I know there isn’t a perfect system, so it’s no surprise that there’s something about 4th edition D & D – otherwise a good system – that bothers me.
It’s a handful of little words.
Defender.
Striker.
Leader.
Controller.
Let’s play the definition game.
Defender: the tank. High damage resistance, low damage output. Paladins and fighters are the standard in 4e.
Striker: the glass cannon. Low damage resistance, high damage output. Rogues and rangers are the standard in 4e.
Leader: the healer and buffer. Low damage all around, generally. Clerics, of course, and the new class – Warlord.
Controller: the one that moves enemies and allies around, keeping “control” of the battlefield. They’ve made Wizards controllers now, which is… interesting…
They’re just words to describe the roles a class plays within the party. But they’re restricting in ways I don’t like, and they almost immediately fall apart. Take the Swordmage. The class is technically a defender class – but the one I’m playing is of a build that makes her a striker. She makes a crappy defender. It took three or four sessions to make that clear to the rest of the group, who were all apparently thinking “hooray, we have two defenders!”
And then there’s this: hand some gamers a list of roles in a party, and they’re paralyzed if they don’t have one of each.
Yes, I know, the old D & D model was “we need a priest and a fighter and a rogue and a mage” – but you could get away without them. It wasn’t some sort of religious codex that must be followed like I’m seeing the new roles being treated as.
These terms are, to the best of my knowledge, coming from the MMORPG world. It is not at all uncommon to see groups standing around with their thumbs up their butts in MMOs because they want to go do X quest or Y instanced quest, and OMG they can’t without whatever role they’re missing. Turns out, they really can – when I was playing City of Heroes, we did perfectly fine with a group of all strikers – they just think they can’t.
And the part that exasperates me the most is that when I’ve brought this up with folks in my group… they don’t really get it. “But the game is designed for a balanced party!” Okay, yes, very true. But why is it balanced in this particular way? Why do we HAVE to have a controller and a leader and a defender and a striker? Why is the game not designed in such a way that you could potentially defeat things with the ‘wrong’ composition? “…”
I know those are unfair questions, but it still bugs me. I keep thinking of City of Heroes, and even World of Warcraft… “Need healer and ready to go!” “Need controller and healer!”
Ugh.