I think Barbarians should be strikers, or maybe even controllers

[DreamChaser]

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.

Not all of the current classes are strict role keepers. The core four are; that is to say, Fighter is pretty much only defender, cleric basic leader, rogue basic striker, wizard basic controller.

That said, the other classes are naturally a bit hybridized. Warlord clearly has some defender aspects, being very "front line" styled. the warlock has some controller elements in his powers.

I have seen comments from the designers that the roles weren't intended to be "pure" but they could be a guide to a new or relatively new player what options might be helpful / fun when entering a new party...

if a party already has a fighter and a paladin, a barbarian (which will almost certainly be a defender) will probably shine less and be less useful to a party. Clearly, there will be other facets to their abilities than simple "mark" or "bash" but the greatest degree of overlap will likely be with other defenders.

Similarly with warlord, bard, cleric: if a party already has two, the third may feel like the proverbial 5th wheel. not because the three classes are the same, but because they (two we know one we don't yet) share much the same end purpose.

The nice thing, however, is that there is a very big MIGHT on all of this, since from what we have seen, clerics and warlords have very little in the way of overlap in terms of power / effect even if they have the greatest role overlap. So, many players will also be fine being the third wheel.

DC

 

[SadisticFishing]

It's more of a wording thing than an actual in-game thing. The fact that everyone has a clearly defined role, using a single word, kind of annoys me a tiny little bit. This'd fix it right up, I'm fine with the PHB being clearly defined, then things messing up.

 

[Gargazon]

I think the Barbarian could function perfectly well as a Defender. I'd imagine he'd probably have some kind of staying-alive power, sort of like Shifter Ferocity (or whatever it was called) in 3.5, that let the Shifter continue clawing people apart even at negative hp.

It'd probably be some kind of Daily power, perhaps looking like this:

Die-Hard
Your body is beaten and broken, but you still won't go down.
Daily - Primal
Immediate Reaction
Trigger: The Barbarian falls to 0 hp or below from an attack.
Effect: The Barbarian continues fighting without penalty until the end of his next turn.
Sustain Minor. The Barbarian cannot sustain this power past the end of the encounter.

Hey, look, I just made up a Defender power on the fly.

And yes, I realise there is nothing to base this off of, but I'm bored and felt like being creative

 

[Fallen Seraph]

We also can assume he can attack more often then normal, ie: his extra bite attack.

 

[malcolm_n]

That's Awesome! Somehow, you posted here exactly what I said (almost to the word) on the WotC message boards. What a coincidence

That said, I like the idea of the Barbarian Controller. The general consensus was striker though, so I'm putting it aside as an idea for when we have more rules and I can HR it.

 

[happyelf]

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.

 

[Zelster]

Since it's so popular to use Blizzard analogies to explain 4E, I present to you:

Diablo II Barbarian! Controllor/striker hybrid, using a combination of AoE battlecries to buff the party or debuff the adds, and maybe some sunder or trip-style maneuvers to make things interesting.

 

[Imp]

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)

 

[Nahat Anoj]

I'm pretty sure of the following:

Barbarian = Primal Defender. They won't be able to wear heavy armors, but they'll have loads of hitpoints and probably the ability to gain damage reduction. Much like how a Paladin has a lot of Leader-y elements, I think the Barbarian will have lots of Striker-y elements (fast movement around the battlefield, ability to do lots of damage to a single target, etc.). But they're primary role will be to keep the monsters off the more squishy members of the party.

Druid = Primal Leader. I see Druid healing as infusing Primal energy into allies, either through spells or primal roars. Like other Leaders, the Druid will be a good second-rank Defender, using shapeshifting to assume various battle forms. If they have spells like Entangle or Call Lightning, they may have some Controller elements as well.

 

[Gargazon]

I really do not like the idea of a Druid being capable of fulfilling more than one role in a fashion equal to another class, purely cause that'll make the Druid unnecessarily complex. But that's not what this topic is about.

I don't see the Barbarian being a Striker. Yes, he should be able to do lots of damage, and should be waving a Greataxe about with wild abandon, decapitating foes all around him. For me, this is exactly why he shouldn't be a Striker. Strikers aren't tough, and while some of them like to get their hands dirty in melee they don't like to get them dirty long, especially when the enemy starts paying attention. The Barbarian wants their attention, cause that way it's easier to headbutt the bad-guys right in the face.

Heck, look at the traditional D&D Barbarian abilities:

• Increased Speed: Great thing for a Defender to have. Wizard in trouble? Excellent, I'll just charge over and help him out, no bother. Arguably useful for a Striker too, but a Barbarian doesn't tumble - he charges.
• Rage: Increased durability, offensive power and Willpower? That's definently something a Defender wants when the mad Wizard tries to make him chop off the Rogue's head. Strikers would like this too, but it just doesn't feel very 'Striker'-ish to me.
• Damage Reduction: Well, if this isn't a definite Defender ability I don't know what is.

Barbarian just does not, at all, fit the 'Striker' role as I see it. He should be in the middle of the fight, chopping up all who dare oppose him, and those who dare ignore him. And that's about as 'Defender' as you can get.

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.