Results 31 to 44 of 44
Thread: No martial controller?
-
2019-06-06, 07:42 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: No martial controller?
Yeah, we're not fighting at all. Both of us have very valid points and a lot of it just relates to 'what is the Martial power source', 'what does Epic *really* mean', and what does suspension of disbelief do.
I kind of think of it as a Thor/Captain America problem. If Thor wrestled a Dragon, I don't think anyone has any issues with it. Captain America? Um, that might be tricky to explain. So is an Epic Grappling specialist moving onto Thor territory in the Grappling realm? Seems plausible to me. Not to ThePurple.
Does a Paragon Grappling specialist ripping the arm off a scaly giant immune to normal weaponry make sense? Sure, seems fun. But I find that less plausible than an Epic Tier grappler specialist pinning down a Dragon if we're going to bring standard physics into play.
But that points right to the problem of a Martial controller in 4e — how restrained by actual physics should we be? Because if a controller can't function in each tier due to real world reasons, it isn't really viable.
-
2019-06-06, 08:48 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2018
Re: No martial controller?
It's just that this sort of mentality just feeds into why martials can't have nice things imo. Noone raises an eyebrow at a wizard waving a finger and warping reality with zero consequences outside of spell slots/powers spent, and like not even with fantasy staples like magic being dangerous or draining the body, but the moment a martial does something that a normal human couldn't in a game of epic fantasy it's all "my suspension of disbelief is totally broken! Sure, a several ton dragon is flying and also has baffling skeletal and muscle structure with 4 legs and 2 wings and there's no way the ecology could support so many giant monsters anyway, but that dude just picked up an ogre?! No verisimilitude here, unrealistic I say!"
And I'm not trying to be disrespectful of your opinions at all, I just get frustrated that this comes up every time and the logic involved just seems so silly to me.
-
2019-06-06, 09:34 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Location
- Shameland (4e Forums)
Re: No martial controller?
One of the things I *like* about 4e is that it gives martial characters all kinds of fancy toys to play around with. 4e gives martial characters more nice things than any other edition has, which is why I think martial players tended to be happier with 4e than people that traditionally play casters (the same seems to be true for a lot of "obligatory cleric healer" types that were freed up from buff spells so that they could actually attack and *do* things via 4e's method of implementing the leader role).
To me, epic tier martial is about having such a prodigious level of skill and sheer determination that you're able to accomplish things that are preposterous. It's Batman and Captain America stuff. Thor starts getting into the divine (or arcane, depending upon how you interpret it) power source so you get a bit more physics-defying allowance, but the point of martial is that, like Batman and Cappy, you're *not* tapping into anything supernatural: you're just *that good*. An epic tier grappler being able to pin down a Medium-sized (or even Large) deific manifestation? Sure, I can get behind that. Even the Greek myths had stories about a human being who is so damned good at something that they're able to beat the gods (of course, in the Greek myths, they end up regretting it), but when the sheer physical presence starts to dictate more than skill, I start having a hard time believing it.
A lot of it also depends upon the genre of the game. If you're talking about a wuxia setting, I can *totally* get behind all of this kind of stuff, because wuxia *loves* the whole "pure skill allows you to do impossible things like wire-fu jumping and finding a toe hold on a cloud so you can fight in the clouds" school of tropes. In wuxia, "martial" is basically a magical power source like any other, honestly.
-
2019-06-06, 10:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2017
- Gender
Re: No martial controller?
-
2019-06-06, 11:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
Re: No martial controller?
Epic tier martial is "I have insane levels of skill due to my dedication and talent in my craft".
But the insane levels are "I am a demigod, or on par with one".
The dragon runs at the wrestling master. The wrestling master shoves his foot into the ground, grabs the attacking limb, the entire dragon pivots around him. The dragon's limb ends up crossing another and the legs are in the air, and if the dragon has to twist itself around to avoid getting two of its limbs being torn off.
That dragon is *pinned*. It might be able to physically roll over, but doing so would be fatal as it would be minus two limbs that the human will use the dragon's bulk to rip off. They are already straining and pulling against each other; if the dragon tightens those muscles, everything will tear.
The dragon can still tear with the other two claws and bite at the wresting master. And it *could* decide "I lose two limbs, bleed out, but I stand up first" (congrats! 0 HP), it probably won't tho.
Any move that a martial character does can be reframed as "the foe must do this or be reduced to 0 HP". Push a gargantuan dragon with an attack? The dragon gets to choose: 0 HP, or be pushed 1 square. Go ahead, take your time, you have 0.25 seconds to decide.
(Note: as a short cut, decree that nobody ever picks 0 HP.)
Sword play is about "I am trying to kill you". Epic martial characters, on every swing, are throwing blows that could even kill a god. Their foes avoid dying usually; but the martial character is so good they can force the defender into worse and worse positions every time it avoids death.Last edited by Yakk; 2019-06-06 at 11:09 AM.
-
2019-06-06, 11:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2018
-
2019-06-06, 02:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: No martial controller?
I suspect we have the exact same opinion. I'm just stating that if there is a problem, the problem is a non-Epic PC ripping a giant's arm off, not an Epic PC grappling a Dragon.
Honestly, I find Vancian casting to be more problematic than martials. For whatever reason, it has been accepted by the majority of D&D players, but it has little internal logic and ends up just stupid in every iteration. Particularly with the rampant single -> mass power creep.
-
2019-06-07, 10:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2017
- Gender
Re: No martial controller?
-
2019-06-08, 11:21 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
Re: No martial controller?
Not great examples. Cap is, in fact, augmented by the "super soldier" serum. Bats can't go toe to toe with monstrous opponents, but relies upon his gear and crazy preparedness.
It would be easier to play Bats in a rules light system, or with a very flexible 4e DM who was not worried about RAW or even RAI and would let PC preparation and planning trump combat rules and skill checks. If you manage to collapse a mountain on a dragon, you don't limit yourself to DMG p. 42.
And wuxia isn't martial, its psionic, a la the monk, and maybe battlemind. Martial characters generally don't fly or do elemental damage without gear.
-
2019-06-08, 04:11 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: No martial controller?
Wuxia is paragon power. One of the Epic Destinies is to actually be a primordial, or a demigod. Hercules is a martial epic, Captain America is a paragon level character and Batman is Heroic.
Epic level characters are dealing in threats that would show up in DC or Marvel's big name comics. Tiamat versus the Avengers would be about the Hulk and Thor tanking her until they could use the mcguffin to banish her or make her scales permeable; they are not threats any normal person is fighting and the destinies agree with that.
-
2019-06-08, 06:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Location
- Shameland (4e Forums)
Re: No martial controller?
Both Batman and Captain America are defined as being "peak-human physical performance". Batman gets there via training while Captain America got there through the serum (he's noted as being Olympic-level in physical capabilities, not superhuman), which is why I used those as examples: everything they're capable of is derived from training and natural inclination. Captain America can fight and be relevant alongside Thor and Iron Man because Cappy *has that much skill* (being in peak physical condition also helps, but the threats relevant to Thor, because he's a god, and Iron Man, because he's in super-tech armor, are so far beyond "peak physical condition" that it's kind of irrelevant). Put his shield in the hands of someone like Tony Stark or Thor, and it won't be able to do *nearly* as much as it will in his hands because, while it's a powerful tool, it's *not* the reason he's a superhero. Same goes for Batman's toolbelt.
For some characters, their gear is literally the only reason they can compete (Iron Man); for others (like Batman and Captain America), it's simply part of their total kit and wouldn't really do anything for the average person (or, at least, would do very little).
Also, I would argue that Batman's "crazy preparedness" is simply a manifestation of martial.
-
2019-06-10, 08:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: No martial controller?
Martial control specialties:
Cutting through a crowd with high mobility
Battlefield level fear and morale effects
Mass pet innate action training
The first is a two weapon build who gets "rain of steel" fighter daily as an at-will, and goes up from there. Someone who can walk through a horde of zombies and leave a trail of bodies, but leaves fighting the dragon to others.
The second is a battlefield captian, one who leaves managing his own troops to the warlords but who can inspire and terrify based on reputation and orders to the troops. (think bagpipes or roman spear/shield banging type stuff)
The third is a trainer of warbeasts, but unlike the beastmaster ranger he doesn't put all his effort into one creature. Innate actions wernt around when the beastmaster came out, but as a way to semi-control a group of animals, it seems ideal. Gets access to the same pet-revive ritual as the ranger, pets are picked up as part of certian Daily powers.
-
2019-06-10, 05:35 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Location
- Shameland (4e Forums)
Re: No martial controller?
The first, based on what you described, is gonna be OP as hell. What's more likely is gonna be bursts, likely without the insane degree of mobility you're describing. This is basically how the Hunter Ranger operates.
The battlefield fear stuff is, imo, more along the lines of what actual samurai were intended to do. The heavy kabuto armor and all of the accoutrements were designed to inspire fear in opponents. I designed a samurai class of the defender role that was either sub-controller (with heavy armor; CHA-based fear secondary effects) or sub-striker (with no armor; DEX-based iajutsu effects); the heavy armor samurai was more historically accurate while the no armor samurai was more in line with the anime/story samurai concepts.
Mass pet actions would be *incredibly* problematic, for both balance and logistics. Balance-wise, instinctive actions play merry hell with the balance inherent in the action economy, especially when you're allowed to put out a bunch of them. I'm also not entirely sure it would work with the controller paradigm. I've always felt that "beastmaster" fit more as a theme with linked PPs and EDs than as a class proper. Your *character* should be the star of the show with your animal companion playing a companion role, not the animals being the main attraction. A theme (designed along the lines of the Fey Beastmaster) would allow you to do this while still providing some mechanical benefits and a streamlined ruleset for doing so.
-
2019-06-18, 10:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2007
- Location
- Australia
Re: No martial controller?
Rather than the samurai, "Hoplite" may be the scary controller given the Greek flavour. Their helmets and formations were certainly designed to intimidate the enemy as well.
How much work do you want to do?
How much do you and your group value balance and how sure are you that you can deliver it?
How much is optimisation part of the game?
You could have a conversation with the player at each level up about which powers, feats etc. So rather than design a class which is a mashup of hunter and seeker which would be OP or require work to balance, design a *build* which is in balance with the party. This would spoil the fun for a player who enjoys the mini-game of optimisation, but its probably best not to give that player a homebrew class unless you're really sure of your work.