The Gaming Den

I'm not keen monster/opponent distribution as a means of game balance or spotlight sharing. That means all adventures need to have equal amounts of undead, traps, animals, ranged opponents, melee opponents, and casters. Seems like an annoying restriction on DMs/module writers. Though, maybe if the categories were role-based it would be palatable.

CatharzGodfoot wrote: EBD to the rescue! Just write up a monster that makes any healing impossible within a 500' radius. I'm not an expert on Leader healing methods, but if they require LoS or touch than a simple divide + conquer strategy would work.

Yeah you can always write a healing negating monster if you want I guess, though the only monster that comes close to doing that is the troglodyte, and ironically there are a bunch of items in the adventurers vault that prevent healing from monsters. Of course the funny thing is that monsters don't really have healing abilities, so this is generally a moot point.

As far as healing methods for leaders, divide and conquer doesn't really work that well, because generally the push and slide abilities just don't push you far enough. You could arguably drop the leader in a pit or something, but that's about it. Other than that, the range on the leader's healing is generally going to be bigger than a level appropriate monster could push him. At high and epic levels it gets to be as big as 15 or 20 squares, which for most 4E battles can be assumed to be the entire battlefield.

RandomCasualty2 wrote:As far as healing methods for leaders, divide and conquer doesn't really work that well, because generally the push and slide abilities just don't push you far enough. You could arguably drop the leader in a pit or something, but that's about it. Other than that, the range on the leader's healing is generally going to be bigger than a level appropriate monster could push him. At high and epic levels it gets to be as big as 15 or 20 squares, which for most 4E battles can be assumed to be the entire battlefield.

By "divide and conquer", I mean throwing down LoS or movement blocking effects. Things like walls, illusions of walls, darkness, and fogs.

Boolean wrote:"Defender" Cleric Build: Note that while this is playable it's not even particularly optimal, I just wanted to fill it up with "defender" powers. We're also playing this game how ti was "meant" to be played, with the 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 lineup.

Dwarf Cleric of Ilmater (Bahamut outside FR)
Str 16 Dex 11 Con 15 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 12

Priests's Shield: This is grossly inferior to Righteous Brand but it boots your AC and your allies in a way similar to wearing a shield and marking, though admittedly not as good.

Sacred Flame: This power gives temporary hit point to your allies but not you-- in other words, it lets you disencentivize monsters from attacking squishy party members and grab the aggro for yourself.

Wrathful Thunder: This dazes an enemy in melee; if he wasn't already adjacent to an ally, or the ally can shift away before his turn, he can't attack anyone but you.

Guardian of Faith: This is almost like a Divine Challenge, but by ally not by enemy-- put it next to a squishy friend and the enemy will take damage as a penalty for attacking them.

Feat: Ilmater's Martyrdom. This feat is like lay on hands, it lets you spend your own surges to heal your friends. Many other FR deities have powers which cost you nothing but only gives saves to your allies, not you -- this is like a mark but for control effects. If you don't like FR, many of the PHB deities will negate an attack against a friend, like Armor of Bahamut -- they just will also do it for you yourself.

That's level one: 5 powers, all of which either absorb attacks or let you manipulate aggro. Now let's advance this sucker.

2: Shield of Faith gives the rest of the party +2 AC, like a mark, while giving the Cleric +2 AC making him as tough as a Plate-clad paladin. Alternately, because Cure Light Wounds restores health without using healing surges, it is perfect aggro control, since it does not matter who actually takes the hits. For our feat, Scale Proficiency.

3 Split the Sky pushes 2 and trips an enemy; if you push only 1, a melee enemy can't attack next turn.
4 Plate Proficiency

5 Beacon of Hope -- it debuffs the attacks of all enemies, that's clear-cut Defending. Or Consecrated Ground, which keeps enemies out of an area more effectively than a polearm.

6 Cure Serious Wounds: more aggro control; Dwarven Weapon Training for big damage.

7 Awe Strike: a melee immobilize more accurate than most Paladin or Fighters powers.

8 I wasn't going to take these, but there's little else good in the PHB for dwarf clerics. Shield Proficiency.

9 Man, every power here is made of win. Blade Barrier is the ultimate "stay away from the ranged attackers" power, Astral Defenders is a huge AoO prsence comparable to a fighter, but since I've hogged all the aggro I'm gonna take Divine Power. I can give myself *regeneration 5* which pretty much singlehandedly makes me the toughest thing out there.

10 Shielding Word gives +4 ac to one ally once per encounter, again very similar to marking. Heavy Shield Proficiency.

11 Holy Shit, Warpriest! Now my AC is BETTER than a Paladin and I can mark enemies for real. Feat: Dwarven Durability. I'm now also the toughest bugger out there.

So yeah, I could go on in these vein but I think my point is made. A Cleric is well built to hog aggro, disadvantage enemy attacks against his friends, control space via walls or AoOs and basically do everything Defenders are supposed to do. He doesn't do as good a job at this as a Fighter because fighters are overpowered but he kicks the crap out of a Paladin or Swordsage.

Also, I could have made this EVEN BETTER by multiclassing my cleric with Paladin or Fighter to get the once/encounter mark and cherry pick a power or two, but I wasn't sure you'd consider that kosher.

You have a pretty resilient character there, but there are a few flaws with how you built it. You really went out of your way to make him defender capable, and in doing so gimped some of his abilities. Since you had to take the higher strength and con to get plate proficiency, his Sacred Flame will only grant 1 temporary hit point at level 1 and will slowly scale up through level 11 to grant 6. 6 is pretty good for an at-will temporary hit point gain but it takes you a while to get to that point.

@ Shield of Faith: nice if you have most of your allies within 5 squares, but of course that depends on party makeup. I'm not sure why you mention cure light wounds here though, since you didn't take it and it's a level 1 power, not a level 2.
@ Wrathful Thunder: Situational but okay. However with 16 Strength and a +2 proficiency weapon you'll be at a disadvantage to hit most worthwhile targets.
@ Split the Sky: You can't choose to push 1, you have to push the full 2. That means the opponent can charge. Cases where you push an enemy one square against a wall will be too rare to consider that a consistent perk of this power.
@ Beacon of Hope: I'm not sure why you list this when it's a level 1 power and you already put Guardian of Faith up there.
@ Consecrated Ground: Your charisma modifier is only +1, so this ability is an incredibly weak choice.

About your choice of weapon-based powers: with a 16 strength/wisdom and using a +2 proficiency weapon you'll be at a bit of a disadvantage for hitting to make some of those effects go off.

With a paladin, not only do you start with plate/heavy shield proficiency, but you have a good number of at-wills, encounters and dailies that do defending. I can start with 18 Charisma, 14-16 Wisdom and a respectable Con depending on race. Shield covers the reflex defense.

Bolstering Strike - You gain temporary hitpoints equal to your Wisdom Mod (+2-3).
Enfeebling Strike - Marked target takes additional -2 to attack rolls.
Shielding Smite - Grant ally Wisdom bonus to AC (+2-3).
Paladin's Judgment - Big damage and ally can spend a surge.
OR
On Pain of Death - Big damage and enemy takes additional damage each time they attack. Less of a direct defending ability but a hefty punishment when stacked with divine challenge.
(2) Martyr's Blessing - Take a hit for an ally as an immediate interrupt.
(3) Righteous Smite - You and each ally within 5 gain temp hitpoints equal to 5 + Wisdom mod.
(5) Hallowed Circle - Burst 3; Enemies within take damage, allies gain +1 to defenses until end of encounter
OR
(5) Sign of Vulnerability - Big single target damage and enemy is now vulnerable to radiant damage, making divine challenge matter more.
(6) Divine Bodyguard - Take half of an ally's damage for the entire fight.
(7) Benign Transporation - Switch places with an ally Wis modifier squares from you, make a free attack against enemy if you're now within range of them.
(10) Noble Shield - Situational but takes an area effect attack that hits you and allies at the same time, offers you the option of having it hit you automatically in return for half damage for your hit allies.
OR
(10) Turn The Tide - Grant instant saving throw to allies. This can prevent ongoing damage.

About whether or not your build beats out a swordmage, it might beat an assault swordmage but I'd argue it doesn't beat a shielding swordmage. Between your dailies and situational encounter powers you don't stop that much damage. With the daily heals you can offset a decent amount, but of course, those are dailies and we've been assuming multiple fights before extended rest. Healing word is of course solid. However, shielding swordmage aegis blocks damage outright on a hit, and doesn't run out as it's an at-will. Over the course of multiple fights that is a hefty amount of mitigation. Combine that with their mobility and sticky at-will booming blade (locks down ranged enemies or keeps a melee away from your own ranged) and you've got a damned solid defender that doesn't even have to take feats to have respectable defenses, which allows for feats that improve their accuracy and direct effectiveness in combat. Also take into account the fact that swordmages do have powers that negate attacks completely. There's even a PP for them that allows for massive temporary hit point gains.

Noobcrusher -- I appreciate the feedback, I really do.

NoobCrusher wrote: You have a pretty resilient character there, but there are a few flaws with how you built it. You really went out of your way to make him defender capable, and in doing so gimped some of his abilities. Since you had to take the higher strength and con to get plate proficiency, his Sacred Flame will only grant 1 temporary hit point at level 1 and will slowly scale up through level 11 to grant 6. 6 is pretty good for an at-will temporary hit point gain but it takes you a while to get to that point.

I did indeed go out of my way to make him Defender-Capable; The build would be a lot more effective if I had taken more healing powers and fewer aggro-drawing powers, for instance. I was playing PHB only, so there was no STR and WIS race--I took dwarf for the flavor, because I was trying as much as possible to play the way they expect you to play. I ended up with Plate by accident -- I didn't intend to burn 4 feats on plate and heavy shield, because I agree that that's rather silly. I ended up doing it because there really aren't any good feats for a Heroic Dwarf Cleric to take, at least without multiclassing. The armor isn't really necessary though since he can heal himself almost as effectively as his party--if he can't afford the armor he could take more heals and less tank powers. Still, when he has Shield of Faith going he's as good as in Plate, and when he has Divine Power going he's ridiculously tough. Dwarven Durability goes a long way in Paragon, too.

Re: Sacred Flame -- Wow, I totally forgot I needed Charisma to make this work. I would definitely give him higher charisma if I did it again.

@ Shield of Faith: nice if you have most of your allies within 5 squares, but of course that depends on party makeup. I'm not sure why you mention cure light wounds here though, since you didn't take it and it's a level 1 power, not a level 2.

Why on earth wouldn't your party be within 5, at least if you pop it off at the start of the encounter -- and anyone that far behind the front line probably doesn't get attacked against AC often anyway. I prefer this to CLW unless someone else in the party is handing out power bonuses to AC, but CLW is of course a level 2 power as there are no level 1 utilities.

@ Wrathful Thunder: Situational but okay. However with 16 Strength and a +2 proficiency weapon you'll be at a disadvantage to hit most worthwhile targets.

You make a good case -- next time around I'll use a +3 weapon and a higher Strength. If you don't like the power, take Healing Strike which actually marks its target.

@ Split the Sky: You can't choose to push 1, you have to push the full 2. That means the opponent can charge. Cases where you push an enemy one square against a wall will be too rare to consider that a consistent perk of this power.

PHB,Page57 wrote: If a hit grants you the ability to compel the target
to move, whether through forced movement or teleportation,
you can move it any number of squares up
to the number specified (or not move it at all, if you so
choose).

@ Beacon of Hope: I'm not sure why you list this when it's a level 1 power and you already put Guardian of Faith up there.

I took it in place of a level 5 daily. I knew Consecrated Ground was weak with these stats, and while Weapon of the Gods is awesome it's not a Defender power. Nor is Spiritual Weapon.

With a paladin, not only do you start with plate/heavy shield proficiency, but you have a good number of at-wills, encounters and dailies that do defending. I can start with 18 Charisma, 14-16 Wisdom and a respectable Con depending on race. Shield covers the reflex defense.

No, it is in fact *impossible* to start with 18 CHA and 16 WIS as I specified default array at the beginning of the challenge, which obviously makes my build weaker than one more customizable.

Bolstering Strike - You gain temporary hitpoints equal to your Wisdom It Mod (+2-3).
Enfeebling Strike - Marked target takes additional -2 to attack rolls.
Shielding Smite - Grant ally Wisdom bonus to AC (+2-3).
(2) Martyr's Blessing - Take a hit for an ally as an immediate interrupt.

Enfeebling strike is legitimately awesome tech and much better at defending than Priest's Shield. I can of course take Righteous Brand and have a vastly more effective ability, but you do have the advantage in defending here. The rest of this is weak bullshit. Bolstering strike only gives *you* temphp, which means it only helps if you're already hogging the aggro -- Righteous Flame, by contrast, directly defends the squishy characters. Also it can be spammed to bubble up each teammate whereas if the enemies simply ignore you after you Bolster there is no point in Bolstering again. Shielding Smite is decent but assuming we *can* use healing surges occasionally, the Cleric's Healing Strike is more impressive. Martyr's Blessing, similarly, is no better than Cure Light Wounds. It doesn't cost an action, but it doesn't undo the damage, so these are about equivalent. Why don't you have a level one daily?

(3) Righteous Smite - You and each ally within 5 gain temp hitpoints equal to 5 + Wisdom mod.

Okay, that's stronger than I remembered and probably better than the cleric's powers.

(5) Hallowed Circle - Burst 3; Enemies within take damage, allies gain +1 to defenses until end of encounter

Okay, this is a much bigger area than the cleric's Consecrated ground. But I just remembered that clerics have Healers Lore. Which Means with WIS 16, CHA 12, Consecrated ground restores 5 hp per turn. A +1 to AC would be equivalent, if the players were taking 100 hp worth of attacks every turn.

(6) Divine Bodyguard - Take half of an ally's damage for the entire fight.

Weaksauce -- the most comparable cleric power is Bastion of Health, which is also a minor action; it lets the ally spend a surge, +CHA and WIS form the cleric. And roll a save. And it's an Encounter power. That will keep your team alive far more efficiently than the Bodyguard will.

(10) Noble Shield - Situational but takes an area effect attack that hits you and allies at the same time, offers you the option of having it hit you automatically in return for half damage for your hit allies.

Noble shield sucks irredeemably. Consider the following case: the paladin and 2 of his friends are caught in the blast. The blast has a 50% chance to hit each of the three. If he does nothing, the blast will do 3X.5 = 1.5 damage units to the team. If he uses the Noble shield, it will do 1+.25+.25 = 1.5 damage units to the party. In other words, unless there are three other allies or he resists the attack, he doesn't decrease the damage the party takes. Indeed, if his defenses are better than those of the other party members, he has caused the team to take MORE total hp damage. Now, he's moved that damage from them to him, but still, this isn't a very impressive effect. And it's a daily.

Compare Shielding Word -- it only works for AC but it actually prevents an attack, and as an encounter power. If you have 4 encounters in the day you'll probably use it successfully in 3 of them, soaking up 3 attacks which is more than the paladin can say. Or if you're willing to waste an action you could Mass Cure Light Wounds and negate the attack and then some. Of course, healing *is* worse than prevention in that you might be stunned, scattered, or killed by the attack; but then, if the attack is applying negative status Noble Shield is stupid because it reduces the damage taken by teammate but subjects you to the status without protecting them from it.

About whether or not your build beats out a swordmage, I'd argue it doesn't. Between your dailies and situational encounter powers you don't stop that much damage. With the daily heals you can offset a decent amount, but of course, those are dailies and we've been assuming multiple fights before extended rest. Healing word is of course solid.

However, shielding swordmage aegis blocks damage outright on a hit, and doesn't run out as it's an at-will. Over the course of multiple fights that is a hefty amount of mitigation.

Let's compare Aegis of Protection with Healing Word. Assuming an 18 CON, you can prevent 14 damage per round, if you have marked a monster, it is alive an active on its turn, attacks someone other than you, succeeds on its attack roll, and you haven't used your immediate yet. How often do you expect that to happen? Certainly not every round. Maybe a few times a fight.

Healing Word, assuming 18 WIS, heals 14 hp, exactly the amount the aegis prevents. It can be used twice per encounter, three times at level 16. How many times were you planning to use your Aegis reduction? Maybe more than that, but not significantly more. In return, the Healing Word can heal whoever needs it, even the caster, and gives you in-combat access to surges as well.

---

My build was far form optimal, so I certainly haven't by myself proved Frank's assertion that Leaders are in all cases superior to Defenders, though I tend to believe he's correct. My goal had been the rather more limited point, that there is no actual difference between the Leader and Defender roles -- both are capable of hogging aggro through marks, mobility restriction, and disencentives, and both are capable of healing or preventing damage to allies. I'll post a more powerful defender cleric in a little bit.

Dragonborn Cleric/Warpriest
Strength 16 Dex 11 Con 13 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 14

Feats:
1 Double Sword Proficiency
2 Soldier of the Faith
4 Armor of Bahamut
6 Scale Proficiency
8 Durable
10 Weapon Focus

Powers:

Righteous Brand (this is just crazy good)
Sacred Flame (3 temphp per whack, 4 at paragon)

Healing Strike (marks and heals 3+, not counting surge)
Split the Sky (see above)
Strengthen the Faithful (this heals allies adjacent to the targeted enemy, disencentivizing him form engaging friends; it restores 5-6 extra HP besides giving surges)
Shielding Word (Soak one attack per encounter)
Divine Challenge (just as good as when your paladin does it, 1/encounter)

Beacon of Hope (This weakens multiple enemies, halving their ability to damage your allies--or you; it also restors 8-9 hp to your whole party and buffs your other healing)
Consecrated Ground: (Regenerate 6-8 hp per turn)
Blade Barrier (the real way to protect your back line)
Shield of Faith (It's like you're wearing plate, and marking all enemies)
Cure Serious Wounds (If we care about surge attrition, getting 2 free and most of a third is a good deal)

Happier? Better attack bonuses and CHA-riders, still decent AC and toughness, vastly improved damage-dealing capabilities. If the attack bonuses are still too low I could dump STR entirely and go with an Elf laser cleric but while he would still be amazingly effective at keeping the party alive he would look and play less like a paladin.

So it looks like in terms of straight "defending" ability, the cleric wins out if built correctly. However I think there's another way to look at how "defender" should be interpreted. I'll elaborate.

Obviously if we use the definition of defender to be somebody who discourages attacks on their allies, buffs, heals and protects, we get something that sounds more like a leader. But if we look at the designated defender classes as another type of attacker, it's possible to see how they're meant to do their job.

Alright, so let's say that instead of building my paladin to be nothing but "defending" powers I go for a more balanced build. Let's see what we can come up with.

Longtooth Shifter (+2 STR +2 WIS) Paladin
Str 18 Con 12 Dex 10 Int 8 Wis 18 Cha 12

Let's go avenging paladin (2-hander) instead of protecting paladin because hey, as you've pointed out, paladins aren't all that good at making enemies pay attention to them via defensive powers. Let's be more proactive. If they're just going to shrug off divine challenge damage let's really give them something to cry about.

Fullblade - costs a feat but it's 1d12 damage, high crit, and a +3 proficiency weapon. With an 18 Strength that's pretty hot. With full plate we've got 18 AC to start out with which isn't bad. With magical armor and levels this will even scale up decently. And besides, again, we're supposedly bad at making enemies want to attack us anyway.

Powers:

(1) Holy Strike - If divine challenge isn't enough to attract an attack by itself, perhaps an additional 4 damage on top of our already respectable damage with a full blade will be.
(1) Valiant Strike - Nice, accurate attack that gets a +1 to hit for every adjacent enemy.
(1E) Radiant Smite - That's 2d12+9 radiant damage.
(1D) Paladin's Judgment - Strength attack that deals 3[W] (3d12+5) AND allows an ally to use a healing surge.
Lay on Hands 4/day - As mentioned before, lay on hands is essentially a defending power.
Channel Divinity (Divine Strength) - Apply +4 to an attack once per encounter.

Already we've established this level 1 character as someone who can:
* Punish enemies that ignore him, not only through the use of divine challenge and holy strike, but also through the amount of sheer ass kicking he'll do if not put down.
* Heal his allies. If enemies want to focus on anyone but him in melee, he has the convenient option of retroactively defending them via lay hands if need be. Paladin's judgment also deals an assload of damage on top of allowing an ally to heal.

Now let's advance him.

(2) Martyr's Blessing - Take a hit for an ally, as noted before, comparable to a cure light wounds daily.
(3) Staggering Smite - Good damage and we can use it to push an enemy 4 squares away.
OR
(3) Arcing Smite - when you're in the thick of things, chances are you'll get a chance to mark two enemies instead of 1. Not as good of damage as Staggering Smite but more protective.
(4) +Str/Wis, Righteous Rage of Tempus Divinity which turns a hit into an automatic crit. With a big weapon attack and a fullblade that's just sick damage waiting to happen.
(5) Martyr's Retribution - sacrifice a surge to deal 4[W]. That's 4d12+5 at this level and even half on a miss.
(6) Divine Bodyguard - Because it's better than the other two powers for this build. And I don't care what you say. It's not "weaksauce". It's valuable even as a daily for preventing damage to a low-AC party member like a two weapon ranger.
(7) Thundering Smite - Decent damage and it knocks an enemy prone. Unfortunately the high crit property is wasted since we're already using a full blade.
(8) +Str/Wis, giving us 20 in Str/Wis which grants another lay on hands per day, more holy strike damage, more damage to everything else we do, higher will save, etc etc.
(9) Nothing good here really since they're all charisma based, but if I have to pick one it makes sense to get Crown of Glory. It's an implement burst attack that slows and does alright damage.
(10) Turn the Tide, because as you pointed out Noble Shield is crap and you can at least save some pain with this one.

Level 11. A whole new world opens up at Paragon. I could've taken the fighter MC feat and could go into Kensai (Fullblade) for my PP. I could also go champion of order for a paragon path that supports both heavy weapon damage and more protective abilities.

Feats
1. Fullblade Proficiency
2. Weapon Expertise Fullblade
4. Channel Divinity: Righteous Rage of Tempus
6. Toughness to offset moderate armor class or a shifter feat.
8. Weapon focus or a shifter feat.
10. Anything

As you can see, this build is set up to mette out a great deal of damage. It's also got a respectable amount of direct mitigation. Maybe not as much as a cleric, but killing enemies and "drawing aggro" is another way of defending. The difference between a normal striker and this class in doing so is that the paladin is more well-requipped to take whatever attention he gets. And at that point he's actually doing his job. With the cleric, you have a lot of "reset buttons". But they don't do as much as the paladin to directly (I realize clerics can indirectly do so by keeping people alive) set the pace of the fight towards winning. It's passive support rather than helping to drop enemies faster. In this way, I'd consider the paladin to still be a very effective defender. There's no need to compartmentalize the role of "defender" to only abilities that soak damage, prevent it, or heal it. The paladin can, however, do this and dish out some serious pain even in the same turn.

Now that I've got that out of the way, I'll address some other things you mentioned in your last post.

[quote="Boolean]
No, it is in fact *impossible* to start with 18 CHA and 16 WIS as I specified default array at the beginning of the challenge, which obviously makes my build weaker than one more customizable.
[/quote]

I meant after racial modifiers, not raw starting attributes. If there were a CHA + WIS race obviously it'd be possible to start the game out with 20/16 or 18/18 in primary/secondary.

Boolean wrote: Let's compare Aegis of Protection with Healing Word. Assuming an 18 CON, you can prevent 14 damage per round, if you have marked a monster, it is alive an active on its turn, attacks someone other than you, succeeds on its attack roll, and you haven't used your immediate yet. How often do you expect that to happen? Certainly not every round. Maybe a few times a fight.
Healing Word, assuming 18 WIS, heals 14 hp, exactly the amount the aegis prevents. It can be used twice per encounter, three times at level 16. How many times were you planning to use your Aegis reduction? Maybe more than that, but not significantly more. In return, the Healing Word can heal whoever needs it, even the caster, and gives you in-combat access to surges as well.

Okay, fair enough. But another way to look at this is that a swordmage might wade into a group of enemies and start sword bursting to his heart's content until they choose not to ignore him. Again, it's sort of like the offensive paladin situation: a swordmage can be really annoying until enemies decide to deal with them. The shielding aegis is nice when it goes off, too, and you are right that it doesn't get triggered all the time. But it is another safety net in the swordmage's arsenal.

Boolean wrote: My build was far form optimal, so I certainly haven't by myself proved Frank's assertion that Leaders are in all cases superior to Defenders, though I tend to believe he's correct. My goal had been the rather more limited point, that there is no actual difference between the Leader and Defender roles -- both are capable of hogging aggro through marks, mobility restriction, and disencentives, and both are capable of healing or preventing damage to allies. I'll post a more powerful defender cleric in a little bit.

I know I've already made this point, but in soaking damage through removal you may be correct. However that is not the only method of mitigation in the game. In cases where a leader is dropped before they are able to undo damage, their abilities aren't as useful. Defenders usually have the ability to prevent damage from happening in the first place, in additional to dealing out a lot more than a leader, so you've got some defensive prevention and offensive prevention.

There is no +CHA +WIS race, so 18/16 stats aren't possible post-mods either.

Damage-dealing? I can't be bothered to demonstrate it at the moment, but a cleric can easily keep up. Nothing keeping him form using a Fullblade or the Kensai PrC (or Pit Fighter!) too, and some cleric damage powers are really good.

Healing being worse than prevention: true, although not a big deal as 4E characters are pretty resilient. Status effect lockdown is the only reason I can see death coming before healing, and the cleric has the edge in granting saves.

Finally, your Paladin build may be a playable character, but I think we've pretty much put paid to the idea that "defender" is a real role at all. Your entire defense of the Paladin and Swordmage is, "they can do damage." But guess what! If the Paladin's contribution is primarily in doing damage, that makes him a Striker.

Defenders don't do anything critical that other characters don't. The Fighter is good because he does more damage than other strikers, not because he is fundamentally different.

Boolean wrote:There is no +CHA +WIS race, so 18/16 stats aren't possible post-mods either.

Half elf. Start with 16/16 Charisma and Wisdom. The +2 Charisma bumps it to 18. I'm talking point buy, not stat array.

Boolean wrote: Damage-dealing? I can't be bothered to demonstrate it at the moment, but a cleric can easily keep up. Nothing keeping him form using a Fullblade or the Kensai PrC (or Pit Fighter!) too, and some cleric damage powers are really good.

Cleric [W] abilities are weaker than a paladin's. None of them go above 2 if we're counting levels 1-11. Some of the abilities you chose in particular forego dealing any damage at all in lieu of buff effects. If you want to dip into fighter and gain worthwhile exploits and/or go Kensai, you'll have to boost strength and sacrifice charisma, which makes some of your "defender" qualities a lot weaker. Same goes for using a two-hander since your AC will take a hit. There are tradeoffs you have to make as a cleric to be more front-lines friendly that a paladin, fighter or swordmage does not.

[quote="Boolean]
Healing being worse than prevention: true, although not a big deal as 4E characters are pretty resilient. Status effect lockdown is the only reason I can see death coming before healing, and the cleric has the edge in granting saves.
[/quote]

Paladins are at least as good, if not better. And anyway, in your particular example build you gave up divine aid for shield of faith. Potentially I'm not sure how many saves-based powers cleric has, but Paladin has a saving throw bonus as a class feature + 3 powers that give others saving throws on their own turn. I see more straight healing than saves from the cleric power list by glancing.

Boolean wrote: Finally, your Paladin build may be a playable character, but I think we've pretty much put paid to the idea that "defender" is a real role at all. Your entire defense of the Paladin and Swordmage is, "they can do damage." But guess what! If the Paladin's contribution is primarily in doing damage, that makes him a Striker.

Not necessarily. Like I said, if you define defending as healing, buffing and damage prevention as you have then obviously a leader is going to have an edge in many cases since that's what they're good at. A defender can be thought of as another type of attacker. What sets them apart from strikers, to me, is that they can deal respectable damage *while* defending others. I see them as more balanced, well-grounded attackers than a pure striker, which sacrifices the abilities defenders are known for in lieu of greater offense.

Boolean wrote: Defenders don't do anything critical that other characters don't. The Fighter is good because he does more damage than other strikers, not because he is fundamentally different.

I'd argue they do. Fighters actually don't do more damage than strikers (or at least rangers, avengers and sorcerers) if properly built, either. The way I see role definition in 4e is that there's bound to be some overlap in almost everything. That's because if roles were so specifically defined and rigid, each role would have fewer options in combat. Remember martial classes in 3rd Edition? Remember how versatile casters were? Yeah. They're much more evened out in that regard with 4e.

Here's the problem. If we define a Leader as one who heals and prevents damage and a striker as one who deals large amounts of damage, you appear to be proposing that a defender is simply a leader/striker hybrid. The problem is that not every class fits squarely into its role. They vary along a continuum.

Shamans are a leader class who, especially in the Bear build, do massive amounts of healing and defense buffing/positioning. Clerics still get buckets of healing but can be more aggressive, since they have melee bombshells like Righteous Brand and some awesome area nukes. Paladins are pretty much halfway between clerics and Fighter, doing some of each. Then you have actual fighters, then tempest fighters who are seessentially like rangers. then to complete the cycle and get back to leaders, we have rogues who do less damage then rangers but more control, and finally Warlocks whose whole schtick is to prevent damage by incapacitating enemies.

Where do you draw the lines? A Cleric and Paladin are different in function, sure, but so are a Fighter and a Paladin. Why draw a fundamental line here and not there. Why is a Warlord not a Defender? Warlords deal large amounts of damage in melee, manipulate positioning, and heal and prevent damage. An Inspiring Warlord is a *lot* like a Paladin, but they're in different roles. Why are a Tactical Warlord and a Laser Cleric in the same role? Apart from having a 2/encounter minor action heal they're nothing alike.

I'm not saying that defenders are leader/striker hybrids. The paladin in particular might be viewed as a defender/leader hybrid, with defender being defined as a balanced attacker and meatshield. They may not always be able to force opponents into attacking them, but they're inherently more resilient than controllers and strikers.

I don't think tactical warlords and laser clerics are nothing like each other. They're both good at support. Warlords are good at giving damage bonuses, free melee attacks, moderate healing and tactical repositioning. Clerics are more about defense and stability; Lots of healing, AC buffing, and a little bit of offense buffing when defense isn't as needed. You could look at them as both being good at support of different kinds. The defender classes have common trends between them too. They all have mark abilities, are more resilient than controllers/strikers, revolve around melee and have similar weapon proficiencies. Paladin has a little bit of leader built in, Swordmage has a bit of controller, and Fighter has a bit of striker. Should they all be made to play exactly the same?

Anyway, I think you might be too fixated on role definition. Why do we need to draw so many lines? What's wrong with picking a role and having a pretty general idea of what the class's strengths will be? What's wrong with reading up on the class to figure out exactly what its strengths actually are? Why is it a game design flaw to not compartmentalize everything so much? Why is it bad that not every class fits square into a specific role (and even this is debatable depending on what your definition of a clearly defined role is to begin with)? I mentioned this before, but wouldn't you be bored if all you did was one thing every combat?

NoobCrusher wrote:
Anyway, I think you might be too fixated on role definition. Why do we need to draw so many lines?... What's wrong with reading up on the class to figure out exactly what its strengths actually are?

Tell that to the designers. My entire argument is that the distinction between roles *is not meaningful*

A Paladin is a melee combatant who can heal and grant temp hp. He can redirect enemy damage by Challenges and by directly taking damage for his allies.

An Inspiring Warlord is a melee combatant who can heal and grant temporary HP. He can direct enemy damage where he wants through repositioning his allies and through targeted, ranged healing.

These are different roles

A Tactical Warlord is a melee combatant who excels at moving his allies, and giving them extra actions. He is best striking fast and hard and ending fights quickly. He also has some minimal healing powers.

A Laser Cleric is a ranged attacker who lays down large area attacks dealing ongoing damage, often negating the need for careful positioning because they only attack enemies. They can also grant regeneration and ongoing healing, which combines with the ongoing damage and zone powers to give them the edge in long, drawn-out confrontations.

These are the same role.

You make a bunch of other statements her and there that I could quibble with, but until you convince me the word "defender" means anything I'm not going to bother.

NC wrote:They're both good at support. Warlords are good at giving damage bonuses, free melee attacks, moderate healing and tactical repositioning. Clerics are more about defense and stability; Lots of healing, AC buffing, and a little bit of offense buffing when defense isn't as needed. You could look at them as both being good at support of different kinds.

But... you said that the fundamental difference that made a Defender a Defender was its provision of AC buffing and defense support. If a Paladin is a Defender because of healing, AC buffing, and a little bit of offense buffing when defense isn't as needed, why is a Cleric a Leader because of what you just said?

A Mark is an AC Buff to your allies. If giving AC buffs is an indicator of "support" to define status as a Leader, you've just blurred the lines between Defender and Leader to illegibility.

NC wrote:What's wrong with picking a role and having a pretty general idea of what the class's strengths will be?

No one said that there was anything wrong with that. It's just that you can't actually do that in 4e because the "roles" don't mean anything consistent. All you really know is that if your class says "Defender" that you'll get more hit points than if it says "Striker." But even that isn't really indicative of anything, because if you happen to be an Inferlock you'll get so many bonus temp hit points that it actually takes more damage to drop you than it does for most Defenders.

-Username17

And Barbarians and Druids don't even follow the HP rules...

Boolean wrote:
A Paladin is a melee combatant who can heal and grant temp hp. He can redirect enemy damage by Challenges and by directly taking damage for his allies.

An Inspiring Warlord is a melee combatant who can heal and grant temporary HP. He can direct enemy damage where he wants through repositioning his allies and through targeted, ranged healing.

These are different roles

So because paladins and warlords can do some of the same things, it's strange that they're different roles? I did say that paladins had a couple of leader-like qualities. But that's ignoring the fact that there are things paladins and warlords do that differ from one another. You're selectively looking at the similarities and ignoring the differences.

A paladin can grant temporary hit points to himself. Lay on hands, while healing, is also retroactive defending. Paladins punish enemies that ignore them by dealing guaranteed damage and penalizing their attack rolls.

Inspiring warlords also heal, but offer more in terms of direct buffing. They grant damage bonuses to allies, facilitate advantageous positioning, and can directly buff the defenses of allies.

Boolean wrote: A Tactical Warlord is a melee combatant who excels at moving his allies, and giving them extra actions. He is best striking fast and hard and ending fights quickly. He also has some minimal healing powers.

A Laser Cleric is a ranged attacker who lays down large area attacks dealing ongoing damage, often negating the need for careful positioning because they only attack enemies. They can also grant regeneration and ongoing healing, which combines with the ongoing damage and zone powers to give them the edge in long, drawn-out confrontations.

These are the same role.

Again, you've selectively listed powers from each of these classes that differ from one another while ignoring what makes them similar at their core. They're both good at support. I told you how in my last post but if you're just going to ignore that then I shouldn't bother repeating myself.

Boolean wrote: You make a bunch of other statements her and there that I could quibble with, but until you convince me the word "defender" means anything I'm not going to bother.

So you could make petty or irrelevant arguments against my other points but you won't because my explanations of defenders don't satisfy you? Okay, I guess.

FrankTrollman wrote: But... you said that the fundamental difference that made a Defender a Defender was its provision of AC buffing and defense support. If a Paladin is a Defender because of healing, AC buffing, and a little bit of offense buffing when defense isn't as needed, why is a Cleric a Leader because of what you just said?

The bolded portion is pretty much word for word what I said makes the cleric a leader. If you'd read through my last few posts, you'd see that I'm actually not defining a defender in this way, or at least not primarily in the way that those qualities make a leader what they are. I might have back on page 3 at some point but that was before Boolean made some good points about clerics being better at that sort of thing than a paladin, so I realized my error and attributed that to leaders. Fighters and swordmages don't have the same leader-like qualities that a paladin does, so it would be silly of me to try to define a defender by those same properties.

I'll try one more time to make it clear. The intended role of the defender, in my eyes, is to be in the front lines and be a balanced attacker. They aren't just meatshields. They're there to create a catch-22 situation for enemies. Either the enemies A. risk a miss against the defender's high defenses, or B. they soak the punishment of not taking option A. An effective defender will make both choices painful or at least undesirable.

Now, I know there's some controversy with paladins since divine challenge is a little bit underwhelming. But it is a guaranteed damage punishment and part of the catch-22. The part-leader aspect of the paladin class is that they can retroactively defend somebody via lay hands and have some powers that directly buff the AC of others or allow them to use healing surges. So far, from what I've seen, we unanimously agree that fighters perform the catch-22 well. They can punish really hard for being ignored and maintain high defenses. So can a swordmage. Just because a warlock, as a striker, is self-sufficient and can gain temp hitpoints out the ass doesn't make them a defender. Just because a cleric can opt to spend feats that boost their defenses to the levels defenders can start with doesn't make them defenders and the defender role not legitimate. I think you and Boolean are looking at specific aspects of a class A, saying "That's like this other aspect of class B!" and saying that because of this, role definition is blurred to hell. It's really not that simple.

FrankTrollman wrote: A Mark is an AC Buff to your allies. If giving AC buffs is an indicator of "support" to define status as a Leader, you've just blurred the lines between Defender and Leader to illegibility.

No. A mark is an attack roll penalty to an enemy. An AC buff is a direct boost to armor class that would apply to all attacks targeting AC.

Okay, please define "support"

Remember to make sure your definition includes laser clerics and tactical warlords, but excludes druids and paladins.

Boolean wrote: Remember to make sure your definition includes laser clerics and tactical warlords, but excludes druids and paladins.

Really? I don't think you're reading my posts. I already said that the paladin has leader-like qualities. I again say that you're too fixated on compartmentalization. Swordmages have a little controller built into them. Does this make the controller role concept bogus too?

Okay then, make it exclude Invokers and Warlocks

I think it's not Boolean that's fixated on compartementalization, but the people who consider defender etc. to mean something.

NoobCrusher wrote: No. A mark is an attack roll penalty to an enemy. An AC buff is a direct boost to armor class that would apply to all attacks targeting AC.

I'm not sure you can actually tell the difference between those things: For example, consider the dodge feat in 3rd edition. If it was "One opponent gets -1 to hit" instead of "get +1 AC against one enemy" are those things different?

No.

Giving someone a penalty to hit is the same as giving everyone else a bonus to their armour class against that guy.

NoobCrusher wrote:The intended role of the defender, in my eyes, is to be in the front lines and be a balanced attacker. They aren't just meatshields. They're there to create a catch-22 situation for enemies. Either the enemies A. risk a miss against the defender's high defenses, or B. they soak the punishment of not taking option A. An effective defender will make both choices painful or at least undesirable.

And this is the point of everyone on the forum. This is the same job that most everyone else does in the game too.

1) A Warlock has huge defenses, in the way of tons of temp HP, and he does a lot of damage. He thus creates a catch 22 between wasting an attack on his defense, or soaking the punishment of not attacking him.

2) A Wizard has huge defenses, in the way of taking away actions, and he does very little damage (but his defenses are super effective). He creates the catch 22 of either attacking him, and thus becoming the target of his stun locks, or ignoring him, and still suffering the AoE damage.

3) A Cleric has huge defenses in the way of a healing pool, and does a lot of damage. He creates the catch 22 of, if you don't kill him, all your attacks get negated by healing, if you do go after him, you have to ignore everyone else, and your attacks still get healed if you don't successfully kill him.

4) A Blank has defenses in the form of Blank, and does a lot of DPS (yes, second not round, a round is six seconds, and DPS has been the established term ever since the early 90s) or has a way of mitigating enemy DPS across the party.

The game is a slider. You either do lots of damage, and don't mitigate damage at all, or you mitigate lots of damage and don't do as much. There are no other functions besides mitigation of enemy damage and doing damage yourself.

There is no room for roles in a world that exists on a single line. There is only a slider. And being at some middle point doesn't make you noticeably different from being at either endpoint.

cthulhu wrote: I'm not sure you can actually tell the difference between those things: For example, consider the dodge feat in 3rd edition. If it was "One opponent gets -1 to hit" instead of "get +1 AC against one enemy" are those things different?

Obviously the two cases in your example are the same, but you misread my response and took it out of context. What Trollman said is that a mark to one opponent is the same as the direct AC buffs leaders like the cleric can give. It's not. The direct AC bonus to an ally applies to all attacks directed towards that ally. The mark penalty applies to all allies attacked by the one enemy.

Kaelik wrote:And this is the point of everyone on the forum. This is the same job that most everyone else does in the game too.

I figured somebody was going to make this argument.

Yes, if you oversimplify everything in 4th Ed, all roles come down to damage dealt versus damage mitigated. But if you look at the game as a slider, you're ignoring the strategic implications of having that higher mitigation at the expense of damage, or conferring specific penalties, or after-the-fact damage mitigation through healing, or melee versus ranged specialty, etc. Saying that roles are meaningless due to this oversimplification is like saying the different positions are a soccer team are all the same because collectively, the team members are all working towards scoring more goals than their opponent to win.

Kaelik wrote:and does a lot of DPS (yes, second not round, a round is six seconds, and DPS has been the established term ever since the early 90s) or has a way of mitigating enemy DPS across the party.

You're kidding me? If you want to measure the rate of damage somebody is doing, it's not logical to put it in terms of damage per second. Combat occurs in rounds. It should be Damage Per Round. How much 4th Ed have you played?

NoobCrusher wrote:

Kaelik wrote:and does a lot of DPS (yes, second not round, a round is six seconds, and DPS has been the established term ever since the early 90s) or has a way of mitigating enemy DPS across the party.

You're kidding me? If you want to measure the rate of damage somebody is doing, it's not logical to put it in terms of damage per second. Combat occurs in rounds. It should be Damage Per Round. How much 4th Ed have you played?

Congratulations. You have proven to everyone's satisfaction that you are dumber then a box of rocks. You can now stop trying to be as intentionally stupid as possible.

4th Ed - the game for people who really think it matters if you call DPS DPR.

I didn't hear the term "DPR" until 4th edition came along.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dpr