|
3 years ago ::
Jul 29, 2010 - 2:27PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2010
|
Monsters should attempt to evade the Defender... rather than behaving as if they are obligated to attack him. -Unmaker
And why is that so?
Do you honestly think even the least low-intelligence critter is able to distinguish between a Defender Type Character and a Striker? I think there is a huge variety on how creatures can (re-)act in a fight against the hero-party.
Some may attack the char, who is the nearest to them. Others may attack the hero, who they see as the biggest threat to them. And others may go after the "smallest in size" char. Some creatures may switch their target during the fight all of a sudden, because maybe one striker did more damage to them than another.
There are tons of possibilities. The verification/validation for being a good DM is not for letting creatures avoid the "tank", but to let creatures (re-)act properly, while still keeping the fights interesting, of course.
Also letting creatures (re-)act in their certain ways helps players to create specific tactics.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jul 30, 2010 - 7:51AM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
One of my minor crusades is to promote the idea that incoming enemy damage should be distributed among the party members when possible. If it's not, then that's a lot of healing surges going to waste per day.
This requires a behavioral change on behalf of the typical party; specifically, the non-Defenders. Probably not so much on the melee Strikers and melee Leaders, but perhaps a bit.
Just because the Defender usually has the biggest bucket of HPs, the best surge count, and some of the best defenses doesn't mean that wizard lurking in the hallway shouldn't still get his rear into the room and take a few hits. Be a man! You're not as glassy of a cannon as you used to be. Spend some of your surges too so the party's workday isn't bottlenecked exclusively by how fast the Defender's surges are depleted.
Previously it'd be a matter of the cleric deciding when the adventuring day is done. "I'm out of heals, guys, time to go rest." The wizard might get antsy when he's down to only a few niche spells and his sling, but ultimately it was your healer's spell supply that told you when to go clock out.
Now it's different. Now everyone is their own walking healing battery. Now everyone is 100% healed when they wake up from an extended rest, and you don' t have to worry about burning healing spells first thing in the morning. Now you wake up and you don't need to stop pressing onward until someone gets awfully close to zero surges.
Therefore, the trick is to try to distribute the battle damage to where ideally everyone gets down to running on fumes at the about the same time.
So why hoard your surges, squishies? Get up in there! Earn more milestones per day! Besides, chicks dig scars.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jul 30, 2010 - 9:37AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
Player Hat: There's more than one way to defend a party. A 4E defender can push the envelope of his role, with high punishment and high survivability, and approach near-WoW level tanking. Or you can back off of one or the other aspect for things like mobility, enemy positioning or even near-striker DPS on your attacks.
I resent the OP's implication that defenders shouldn't try to be MMO tanks, because that is EXACTLY what my paladin does and she's damn good at it. My motto is "every time the monsters swing at me I win." It works because unlike most PC's, I layer every type of damage mitigation (damage reduction, temporary hit points, high hit points, high defenses and self healing) and pair it with pushing the envelope on my punishment mechanics as well. I do almost trivial damage on my standard actions, but I keep the rest of the team safe to do whatever they need to do to drop the monsters.
I've seen a lot of other defenders and they take different approaches. They work just fine too. The defender "role" is broad enough to accommodate different playstyles, which is part of what makes 4E fun.
DM Hat: As a DM I make defenders earn their paycheck. If a monster isn't marked, it's going to need a damn compelling reason to attack the defender. Now that's not a blind approach...the afformentioned damn compelling reason does come up often enough, but unless a monster is literally mindless (some undead, jellies, etc...) they avoid defenders. I refuse to listen to arguments about low INT monsters, because prowess should be measured by Wisdom, not Intelligence. One of the silliest arguments I've ever heard was that wolves weren't intelligent enough to move into a flank.
To me, if I don't do that as a DM, I'm invalidating all the work defenders do to make themselves sticky.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jul 30, 2010 - 12:32PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Jul 14, 2010
|
One of the silliest arguments I've ever heard was that wolves weren't intelligent enough to move into a flank.
"Clever girl. . ."
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jul 31, 2010 - 8:55AM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Aug 27, 2007
|
DMs need to get used to shizophrenia:
- For a campaign, they are supposed to be on the heroes side, and plan events that make them saviours or the world.
- As rules arbitor, they are supposed to be neutral, and neither tip the game towards himself or to the players
- When they play monsters on the battlefield, they are supposed to be against the players, and use every bit of tactical skill to defeat them.
These contradictions are hard to grasp if you're not a seasoned DM with 10+ gaming years. You'll understand at some point, but it's not obvious and nowhere clearly stated.
Well said.
The more it was earned, the sweeter the victory.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jul 31, 2010 - 5:36PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2010
|
DM Hat: I refuse to listen to arguments about low INT monsters, because prowess should be measured by Wisdom, not Intelligence. One of the silliest arguments I've ever heard was that wolves weren't intelligent enough to move into a flank.
To me, if I don't do that as a DM, I'm invalidating all the work defenders do to make themselves sticky.
Actually tactical approach and strategy is a matter of Intelligence. Wisdom - as in this game - is an Assessment for perception and life experiences (Insight), but still can influence the topic.
However Intelligence is neccessary. Wolves' hunting tactics are instinctive and therefore predictable.
And now take a good look at the mentioned MMORPG Players.
Have you ever participated in PvP Battlegrounds in WoW?
There are a lot of humans out there - yes, humans, and a LOT - in this case players, who
have no idea about tactics. They keep hacking and shooting upon the warrior in front,
while the priest/druid/paladin/shaman resides unharmed at a backward position and healing up the warrior while being unattended and often even unnoticed. And that's only one of the many occuring mistakes they make, especially Alliance players.
If even human players lack the logic to flank the healer first in an MMORPG,
why shouldn't some NPCs in a PnP RPG lack that knowledge from time to time either?
Take a good look at those MMORPG players in PVP, who play with no tactical behavior
- and there are many of those - and ask yourself if everyone, who is armed really has a clue about fighting and tactics.
To cut a long story short, Imho NPCs also can act as dumb as PCs can do, may it be in a PnPRPG
or MMORPG. Why should NPCs especially critters be more intelligent than PCs?
Why should NPCs be more intelligent than PCs anyway?
Maybe more of a philosophical question...
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 7:12PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2011
|
Personally I don't see what all the complaining is about. The god mage character was killed off in 4E. There is no reason to think that the monsters will instinctively bypass defendrs to get at other characters in a fight unless said monsters have had experience in fights before. Because you as a player or DM understand what certain classes are capable of that knowledge does not translate to most monsters unless said monsters have a familarity with pc powers. Liches and vampires would certainly qualify. Orcs would not. In most fights you fight the people running at you. You don't try to run around them and fight others unless there is a compelling reason to do so. I would be much more worried about some brute with a huge axe storming after me than some old man in his bathrobe. Events during the battle may change priorities but that happens as the combat unfolds. So man (or dwarf, elf, grimlock, etc.) up and do your job by protecting others. It is what you are there for. If you want to do mad dps and not get hit then play a bow ranger or a crossbow rogue.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 27, 2012 - 7:19PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Sep 17, 2007
|
Personally I don't see what all the complaining is about. The god mage character was killed off in 4E. There is no reason to think that the monsters will instinctively bypass defendrs to get at other characters in a fight unless said monsters have had experience in fights before. Because you as a player or DM understand what certain classes are capable of that knowledge does not translate to most monsters unless said monsters have a familarity with pc powers. Liches and vampires would certainly qualify. Orcs would not. In most fights you fight the people running at you. You don't try to run around them and fight others unless there is a compelling reason to do so. I would be much more worried about some brute with a huge axe storming after me than some old man in his bathrobe. Events during the battle may change priorities but that happens as the combat unfolds. So man (or dwarf, elf, grimlock, etc.) up and do your job by protecting others. It is what you are there for. If you want to do mad dps and not get hit then play a bow ranger or a crossbow rogue.
Mountain Cleave Rule: You can have any sort of fun, including broken, silly fun, so long as I get to have that fun too (e. g., if you can warp reality with your spells, I can cleave mountains with my blade).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 28, 2012 - 9:50AM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2011
|
If this thread is dead why bother to post a reply to me?
Yes I do play MMO's but I have played tabletop RPG's long before MMO's were even a dream. The role of the fighter and all fighter subclasses has always been to protect other party members. The only exception was when magic-users became powerful at the high levels did DM's try to get around fighters to go after robe wearers. If you don't like taking hits then don't play a defender and go hide in the back. Defender powers are set up for them to attract the attention. So MAN UP and quit complaining about it. Seriously, before 4E all fighters complained about was that they were not a threat and how monsters tried not to engage them. Now that they do in 4E and the OP is complaining about it? Whatever....
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 28, 2012 - 9:56AM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Dec 22, 2010
|
The orginal player was complaining about it three years ago. Strangely enough things have changed since then and the fighter can now be anything from a super-sticky tank (e.g. SuperDuperKnight) to a grab-and-never-let go (e.g. Beowolf, Master of Grabs) to a very good dpr charger (there is no famous build for it but it is easy to do with all their multitarget charge powers).
|
|
|
