But that's the point! PWE and Cryptic don't want the Defenders in this game playing like tanks in another game. They do not want the Defenders to be tanking at all really. The mark system is there so that the Defender can grab the aggro of the 1 really important mob, while the Controller's job is to handle all the other mobs.
Or they could have simply made the mark work like it does in the PnP. Ignore the fighter and he gets an extra attack for free every round while you get penalties to hit. Try to move past him and he gets a free attack and stops you if he hits.
1. give us camping kits. Like a sleeping roll or something with maybe a 5 minute CD
2. This is fine. Certain classes just aren't trained in certain fields. Be happy they even GAVE us kits.
3. Fix this. Make it so that if anyone BUT the tank gets hit, it removes the mark (to give more incentive to avoid AoE and to try and flank)
Additionaly this will solve the cleric aggro problem, if the tank is ABLE to hold the aggression.
In ddo you have the intimidate skill,that is essential for a tank build. This is the strength of an high armor class built. Pull the aggro, and then DUCK behind his shield. Dwarf are extremly good in this, because the fit completly under their tower shield. .... Only kidding.
But I agree to one point. Whoever thought this mechanic for GFW was a good idea, should be forced to write only documentations from now on. Devs really hate that!
So, apparently a lot of you don't play D&D. In D&D (4E), characters have various ways to mark targets. Defenders are special in that every single turn, as a free action, they have some way to mark at least 1 target. And guess what...the marks go away. It's why it's a free action. You MUST reapply the mark EVERY SINGLE ROUND of combat if you want a specific enemy to stay marked. EVERY...SINGLE...ROUND.
*sigh* Yet another thing 4e scrood the pooch on. Go WotC. I'm glad my tabletop group went to Pathfinder.
Even in AD&D the fighter has the role of blocking the way to the "weaker" -- less AC -- classes. And pull the aggro through using their intimidate skill.
They fail utterly and total with this system.
But lets invite some player clerics. They can tell you how well this system works for THEM.
With your description you only make it clear, theat they totally suck in the implementation of the AD&D rules into Neverwinter an AD&D world setting of the forgotten realms.
Congratulations.
P.S. I mean the real AD&D system, not the 4ed <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>.
0
steppenkatMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
But that's the point! PWE and Cryptic don't want the Defenders in this game playing like tanks in another game. They do not want the Defenders to be tanking at all really. The mark system is there so that the Defender can grab the aggro of the 1 really important mob, while the Controller's job is to handle all the other mobs.
Let me break it down really simply.
In a standard trinity MMO, you have a tank (and usually an off tank). With the exception of AoE damage (which is usually avoidable), the tank is the ONLY character supposed to be taking any real amount of damage). Period, end of story.
In this MMO, firstly, there is no trinity system. Someone discussed the quadumvirate system that 4E, and by extension NWO, uses. In this system, the Defender is NOT a tank from a standard trinity MMO. If he was the only one taking the majority of the damage, he would die, nearly instantly. And that's how it's supposed to work. A Defender's role is NOT to tank. It's to make sure that the biggest, baddest monster around isn't messing with the party. That's it. That's their whole job. It's the Controller's job to make sure the rest of the monsters (aka adds) aren't killing the Leader While the Strikers kill them.
And I think that's the problem. People want Neverwinter to play like WoW. It doesn't. It doesn't on purpose, and not just because the source material doesn't play like WoW (no matter how much people say it does). It doesn't play like WoW because Cryptic/PWE didn't want it to play like WoW. They could have easily made a standard trinity game. They didn't. And they didn't on purpose.
So you can either play the game they designed, how it was designed (and have a good time), play it in a way it wasn't meant to be played (and be miserable), or not play it. Those are choice. Trying to get PWE/Cryptic to make Defenders into standard trinity tanks just isn't gana happen. And if you're waiting for it to happen...I got some bad news...
And yes, you CAN think, you CAN plan, and you CAN play tactically. The actual action of the game doesn't happen any faster in this game than in any other MMO. Saying that your tank can't be strategic with mark is just silly.
And now if I tell you that a Cleric can out-tank by far a GF and offer more utility to his team, where does your theory fit with this?
Someone needs to pull the mobs so the Controller can wipe them. You can't simply let them scatter around and expect the CW to burn everything trying to root.
The current tactic that's often used in T2s is basically:
- TR tanks the boss while in AS. He outdamages a GF and can dodge the boss's skillshots, so he actually takes less damage, can hold aggro better due to insane Crit ratings and he can sustain himself.
- Another TR to do single target DPS to the boss.
- Clerics build tanky and revolve around using aggro to pull and survive the zerg waves , gathering all the mobs.
- CW/GWF that DPS these mobs.
- Another CW that focuses on utility control, by CCing adds, gathering them in a pack and pushing them through cliffs when the map allows so.
You can see that in this setup, a GF is meaningless. He cannot be enough of a threat to the boss as his single target damage is inferior to the Rogue's. His superior resilience is both meaningless and overkill due to the Cleric's AS. He cannot also assist in Controlling the enemy swarm as his marking system is inneficient at gathering aggro.
It's not just that you can't play a Trinity, it's that the Defender role is pointless right now, as it's been translated to the game. Two Leaders/Controllers are better assets.
Characters: - Titania Silverblade, the Iron Rose of Myth Drannor (Lvl 60 GWF, Destroyer) - Gwyneth, the Cowardly Cat Burglar Drowling (Lvl 60 TR, Saboteur) - Lady Rowanne Firehair, Heartwarder of Sune (Lvl 33 DC) - Satella, Sensate (LvL 44 CW, Renegade, Non-Active)
steppenkatMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited May 2013
As a corollary, I'm building my Cleric oriented to mitigate damage and surviving aggro. I'm not intending to play a "buffer" only, but an actual tank since there are builds that allow this to happen.
Characters: - Titania Silverblade, the Iron Rose of Myth Drannor (Lvl 60 GWF, Destroyer) - Gwyneth, the Cowardly Cat Burglar Drowling (Lvl 60 TR, Saboteur) - Lady Rowanne Firehair, Heartwarder of Sune (Lvl 33 DC) - Satella, Sensate (LvL 44 CW, Renegade, Non-Active)
No, not potions. Potions are for during fights. Incidentally, this is why everyone and their grandmother takes the cleric companion; it's not that they can't make it through a fight without healing, it's that they want to be topped up before the next scrap. A good rule of game balance is this: if everyone does something, it's either too good and should be nerfed, or too necessary and should be free. Come on, lads, you're certainly not shy about borrowing from other games, and you MUST have noticed that almost every MMO makes it trivially easy to top up that green bar out of combat.
Many seem to complain how auto-regen would be too non-D&D, but this is first and foremost a game, and as such a principle like the one you mention should apply. So many take the cleric companion because otherwise healing up between fights becomes an annoying chore. We don't play games to experience annoying chores. Lacking regen (unless heavily gearing for it) seems like a forced way to make gold have value because otherwise AD is the only thing that matters. It feels awkward, like something from a decades-old game. I'd be all for harking back to some aspects of older games, but this is one trait I'd rather leave to history.
I think you are pretty much right on with all 3 points. I think they ARE simple mistakes, and easy to notice.
3) I play a Guardian Fighter (2 of them actually one L45 and the other L34) so the agro issue is obviously the most important to me. One should have to use a special skill or weird kind of magic to be able to lose threat at all, let alone having it all vanish because the monster has successfully attacked the target he hated the most.
So they want a consequence for an unblocked attack besides just damage. That isn't too much to ask. I think the consequence could be something less...critical...to a tank class than messing with the threat dynamic.
Maybe a marked target that makes an unblocked hit could have a temporary debuff of some kind, or do a bit of extra damage. Or maybe the mark needs to be reapplied, but the current level of threat shouldn't vanish suddenly - that is not only breaking the class' central role, but it doesn't make any sense.
How could they NOT do something here? I hate using the word 'stupid' when criticizing something but in this case, if the shoe fits...
2) The skill kit thing IS pretty dumb. Their goal seems to be either to increase the amount of coin used over all (money sink) or it is to slow down the character (by another 5 to 10 sec? Maybe 15? *...sigh*). This isn't a huge amount of time or money to me, but now that the op pointed it out - yeah, it detracts from the flow of game play.
The truth is, if everyone can use (through using skill kits) every skill out there, doesn't this sort of trivialize the idea of having a unique skill?
The rogue in the 'classic' D&D sense was always a class who's core concept revolved around their UNIQUE skills. If everyone can do these things, just what is even unique about them? I guess I don't know 4th Ed. well at all - do rogues NOT have unique skills in 4th?
All classes should be able to do something that others cannot, and there shouldn't be such a simple work around like a "skill kit" which really does trivialize a character's skills. Removing the whole skill/proficiency element from the game is really removing a huge PnP D&D element, as well as an avenue for customizing and making your character unique.
1) Healing between battles. It always seems pretty lame to have to use so many potions. Using them in battle is a necessity become reflex but between fights...*shrug* expensive.
Regen. ability on a character with 19k hp - a L45 GF - is slow as can be and almost pointless, thus potions I guess. I can't really ever seem to earn a positive amount of gold because I have to stock up on potions so much.
I use a dog as a companion because my cleric ALWAYS dies (so I have to use pots anyway) and still will often not heal me when not fighting even if my hp are notably low (so again, I have to use pots anyway).
Campfires are simply impractical if one is depending on them. Solo you can run back to a fire as often as necessary, but it slows you down and is tedious. In groups the idea of constantly running back to a fire to heal just won't work the way people tend to play.
I guess I don't have any ideas for this one though...
urnusthebeatpoetMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 62Arc User
edited May 2013
First, I want to say, I am sure your way works. I am sure you kill bosses with it. But you're bending the rules and thinking outside the box (neither of which is a bad thing, more power to you if it works). The game isn't meant to be played this way (because 4E isn't meant to be played this way). Play it however you want, I honestly think you SHOULD be able to play the game however you want. But it's VERY obvious that Cryptic/PWE had some specific things in mind about how people should play their game, and I'll go over what I see as wrong with your breakdown, from a 4E/PWE/Cryptic point of view. Again, I am not attacking you, nor the way you play the game. I think it's rad that these strats work for you. But PWE/Cryptic did NOT design the game with these strats in mind.
And now if I tell you that a Cleric can out-tank by far a GF and offer more utility to his team, where does your theory fit with this?
In 4E, there is no tank. If the DM decides that all the monsters only ever want to attack the cleric, there is absolutely nothing the players can do to stop this. Nothing at all. The DM has all the monsters attack the cleric. The cleric heals/runs away, the strikers dps the monsters down, the controllers slow, stun, root, etc the monsters (more on this in the next point), and the defenders make it harder for the monsters to get to the cleric (by literally trying to stand in the way) and make them less effective at hurting the cleric (via marks and other debuffs). There is no taunt. There is 0 different ways to force an NPC monster to attack you.
Neverwinter, on the other hand, has hard taunts. GF have them (a few) and GWFs have them (a very very very tiny amount). These TOTALLY break with D&D, 4E or otherwise, but they are there. They aren't super powerful, however, and the tank must control targets via marking and damage (JUST like in PnP 4E).
So then, if the cleric is "tanking" the adds, what's the guardian fighter's job? Well, you know that one big add? The one with the massive AoE? The one with the line of death? The one that can 1 shot the cleric? That single add, that's the GF's job. Sometimes this is the boss (Wolf Den final boss, Mad Dragon Second Boss, Pirate's Lair and Cragmire Crypts Final boss, etc). Sometimes it's a really nasty add (Mad Dragon, Last Boss, big demon thing, etc). But their job is almost always managing a single, solitary enemy, and making sure that single, solitary enemy isn't (almost) instakilling the cleric.
Now, if there is a place for that in an MMO, that's a different story. But a Defender's job is NOT to tank all the adds. It's NOT to take all the damage. It's to manage one or two REALLY dangerous monsters, and keep them away from the rest of the party. That's it. That's their whole job.
I agree that in the current, add heavy boss fights of NWO, this job feels under-valuable and less than necessary. However, that doesn't we can pretend Defenders should be doing something else. They aren't made to do something else, they are made, both in PnP and in the MMO, to do the job listed above.
Someone needs to pull the mobs so the Controller can wipe them. You can't simply let them scatter around and expect the CW to burn everything trying to root.
This is one of the biggest mistakes I see people making, and this one, unlike most of the ones in your list, is actually the cause of most wipes in Epic 5 mans. A Controller's (aka Control Wizard right now) job is to control, NOT do damage. Your Controller should NOT being trying to kill everything. They should have 7 powers that stun, root, slow, pull, push, throw, move, slide, knockdown, knock up, etc. Damage is the LAST thing they should be worried about (ability to control, defenses, THEN damage).
A good control wizard will still do good damage, but that's a side effect. It is NOT the goal, it's just a pleasant bonus. In a good team, the CW gather's up all the little adds, holds them in 1 spot, and then the GWF kills them all. That's how that's supposed to work (again, from a PnP 4E/Cryptic/PWE perspective). And don't let anyone tell you GWFs can't fill this role right now. A decently geared level 60 GWF who knows what he's/she's doing (hai, that's me...I play GWF) will pull as much if not more DPS than a good CW IF the CW is actually doing their job (grouping and controlling, not focusing on damage). And while it may seem like it would just be smarter to have the CW focus on damage and forget about the GWF, trust me when I say you're groups will run a LOT smoother and you'll kill things a LOT faster when your CW forgets about doing damage and lets the GWF (or a second CW) worry about doing the killing.
The current tactic that's often used in T2s is basically:
- TR tanks the boss while in AS. He outdamages a GF and can dodge the boss's skillshots, so he actually takes less damage, can hold aggro better due to insane Crit ratings and he can sustain himself.
- Another TR to do single target DPS to the boss.
- Clerics build tanky and revolve around using aggro to pull and survive the zerg waves , gathering all the mobs.
- CW/GWF that DPS these mobs.
- Another CW that focuses on utility control, by CCing adds, gathering them in a pack and pushing them through cliffs when the map allows so.
You can see that in this setup, a GF is meaningless. He cannot be enough of a threat to the boss as his single target damage is inferior to the Rogue's. His superior resilience is both meaningless and overkill due to the Cleric's AS. He cannot also assist in Controlling the enemy swarm as his marking system is inneficient at gathering aggro.
It's not just that you can't play a Trinity, it's that the Defender role is pointless right now, as it's been translated to the game. Two Leaders/Controllers are better assets.
Your general assessment is sound. There are a (very) small number of bosses where this won't work, because the bosses have a basic melee attack that will 2 shot rogues (Wolf Den is the first that springs to mind quickly). But for the most part, you're totally correct with your assessment. I've always wanted to try a DC/DC/CW/CW/CW group for some of the harder T2 dungeons, because I think it would be a totally efficient party.
This does not change the face that this isn't how the game was meant to be played. I guarantee that Cryptic/PWE isn't going to mold their game around this strat. What's gana happen is that they are gana nerf the abilities that allow this strat to work to force you to play the game the way they intended it to be played. They are gana nerf DC's AD. They are gana give more bosses basic melee attacks. They are gana give more big adds basic melee attacks. They are gana make more types of mobs totally immune to CC of any kind (so that they must be tanked by someone). These are the sorts of changes they are going to make.
Now hopefully, before they make those changes, they'll fix the classes that need fixing (Mostly GF, but GWF could use some more love too). Hopefully they'll give GF specifically (but all classes in general) more ways to better do their job and make them stand out at the role they are supposed to play. But even if the good changes never come (which I find highly unlikely), the bad changes will come (the ones in the last paragraph).
So while I agree with the problems you stated in your assessment of T2 dungeons (although I think the biggest problems with T2 dungeons are that bosses have WAY too much health and that WAY too much of the "winning" strats involve knocking hordes of enemies off cliffs), I think we, as a player base, are gana eventually have to get used to playing NWO with a 4E PnP mindset, because that's obviously the way PWE/Cryptic want us to play, and I have a strong feeling that's gana be the way they make us play, once they start doing balancing.
EDIT: I wanted to add on a little closer to this, because of some of the other posts in this thread. I think a lot of peoples complaints boil down to this sentance; "X is different in NWO than it is in my old MMO. I like the way they did it in my old MMO better. NWO should change X so it's like my old MMO." This comes up when people talk about crafting times, no out-of-combat health regen, no standard trinity design, identification scrolls, no dungeons for more than 5 people, and many many many other things. To this I have only one thing to say. NWO is different from your old MMO and this is a very very very very very very very very very very very good thing. You don't have to like NWO. If you really love the way your old MMO did X, Y, and Z, then just go play your old MMO. But if, like many people I know (myself included) you are looking for something different, then don't complain because it's different. That's like saying you're tired of cold cereal for breakfast and then complaining because the cream of wheat your handed isn't cold and refreshing like your cold cereal you used to eat.
I get that NWO might not be for everyone. That's fine. But a lot of us LIKE the fact that there isn't a standard trinity, there isn't constantly regenerating health, there isn't a slew of old, tired MMO tropes. We like that things are different. And PWE/Cryptic likes that things are different too. I wouldn't hold your breath and hope PWE/Cryptic are gana change NWO into your old MMO. It's just not gana happen.
Now that doesn't mean that PWE/Cryptic got everything right. There are lots of flaws with NWO. But it's still really fun. And it's still really exciting to see a company try something that is so different from your standard MMO. And I honestly believe that PWE/Cryptic can iron out the issues, over time, and make this a really really fantastic game that is both extremely fun AND extremely different. And that's a really fantastic thing. They still have a long way to go to fix some of the problems, but it'll get there.
#1 because D&D rule doesn't allow auto-healing just for granted, hard and tough yes, but this is D&D style. you can only get heal by Potion, Altar or 3rd party (player/companion). there is a simple way to do healing automatically by equiping Regeneration stat gear or enchanment.
#2. again, because in D&D rule kit is basically rolling so yea it is on chances, but hey, every class has their own feat skill (wizard-arcane, Fighter-Dungeoneering, rogue-thievery, Cleric-Religion) which is 100% success
#3 well, like I always said everywhere around, this is a Guardian Fighter, he is a Fighter that help guarding, not a full tanker like defender or paladin job
well, for #3 I really don't mind people whining on, cause I don't really understand why GF is out there instead of Paladin, but for #1 and #2 is not a mistake but simply basic thing for D&D game, I hope you still remember that this game build based on D&D rule not just some casual MMO out there.
You can see that in this setup, a GF is meaningless. He cannot be enough of a threat to the boss as his single target damage is inferior to the Rogue's. His superior resilience is both meaningless and overkill due to the Cleric's AS. He cannot also assist in Controlling the enemy swarm as his marking system is inneficient at gathering aggro.
It's not just that you can't play a Trinity, it's that the Defender role is pointless right now, as it's been translated to the game. Two Leaders/Controllers are better assets.
I have to ask...do you not see anything wrong with that?
Well the current meta for the game is one of movement and positioning.
I think one simple improvement for the GF would be to allow their block to effect a small AOE behind the GF. Have that shield have a bit more meaning. And allow the GF to actively defend other players with it. Blocking itself should also act as a taunt drawing in adds towards the GF in a manner similar to Clerics heal aggro.
Well the current meta for the game is one of movement and positioning.
I think one simple improvement for the GF would be to allow their block to effect a small AOE behind the GF. Have that shield have a bit more meaning. And allow the GF to actively defend other players with it. Blocking itself should also act as a taunt drawing in adds towards the GF in a manner similar to Clerics heal aggro.
I think that would help alot. Having the shield have a frontal AOE block, so if a Guardian Fighter is in front of someone taking damage, the damage is blocked by his shield instead of just the Guardian Fighter blocking damage for himself. Though I think the blocking damage generating aggro should be a passive power or feat. That way Guardian Fighters who want to not be the main gaurdians in dungeons dont have to specialize in it, but can still guard other people without generating aggro themselves so the possibility of having more than one Guardian Fighter isnt hampered by there being another.
I think thats one good step to helping the Guardian Fighter's role.
I think that would help alot. Having the shield have a frontal AOE block, so if a Guardian Fighter is in front of someone taking damage, the damage is blocked by his shield instead of just the Guardian Fighter blocking damage for himself. Though I think the blocking damage generating aggro should be a passive power or feat. That way Guardian Fighters who want to not be the main gaurdians in dungeons dont have to specialize in it, but can still guard other people without generating aggro themselves so the possibility of having more than one Guardian Fighter isnt hampered by there being another.
I think thats one good step to helping the Guardian Fighter's role.
I agree GFs need a passive taunt. But the shield needs to be an agro magnet as well, for two reasons. One, while blocking the GF isnt doing much damage, so in effect they are loosing agro while doing the thing the are made for. And two, if the shield can be used to actively block for other players. There needs to be a way for the GF to steal agro, while blocking, otherwise the GF just becomes a movable shield instead of a proper tank.
Comments
Or they could have simply made the mark work like it does in the PnP. Ignore the fighter and he gets an extra attack for free every round while you get penalties to hit. Try to move past him and he gets a free attack and stops you if he hits.
Additionaly this will solve the cleric aggro problem, if the tank is ABLE to hold the aggression.
In ddo you have the intimidate skill,that is essential for a tank build. This is the strength of an high armor class built. Pull the aggro, and then DUCK behind his shield. Dwarf are extremly good in this, because the fit completly under their tower shield. .... Only kidding.
But I agree to one point. Whoever thought this mechanic for GFW was a good idea, should be forced to write only documentations from now on. Devs really hate that!
*sigh* Yet another thing 4e scrood the pooch on. Go WotC. I'm glad my tabletop group went to Pathfinder.
Occam's Razor makes the cutting clean.
Even in AD&D the fighter has the role of blocking the way to the "weaker" -- less AC -- classes. And pull the aggro through using their intimidate skill.
They fail utterly and total with this system.
But lets invite some player clerics. They can tell you how well this system works for THEM.
With your description you only make it clear, theat they totally suck in the implementation of the AD&D rules into Neverwinter an AD&D world setting of the forgotten realms.
Congratulations.
P.S. I mean the real AD&D system, not the 4ed <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>.
And now if I tell you that a Cleric can out-tank by far a GF and offer more utility to his team, where does your theory fit with this?
Someone needs to pull the mobs so the Controller can wipe them. You can't simply let them scatter around and expect the CW to burn everything trying to root.
The current tactic that's often used in T2s is basically:
- TR tanks the boss while in AS. He outdamages a GF and can dodge the boss's skillshots, so he actually takes less damage, can hold aggro better due to insane Crit ratings and he can sustain himself.
- Another TR to do single target DPS to the boss.
- Clerics build tanky and revolve around using aggro to pull and survive the zerg waves , gathering all the mobs.
- CW/GWF that DPS these mobs.
- Another CW that focuses on utility control, by CCing adds, gathering them in a pack and pushing them through cliffs when the map allows so.
You can see that in this setup, a GF is meaningless. He cannot be enough of a threat to the boss as his single target damage is inferior to the Rogue's. His superior resilience is both meaningless and overkill due to the Cleric's AS. He cannot also assist in Controlling the enemy swarm as his marking system is inneficient at gathering aggro.
It's not just that you can't play a Trinity, it's that the Defender role is pointless right now, as it's been translated to the game. Two Leaders/Controllers are better assets.
- Titania Silverblade, the Iron Rose of Myth Drannor (Lvl 60 GWF, Destroyer)
- Gwyneth, the Cowardly Cat Burglar Drowling (Lvl 60 TR, Saboteur)
- Lady Rowanne Firehair, Heartwarder of Sune (Lvl 33 DC)
- Satella, Sensate (LvL 44 CW, Renegade, Non-Active)
Check Steppenkat's Foundry Quest Reviews!
- Titania Silverblade, the Iron Rose of Myth Drannor (Lvl 60 GWF, Destroyer)
- Gwyneth, the Cowardly Cat Burglar Drowling (Lvl 60 TR, Saboteur)
- Lady Rowanne Firehair, Heartwarder of Sune (Lvl 33 DC)
- Satella, Sensate (LvL 44 CW, Renegade, Non-Active)
Check Steppenkat's Foundry Quest Reviews!
Many seem to complain how auto-regen would be too non-D&D, but this is first and foremost a game, and as such a principle like the one you mention should apply. So many take the cleric companion because otherwise healing up between fights becomes an annoying chore. We don't play games to experience annoying chores. Lacking regen (unless heavily gearing for it) seems like a forced way to make gold have value because otherwise AD is the only thing that matters. It feels awkward, like something from a decades-old game. I'd be all for harking back to some aspects of older games, but this is one trait I'd rather leave to history.
3) I play a Guardian Fighter (2 of them actually one L45 and the other L34) so the agro issue is obviously the most important to me. One should have to use a special skill or weird kind of magic to be able to lose threat at all, let alone having it all vanish because the monster has successfully attacked the target he hated the most.
So they want a consequence for an unblocked attack besides just damage. That isn't too much to ask. I think the consequence could be something less...critical...to a tank class than messing with the threat dynamic.
Maybe a marked target that makes an unblocked hit could have a temporary debuff of some kind, or do a bit of extra damage. Or maybe the mark needs to be reapplied, but the current level of threat shouldn't vanish suddenly - that is not only breaking the class' central role, but it doesn't make any sense.
How could they NOT do something here? I hate using the word 'stupid' when criticizing something but in this case, if the shoe fits...
2) The skill kit thing IS pretty dumb. Their goal seems to be either to increase the amount of coin used over all (money sink) or it is to slow down the character (by another 5 to 10 sec? Maybe 15? *...sigh*). This isn't a huge amount of time or money to me, but now that the op pointed it out - yeah, it detracts from the flow of game play.
The truth is, if everyone can use (through using skill kits) every skill out there, doesn't this sort of trivialize the idea of having a unique skill?
The rogue in the 'classic' D&D sense was always a class who's core concept revolved around their UNIQUE skills. If everyone can do these things, just what is even unique about them? I guess I don't know 4th Ed. well at all - do rogues NOT have unique skills in 4th?
All classes should be able to do something that others cannot, and there shouldn't be such a simple work around like a "skill kit" which really does trivialize a character's skills. Removing the whole skill/proficiency element from the game is really removing a huge PnP D&D element, as well as an avenue for customizing and making your character unique.
1) Healing between battles. It always seems pretty lame to have to use so many potions. Using them in battle is a necessity become reflex but between fights...*shrug* expensive.
Regen. ability on a character with 19k hp - a L45 GF - is slow as can be and almost pointless, thus potions I guess. I can't really ever seem to earn a positive amount of gold because I have to stock up on potions so much.
I use a dog as a companion because my cleric ALWAYS dies (so I have to use pots anyway) and still will often not heal me when not fighting even if my hp are notably low (so again, I have to use pots anyway).
Campfires are simply impractical if one is depending on them. Solo you can run back to a fire as often as necessary, but it slows you down and is tedious. In groups the idea of constantly running back to a fire to heal just won't work the way people tend to play.
I guess I don't have any ideas for this one though...
Amillion Dollars L60 'easy mode' GWF
In 4E, there is no tank. If the DM decides that all the monsters only ever want to attack the cleric, there is absolutely nothing the players can do to stop this. Nothing at all. The DM has all the monsters attack the cleric. The cleric heals/runs away, the strikers dps the monsters down, the controllers slow, stun, root, etc the monsters (more on this in the next point), and the defenders make it harder for the monsters to get to the cleric (by literally trying to stand in the way) and make them less effective at hurting the cleric (via marks and other debuffs). There is no taunt. There is 0 different ways to force an NPC monster to attack you.
Neverwinter, on the other hand, has hard taunts. GF have them (a few) and GWFs have them (a very very very tiny amount). These TOTALLY break with D&D, 4E or otherwise, but they are there. They aren't super powerful, however, and the tank must control targets via marking and damage (JUST like in PnP 4E).
So then, if the cleric is "tanking" the adds, what's the guardian fighter's job? Well, you know that one big add? The one with the massive AoE? The one with the line of death? The one that can 1 shot the cleric? That single add, that's the GF's job. Sometimes this is the boss (Wolf Den final boss, Mad Dragon Second Boss, Pirate's Lair and Cragmire Crypts Final boss, etc). Sometimes it's a really nasty add (Mad Dragon, Last Boss, big demon thing, etc). But their job is almost always managing a single, solitary enemy, and making sure that single, solitary enemy isn't (almost) instakilling the cleric.
Now, if there is a place for that in an MMO, that's a different story. But a Defender's job is NOT to tank all the adds. It's NOT to take all the damage. It's to manage one or two REALLY dangerous monsters, and keep them away from the rest of the party. That's it. That's their whole job.
I agree that in the current, add heavy boss fights of NWO, this job feels under-valuable and less than necessary. However, that doesn't we can pretend Defenders should be doing something else. They aren't made to do something else, they are made, both in PnP and in the MMO, to do the job listed above.
This is one of the biggest mistakes I see people making, and this one, unlike most of the ones in your list, is actually the cause of most wipes in Epic 5 mans. A Controller's (aka Control Wizard right now) job is to control, NOT do damage. Your Controller should NOT being trying to kill everything. They should have 7 powers that stun, root, slow, pull, push, throw, move, slide, knockdown, knock up, etc. Damage is the LAST thing they should be worried about (ability to control, defenses, THEN damage).
A good control wizard will still do good damage, but that's a side effect. It is NOT the goal, it's just a pleasant bonus. In a good team, the CW gather's up all the little adds, holds them in 1 spot, and then the GWF kills them all. That's how that's supposed to work (again, from a PnP 4E/Cryptic/PWE perspective). And don't let anyone tell you GWFs can't fill this role right now. A decently geared level 60 GWF who knows what he's/she's doing (hai, that's me...I play GWF) will pull as much if not more DPS than a good CW IF the CW is actually doing their job (grouping and controlling, not focusing on damage). And while it may seem like it would just be smarter to have the CW focus on damage and forget about the GWF, trust me when I say you're groups will run a LOT smoother and you'll kill things a LOT faster when your CW forgets about doing damage and lets the GWF (or a second CW) worry about doing the killing.
Your general assessment is sound. There are a (very) small number of bosses where this won't work, because the bosses have a basic melee attack that will 2 shot rogues (Wolf Den is the first that springs to mind quickly). But for the most part, you're totally correct with your assessment. I've always wanted to try a DC/DC/CW/CW/CW group for some of the harder T2 dungeons, because I think it would be a totally efficient party.
This does not change the face that this isn't how the game was meant to be played. I guarantee that Cryptic/PWE isn't going to mold their game around this strat. What's gana happen is that they are gana nerf the abilities that allow this strat to work to force you to play the game the way they intended it to be played. They are gana nerf DC's AD. They are gana give more bosses basic melee attacks. They are gana give more big adds basic melee attacks. They are gana make more types of mobs totally immune to CC of any kind (so that they must be tanked by someone). These are the sorts of changes they are going to make.
Now hopefully, before they make those changes, they'll fix the classes that need fixing (Mostly GF, but GWF could use some more love too). Hopefully they'll give GF specifically (but all classes in general) more ways to better do their job and make them stand out at the role they are supposed to play. But even if the good changes never come (which I find highly unlikely), the bad changes will come (the ones in the last paragraph).
So while I agree with the problems you stated in your assessment of T2 dungeons (although I think the biggest problems with T2 dungeons are that bosses have WAY too much health and that WAY too much of the "winning" strats involve knocking hordes of enemies off cliffs), I think we, as a player base, are gana eventually have to get used to playing NWO with a 4E PnP mindset, because that's obviously the way PWE/Cryptic want us to play, and I have a strong feeling that's gana be the way they make us play, once they start doing balancing.
EDIT: I wanted to add on a little closer to this, because of some of the other posts in this thread. I think a lot of peoples complaints boil down to this sentance; "X is different in NWO than it is in my old MMO. I like the way they did it in my old MMO better. NWO should change X so it's like my old MMO." This comes up when people talk about crafting times, no out-of-combat health regen, no standard trinity design, identification scrolls, no dungeons for more than 5 people, and many many many other things. To this I have only one thing to say. NWO is different from your old MMO and this is a very very very very very very very very very very very good thing. You don't have to like NWO. If you really love the way your old MMO did X, Y, and Z, then just go play your old MMO. But if, like many people I know (myself included) you are looking for something different, then don't complain because it's different. That's like saying you're tired of cold cereal for breakfast and then complaining because the cream of wheat your handed isn't cold and refreshing like your cold cereal you used to eat.
I get that NWO might not be for everyone. That's fine. But a lot of us LIKE the fact that there isn't a standard trinity, there isn't constantly regenerating health, there isn't a slew of old, tired MMO tropes. We like that things are different. And PWE/Cryptic likes that things are different too. I wouldn't hold your breath and hope PWE/Cryptic are gana change NWO into your old MMO. It's just not gana happen.
Now that doesn't mean that PWE/Cryptic got everything right. There are lots of flaws with NWO. But it's still really fun. And it's still really exciting to see a company try something that is so different from your standard MMO. And I honestly believe that PWE/Cryptic can iron out the issues, over time, and make this a really really fantastic game that is both extremely fun AND extremely different. And that's a really fantastic thing. They still have a long way to go to fix some of the problems, but it'll get there.
You already have them, portable alters.
#1 because D&D rule doesn't allow auto-healing just for granted, hard and tough yes, but this is D&D style. you can only get heal by Potion, Altar or 3rd party (player/companion). there is a simple way to do healing automatically by equiping Regeneration stat gear or enchanment.
#2. again, because in D&D rule kit is basically rolling so yea it is on chances, but hey, every class has their own feat skill (wizard-arcane, Fighter-Dungeoneering, rogue-thievery, Cleric-Religion) which is 100% success
#3 well, like I always said everywhere around, this is a Guardian Fighter, he is a Fighter that help guarding, not a full tanker like defender or paladin job
well, for #3 I really don't mind people whining on, cause I don't really understand why GF is out there instead of Paladin, but for #1 and #2 is not a mistake but simply basic thing for D&D game, I hope you still remember that this game build based on D&D rule not just some casual MMO out there.
I have to ask...do you not see anything wrong with that?
Occam's Razor makes the cutting clean.
I think one simple improvement for the GF would be to allow their block to effect a small AOE behind the GF. Have that shield have a bit more meaning. And allow the GF to actively defend other players with it. Blocking itself should also act as a taunt drawing in adds towards the GF in a manner similar to Clerics heal aggro.
I think that would help alot. Having the shield have a frontal AOE block, so if a Guardian Fighter is in front of someone taking damage, the damage is blocked by his shield instead of just the Guardian Fighter blocking damage for himself. Though I think the blocking damage generating aggro should be a passive power or feat. That way Guardian Fighters who want to not be the main gaurdians in dungeons dont have to specialize in it, but can still guard other people without generating aggro themselves so the possibility of having more than one Guardian Fighter isnt hampered by there being another.
I think thats one good step to helping the Guardian Fighter's role.
I agree GFs need a passive taunt. But the shield needs to be an agro magnet as well, for two reasons. One, while blocking the GF isnt doing much damage, so in effect they are loosing agro while doing the thing the are made for. And two, if the shield can be used to actively block for other players. There needs to be a way for the GF to steal agro, while blocking, otherwise the GF just becomes a movable shield instead of a proper tank.