I think Barbarians should be strikers, or maybe even controllers

[malcolm_n]

Do you have a link? I'd be interested in the thread if there were some good posts on it.
I honestly think there's a good chance of them writing barbs up as a striker, IAE i'll probably end up doing a 'beserker' controller class myself once the books are out, just to see if it works.

certainly, though not much there. http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1005174

 

[Ciaran]

I also don't see any major equipment-based class being a Controller. It's just not possible for someone like the Barbarian to alter terrain and affect multiple foes without atleast some mumbo-jumbo (or magic, as it is more commonly known), which isn't very Barbarian. Thog smash to kill puny goblin, not cast 'entangling roots' and tangle goblin up.

No, Thog roars so scarily that a dozen goblins are shaken, then barrels into their formation so as to knock down half a dozen of them at once. Battlefield control != tangible magical manifestations; just because walls and entanglements allow you to control the battlefield doesn't mean they're the only tools that can control the battlefield. Martial control is more limited, true, but a hypothetical barbarian Controller class would be a bit of a hybrid anyway, so that's okay.

 

[Mad Mac]

The hardest thing about slotting new classes into the controller role is that we only have one example so far. Every other role we have enough classes to see different ways the role can be filled, eg--

Defender Fighter wades into melee and kicks the crap out of anything unlucky enough to get within reach, while the Paladin is throwing around radiant damage and handing out buffs/penalties to make attacking anyone else tactically unsound.

Striker Rogue skulks around the battlefield, slinking up behind people and knifing them in the kidneys, while the Ranger shoots them full of arrows from long range and the Warlock uses his arsenal of magic blasts to target different defenses and attach crippling rider effects.

Leader Cleric seems more focused on healing and buffing, while the Warlord is playing chess with the battlemap.

Controller Wizard does...wizard stuff. Obviously lots of focus on AoE damage and stuff, but since we only have one controller, and the Wizard is getting totally revamped so that we aren't even sure what all he's capable off...hardest position to fill, except with classes that are already wizard knockoffs.

I do agree that defender seems best fit for the Barbarian. Make him a lightly armoured, blender of death defender, sure, but he's still a frontline guy.

A leaderish-defender, incidently, would probably be stepping on the Paladin's toes, even though the flavor is completely different.

 

[happyelf]

No, Thog roars so scarily that a dozen goblins are shaken, then barrels into their formation so as to knock down half a dozen of them at once. Battlefield control != tangible magical manifestations; just because walls and entanglements allow you to control the battlefield doesn't mean they're the only tools that can control the battlefield. Martial control is more limited, true, but a hypothetical barbarian Controller class would be a bit of a hybrid anyway, so that's okay.

Exactly, and I think it would be more fun themanticly than another magical controller or whatever.

A barbarian or beseker controller could cast his foes into fits of terror, fling them around the place, let loose a storm of blows that act as an AE attack (the wizard AE was int and implement based, no reason a barbs AE could not be str and weapon based), and so on.

He could even do metamagic tricks- after all barbarians are supposed to hate wizards. So what does he do when confronted by a magical wall erected by a foul sorcerer? Why, he uses his savage primal power to smash it to pieces.

 

[Klaus]

The way I see the "primal" power source breaking down is:

striker -> barbarian/berserker
defender -> shapeshifter (splitting off that branch of druid powers)
controller -> druid (entangle, call lightning, produce flame, creeping doom, etc.)
leader -> bard (because it'd be nice to link bards and druids thematically)

This.

 

[Gargazon]

No, Thog roars so scarily that a dozen goblins are shaken, then barrels into their formation so as to knock down half a dozen of them at once. Battlefield control != tangible magical manifestations; just because walls and entanglements allow you to control the battlefield doesn't mean they're the only tools that can control the battlefield. Martial control is more limited, true, but a hypothetical barbarian Controller class would be a bit of a hybrid anyway, so that's okay.

If anything I would still see that as primarily being a Defender. We've already seen that the 4e Fighter has some ability to 'throw people around', albeit 1 square (the Tide of Iron power) and I reckon that whirlwind attack and such will be daily or maybe even encounter powers for the Fighter, so those can all feasibly be Defender abilities.

As for letting loose a roar and making all the goblins shaken, the Barbarian would still be wanting those goblins to go after him. He doesn't give out the roar, charge into the midst of the fight, then let all the goblins go after the Fighter because he has them marked. He beats the snot out of any goblin that dares try and get away from him. And that's what a Defender does.

If anything the Barbarian would be a able to act a little like a Controller, like how the Fighter acts a little like a Striker, or the Paladin acts a little like a Leader. I don't see that being his primary role.

 

[Chucklesnj]

No, Thog roars so scarily that a dozen goblins are shaken, then barrels into their formation so as to knock down half a dozen of them at once. Battlefield control != tangible magical manifestations; just because walls and entanglements allow you to control the battlefield doesn't mean they're the only tools that can control the battlefield. Martial control is more limited, true, but a hypothetical barbarian Controller class would be a bit of a hybrid anyway, so that's okay.

It is worth noting that the primary function of the Barbarian class in Iron Heroes (designed by Mike Mearls and easily my favorite variant 3.x rule set) was to wade into large groups of foes and keep them busy while the rest of the party dealt with any "boss" type threats. In other words, if you wanted a class to keep the goblin horde busy while the rest of the party fought the big boss, the Barbarain was your man.

In my mind, this is the picture perfect definition of what are "melee controller" would do.

 

[Cadfan]

In my mind, this is the picture perfect definition of what are "melee controller" would do.

I don't disagree that you've described a cool way to create a barbarian.

I'm just pretty sure that what you just described was a defender. Wades into melee, and holds off multiple foes at one time so that they can't interfere with the rest of the party? I'm pretty sure that's a defender.

 

[Gargazon]

It is worth noting that the primary function of the Barbarian class in Iron Heroes (designed by Mike Mearls and easily my favorite variant 3.x rule set) was to wade into large groups of foes and keep them busy while the rest of the party dealt with any "boss" type threats. In other words, if you wanted a class to keep the goblin horde busy while the rest of the party fought the big boss, the Barbarain was your man.

In my mind, this is the picture perfect definition of what are "melee controller" would do.

To me that is the picture perfect definition of what a 'Defender' should do. He's holding back the monster horde from getting at the squishy characters, and that says 'Defender' to me far more than 'Controller'.

 

[happyelf]

It's not about holding them back or tieing them down, that's my point- it's about scattering them, doing damage to a lot of them at once, knowing them around, and other manuvers iof that sort. It's about controlling the battlefield, not freezing bits of it in place.

By that logic people are using we could call pretty much anything a defender. I mean is a wizard who uses a lot of walls a defender, too? I think people are stuck on the idea that front line fighter=defender but that's only going to lead to a dull situation where each role is dominated by variations on the same archetypes.

If all the controllers have the same kind of flavour (magic) then that will be boring. Every party will end up filling that niche with a spell-hurling rear rank weeny. Dull. A 'hands on' controller is a cool idea and a good alternative take on the niche.