4e Class Roles

[ghost_warlock]

Okay, so some of what I'm wondering about will likely be answered when I get the book(s), but I'm curious NOW, dammit! :smalltongue:

I've heard a lot about Class Roles in 4e and how they'll pretty much define a character's abilities (because they dictate what a character of that class is supposed to be able to do).

So far, I've heard about four roles: Controller, Defender, Leader, and Striker. (Four roles, fourth edition...hmm.) I have yet to read a very specific description of each of these, though (which I'm expecting to find in the PHB when it arrives).

My principle question is, essentially, "is that it?" Is this all we can expect to see? For each Power Source (also a somewhat vague definition), we can expect to see four classes at most? Any more than this and you'll be stepping on someone's toes. Do we really need two arcane controller classes, for instance? Won't two classes with the same power source and the same role be similar to the point of redundancy?

So, is it possible to come up with new Class Roles? I'd assume that suitably creative people could come up with something, but what?

(In retrospect, maybe this would have been better placed in Homebrew but, since we're likely nowhere near the mechanics stage, yet, I figured this is as good a place as any).

[JaxGaret]

So far, I've heard about four roles: Controller, Defender, Leader, and Striker. (Four roles, fourth edition...hmm.) I have yet to read a very specific description of each of these, though (which I'm expecting to find in the PHB when it arrives).

Leader = healer + buffer
Defender = most HP + healing surges, aggro
Striker = single-target massive damage output
Controller = battlefield control + AoEs (although this may just be the Wizard; other Controllers might go about this role a in different manner)


My principle question is, essentially, "is that it?" Is this all we can expect to see? For each Power Source (also a somewhat vague definition), we can expect to see four classes at most? Any more than this and you'll be stepping on someone's toes. Do we really need two arcane controller classes, for instance? Won't two classes with the same power source and the same role be similar to the point of redundancy?

There are two Martial Strikers in the PHB (Ranger and Rogue), and they play quite differently, so no, I don't think any two classes with the same power source and the same role will be similar.

Even across power sources but within the same role, Fighters and Palading play quite differently, and Warlords and Clerics play quite differently. Warlocks are also very different from both Rangers and Rogues.

But yeah, I'd expect them to try and hit every power source/class role combination if they can.


So, is it possible to come up with new Class Roles? I'd assume that suitably creative people could come up with something, but what?

Just wait and see. I am sure the homebrewing will start soon.

[Aron Times]

Take note that class roles only tell you what the class is best at. Each class has a little bit of defender, striker, controller, and leader. For example, wizards have spells that deal massive damage to a single target, letting them double as strikers.

And that's if you don't multiclass. Multiclass characters can fill two roles almost as well as single-class characters. A fighter/wizard might not be as good at battlefield control as a pure wizard, but he is a decent fighter and wizard.

[JaxGaret]

Take note that class roles only tell you what the class is best at. Each class has a little bit of defender, striker, controller, and leader. For example, wizards have spells that deal massive damage to a single target, letting them double as strikers.

This is true. The classes aren't completely straitjacketed into their role.

For instance, Paladins have some Leader abilities, and also some debuffs (Controller?), whilst Fighters have a little more Striker in them. They're both Defenders.


And that's if you don't multiclass. Multiclass characters can fill two roles almost as well as single-class characters. A fighter/wizard might not be as good at battlefield control as a pure wizard, but he is a decent fighter and wizard.

I've said it before, I find the multiclass system in 4e to be both well balanced and elegantly designed.

[Kupi]

The class roles, I think, are less a hard and fast rule and more a guiding philosophy derived from accepting the existing mechanical realities. In most combat-centric RPGs, a character will succeed for one of the following reasons:

- Its defenses are too strong for the enemy to overcome
- It heals and increases the power of its allies
- It simply deals more damage than its enemies
- It changes the battle situation to its own advantage

These statements were then mapped to the archetypes Defender, Leader, Striker, and Controller. So when we say that a Fighter is a Defender, we mean that the Fighter's chief advantage is the fact that he is difficult to defeat; he wins because he is difficult to damage. The Wizard is a Controller because he can slow his enemy's movement (allowing him to continue attacking at range) and use area-of-effect attacks (to discourage enemies from attacking in clusters). To draw an analogy, think of a class's role as something like an alignment: a statement of purpose and a guide toward ideal behavior, but not a straight-jacket or an exclusive rule.

I hope that helped make sense of it!

[JaxGaret]

- Its defenses are too strong for the enemy to overcome

-So when we say that a Fighter is a Defender, we mean that the Fighter's chief advantage is the fact that he is difficult to defeat; he wins because he is difficult to damage.

Incorrect. A Defender need not merely be able to absorb punishment; they must also have some way to draw the attention of enemies to them. This is usually termed "pulling aggro". So far, the primary and secondary Defender classes in 4e do this by means of a Marking mechanic.