I think Barbarians should be strikers, or maybe even controllers

[Howndawg]

The tough thing about the barbarian in 3e is that he was a hybrid striker/defender. On the one hand, he dished out a lot of damage, but on the other he was a frontline fighter. Typically, many barbarian players I knew would rage, charge into combat with a power attack, and then keep pounding on the foe until he was dead. Then he would charge the next guy and repeat. I could see the barbarian going either way.

As to the barbarian being a controller? Controllers tend to stay out of melee and drop stuff like walls and area effect spells. This does not seem very barbarian to me.

 

[interwyrm]

I really like the barbarian as controller idea.

Instead of 'wizard with different fluff', it's 'controller with totally different tactics'.

Plus, how cool would it be to have a barbarian with a fear howl and the ability to throw scenery to change the terrain or cause area damage?

 

[happyelf]

Exactly, the tactics would be quite differnt (not as much range for instance) but he would still be a controller since a lot of what he would be doing is moving enemies around and otherwise causing havok. And yeah the whole 'terrifying rage' thing would a good way to describe some abilities, as would throwing furniture and foes around as improvised weapons and barriers.

It's not as if it would be that complex. They could have a per encounter "hurl foe" power that would effect an enemy in a grapple, pushing them 3 squares and damaging them and whatever else is in the target square.

Again, it's debatable wether a defender could have stuff like this but a defender is meant to block and operate as a front line, while a barbarian (or beserker) is meant to tear through the melee pell-mell kicking ass and taking names.

 

[VBMEW-01]

I guess everyone else is so I might as well...

For Primal I'd like to see....

Barbarian- Defender (standard 3E-esque)
Shaper- Striker (the wildshaping Druid)
Shamen- Leader (The healer Druid)
Druid- Controller (terrain-effects and AoE Druid)

This is similar to many of you, and is what I'd like to see.

 

[Jack99]

I guess everyone else is so I might as well...

For Primal I'd like to see....

Barbarian- Defender (standard 3E-esque)
Shaper- Striker (the wildshaping Druid)
Shamen- Leader (The healer Druid)
Druid- Controller (terrain-effects and AoE Druid)

This is similar to many of you, and is what I'd like to see.

Druid will be the wild-shaper, according to R&C, and since wildshapping is pretty much the defining ability of the druid (and has been for a long time), I very much doubt that they will call him anything else. My guess is that the druid will be either striker or defender, with the barbarian being the other one. Shaman sounds fine as leader, but since druid will already be taken, they will need another name for whatever class will be the primal controller.

Cheers

 

[Doug McCrae]

Striker, yes. Controller, no.

i'm wondering if they could be a controller instead, like a wizard. While it might seem odd to think of a barbarian as comparable to a wizard, when you think about it a really hell-for leather barbarian rampage might be best depicted in the rules by area effect attacks, status effects, and the ability to move foes around. You could easily imagine a barb charging into a swarm of goblins, bowling them over, sliacing a few at a time, while he hefts one up by the throat and hurls it into a chasm.

The 4e fighter can affect more than one foe at a time with Cleave and move them around with Tide of Iron. But he ain't a controller.

 

[DandD]

They should have made the Barbarian simply a sub-type to the Fighter. Really, a barbarian isn't a class, it's just a social status, meaning non-civilised guy. That's one of those D&D-ism that is simply stupid, but we'll have to live with.
What next? Is your character class going to be 'Hobo'?
Alternatively, they should rename Barbarian into Berserker, or something like that, but the name Barbarian as a class and a profession is dumb. Conan was a pirate, a warlord (well, several times, of course), a thief, a king, a murderer, whatever. Whenever they called him a barbarian, it was simply meant as a deragatory term for 'Uncivilised outsider who can't be trusted because he smells and stuff'.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I could see the Barbarian as either a Striker or a Defender. I think probably (in my eyes) the type that makes the most sense is a Defender that has lower AC (but temporary HP side-effects built into his powers) with a dash of striker in some of his attacks.

I see the Barbarian given that one of the classic Berserkers (honestly in-todays modern culture the two terms are interchangeable) is Cúchulainn where he essentially frenzies on a bridge and turns into a monstrous creature with his organs on the outside fending off all those who tried to cross the bridge, building a wall of bodies.

If that doesn't scream defender, but one that dishes out damage I don't know what does. It will be interesting too, that since the Barbarian will be in the Primal group, it can more distinguish itself from the Fighter in its powers, besides simply rage.

 

[Cadfan]

We need to take the "Defenders don't do damage, they just protect others" meme out back behind the woodshed, and shoot it in the face.

If you want a guy who wades into the middle of a battlefield and chops down foes left and right, you want a defender. A striker is going to be lurking around the edge of that battlefield because venturing in will get him killed. The striker might have higher per attack damage than the defender, and might be better at messing up a single opponent, but that doesn't mean that the defender isn't dishing out a boatload of pain.

"This happens every time," said Verdonn, Archmage. "We can't go anywhere nice."

Thul the Silent shrugged. "He enjoys himself. And he always insists on paying for the damage once he sobers up."

Verdonn and Thul ducked under the table as a chair flew past their head. "How many is he fighting now?" Verdonn asked, as he sat on the floor and poured Thul a shotglass of whisky.

"There were six of them, but he threw that one guy through the window. I think there's just five now." Thul sipped at his shotglass. "This is strong! Wouldn't expect it in a town like this."

Verdonn took a drink straight from the bottle. "Yeah! Yeah, strong. Woah." There was a pause for a few moments. "Didn't he throw that one other guy behind the bar?"

"Yeah," said Thul. "But a few moments later he reached over the bar and dragged him back."

"So indecisive. I guess that's five then. Another shot?"

"Just a moment... I got a feeling..." Thul stood up, shotglass in hand. A man in uniform burst through the bar's door, cudgel in hand. Before the guard could say a word, Thul's arm snapped forward, launching his shotglass like a crossbow bolt. It struck the guard in the forehead, and he dropped like a stone.

Thul sat back down under the table, and reached for the bottle. "No sense letting the Watch ruin the fun. Besides, he'd thank me. The headache tomorrow will hurt less than what he was about to get himself into."

 

[SadisticFishing]

I can totally see a Barbarian as a two-threat character. Druid too, even Bard!

Bard: Controller/Leader (maybe ;x)
Barbarian: Striker/Defender
Druid: Controller/Leader

This one role thing will get boring if every single class sticks to it, and those ^ ones were all multi-threat classes anyways.