expect someone else to be willing to fill in what's "missing" - regardless of wether that someone else will enjoy doing so....  So screw it.  If playing defenders isn't fun for you?  Don't play one. It's not so much that none of them have an interest in playing a Defender. It's that I elected to be the Defender when we started playing, because the strategy of forcing all these monsters to attack me and leave the squishies alone appealed to me. But there is no strategy involved under this DM, the modus operendi of every monster from the word go is to kill me. He even 'forced' us to have taken seperate routes of entry, because I failed my stealth roll and everyone else succeeded. So I was on one side of the map, and everyone else was on the other side. Instead of going after the large group of less defended and much more potent threats, the monsters in the middle portion of the room rushed for me. There has not been a point in any encounter where everything did not immediately drop what they were doing, and run as fast as possible towards the Paladin in plate armor, and a really big shield. As opposed to the Assassin who is doing 14-20ish damage a hit, and a Cleric that is helping to keep me alive with Astral Seal. (He's a Pacifist Healer.) At this point, everyone is happy with what they made, no one else feels like rerolling. So it's not that no one else wants to play the role, it's that they are content with what they made and don't want to reroll new characters, and everytime I suggest something else, they reply with "But, then we'd have no defender, who would be the tank?"
#5 sumec Jun 07, 2010 14:40:56	Remind them that DnD isn't a MMO, then inform them that you don't actually need to fill all roles in order to succeed.  Sure, it's nice to have a defender, but if you don't want to play one then dont.  OTOH, you could create a defender that is designed entirely to do damage while neglecting their defenses just to show them that defenders aren't necessarily tanks. Ironically, the DM did that the last time we played, and he made an Avenging Paladin who used a Maul. I was DMing that time, and the entire party died in the Kobold Lair, I expect because they were level 1 still, when they reached that area, where as we were level 2, because we went to the Dragon Burial Site first, this time. Instead of deciding that Defender does not = Tank, they decided he had built the wrong kind of Defender, and should have been sword and board. As far as they are concerned, a more striker focused Defender is only an acceptable off tank, and is worthless if there isn't a 'true' tank in the party already. I dunno, I think I'll just make the Avenger and tell them it'll be fine, pretend his class Role is Defender. God knows his defenses will be close to on par with my Paladin, and I'll feel like I'm actually doing something with my abilities. Although Censure of Pursuit isn't likely to trigger at all, anymore than my Marks did. Unless I rush a Wyrmpriest or something.
#6 sanguinesphinx Jun 07, 2010 16:15:53	Sounds like the problem is with the DM. Tell him that you'd prefer him to be a bit more realistic while playing the roles of the monsters. Non-intelligent creatures will likely attack whatever's closest, whether that's you or not. Intelligent ones will have different strategies, many of which would involve killing the healer or another character first. I haven't played 4th, but I assume the role of the defender is to defend the party - manouvering into tactical positions to cut off the enemies. By making the enemies just attack you anyway, your DM is completely eliminating any sense of tactical thought.
#7 Cohen95 Jun 07, 2010 16:34:02	Yeah, I'm pretty much in agreement with others on the thread here. Play what you want to play. If you're not happy playing a particular character, you're not having as much fun, and you're basically doing it wrong. If other party members complain, level with them. "Guys, I didn't enjoy playing the meatshield. I want to mix it up more." Point to the PHB where it plainly says that no role is absolutely necessary, and if they give you grief, point out the ability of any of them to multiclass into a defender class, if they feel it's that big of a deal. Unfortunately, the biggest problem is that your DM doesn't seem to be offering much in the way of tactical diversity, which can just be really, really boring for your Defender. I've had similar problems in the past, and the only way to fix it is to teach it. Some people just don't have tactical minds, and that can really suck until they learn some concept of tactics. Best of luck.
#8 kenlar Jun 07, 2010 17:09:11	I think the other players in your group are wrong. You never need to have all the roles filled. Right now, we're playing with a primary team of 3 strikers (two changeling assassins and a tiefling warlock) and a controller or leader (Deva Wizard or Half-Elf Ardent) depending on who's DMing, and we're doing fine so far. If you don't want to play a defender, play another role and if the other players want a defender in the party, just let them die and make one themselves. You don't have to play a role you don't want to play. All that matters is that everyone is having fun around the table, even if it means playing without all roles filled.
#9 sirkaikillah Jun 07, 2010 23:08:56	I disagree you need to fulfill at least one role, that is of leader.  If you don't have a leader for the healing, then you will have a tough time, especially in published adventures.  After that I would rank them with defender, striker, controller.  I have seen groups as player and Dm, handle combat with out a defender, put it is a lot easier with that role filled.  So I see no reason for you not to want to fill that role for the rest of the gaming group.  I think before you ask your Dm change the enemies tactics, maybe you should ask the other players to help develop tactics drawing your enemies to attack when they are marked by your defender.  As a Dm I play marked enemies very aggressive toward the marking Pc.  But the group I regularly Dm, are always getting those marks into play.  The are good at isolating marked enemies, placing them into a position of attacking another non marking Pc or forgo an attack all together.  I go for the attack as a Dm in that situation.  I just have a different perspective than most of the posters.  I think you should work with you adventure group, to develop tacitics, tempting marked enemies into attacking someone other than the marking Defender i.e. provoke attack of opprtunities, even placing marked enemies into position of either attacking a non marking Pc or forgoing an attack altogether.  If your Dm decides to forgo making any attack during the round, so as not to trigger a mark, then you should talk to him about monster tactics.
#10 kouk Jun 07, 2010 23:23:10	Speak to the DM about your concerns. Even as a whole group, because the other players are probably bored too. Remind the DM that an "automatic" 5-7 damage isn't all that scary when monsters have a hundred HP, and while the other party members are doing 20+ unhindered. If he knows mostly MMO terms, remind them that monsters should "aggro" on enemies that do the most damage or heal the most. Your marking effects add "aggro" to yourself, but they aren't a passive effect that monsters must obey for a set period of time.
#11 geoffa Jun 08, 2010 9:33:39	In my experience, you can be successful with some pretty strange combinations which do not include all roles.  Here's two examples: 1. This past weekend I was in an LFR game where we had three strikers (duelist rogue, sneak and throw daggers rogue and bow ranger) and two leaders (artificer and pacifist cleric).  I thought we were going to be in big trouble because of our lack of front line defender-type characters, but it turned out fine.  Between ranged and melee strikers, we could take out threats very quickly, and the leaders kept the party alive to keep fighting. 2. There are several characters who are not technically defenders, but they can act like defenders when you need somebody to stand in the front and be the tough guy.  A friend of mine has a barbarian character (technically a striker) who generates a lot of teporary hit points.  He charges into battle, dishing out big damage, generates temp hps when enemies die and that allows him to soak much of what the monsters throw back at him even though he doesn't have the defenses of a fighter or paladin.  I believe you can do similar things with a warlock. I believe it is hardest to work around not having some sort of leader/healing character but even that can be done.
#12 Neutronium_Dragon Jun 08, 2010 10:56:43	The general principle of 4E party design is: You don't need to fill any given role for the party to succeed. You do need to have a strategy for dealing with any gaps in the party's capabilities. There've been several good examples here of how various groups did just that, and it's something that can come up even with all of the roles filled (because most characters who fill a role are specialized in certain elements of that role).
#13 sumec Jun 09, 2010 1:06:29	Thanks for your help everyone, I decided to go with an Avenger to replace my dead Paladin. After discussing the reasons for going with this class, the whole team seems pretty content that this new set up will work fine.
#14 shard_of_suzail Jun 11, 2010 4:01:45	A whole party of strikers can be a heck of a lot of fun. I really do not like the way 4th edition does its character types. It is indeefd very mmo and promotes the "tank" role to the extent that the mmo flaw of "nobody likes to play the meatshield" has appeared in the playerbase. Everyone loves to play dps and they like to see the big numbers. Healers and tanks are less fun. The mark mechanic is basically taunt and aggro...and guess who dies when things go wrong, yes, its the tank. I am very much a fan of "i have sword/ bow and i`m a dwarf/ elf". Pick up your weapon, wade into the combat and be a big damn hero, thats what its all about. When it comes to mmo's i actually play class combinations in innapropriate or uncommon roles. I was one of those who played "tank" type characters in pvp, where they traditionally didnt function. Now its commonly accepted that that is a functional playstyle. People never expected it and when rogues jumped me and got a shield in the face and ten tonnes of armour plate, that really made my day. "but tanks dont do pvp, its all about burst damage"....yeah, which is why your silly daggers do nothing to me. Break the mold and enjoy the freedom. Dont end up playing a robot who has to "fill x role"
#15 MusicOfCreation Jun 11, 2010 13:28:58	A whole party of strikers can be a heck of a lot of fun. I really do not like the way 4th edition does its character types. It is indeefd very mmo and promotes the "tank" role to the extent that the mmo flaw of "nobody likes to play the meatshield" has appeared in the playerbase. Everyone loves to play dps and they like to see the big numbers. Healers and tanks are less fun. The mark mechanic is basically taunt and aggro...and guess who dies when things go wrong, yes, its the tank. I am very much a fan of "i have sword/ bow and i`m a dwarf/ elf". Pick up your weapon, wade into the combat and be a big damn hero, thats what its all about. When it comes to mmo's i actually play class combinations in innapropriate or uncommon roles. I was one of those who played "tank" type characters in pvp, where they traditionally didnt function. Now its commonly accepted that that is a functional playstyle. People never expected it and when rogues jumped me and got a shield in the face and ten tonnes of armour plate, that really made my day. "but tanks dont do pvp, its all about burst damage"....yeah, which is why your silly daggers do nothing to me. Break the mold and enjoy the freedom. Dont end up playing a robot who has to "fill x role" In 4E you can be a defender w/o being a meatshield. Our party has two 2hander Fighters and they lock people down and beat them to a pulp and because of their class features the enemies have no choice, but to stand toe to toe with them or be beaten down even harder. Also, its universally considered that 4E defenders aren't supposed to tank everything like MMO tanks do. They grab two or three enemies and let strikers/controllers deal with others, otherwise you end up having to do an extended rest every three encounters due to your defender being surgeless. Also 4E leaders play similar to pvp healers in other games than pve healers. They deal damage, provide utility, enhance their teammates, and heal when necessary. They don't just stare at health totals and hit one or two buttons. If you played WoW arenas(which I'm guessing you played WoW from the info above) then you've probably seen some matches where a discipline priest doesn't heal a single hit point and instead mana burns healers and helps dps down a kill target. It is very possible to have combats like that with the right kind of leader in 4E.
#16 warrl Jun 23, 2010 17:05:28	He even 'forced' us to have taken seperate routes of entry, because I failed my stealth roll and everyone else succeeded. He WHAT!?!?!?!?!?!? Failing a stealth roll does not stop anyone from walking through a particular corridor or doorway. It simply means that the character who failed is observed walking through it - assuming there are some potential observers. Said observers, if they are smart and observe one character walking along, will wonder if he's really alone and thus possibly do active perception checks; this would possibly result in some of your character's allies also being observed. Or if everyone else tends to make nearly all their stealth checks and you routinely fail, your party can work that into your tactics using you to draw the enemy into positions where your hidden strikers have easy access to the enemy's squishies, while you defend yourself and a healer. At this point, everyone is happy with what they made, no one else feels like rerolling. So it's not that no one else wants to play the role, it's that they are content with what they made and don't want to reroll new characters, and everytime I suggest something else, they reply with "But, then we'd have no defender, who would be the tank?" "Anyone who wants to. That would be not me." And with a DM who automatically sends everything at the tank, it probably won't be anyone else either. Although if someone DOES want to... just build a tank that is heavily optimized for defenses and durability (including temp hit points and/or self-healing), not much for damage or mobility. As the enemy gang up on him, they are nicely clustered for other characters' close blasts and area bursts. Also be sure the player communicates with other players. In particular your primary healer should be getting updates on the tank's hit points at the beginning of each of his (the healer's) turns. With that setup, a defender with low damage is doing a WONDERFUL job. He's keeping the enemy off his squishy allies, probably offering easy flanking for any melee allies, and presenting convenient groups of targest for AoE allies.
#17 Psikerlord Jun 24, 2010 7:35:19	Most defenders can do pretty wicked damage, in the striker range, especially in heroic - there are plenty of fighter builds in this vein on the boards, along with strength paladins optimising holy strike. They tend to sacrifice a bit of "defender" to achieve this, but that's no biggie. Good luck with your avenger!