Unearthed Arcana New Barbarian Primal Paths in November 7th Unearthed Arcana

The new paths are

• Path of the Ancestral Guardian
• Path of the Storm Herald
• Path of the Zealot

 

[Corpsetaker]

I would like to see a Shaman that has nothing to do with a companion.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I wonder if the shaman NPCs from SKT are a prelude to the shaman class (or more likely subclass) we will (hopefully) eventually get.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I would like to see a Shaman that has nothing to do with a companion.

Genuine question: How would that look different from a druid, or possibly a nature cleric? What about them doesn't suffice for representing a shaman-type character?

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Meh.

There's already plenty filler content for barbarians. This doesn't change anything. This doesn't open up new ways to play.

Ancestral Guardian: The spirits are only fluff - they have no actual battlefield presence. They are only an overly elaborate way of saying "you got disadvantage" or whatever. And the benefits are kind of hodge-podge. I'd much rather wait for a proper 4E-style Shaman character, where the spirit guardian is a kind of proto animal-companion that actually has a definition on the battlefield. Grade: entirely forgettable.

Storm Herald: ouf. "Powerful, [] effects" - you gotta be kidding me. Way too complicated. Fiddly and mediocre. Wait... that reminds me of something... was this designed by the 4E magic item designer? Grade: Useless.

Zealot: Immediately fire the Ancestral and Storm designer and replace with this one. This one's rules actually work. The "can't be killed" effect comes late, but has an actual battlefield impact. Not to mention is way cool. Grade: worth my reading time.

Overall grade: Scrap the first two and start over from scratch. Keep the Zealot for further fine tuning.

Why would a barbarian, full of melee-orientated class abilities, want to hang back and let his/her spirit companion fight for him/her like the 4e shaman would?

I am afraid we need to hold you back a grade in barbarian 101.

 

[Tony Vargas]

There's already plenty filler content for barbarians. This doesn't change anything. This doesn't open up new ways to play.

Totem barbarians fell pretty far short of fully exploring the 'spirit' connection, and at two sub-classes in the PH, barbarians were one of the sparsest classes in that sense.

But, no, sub-classes aren't going to change much or open up new ways to play, sub-classes just aren't that dramatically different. You'd need new classes with new mechanics to shake things up that much.

Why would a barbarian, full of melee-orientated class abilities, want to hang back and let his/her spirit companion fight for him/her like the 4e shaman would?

Not exactly what they did, but I think the point was that the Barbarian doesn't have the design space left over to do spirit-based stuff well. (That the 'ancestor spirit' schtick should have been left to a more flexible caster sub-class or new caster class.)
I disagree - magical variations on Rage, alone, seem to have done the trick.

 

[Corpsetaker]

Genuine question: How would that look different from a druid, or possibly a nature cleric? What about them doesn't suffice for representing a shaman-type character?

How would a class that has a nature spirit companion really be any different than a druid? Why wouldn't that just be either an alternate druid feature or a subclass? Nature spirits fall in line perfectly with druids.

I see the Shaman being shoe-horned into a class just because they want to use the name for something.

 

[Corpsetaker]

Basically, what could make a good Shaman class has really been split across the barbarian and druid classes. I would picture totems belonging to shamans before I would barbarians.

 

[Mercule]

Basically, what could make a good Shaman class has really been split across the barbarian and druid classes. I would picture totems belonging to shamans before I would barbarians.

This. I'm just not loving the Barbarian. The Berserker path could easily be turned into a Fighter kit. The Totem, I guess, could be thrown to the Druid for something more combative w/o the shape-shifting. These new paths don't actually do anything for me.

Really, I'd rather see the Barbarian looted and divvied between the Fighter, Ranger, and a new Shaman class.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Overall grade: Scrap the first two and start over from scratch. Keep the Zealot for further fine tuning.

That's not actually a grade - that's you saying "I'm not into it, so no one can have it." and that's not cool.

Maybe just stick to what is a grade in the future and say only the "I'm not into it" part rather than imply that no one is or could be into it so it should just be tossed out?

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Totem barbarians fell pretty far short of fully exploring the 'spirit' connection, and at two sub-classes in the PH, barbarians were one of the sparsest classes in that sense.

But, no, sub-classes aren't going to change much or open up new ways to play, sub-classes just aren't that dramatically different. You'd need new classes with new mechanics to shake things up that much.


Not exactly what they did, but I think the point was that the Barbarian doesn't have the design space left over to do spirit-based stuff well. (That the 'ancestor spirit' schtick should have been left to a more flexible caster sub-class or new caster class.)
I disagree - magical variations on Rage, alone, seem to have done the trick.

Okay, I can see that. I was trying to figure out why he was asking for a shaman in a barbarian subclass. There are plenty of good places to put a shaman, but barbarian was a funny one.

Thank you.