|
2 years ago ::
May 23, 2011 - 10:04AM
#1
|
|
|
Leaders have a very odd place in LFR. More than any other 4e role, the effectiveness of a leader depends very heavily on its party. A healing-focused leader isn't very useful in a party with multiple leaders or in a party with lots of tough PCs. A leader that enhances movement isn't useful in a mobile party. A leader that gives lots of basic attacks is completely useless in a party where no one has a good basic attack. The problem with leaders in LFR is that you never know what the party composition will look like. If you build a leader that is very good at one thing, then they will either be very effective or very ineffective, depending on party composition. If you build a leader that is very versatile, the character will be somewhat useful in most parties, but will probably be fairly mediocre. (Because there will always be things that the party doesn't really need help with.) I have seen tons of Warlords in LFR, but other leaders are either very underrepresented (at least in my area) or rarely get a chance to shine because the party make-up is so random. And even Warlords - sometimes they're completely useless depending on what other characters are in the party.
To make matters worse, most LFR players build fairly versatile characters in general because they don't know what kind of party they will be in. It's fairly likely that a leader will end up in a party where the PCs are all fairly self-reliant already. PCs have the ability to heal themselves, give themselves saving throws, and otherwise get out of tricky situations through the use of various magic items, feats, and powers. This is especially true at higher levels (mid-paragon and up) when characters have a ton of resources and can become very individualistic - not really needing to rely on leaders or other party members. Since PCs are mixed-and-matched in LFR, it is very difficult to build a fun/useful leader that actually significantly benefits whatever party they get thrown into.
I guess I'm just wondering if it's possible to make a leader for LFR that is routinely useful and fun to play, regardless of the party make-up. By "useful" I mean actually contributing significantly to the party is a real way. More than once I've seen leaders in LFR games that end up doing more harm than good - an extra player means more monsters and the leader doesn't provide enough benefit (with that particular party) to counterbalance that. The more I see LFR leaders in action, the more frustrated I get with them. I can easily build a defender, striker, or controller that is lots of fun to play in practically any party. Leader? Not so much.
As a note - I really like the 4e design concept of parties being balanced around the 4 different roles. A PC performing their role well means that other PCs can perform their own roles well. Everyone works together as a team, doing their part, and you end up with a cohesive whole that is much stronger than each individual part. Unfortunately the random nature of LFR tables means that this fundamental 4e design concept basically has to be thrown out the window. You can't build an effective LFR character that needs to rely on their party because you have no idea what party you'll end up with. Leaders seem the hardest hit by the individualistic culture that results from the random mix-and-match LFR playstyle.
Thoughts?
Lori Anderson
WotC Freelancer, LFR author
@LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author)
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author)
CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author)
QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author)
EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
TotalCon: http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 23, 2011 - 10:05AM
#2
|
|
|
Part of the reason I bring this up... Of my 12(?) LFR characters, only 1 is a leader (Cleric). She was one of my first LFR characters and is now epic level. Over her 21 level career (and over the last 2 1/2 years of real time), I have found myself continually retraining her and tweaking her because it was so hard to build an LFR leader that was fun regardless of the constantly changing party makeup. Before the huge healing nerf (last year?) and pre-MM3 damage expressions, the biggest problem with my cleric was that she was too good at healing. No one ever needed healing and when they did I could heal them excessive amounts - so most of the time my cleric felt useless. When Divine Power came out, I branched out my leader-y abilities and became very good at granting saving throws. In fact, I was extremely good at granting saving throws - to the point of handing out about 1 automatic, no-action save per round (due to some silliness that still hasn't been nerfed). But over the years new 4e products kept having more and more and more ways for PCs to be self-reliant and not need a leader. PCs have SO many ways to shake off or ignore conditions these days that a leader who can grant saving throws isn't really necessary. She started as a healing-focused leader that had more healing than anyone actually needed. Then she was a cleric who had too much healing AND gave out too many saves. No one ever needed her because they were too self-reliant and she was too good at her job. The majority of my turns consisted of me asking "Does anyone need a heal? Does anyone want a saving throw? Does anyone need anything at all? Are you sure? No? None of you need anything? Really? PLEASE can I do something for someone?? No? *sigh* Ok, well, I guess I use my at-will again."
Frustrated, I kept tweaking and tweaking my character, trying to find a way to fit into any random party. Eventually I discovered Turn Undead builds and retrained her as a Radiant Servant. I was so excited. I was finally useful. I could contribute something to a party instead of just sitting on the sidelines hoping that someone would get crit or dominated so I could actually do something useful. My cleric still wasn't useful all the time, but she had enough time in the spotlight to make it a fun character to play. Now that the cleric has been slammed in the face with a nerf-log (again), I just don't know what to do with her. 4e has gotten to the point where any party can pretty easily thrive without a leader. In LFR most people make versatile, self-sufficient characters and, especially at higher levels, parties rarely actually need a leader. It just doesn't feel like LFR has much room for leaders. Since players never know if they are going to end up at a leader-less table, they build characters that don't need to rely on a leader. Which means that when there actually is a leader at the table the party doesn't really need them...
Lori Anderson
WotC Freelancer, LFR author
@LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author)
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author)
CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author)
QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author)
EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
TotalCon: http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 23, 2011 - 10:37AM
#3
|
|
|
I play a lot of leaders, too (warlord, cleric, bard, artificer in LFR, plus an ardent in a home game); it's the role which I enjoy the best.
I agree with you that overbuilding towards healing can often be overkill (though, I haven't played many of the newer modules yet, so my POV on that might change). OTOH, especially once one gets into the higher end of Heroic and beyond, being able to grant saving throws is useful, more often than not. That said, I haven't played at high Paragon or Epic, so it may well be that I'll see that, too, become overkill.
Most of my leaders have some level of focus on providing bonuses to attacks and / or damage, which never seems to be wasted.
"Of course [Richard] has a knife. He always has a knife. We all have knives. It's 1183, and we're barbarians!" - Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winter"
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 23, 2011 - 10:38AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2002
|
I think this is part because you play typically with a very optimized group who can't trust that your specific character will be part of their party.
There are plenty of choices to make a Cleric useful. Just go for enabling over healing whenever given the chance. I think you played with my Bard at one point and he's almost a controller.
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) Handbooks
Show
Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 23, 2011 - 1:48PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jun 14, 2009
|
I've played the following in LFR: taclord to 16, artificer|warlord to 10, strength cleric to 9, pacifist cleric to 7, bard to 5, ardent to 4. My leader experience in LFR far outstrips the other three roles combined (and that includes the fact that my highest level character is an 18th level paladin, although she has a strong leader secondary.)
My general experience is that leaders are best if they have a defender to work with. They don't need a ton of healing, but they always benefit from a panic button "nova heal". Giving bonuses to accuracy and damage are typically appreciated, as is the ability to grant saving throws. Focusing on granting MBA's can be risky, unless you know you'll be playing with someone who can take advantage of them. Finally, leaders are great to play with a partner...whether that be a significant other or even a good friend...as you can tune yourselves around the other, knowing they will be reliably present at your table.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 23, 2011 - 9:51PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Oct 25, 2007
|
LFR parties tend to be fairly self-sufficient with fairly experienced players. Leaders that enable through buffs, or have solid secondaries are always valuable and always fun to play. I've played a sentinel to 13, a lazy warlord to 8, an artificer to 7, a passifist cleric to 4, and a bard and ardent to 3. My favorites are by far my sentinel and artificer. Both are always useful, as the sentinel is extremely versatile and the artificer gives out massive buffs. My dwarven sentinel has been fun from level 1. She's from the Vast Swamp, and talks with my version of a southern country accent. Mechanically she's EXTREMELY versatile. For example, at 13, I have defender level hp (102), higher than defender surge value (33), and low defender-level defenses (level +16 or 17 ac, with similar NADs). I've got a spider mount and antipathy gloves, so I block shifting in 12 squares and simply form a huge wall that's hard to get around. I enjoy watching DMs get that look of glee in their eye when they decide to focus fire on the leader, and then realize that they've fallen into my trap. With my mount, my spirit companion, my wolf and my summons I simply block off creatures from attacking the squishies. There are few encounters in which I don't cause at least one monster to lose at least one attack on a party member. If there is another leader, I use my 3 encounter heals (and my second wind as a minor) to just heal myself, my summons, and any party members that need it. I've never dropped, as far as I can remember. Damage is repectable, and when I have a summons (or 3) out I attack up from 2 to 6 times a turn. In the last spec I did, I was level 12, doing 3-2 at level 14. During the solo end battle versus the hydra I had all three summons out, which proned, grabbed, and pulled respectively. The hydra never managed to move (as it either broke the grab or stood up), and was typically taking 5 attacks from me per turn. Oh, and the wolf made the hydra grant CA the entire encounter despite all-around vision. I am typically the only leader in the party, and I've always done fine as sole leader. Overall, it's a lot of fun. The artificer can give massive buffs, and has nice interrupts and other fun powers. The only thing that keeps the artificer from being more fun is that you tend to spam a lot of Magic Weapon. It is always extremely effective though. Once an artificer hits paragon, the temps they can generate are crazy. We played spec 3-2 with no defender at level 18, and my 15 level monk (which you've played once with Lorika) and a 15 level melee ranger were the front line. The party spent, I believe, a grand total of 4-5 surges on actual healing from damage. My lazy warlord mechanically was the least fun as a leader, as I frequently found myself in parties without significant basic attacks. Despite this, I tended to play him a lot simply because I liked to roleplay him. At level 3, I haven't really enjoyed the bard much mechanically. Everything seemed sort of lackluster at low heroic. Fun to roleplay though. Passifist clerics are decent controllers, but I find them boring mechanically to play with and to play. Ardents have a lot of versatility and can be built to do a lot of fun and variable things. I like the build versatility I see in them. They're cha based so they also can be fun to roleplay. I've never played a shaman, but both my warlord and sentinel MCed into the class for the spirit buddy. I'm interested in giving a full shaman a spin, but I'm a little concerned it will be a bit of a let down as I've already played a lot with the spirit buddy.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 24, 2011 - 2:01AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2005
|
I agree with you that overbuilding towards healing can often be overkill (though, I haven't played many of the newer modules yet, so my POV on that might change). OTOH, especially once one gets into the higher end of Heroic and beyond, being able to grant saving throws is useful, more often than not. That said, I haven't played at high Paragon or Epic, so it may well be that I'll see that, too, become overkill.
Most of my leaders have some level of focus on providing bonuses to attacks and / or damage, which never seems to be wasted.
This is good advice. Buff and debuff are useful. Some healing is good,
but too much can be wasted. I would avoid dedicated pacifist healers
unless you will always play with the same people who are not leaders.
Otherwise, you might sit down to the table of multiple pacifist healers.
You could also have your backup character in case of too many leaders.
This does not help with Epic, where you likely have only one character,
but for Epic you should put together a dedicated team to play anyway.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 24, 2011 - 4:16AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2004
|
My only LFR leader has been an artificer, who I played to 19. His primary functions as a leader were, in order:
1. Provide bonuses to attack and damage, exacerbated by cheese combos like Icy Weapons/Lasting Frost (because the only thing better than making an enemy vulnerable to your cold attacks is making the enemy vulnerable to cold attacks and making your allies do cold damage at the same time).
2. Provide "solutions" to tactical and strategic problems through the use of utility powers like Slick Concoction and rituals of all kinds.
3. Give allies massive amounts of temporary hit points.
Nobody ever complained about me not being an effective enough leader, and I never felt ineffective.
John du Bois
Living Forgotten Realms Writing Director, Netheril story area
Follow me on The Twitter: @JohnduBois
Follow my presence on The Intertubes: johncdubois.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 24, 2011 - 7:33AM
#9
|
|
|
What's that you say? Your leaders don't have enough opportunities to heal and you want the Epic campaign to be even tougher? *scribbles a note* Consider it done. 
Dave Kay
LFR Writing Director Retiree
dkay807 [at] yahoo [dot] com
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 24, 2011 - 7:53AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Oct 27, 2009
|
What's that you say? Your leaders don't have enough opportunities to heal and you want the Epic campaign to be even tougher?
*scribbles a note*
Consider it done.
Yes!
Though I do hope I can give players who will be going to Carceri a run for their lives. :D
Spoiler:
Show
I hope they at least go to Agathys in the end. I heard it's 'warm' this time of year.
|
|
|
