Nature Power Source

[Atlatl Jones]

The R&C book strongly implies that barbarians, when they're released in the PH 2, will be of the same power source as druids, not martial. I'm assuming this will be a Nature power source.

The barbarian is clearly a defender. The druid is less clear: its 3e boom spells make it seem like a controller, but the stronger emphasis on shapechanging make it sound like it could be a defender or even a striker.

What other classes could be based on the nature power source?

The Wu Jen could easily be nature based controller, rather than arcane, and it could be reimaged as a savage elementalist/naturalist.

The Shaman could be a leader. There's never been a shaman type that's clearly differentiated from the cleric, but it could be given a whole new suite of powers based on spirits.

I can't think of a nature-based striker, since the Ranger is probably going to be martial.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

The barbarian is clearly a defender.

I'm not sure it is so clear. An argument could be made the barbarian could be a striker.

 

[Rechan]

The Shaman could be a leader. There's never been a shaman type that's clearly differentiated from the cleric, but it could be given a whole new suite of powers based on spirits.

This is how I would go. The Shaman can buff by invoking aid from spirits. "Brother Air, guide my friend's arrows, making them strike true and hard." And he could toss down hexes and the like.

The trick is making it more distinct than just a variant cleric, as from what the cleric sounds like, you could do what I just listed above by just describing the powers differently. The Preview of the Cleric mentions striking fear in enemies, weakening opponents defenses, doing damage over time, flamestrikey powers, in addition to buffs and healing.

One thought that comes to mind is allowing the Shaman to be a spirit medium. Literally allowing himself (or his allies) be possessed by spirits, and thus gaining some powers of the spirit inhabiting their body. Injecting an earth elemental's essence into an ally, giving him damage reduction, or the spirit of the snake into his striker friend so that his attacks are poisonous.

I can't think of a nature-based striker, since the Ranger is probably going to be martial.

It's possible that a shape-shifting druid could do the job. I'm thinking a druid changing into a panther, and leaping into someone's face. It would certainly grant him the mobility. Although, depending on their shapeshifting and what powers they get, they could be a Defender, or a Striker.

To me, the classes in R&C seem to have a little overlap. Paladins: Defender, with some leader powers. Clerics: Leaders with some striker-sounding powers. Warlocks: Strikers with soem controller-like powers. So a Druid who's a striker with defender-y abilities, or vice-versa, doesn't sound bad.

Another option as to "Natural Striker" would be someone who relies on an animal companion. The beastlord, who uses his animal friends to flank.

A Geomancer, the "I bring down lightning, volcanic eruptions, and summon clouds of insects to eat your face" sounds pretty appropriate as a controller. I'd definitely give them control over the environment - Entangles, but also basically power over any environment (none of this "Oh look, you're in a cave, your druid is useless" business).

 

[the Jester]

The R&C book strongly implies that barbarians, when they're released in the PH 2, will be of the same power source as druids, not martial. I'm assuming this will be a Nature power source.

Wait- does it explicitly state that the barbarian won't be in the PH1??

The barbarian is clearly a defender. The druid is less clear: its 3e boom spells make it seem like a controller, but the stronger emphasis on shapechanging make it sound like it could be a defender or even a striker.

What other classes could be based on the nature power source?

I like the idea of the shaman as nature-based leader; it makes sense. (And actually, the shaman in the 2.8 edition book Players Option: Spells and Powers made for a drastic change from the cleric.)

I could see the idea of a beastmaster type class that was nature-powered as either a striker, a defender or a controller. But I suspect that 4e wants to stay away from effects that give a pc more attacks via more figures on the battlefield to keep track of, so I doubt whether we'll see one.

I can't think of anything more atm that might be nature-based- I suspect we'll see some entirely new classes at one point or another. I do suspect PH2 will include Nature, Psionic and maybe Ki as power sources.

 

[marune]

I can't think of anything more atm that might be nature-based- I suspect we'll see some entirely new classes at one point or another. I do suspect PH2 will include Nature, Psionic and maybe Ki as power sources.

Nature
Psi
Ki

Yeah, that must be it.

 

[Irda Ranger]

The R&C book strongly implies that barbarians, when they're released in the PH 2, will be of the same power source as druids, not martial. I'm assuming this will be a Nature power source.

The barbarian is clearly a defender.

Bill Murray has many good quotes, but one of my favorites is "Oh, I don't do defense." I don't think a Barbarian does either. He's more about laying down smack.

I say: Striker.

The druid is less clear: its 3e boom spells make it seem like a controller, but the stronger emphasis on shapechanging make it sound like it could be a defender or even a striker.

Striker? You and I must have different understandings of the role. I think a Druid could be built as a Defender, but he makes the most sense as a Controller.

I think a Nature Defender would be interesting, but I haven't seen any classes released during 3E that really fit that Role and Power. But if he came out for 4E, I bet he'd have a lot in common with Treants.

 

[Dormammu]

I think Nature, Psi and Ki would be cool and obvious power sources also. The most interesting thing about it to me is: if Nature is a power source and Ranger's are Martial, how much will Rangers be changing? No more spells seems likely. That's a pretty major alteration (and a good one; we need an option for non-casting Rangers).

 

[Hammerhead]

Bill Murray has many good quotes, but one of my favorites is "Oh, I don't do defense." I don't think a Barbarian does either. He's more about laying down smack.

I say: Striker.

d12 HD, bonuses to CON when raging, uncanny dodge, DR? Sure, he's really easy to hit, but he's going to soak up way more damage than any other character before he drops. I'd definitely say Defender; the "Glass Cannons" generally get the Striker role.

 

[Victim]

Druid spells often do things to the battlefield (Entangle), summon creatures or can disrupt enemy strategies (repel X) besides blasting. So I'd put a casting sort of druid as a controller, if it keeps the same sort of abilities.

But there's enough druid to split into two classes and still have good characters. I could see a shapeshift/buff druid as a defender, while a more caster sort as a controller - depending on how well the new Cleric or Fey Warlock deals with that stuff.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Personally, I suspect that barbarians will appear in the Martial power source supplement, and druids in the Divine power source supplement.