I'm going to play D&D 4e on the PC side of the screen for the first time soon, and it looks like the best way to fill the party's needs is by taking up a striker that can also defend a bit. Maximizing stickiness in a striker build is a priority.
|
On paper, I'd go with a lot of the choices listed, especially the Barbarian, but in practice I've seen melee rangers really end up excelling in this role, especially if they're willing to drop a feat or two into armor proficiency. The lack of marking is, of course, a problem, but it's offset (perhaps strangely) by some of the ranger's more controller-ey attacks that slow or move enemies. This allows for a decent amount of battlefield control (something both Defenders and Controllers achieve) while maintaining an immediate melee threat (which is something Defenders and Strikers both achieve) without requiring any fiddly multiclassing or peculiar gear combinations. It does require the tradeoff of ditching dexterity in favor of strength, but that choice is one that any ranger needs to make anyway. The trick is not to think of it as forgoing ranged attacks so much as knowing that you have some secondary range capability to fall back on. As a bonus, in reducing focus on dexterity, the investment in strength and constitution means that you can actually take the heavy armor feats. Again, not as fiddly and interesting as some other options, but I've seen it at the table twice, and in both cases it's surprised me with its effectiveness. |
||||
|
As of December 2010, here is a list of strikers who can secondary in defender, ordered roughly by effectiveness: List of Builds taken from the CharOp Wiki and Heroes of the Forgotten Lands, with hypotheticals taken from Heroes of the Fallen Kingdoms previews. (If someone pings me when HoFK drops, I'll update this.) The important characteristic of the Defender, as taken from the Art of Defending is to impose the Defender Catch 22:
Defender as secondary presents the "we can defend everyone some of the time, or someone all of the time, but not everyone all of the time." Considering that requirement, I'll class a defender as secondary if they perform at least one of the following well:
List of Builds, each rated by suitability for defender secondary:
|
||||
|
|
|
The Rageblood Barbarian is a good choice for a Defender-y striker because you can stand up to a lot of punishment. I think it's the most defender-y of the strikers. But it's not super sticky. Match it with a durable race (dwarf, goliath, or warforged) to be extra-chewy. If stickiness is the goal, have you considered just making a very striker oriented defender? The Ardent Paladin is a great choice because it's already a defender, but then it deals some major damage with ardent strike, challenging strike, and blood of the mighty (a reliable 4W attack). Focus everything on your defender toward strength, use a brutal 2-hander, and pick a race like half-orc or human and you'll have a real bruiser of a defender. Another option is a tempest fighter. |
|||||
|
|
Barbarians in general have the hit points to be sort of like defenders, although you'll find yourself short on ways to be sticky. There are a handful of powers that allow barbarians to mark at higher levels. A dragon sorcerer becomes an interesting choice around paragon tier -- the Dragon Guardian paragon path has an encounter power that marks. If you focus on defensive utilities and a couple of specific powers, like Lightning Breath, that damage opponents when they hit you, you can make up for your low hit points and low number of healing surges. Again, though, you'll be punishing monsters that hit you rather than punishing them for leaving you alone. I would actually choose a pursuit avenger. You can, with effort, push your defenses up reasonably high, although you'll never soak damage like a barbarian would. However, your ability to punish opponents for leaving you alone is unparalleled among strikers. It's an excellent choice if stickiness is your concern. If you don't mind being a defender with a lot of striker in you, a two-handed weapon fighter or a tempest fighter might work out for you. Fighters who focus on offense and don't bother with defensive feats or shields do a surprising amount of damage even without a striker class feature, and obviously the stickiness is built right in. |
||||
|
|
It's easier by far to build a defender who is very striker heavy. Almost all of the defenders builds have a striker secondary and most feel the roll fairly well. Both Fighters and Wardens have builds that can make them very capable strikers without sacrificing much in the way of defending. It's always going to be easier to add damage to a defender build than add marking/defense to a striker. If you have to go striker, beast rangers do a decent job of sucking up the damage and controlling enemy positioning. |
||||
|
|
You may want to consider a staradin (a warlock, paladin hyrbid), play it up as a heretic paladin . Also thraneborn barbarian, despite technically being a leader secondary, is brawley enough to merit some attention as a defender (especially if you use some cheese such as polearms or heavy armour, and a good multiclass/paragon choice could make it viableish I think + Barbarians are fun to play). |
||||
|
|
|
The Master Pai Mei build (courtesy of svendj at the 4e CharOp forum) combines decent (though not stellar) striker damage and an almost complete defender package. It prevents foes from shifting away, has a decent OA if they move away, and starting in paragon its OAs knock foes prone (or as early as level 2 if you go with the minotaur variant) and it gains the ability to mark; the only thing it lacks is defender mark punishment. It's an Iron Soul monk build so it has good HP & defenses (typical same level enemies need at least a 15 on the die to hit its AC). Monk in general offers a lot of versatility and maneuverability as well, to ensure you can go lock down the enemy you want to lock down. |
|||
|
|