Secondary role better than many proper primaries

107 posts / 0 new
Last post
So, I'd like to know if there are classes with secondary roles better than those that have them as primary. For example, is it wrong to assume that with proper building a Fighter is a better striker than, say, barbarian?

Therefore, I'd like to know what are your unusual picks for the classes. If I'm not mistaken, pyromancer mages are also great strikers, right?

So, what do you say?
No. A well built Barbarian > Fighter in terms of being a striker.

However a Bladesinger is a much better striker than controller

And a fighter is a better striker than a monk IMO.

10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
a bladesinger being a "much better striker than controller" means that he is a good striker? or just that, more striker than controller? If I picked a bladesinger for striking, would that be a good option? If so, what would be the route to do it? Charge abuse?
a bladesinger being a "much better striker than controller" means that he is a good striker? or just that, more striker than controller? If I picked a bladesinger for striking, would that be a good option? If so, what would be the route to do it? Charge abuse?


No, it's not a good option except for levels 1-5. Yes, charging.

There are a lot of classes who are better at their secondary role than other classes whom have that as their primary role, and it varries a lot by level In Paragon, Cleric can be a better Defender than Battleminds and Wardens; Battleminds can be better Strikers than ... most other strikers (only Barb, Sorc, Ranger still beat it I think?)
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
Wardens make me sad. I really like the idea of them. I really don't like the execution.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
So the Line-up would be:

Possible Strikers:
Fighter
Bladesinger
Battlemind

Possible Defenders:
Cleric (Paragon)

Can you think of any non-controller being a good controller? and non-leaders being good leaders?

Is charge the only route for Bladesingers to be decent strikers, Zathris?
If you can't multiattack you typically charge.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
warlocks can be built to be decently leaderly in terms of enabling, but cannot heal.

Clerics and Archer Rangers are better controllers than hunters and binders, probably still seekers.

Any divine class who wanted to could become a full leader in mid-epic by taking the Revered One ED and a half dozen or more CD feats.

blaster wizards, wrath invokers, swordmages, fighters, battleminds, and bards, shamans and warlords (if you count enabling) are all better strikers than the vampire, at the very least. 
So the Line-up would be:

Possible Strikers:
Fighter
Bladesinger
Battlemind

Possible Defenders:
Cleric (Paragon)

Can you think of any non-controller being a good controller? and non-leaders being good leaders?

Is charge the only route for Bladesingers to be decent strikers, Zathris?


Just curious what your goal is here. "I want to create a party that doesn't follow their role"?

Warlock or Warlock/SM for the non-Controller Controller.

Leader is going to be the blocking point. I'm sure you'll get a couple people responding saying how Paladins, or Life-Wardens, or Warlocks, or Wizards can be Leaders in some sense of the word. It's Rubbish. You need the heals, you need ally buffs/enabling, you need save granting. You're better off as any real leader than a non-leader for that Role.

And I think you missed me saying the Bladesinger was bad. It's better as a Striker than a Controller, and it's not better than any real Striker.

Basically the off-role thing works for several classes because Control effects and Damage are a function of any good PC, since those contribute to the win condition: No enemy can attack us. "Defender" is basically "Controller with high defenses and off-turn bonus damage (Striking) for not being attacked". Leader is Leader, you need one.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
If I'm not mistaken, pyromancer mages are also great strikers, right?



You are hilariously mistaken. Compared to the sorcerer, invoker, and even the lightning wizard, pyro's a joke.
actually, I'm trying to understand and perhaps build some kind of reference for noobs that may be led into thinking that the classes are bound (competence/optimization-wise) to their primary roles.

I thought that a reference list (cuz handbooks would be way too troublesome) of other possible roles to the classes could be useful, considering that most handbooks rate the choices according to their primary roles (Which is understandable, given the enormous amount of powers/feats/fatures around and the bother it would be to consider them modularly).

From what you've said I gather that unless I pull some specific build, no other primary role will cut as an efficient healer. Ok, check. That leaves us with controlling, striking and defending as possibilities.

PS: what a shame for the bladesinger.
Stick to your role and 9/10 you'll be fine. Why are you giving a reference guide to noobs? Clearly you're having some struggles understanding the optimization meta (which is fine mind you), so I don't think this is the best way to do this...
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
So, I'd like to know if there are classes with secondary roles better than those that have them as primary. For example, is it wrong to assume that with proper building a Fighter is a better striker than, say, barbarian?

Therefore, I'd like to know what are your unusual picks for the classes. If I'm not mistaken, pyromancer mages are also great strikers, right?

So, what do you say?




Imo, Battlemind got the biggest gap between how it was intended to be and how it's played most efficiently.
actually, I'm trying to understand and perhaps build some kind of reference for noobs that may be led into thinking that the classes are bound (competence/optimization-wise) to their primary roles.


The comparison you are attempting will show that some classes are so bad at their primary role that other classses outperform them even though its not their primary role.
It will not show that the class with the secondary role is good enough to fill this role. 

If you are trying to prove that some classes are good enough at their secondary role to be considered to fill that role then you have to compare them to the above average classes of that role.

The truth is that roles have a practical purpose, that is to help people with not so deep knowledge of the game build well rounded teams.

There have been builds which approach the secondary role effectiveness of the top tier classes in the role (usually hybrids) but these are exceptions and require high OP.
There are also team make ups which can have only one or two roles covered and be very succesfull.
But these are not what a noob should be looking for...
So, I'd like to know if there are classes with secondary roles better than those that have them as primary. For example, is it wrong to assume that with proper building a Fighter is a better striker than, say, barbarian?

Therefore, I'd like to know what are your unusual picks for the classes. If I'm not mistaken, pyromancer mages are also great strikers, right?

So, what do you say?




Imo, Battlemind got the biggest gap between how it was intended to be and how it's played most efficiently.


Sentinel as a pure class is further from "Leader", but that's because it's also further from "effective at anything". Warlock is probably the only class other than Battlemind where if you show up with something off-role, people won't think you're wasting class potential. I'd say Bard too but that's because good control looks an awful lot like leading if you just look at numbers (Dominate = I grant OAs, Unconscious = +5 to hit and you auto-crit! Other Stuff = CA)
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
what about the so-called blaster mages? are they striker-stuff?

And someone mentioned archers as controlers. Sincerely, I don't see ranger archers being effective controlers.
Genasi Lighting/Thunder Blaster Wizards are "AE strikers." Which is to say they aren't really strikers, unless you have someone else in the party doing AE, in which case it is broken. There was a point, before damage on entry errata, where they were quite powerful all on their own. They still have Storm Pillar+Dominates though, or creative uses of a couple of the Charm of... line of spells.

Resourceful Magician Cunning Bards are leaders+controllers past 16.

For a non-CharOp game a Paladin built around it could probably be a decent leader, for the right party. Zathris is right that in any optimized game he wouldn't cut it though. Even some of the weird grant saves constantly Paladin builds.

Battleminds and Fighters can be built to meet striker benchmarks.

A list of what isn't capable of meeting its intended role would be more useful for people who are new to the game. Knowing that a Cavalier can't be a real defender or anything else is useful information. Knowing that a SM|Lock can be a Controller, if you build it correctly, pick the powers correctly, etc., is not quite as useful to a person who has no knowledge of how to do any of that.
So I'll take your cue Alcestis and try to do so. Do you think I should open another thread or this one will do the job for asking ?

So, what do we have?

Very poor controllers: bladesinger

Very poor defenders: cavalier

Very poor strikers: monk, vampire

Very poor leaders: ?
Monks are not poor strikers.  Oassassins are poor strikers.
Sentinel Druids are very poor leaders. 

And you've been asking about Bladesinger builds. Get out the link in my sig for some funky ways to squeeze some damage out of them. 
Classes that can't meet their intended role (as expressed in the actual rules/books):

Controllers:

Binder
Bladesinger (as noted with weird builds they can be strikers, but the book doesn't say they are strikers)
Hunter (high single target damage with a splash of control is not controlling)
Swarm Druid (past low Heroic).

Strikers:

Assassin (without Erachima's reading of certain powers, which I agree with but is controversial and requires a rather thorough understanding of the rules, so either way not good for new people)
Blackguard (except insofar as you can be completely classless and meet striker benchmarks by charging.... but if all you're doing is charging, why play a Blackguard? And same deal, they don't know they are signing up to be a charge-bot and explaing system math to a new player is not how to get them involved)
Vampire (past low Heroic).

Leader:

Sentinel.

Defender:

Cavalier.

So... grand total of 8 classes and 1 build of another class that can be ignored... I'm not sure where or if I'd put Berserker on that list. Runepriests almost don't have enough support, specifically the decision they made with feats for them is God-awful, to really be fully effective leaders. Borderline case. Monks actually can be viable strikers these days.

There are probably a few things that can be added to that list, this'd be good thread for the discussion yes and you can start a... I don't know "Handbook of design failure"? after a bit of talking.
Monks are not poor strikers.  Oassassins are poor strikers.



All but two Monk traditions are definitely worse strikers than Assassins.
Monks require very specific and non-intuitive (unlike the avenger) optimization routes to be a good striker. They are passable Blasters and excel in groups of such due to forced movement.

So I'll take your cue Alcestis and try to do so. Do you think I should open another thread or this one will do the job for asking ?

So, what do we have?

Very poor controllers: bladesinger, binder (except Fey), hunter (which is what they meant by "archers"), seeker.

Very poor defenders: cavalier, berserker, brawler Fighters

Very poor strikers: monk, vampire, hexblade, blackguard, assassin

Very poor leaders: sentinel, most warpriests (can't remember the good ones off the top of my head)


Probably shouldn't put some of those as "very poor", but just "poor" classes really aren't worth playing vs another class, someone wanting to play hexblades or binders for example should just play a regular warlock. Should be noted that berserkers make fine Strikers.
"Invokers are probably better round after round but Wizard dailies are devastating. Actually, devastating is too light a word. Wizard daily powers are soul crushing, encounter ending, havoc causing pieces of awesome." -AirPower25 Sear the Flesh, Purify the Soul; Harden the Heart, and Improve the Mind; Born of Blood, but Forged by Fire; The MECH warrior reaches perfection.
Seekers can't effectively meet controller benchmarks. 

Besides the already listed classes, Executioners, Thieves and Hexblades can't meet striker benchmarks past heroic if they don't invest in charge-op, which I feel should be a sub-set of this list. 
Seekers can't effectively meet controller benchmarks. 

Besides the already listed classes, Executioners, Thieves and Hexblades can't meet striker benchmarks past heroic if they don't invest in charge-op, which I feel should be a sub-set of this list. 

Just wondering, why aren't Scouts on that list?   Because it's easier for them to poach Ranger powers and/or baked-in multiattacking?

Just wondering, why aren't Scouts on that list?   Because it's easier for them to poach Ranger powers and/or baked-in multiattacking?


The latter. Sure, they get even better when charge-opped, but it ain't required when you have a built-in Twin Strike++.
You are hilariously mistaken. Compared to the sorcerer, invoker, and even the lightning wizard, pyro's a joke.



Exactly why? I don't agree at all.

Chauntea/Lathander/Torm Cleric since 1995 My husband married a DM - καλὸς καὶ ἀγαθός

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/14.jpg)

A list of what isn't capable of meeting its intended role would be more useful for people who are new to the game. Knowing that a Cavalier can't be a real defender or anything else is useful information. Knowing that a SM|Lock can be a Controller, if you build it correctly, pick the powers correctly, etc., is not quite as useful to a person who has no knowledge of how to do any of that.



How about simply making a list of roles, and rating each class (that has that role listed) on its effectivity within that role? This would be highly useful for beginning players. For instance,

Controllers:
Wizard
Invoker
Druid
(except Swarm Druid)
Psion
Seeker
Binder
Bladesinger 


A few notable off-role classes could be listed; for instance, the blaster wizard should be listed under strikers as well (albeit not as skyblue) because people expect to be able to play it as a striker. Paladin should be listed under leaders somewhere, likewise because expect it to be there. Maybe the warlock should be in the above controller list. "Any class with charge-op" should be an entry on its own in the striker list, probably (and several strikers would have a lower rating than that if they don't charge-op).
I would at least use the standard CharOP colours.
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
I would at least use the standard CharOP colours.


Of course, but I don't see them in the WYSIWYG menu.

At any rate, I am not proposing that I create such a handbook, I am suggesting that one of the charop regulars does so (with feedback from the other regulars), and preferably in a new thread. I do feel it would be a useful resource, and it answers the question posited by this thread, among others.
Amber
Sky Blue
Blue
Black
Magenta
Red 
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
You guys are horribly underrating Seekers. And its clear you haven't played one. Also, what the **** is a controller "benchmark." Seekers aren't that far below druids and Psions anymore.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
Language...

Controller benchmark is the ability of a class to significantly reduce the effectiveness of large groups of enemies. And I might be working with outdated knowledge, but I was under the impression that Seekers couldn't perform the role adequately, either by not targeting enough enemies or applying insignificant control effects.
A censor is there for a reason. And you're using outdated knowledge. It's best not to comment on a classes efficacy without knowing what it does.
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
Small numbers of targets can be controlled and still be a controller if that control is stun/dominate/unconscious.

Casseo's article gave seekers some much-needed umph. 
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
I see one L29 single target stun, one L19 single target dominate and one L15 area burst sleep if the targets fail their save. Color me unimpressed. What does the class do nowadays that makes them at least capable controllers?
I see one L29 single target stun, one L19 single target dominate and one L15 area burst sleep if the targets fail their save. Color me unimpressed. What does the class do nowadays that makes them at least capable controllers?



They've got much better encounter and at-will options now, especially in the context that they can shoot 50 squares as opposed to 10-20.

Tidal Spirit Shot(at-will), Bonds of Moonlight(13), and Feyjump Shot(7) are all extremely good. Into the Black Bog(3) is solid. Wisp Shot is arguably as good as many controller Daily 19 powers and is an encounter power - save ends or be weirdly helpless.

I don't think they're especially exciting because there's usually one good choice at every level, so most builds will look extremely similar in power choice. Where the other controllers usually have at least 2 good if not 3-4 options for every level.
E1 - 2-target daze
D1 - AB2 CA and forced movement
E3 - 2-target forced movement and penalty to damage (of more use at the level you get it) 
E3 - Lots of forced movement 
D5 - Reoccuring immobilisation
E7 - 2-target daze and switch positions
D9 - AB2 Weakened and forced movement
E13 - 2-target restrain 
E13 - target is blind and others near by take a serious penalty to attack rolls
E13 - Force the target to charge - this can provoke OAs from allies if set up right
D15 - Reoccuring dazed
D15 - AB unconscious after a failed save
E17 - Forced movement and an ally can take a swing at it (shame it eats the ally's immediate)
D19 - Save ends dominate
E23 - Save ends 'cannot use anything but a move action' also stops its allies using immediate or teleporting
E23 - AB2 daze
D25 - Reoccuring 'removed from play'
E27 - AB2 forced movement and -5 to attacks, also gives the same rider to all your ranged attacks ueont.
D29 - Stun and a -2 penalty to attacks for all enemies that can see. 

It may not be as nice as list as some, but there is something passable at every level and that's all you really need.
Back to Basics - A Guide to Basic Attacks You might be playing DnD wrong if... "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Cool, thanks for writing it all out. I agree with the sentiment that this is a decent list, and that the lack of meaningful choices is what really holds the class back. 
Holds it back from what? You could argue most of the Warlord's power selection is constrained too. Warlords have a TON of awful powers. All you need is 1 good power at each level. Sure you have flexibility within builds, but an optimized Taclord is going to pick powers similar to how a seeker will.

No one complains about Invoker's e27s, but they're almost all garbage except one. It just happens to be a blast dominate.

 
10/10 Would Flame Again: An Elite Paladin|Warlock The Elemental Man (or Woman): A Genasi Handbook The Warlord, Or How to Wield a Barbarian One-Handed The Bookish Barbarian Fardiz: RAI is fairly clear, but RAZ is different That's right. Rules According to Zelink!
Seekers are good controllers, now.

I like the idea of rating every class (and sub-build) based on how good it is at its intended role, that would actually be an even more useful resource and would still accomplish the goal of pointing out classes/builds that cannot do their job. If no one else steps up to do that, I might actually make a handbook.
Sign In to post comments