D&D 5E How many fans want a 5E Warden?

[Jester David]

Not sure what a primal defender is first off.

In theory it was a druid-esque defender that shapeshifted into animal, elemental, and nature forms like trees. In practice, only its daily powers did this, and half of them involved no shapeshifting, so it was just a tank whose powers had a vague nature flavour.

 

[steeldragons]

Primal in 5e is back to being an adjective, not a noun, as it should be.

Defender, similarly, has no meaning in a 5e context. Someone who protects the squishies is anyone with armor and HPs, and a somewhat valiant heart...and/or, arguably, maybe anyone with the "Defense" fighting style.

These terms mean nothing in 5e. To try to define a 5e class in 4e terms or a desire for a "5e class" based on a "4e concepts" actually gives it no context.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Primal in 5e is back to being an adjective, not a noun, as it should be.

Defender, similarly, has no meaning in a 5e context. Someone who protects the squishies is anyone with armor and HPs, and a somewhat valiant heart...and/or, arguably, maybe anyone with the "Defense" fighting style.

These terms mean nothing in 5e. To try to define a 5e class in 4e terms or a desire for a "5e class" based on a "4e concepts" actually gives it no context.

All these 4e'isms confuse me at times though I get the basic gist due to my brief foray into MMO games, city of heroes especially.

 

[mellored]

Primal in 5e is back to being an adjective, not a noun, as it should be.

It was also an adjective in 4e.

Defender, similarly, has no meaning in a 5e context. Someone who protects the squishies is anyone with armor and HPs, and a somewhat valiant heart...and/or, arguably, maybe anyone with the "Defense" fighting style.

Yes, it does have meaning. You really need to get off your anti-4e terminology crusade.

Just because you call it "aqua" and someone else calls it "water", doesn't mean your right and they are wrong. Or if you say "hi" and they say "hello". Plenty of examples of different words having the same meaning.


The main difference between 4e and 5e design is that defender/striker/controller/leader are builds, not classes.

i.e a sword & board fighter with defensive style, heavy armor expertise, defensive duelist, and sentinel can be called either a "defender" or "tank".
a 2-handed fighter with great weapon style, great weapon master, precision strike, and savage attacker can be called either a "striker" or "DPR".
ect...

Not that you had to stick to your initial 4e class description either. It was plenty easy to make striker wizards or controlling rogues.

 

[mellored]

All these 4e'isms confuse me at times though I get the basic gist due to my brief foray into MMO games, city of heroes especially.

In city of heros terms, defender would be a tanker.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

But the two handed sword guy in plate armor spends all his time in the front ranks fighting the meanest bad guys, along with the plate armored cleric with mace and shield. Why would one be a striker and one a defender or whatever? What is the minimum AC to be a defender vs a striker? Or is it a HP thing?

 

[Minigiant]

If it were up to me, I would straight up combine the warden and seeker

Then make it the "I enchant my weapon with nature" class.

Want a controller? Pick Vine Arrow.
Want a defender? Pick Vine Axe.
Want a damage dealer? Pick Lava Arrow.
Want a support? Pick Earth Hammer.
Want a AOE damage? Pick Lightning Arrow.

 

[mellored]

But the two handed sword guy in plate armor spends all his time in the front ranks fighting the meanest bad guys, along with the plate armored cleric with mace and shield. Why would one be a striker and one a defender or whatever? What is the minimum AC to be a defender vs a striker? Or is it a HP thing?

That's kinda like asking when does red become orange. "red" is a general area of the color spectrum, not an exact measurement (unless you put it under a magnifier glass). And there's plenty of shades in between.

They where rough descriptions, not hard definitions. Just like "tank" or "DPR" is a rough description.


You could be a striker-ish defender, a defender-ish striker, or focus on pure defender just like you can have reddish orange, orange-ish red, or deep red. And all the shades in between.

 

[Shades of Eternity]

I guess when I think of warden, I think of this.

(admittedly John isn't magical, but work with me)

You see a man, not well armed or equipped, but obviously incredibly powerfully built.

He stares back at you, not with rage, but conviction.

You move towards him, and immediately get stuck in brambles before he takes a swing with his quarterstaff and hits like a stag just charged at you knocking you to the ground.

You attempt to rise to your feet, only to be struck by a random lightning strike, forcing you to the ground.

It is only then that you realize your not just fighting a man, but nature itself and he is merely its avatar.

*****************************
I guess the closest analogue from other versions of dnd is a druidic knight.

 

[steeldragons]

It was also an adjective in 4e.

I meant in the sense of it as a self-contained "power source", it is a noun. As used in 4e, it is PREscriptive, not DEscriptive.