I wanted to play a barbarian starting at the very end of 3.5's lifespan but never got around to it. Now the advent of the 4e barbarian playtest is soon upon us so i felt like getting into discussion about what it could be.
My speculation
I see a barbarian that has a 2 handed style and a swoard(sword+board) style. Armor proficiency up to Hide armor.
I see the 2 handed style being the raging warrior thats frothing at the mouth, the truly big damage sort of guy.
I see the other being more of the animal totem barbarian, calling upon animal spirits (including griffins and dragons possibly, being this is a fantasy game) to give him strength in more ways than one or to aid him in some other fashion. The bear spirit gives strength, owl wisdom, etc.
I see powers that help to emulate the barbrarian rage.... Like a barbarian rage encounter power that gives +2 damage and +2 will defense but -2 AC. This is perhaps a sort of stance?
I see howls and cries to make enemies back away (push) in fear
Powers for temporary HP for our barbarian.
How I figure they'll work is like this:
Any opponent that hits you and does damage is marked. This triggers your rage against that opponent. All your attacks deal extra damage, I would think 1d8 would be a good start, because the mechanic would be based on you taking damage. You can only mark one opponent as the recipient of your rage at a time.
I figure the barbarian will be tough, lots of hit points and healing surges, and a couple of powers that can heal themselves (totems), along with inflicting massive damage. I would also think they would have an affinity for two handed weapons. Mauls, greatswords, greataxes, etc.
Now, if the barbarian was to be be purely defender, I'd expect that they'd have an rage aura that any opponent that is marked, automatically takes damage equal to their strength modifier, maybe half if your only using a one handed weapon.
Also, i wonder what they are going to do about hp and healing surges if the barbarian is a striker? I cant imagine the biggest, toughest archetype having rogue or warlock level hit points and healing, especially considering last edition he was the burliest in the hp department.
We have a 2-weapon striker, and we have a light weapon striker, but we don't have a huge damage with huge weapons striker. Besides, during a developer's little anecdote about their barbarian, everything they related just said "striker" to me.
As for the difference in HPs from 3.X, well, add it to the list of changes. They can give the barbarian a class ability that let's it heal more often or heal better or get more HPs or something. In 3.X they were more of a defender, anyway.
My 2c.
This sort of play may be encouraged by powers which grant extra effects when the barbarian is bloodied (such as extra rage damage, healing surges, and other stuff like that). I'd also agree that STR, CON, and WIS will be the barbarian's most important stats.
I'm going to guess that the barbarian is more of a 'tank' striker, with more HP and/or healing surges than a ranger or rogue. He can take more hits than the martial strikers, but doesn't have the 'stickiness' of the fighter, and uses hide armor which gives him less AC. His durability will probably let him serve as a secondary defender, though.
I agree. I think one of the iconic features of the barbarian is toughness, so I'm expecting an hp boost as a class feature, in addition to abilities that allow regeneration, temporary hp, etc.
I'd also like to see a class feature that allows the barbarian to get more mileage out of hide armor.
I think they should go up to Chain automatically, if for no other reason than it differentiates them further from rangers, and as they probably won't be so mobile as the other strikers (as far as moving away from things), they'll need better defenses. No shield prof, though, since 2-handers are their thing.
I expect a lot of charge-based powers.
I expect a fair number of ways to get temporary HP for themselves, rather than actual self-healing.
I expect a few powers with the fear keyword that impose penalties and status effects.
Class feature that gives them a little more damage with a 2h weapon (possibly only in conjunction with Power Attack).
Class 1) Primal Striker who uses fast speed and savage, animalistic attacks like leaps and bites. We could call him Tarzan. :P
Class 2) Primal Defender made of hulking brute who channels strength and endurance to shrug off damage and swing a big axe. This guy we'd call Krusk. ;)
(Sidetrack...I wonder if Conan or Red Sonja would fit either of those...?)
What if they split the Barbarian into two classes like they've done with the healer & caster "priests," the weather & spirits "druids," or even the foresty & arcane "elves?"
Class 1) Primal Striker who uses fast speed and savage, animalistic attacks like leaps and bites. We can call him Tarzan for now. :P
Class 2) Primal Defender made of hulking brute who channels strength and endurance to shrug off damage and swing a big axe. This guy we'd call Krusk. ;)
(Sidetrack...I wonder if Conan or Red Sonja would fit either of those...?)
Hm. I'm actually thinking it's more likely that the Druid got split up, since they were originally designing it as a hybrid, and rumors are indicating that they couldn't get hybrids to work.
Basically, a "animal/plant/weather controller" and a "shapeshifting defender".
That's getting a bit off-topic, though. A striker with a defender minor might actually suit the barbarian well, since the Fighter is a defender with a striker minor.
Hmm. Every class we've seen so far (barring playtest articles) has had two build options. I can't think of any kind of barbarian besides 'two-handed smashy'. I suppose weapon and shield could be in there.
As I said earlier, I think that a bare fisted option could work really well.
However for a second build, what about...
- A Wis based build focusing on pushes and -damage debuffs, i.e. scaring enemies into being weakened and breaking their lines, maybe a few minor melee buffs
Could be fun.
I really hope dragon is still free when the playtest comes along ~.~ or I will be royally urinated-off and would have to find other ways to view that material.
*Busts into WOTC headquarters with TNT which are actually sticks of sausage* I AM A BOMB! IF YOU DO NOT SHOW ME THAT MATERIAL I WILL BLOW UP IN EXPLOSION OF SPICY FLAVOR GOODNESS THAT IS SUMMER SAUSAGE. MAKE YOUR MOVE! *Cue good/bad/ugly duel music* ahhhhh-ahhhh! wahhh wahh wahhhh
edit:...i want some summer sausage.
As the first responder said and I forgot to put in the initial post... I would like to see some kind of ability that triggers when the barbarian becomes bloodied like some sort of frenzied beserker deal.. this could be spread across the whole class or maybe just your crazy 2h wielding psychopath build O.o.
I do hope you mean 'frenzied berserker' not in reference to the pain-in-the-butt 3.5 Prestige Class. If there's even a hint of party-killing stupidness in the 4e Barbarian, it goes on the banlist in a hurry.
I do hope you mean 'frenzied berserker' not in reference to the pain-in-the-butt 3.5 Prestige Class. If there's even a hint of party-killing stupidness in the 4e Barbarian, it goes on the banlist in a hurry.
I'm hoping for the barbarian (are they really keeping that name?) to include a "beserker" build and a "totemist" build.
Anyone else remember the beserker from the 2e Viking's Handbook (one of the green campaign books they released)? Beserkers had a rage ability like the barbarian, and also got shapeshifting into wolf, then bear, and eventually spirit horse forms. Since barbarians are going to be in the primal group, why not let them do this?
The "totemist" I would see as more of an "Indian brave"; a warrior who gets guidance from a totem spirit or animal.
I'm hoping for the barbarian (are they really keeping that name?) to include a "beserker" build and a "totemist" build.
Yeah, i'd be surprised if the build options are "2-handed vs. X" as opposed things like rage or totem powers. Considering he is primal and not martial, i cant image the builds revolving around weapon styles as opposed to...well...primal stuff.
I doubt they will make a 2-handed specific build, wanna know why?
Small characters for one can't use 2 handed weapons, secondly they can use versatile weapons but they must be used 2 handed and they don't get a bonus to damage.
The idea behind 4e I believe is that any race can be any build. Making a build that would have small characters gimped in the first place seems kinda unfair... I mean it's unfair to be a small character already as it is! There is really no advantage to being small. I'm not sure on the rules of squeezing and maybe they can squeeze into even smaller places but thats a highly situational deal and i'm not even sure on the rules of it.
Every small race was given about an extra foot of height yet they are still screwed over.
This can be remedied if the barbarian 2-handed build says something like "Small characters who become this build can use two handed weapons and get a +1 bonus to damage when using versatile weapons 2 handed"
Though i doubt the above will happen. Therefore I don't think there will be a 2 handed SPECIFIC build.
What I now believe is that there will be the "raging" build, and many people will be using 2 handed weapons with that as it will be the high damage build. Then the totem animal spirit build.
Oh crap I just realized something!
I doubt they will make a 2-handed specific build, wanna know why?
Small characters for one can't use 2 handed weapons, secondly they can use versatile weapons but they must be used 2 handed and they don't get a bonus to damage.
I don't think there will be a 2 handed SPECIFIC build.
What I now believe is that there will be the "raging" build, and many people will be using 2 handed weapons with that as it will be the high damage build. Then the totem animal spirit build.
Small can use Versaile weapons 2 handed. So they can still benefit from PA and other 2 handed abilities. They just don't get Versatile bonus to damage.
I guess I am the only person here who sees the Barbarian as a Primal Controller. I envision someone with either a 2-hander or 2 weapons leaping across the battlefield whirlwinding and yelling at people.
The build would have two options, a melee based build that involves jumping to key points, flailing his weapon(s) wildly and taking out minions. He would of course have abilities (similar to the infernalock) that give him temporary hit points since he would be in the thick of things.
The second would be more of a shouter, probably favoring the 2-hander. He would have abilities similar to thunder wave (from wizard) and other close burst/blast powers.
Armor would of course be hide.
As for rage, I think a mechanic similar to Heart of the Titan would work. Have it be an encounter class ability (possibly different effect relating to the builds) that lasts until a pool of temp HP is gone. Or if he goes 2 rounds without hitting or getting hit.
Small can use Versaile weapons 2 handed. So they can still benefit from PA and other 2 handed abilities. They just don't get Versatile bonus to damage.
whats PA? O_o
I just doubt we will see powers that say you MUST be using a 2-handed weapon.
As for the shield bit by the other poster. When I think of viking barbarians and all that I can certainly imagine a shield, though made from wood or hide. Thus I can see light shield proficiency but NOT heavy.
whats PA? O_o
Power Attack.
Oh crap I just realized something!
I doubt they will make a 2-handed specific build, wanna know why?
Small characters for one can't use 2 handed weapons, secondly they can use versatile weapons but they must be used 2 handed and they don't get a bonus to damage.
The idea behind 4e I believe is that any race can be any build. Making a build that would have small characters gimped in the first place seems kinda unfair... I mean it's unfair to be a small character already as it is! There is really no advantage to being small. I'm not sure on the rules of squeezing and maybe they can squeeze into even smaller places but thats a highly situational deal and i'm not even sure on the rules of it.
Every small race was given about an extra foot of height yet they are still screwed over.
This can be remedied if the barbarian 2-handed build says something like "Small characters who become this build can use two handed weapons and get a +1 bonus to damage when using versatile weapons 2 handed"
Though i doubt the above will happen. Therefore I don't think there will be a 2 handed SPECIFIC build.
What I now believe is that there will be the "raging" build, and many people will be using 2 handed weapons with that as it will be the high damage build. Then the totem animal spirit build.
Ok if I am understanding your argument correctly, you are saying that they would never do a two hand weapon build for a class because small characters wouldn't be good at it. I counter with the fighter build option, fighter weapon talent(one handed weapons or two handed weapons). :P
Role: Striker
Power Source: Primal
Prime Stats: Strength, Charisma, Constitution
Armor: Cloth, Leather, Hide
Weapon: Simple Melee, Military Melee, Simple Ranged
Bonus to Defense: +2 Fortitude
Hit Points at 1st Level: 14 + Constitution
Hit Points per Level gained: 6
Healing Surges per Day: 8 + Con Modifier
Trained Skills: At 1st Level choose 4 trained skills from list below.
Athletics (Str) Endurance (Con) Dungeoneering (Wis) Intimidate (Cha) Nature (Wis) Perception (Wis) Streetwise (Cha)
Rage: Encounter Power, Primal, Stance
Req: Must be Bloodied.
Effect: +2 to Hit, +2 Damage, +2 Will Defense, -2 AC. Effect lasts untill no longer Bloodied.
Overpowering Strike: Add an amount of damage to all basic melee attacks based on your level when useing a Two-handed weapon.
or
Brawler: Your unarmed attacks deal damage based on your size and level.
1st-10th 1d8
11th-20th 2d8
21st-30th 3d8
Small: 1st-10th 1d6 11th-20th 1d8 21st-30th 1d10
Medium: 1st-10th 1d8 11th-20th 1d10 21st-30th 1d12
I can see something like this, of course without spelling, grammer, and poor wording :P
First off, I just can't ever imagine a barbarian who would be using a shield... ever. It is about as foreign to me as a 2-weapon defender. No striker should ever have a reason to don a shield unless the party has no defenders or melee leaders at all.
Berserkers are said to have reached a state of battle frenzy by biting their shields. That's the kind of barbarian I want to play.
This is how I see the Barb....
Role: Striker
Power Source: Primal
Prime Stats: Strength, Charisma, Constitution
Armor: Cloth, Leather, Hide
Weapon: Simple Melee, Military Melee, Simple Ranged
Bonus to Defense: +2 Fortitude
Hit Points at 1st Level: 14 + Constitution
Hit Points per Level gained: 6
Healing Surges per Day: 8 + Con Modifier
Trained Skills: At 1st Level choose 4 trained skills from list below.
Athletics (Str) Endurance (Con) Dungeoneering (Wis) Intimidate (Cha) Nature (Wis) Perception (Wis) Streetwise (Cha)
Rage: Encounter Power, Primal, Stance
Req: Must be Bloodied.
Effect: +2 to Hit, +2 Damage, +2 Will Defense, -2 AC. Effect lasts untill no longer Bloodied.
Overpowering Strike: Add an amount of damage to all basic melee attacks based on your level when useing a Two-handed weapon.
or
Brawler: Your unarmed attacks deal damage based on your size and level.
1st-10th 1d8
11th-20th 2d8
21st-30th 3d8
Small: 1st-10th 1d6 11th-20th 1d8 21st-30th 1d10
Medium: 1st-10th 1d8 11th-20th 1d10 21st-30th 1d12
I can see something like this, of course without spelling, grammer, and poor wording :P
Why does the barbarian have streetwise? ^^;;
that unarmed attack leveling seems more like monk territory
I suspect some sort of rage ability that can be activated as an immediate interrupt once they are bloodied... and I suspect the bonuses to become greater as they reach other tiers
heroic: +2 hit/damage, +2 will, -2 AC
paragon: +4 hit/damage, +4 will, -2 AC
epic: +6 hit/damage, +6 will, -2 AC
I still think there will be some sort of rage powers that can be used while you are not bloodied though. Because having to be at half your hitpoints just to use your staple power sounds incredibly incredibly risky, especially at low levels where you say your max hp is 30, you rage at 15 and basically one more good hit can kill you and having a minus to your AC isn't helping that situation.
How about a rage power you can activate at any point but the power is further increased while you are bloodied? That makes a bit more sense :D
I sort of want this striker to have defender hit points... just because the barbarian has always been the big HP king/queen. I suspect the barbarian might have the defender's amount of healing surges.... he has a bonus to his healing surge value equal to his con bonus, etc.
I deduct there will be powers that require you to be in a state of rage (this will be of the rage build I presume if raging is build specific, conan didn't necessarily rage and he is ONLY THE MOST WELL KNOWN FICTIONAL BARBARIAN OF ALL TIME <_<) Or powers that do more when you are raging.
Lots of self healing in the form of temporary hp.
Barbarian may be a striker but I think he will be really close to a striker/defender hybrid.
Priority abilities....... each class has 3 abilities based on each build and those 3 slightly differ in each build......so......
The rage build (or if its a 2-h build) I believe will be STR, CON, CHA
The totem animal spirit build we blelieve exist would be STR, CON, and WIS.
that unarmed attack leveling seems more like monk territory
Who says that the monk has to be the only person who is able to fight unarmed? I think that it would be very thematically appropriate for the barbarian to have an option to enshew fighting with weapons. The monk could have the "disciplined maximum effect for minimum effort" unarmed attacks while the barbarian gets the "ripping plate armor in two with raw strength" unarmed attacks.
(this will be of the rage build I presume if raging is build specific, conan didn't necessarily rage and he is ONLY THE MOST WELL KNOWN FICTIONAL BARBARIAN OF ALL TIME <_<)
Except Conan wasn't a D&D barbarian. If he was statted in D&D he would most likely be a Fighter multiclassed Rogue or Warlord depending on the story.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1082773
And, yes, this is purely speculation.
-SYB
I believe we know rage is going in. It's just a matter of how this will work. As I said in some other post I don't think being bloodied will be a requirement to rage but instead your rage will be enhanced when bloodied.
Now will this be a class feature or a power? I'm not sure, honestly. I can see it kinda both ways but if its a power it will be a minor action and an encounter power that lasts until the encounter or until you decide to dismiss it yourself.
Actually now that I think of it that way... thats more like a power thats given to you automatically as a class feature. Yes... i'm 99% certain thats how it will be (it would be 100 if we had actual confirmation :O) Just like healing word, inspiring word, etc.
Speed bonus: It was never gamebreaking in 3.5. Though 2 extra squares of movement is pretty massive for any character. If this is put in I expect the speed bonus to be only +1 square of movement and have the same restrictions about armor and loads as the 3.5 version did.
Power: Primal (duh)
Role: Striker (duh?)
armor: up to hide
weap profs: all besides superior obviously
save bonuses: +1 fort, +1 will
Skills: Athletics, Endurance, Intimidate, Nature, Perception, Stealth? I wanna think if you are a warrior living in the wild you know how to hide in the bush in stuff so I would give barbarians some stealth as they probably know how to ambush too. Barbarians are more than just "THERE IS ENEMY! SMASH!" And probably 1-2 more skills.
Who says that the monk has to be the only person who is able to fight unarmed? I think that it would be very thematically appropriate for the barbarian to have an option to enshew fighting with weapons. The monk could have the "disciplined maximum effect for minimum effort" unarmed attacks while the barbarian gets the "ripping plate armor in two with raw strength" unarmed attacks.
Man, I wanna just pick people up and rip them in half like Kratos.
I do hope you mean 'frenzied berserker' not in reference to the pain-in-the-butt 3.5 Prestige Class. If there's even a hint of party-killing stupidness in the 4e Barbarian, it goes on the banlist in a hurry.
If the Frenzied Berserker stuff were triggered by being bloodied like he suggested, it wouldn't be a problem at all. All you'd have to do would be to heal him above 1/2 HP and it would stop, and since you'd usually heal everyone at the end of the encounter anyway, you could easily bring him out of it.
Instead we have 2 people both saying they were told at gen con by those working on the barbarian that it's a primal striker.
Funny part is I haven't seen anyone saying like "pics or it didn't happen" everyone seems to trust these sources. So oh well.
He's not a battlefield controller. He's a really buff guy that lays the smack down, he's a striker but not in that graceful stabby stabby way like a ranger or rogue. He's must more scream in your face and cleave you in two with a greataxe sort of striker. :fight!:
2 different flavors, same result.
I'm still in the Defender camp. Fighters and paldins have their own way of protecting people, and the barbarian will have his way. Dealing big damage is something defenders (espeacially fighters) can do quite well. Good movement also doesn't convince me (sword mage and all his teleportiness still a defender make). The barbarian wants you to hit him, just to prove how tough he is, if you don't, he gets cranky (or ragey) and smacks you across the battlefield, keeping the squishy allies safe. It'll be a different sort of defendership, but i'm sure its doable.
Could he be a striker: sure, but i think its unneccesary, and you really need to bend some things (hitpoints, surges, for example). He can do all his barbarian things AND have keep enemies away from the squishies. if WoTC disagrees, oh well, i'll still like it.
I heard it has been confirmed that the barbarian is not a defender?
It hasn't, but the people who believe it's a striker are crazy. It's almost as if they were barbarians themselves. I wouldn't dare contradict them.
It hasn't, but the people who believe it's a striker are crazy. It's almost as if they were barbarians themselves. I wouldn't dare contradict them.
I have to admit, I would find it odd if the barbarian ends up a striker, I can't see the barbarian having medium (striker – 12 at first, 5 per level) HP. I'm still leaning towards defender.
I am barbarian hear me roar, I am too big to…
Why is everyone describing a Martial character? If I remember correctly, Barbarian is Primal and thus should venture a lot further into the realm of the supernatural than you guys are implying.
Looks like I was right. Check out this picture of a Barbarian charging like the badass mother****er that he is. Note the fire.
EDIT: What nerve, changing the picture like that!
I have to admit, I would find it odd if the barbarian ends up a striker, I can't see the barbarian having medium (striker – 12 at first, 5 per level) HP. I'm still leaning towards defender.
I am barbarian hear me roar, I am too big to…
I was very, very stuck on this as well, but I think now that a striker barbarian wouldn't necessarily have to have moderate hp just because it is a striker.
Strikers specialize in dealing high amounts of damage to a single target at a time. They have the most concentrated offense of any character in the game. Strikers rely on superior mobility, trickery, or magic to move around tough foes and single out the enemy they want to attack.
Note that the first two defining sentences specifically refer to damage output only. In relation to the final sentence on mobility and evasion, the barbarian may rely on a combination of increased movement and high hit points to "move around" tough foes. In other words, s/he may not be able to tumble past opponents or teleport, but may have a slightly higher speed and much higher hit points to simply absorb attacks of opportunity caused by moving.
Would that reconcile the images of the 3e HP-tank and the 4e striker role for anyone else who was stuck on that? For those who were already on board with a barbarian-as-striker concept, is that what you are/were envisioning?
Edit: Btw, nice pic in the previous post. Looks like some sort of draconic rage power.
I was very, very stuck on this as well, but I think now that a striker barbarian wouldn't necessarily have to have moderate hp just because it is a striker.
Note that the first two defining sentences specifically refer to damage output only. In relation to the final sentence on mobility and evasion, the barbarian may rely on a combination of increased movement and high hit points to "move around" tough foes. In other words, s/he may not be able to tumble past opponents or teleport, but may have a slightly higher speed and much higher hit points to simply absorb attacks of opportunity caused by moving.
Would that reconcile the images of the 3e HP-tank and the 4e striker role for anyone else who was stuck on that? For those who were already on board with a barbarian-as-striker concept, is that what you are/were envisioning?
Edit: Btw, nice pic in the previous post. Looks like some sort of draconic rage power.
Exactly, Barbarian could be a Striker Hybrid: Striker + Defender.
Has hps/surges of a defender (no marking) With light armor + Striking extra damage from Striker role.
See, he would lose Heavy armor and Marking that Defenders get.
Looks like I was right. Check out this picture of a Barbarian charging like the badass mother****er that he is. Note the fire.
Though TVTropes is a bit used-and-abused at the moment, I just can't resist this one, since it's just so perfect:
Incendiary Exponent
The perceived badassery of any given action will increase tenfold if the action is performed while on fire.
In short: A raging Barbarian is awesome. A raging Barbarian who is on fire is just that much more awesome.
You can imagine how much flack I got for that. It will be interesting to see alot of words eaten now. :P
That said I could have been wrong and been eating the same words, however I stayed respectful in my debating the topic. The "defender" debaters acted like I just lit their mothers on fire and stomped them out with bowling shoes. Man, they were heated, and pricks to boot.
Just wanted to vent that!
Way back when we were speculating about the barbarian (many moons ago), I posted something saying that I thought it would be a striker, vise a defender, because it just made sense. Big damage, hardly any armor, etc...
You can imagine how much flack I got for that. It will be interesting to see alot of words eaten now. :P
That said I could have been wrong and been eating the same words, however I stayed respectful in my debating the topic. The "defender" debaters acted like I just lit their mothers on fire and stomped them out with bowling shoes. Man, they were heated, and pricks to boot.
Just wanted to vent that!
It hasn't been confirmed to be a striker, homes.
Way back when we were speculating about the barbarian (many moons ago), I posted something saying that I thought it would be a striker, vise a defender, because it just made sense. Big damage, hardly any armor, etc...
You can imagine how much flack I got for that. It will be interesting to see alot of words eaten now. :P
That said I could have been wrong and been eating the same words, however I stayed respectful in my debating the topic. The "defender" debaters acted like I just lit their mothers on fire and stomped them out with bowling shoes. Man, they were heated, and pricks to boot.
Just wanted to vent that!
I feel the same way. I always thought it would be a striker because of big damage and less armor than the other defenders.
There is some truths you gotta realize
Defenders = Highest AC (Though this could change with later classes having defenders with little armor or something along those lines)
Barbarians will probably get hide at the highest and won't get into the heavy armors. So he's already somewhere down a few points less than other defenders in AC.
Swordmages get by this with swordmage warding. They can get the +3 bonus to AC and if in leather thats a +5 to AC. Then you add in that they can add their dex or INT to AC... which obviously they will have high INT so thus thats usually a +3 or +4 to AC. Thus with just a swordmage in leather he can have a 21-22 AC at first level.
Don't expect barbarians to have any crazy INT scores and only mild dex scores (unless dex becomes an important attribute which i doubt) so expect +1-2 for AC from dex to start off with. In hide they will have a +3 so thats 15 ac at first level.
How could barbarians get around this to be more defenderish? It's hard for me to even imagine how a barbarian does anything to have more AC, especially with how reckless his attacks become. At most I can see maybe possibly adding his con mod as a dex/int replacement or AC or being able to have con mod ALSO added to bolster his ac (showing how tough he is). Other than that, I could imagine a damage reduction of so much + con mod. So he gets hit a lot but he can take it.
I stick my original statement. barbarians will be strikers with splashes of defender and maybe some leader thrown in with howling war cry buffs or debuffs
As for the "toughness" aspect, I would really like to see the Striker "aspects" twisted just a bit, with the ability to avoid / soak damage replacing the typical "mobility and dodging foes" ability.
Defenders have the highest defenses in the game and good close-up offense. They are the party's front-line combatants: wherever they're standing, that's where the action is. Defenders have abilities and powers that make it difficult for enemies to move past them or to ignore them in battle.
Seems like, at bare minimum, Defenders = good defense & sticky while Strikers = high single target damage & mobility. However, if you remember that everyone was working off of very limited examples of how each role could be fleshed out the skepticism seems understandable, no? It's only now that the very specific and minimal reqs for each role are widely seen--and "widely" is still a stretch until PHBII.
The whole "hybrid classes" issue may have created some confusion as well. The concept was being considered for the druid, but now hybrid classes are out (:clap
, and some people didn't like the idea in the first place. With this context on the brain, paladins and swordmages are not "hybrids," they are defenders with some other abilities. A barbarian could be a striker with some other abilities, but if you call it a "hybrid" it may be unintentionally misread/misleading.Regardless, here is your guys' well-deserved cookie for striking gold early on in finding mechanical possibilities for the barbarian!
[INDENT]
[/INDENT]Good job!
Now we just have to see if things actually turn out that way.Imagining a barbarian in full rage mode does not bring forth images of care and concern for fellow party members. I had played a lot of third edition GURPS, and I felt that their version of rage (I think it was a beserk disadvantage) would boost the character up but also forced the player to attack every round. Also, if there was no enemies nearby, the guy would start attacking party members.
Now that is the type of Barbarian I want for 4E. When raging I want the barbarian to be a fountain of primal power, a loose cannon, a pure striker, and having no care if he lives or dies.
I want the Barbarian to be feared... even a little bit by his own party.
But that is just me.JesterOC
Martial have exploits
Divine have prayers
Arcane have spells
Primal characters have?
I really really don't know could go several ways.
I recently had an idea that I thought I would share. What if the barbarian has defender surges and hp, but to use his most powerful attacks(dailies and perhaps some encounters) he has to use up healing surges. It would represent that channeling the primal fury of nature is very taxing on him. In a pinch he could serve as a meat shield, but he works best at ripping things to shreds.
No.
Not every defender is not the same in terms of hitpoints and whatnot. Best example is paladins actually have more starting healing surges than fighters!
I recently had an idea that I thought I would share. What if the barbarian has defender surges and hp, but to use his most powerful attacks(dailies and perhaps some encounters) he has to use up healing surges. It would represent that channeling the primal fury of nature is very taxing on him. In a pinch he could serve as a meat shield, but he works best at ripping things to shreds.
I think it's an interesting idea worth considering. I guess I'd be curious to see, though, what happens if the barbarian decides not to spend surges. Is he an uber-tank then? A defender until he chooses to be a striker by spending surges? etc.
Anyone know what the primal powers will be called....
Martial have exploits
Divine have prayers
Arcane have spells
Primal characters have?
I really really don't know could go several ways.
There's a whole thread for this over here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1074075 .
Some of the ideas floating around (on the boards anyway) for primal powers are rages, totems, furies, channels, trances, and rites.
No.
Thanks for the detailed feedback.
I think it's an interesting idea worth considering. I guess I'd be curious to see, though, what happens if the barbarian decides not to spend surges. Is he an uber-tank then? A defender until he chooses to be a striker by spending surges? etc.
He'd just be a striker with a lot of hitpoints who is not using his most powerful abilities.
He'd just be a striker with a lot of hitpoints who is not using his most powerful abilities.
That sounds like the ideal, yes. But I'm just not sure that the situation isn't open to abuse somehow. Emphasis on not sure, that's why I'm bringing it up for mechanics wizards I guess. That's all.
Thanks for the detailed feedback.
No problem.
But seriously, you don't make anyone spend additional resources to simply be able to use abilities of the same power level as is peers. The very idea is ridiculous, and it throws game balance completely out the window.
Detailed enough?
No problem.
But seriously, you don't make anyone spend additional resources to simply be able to use abilities of the same power level as is peers. The very idea is ridiculous, and it throws game balance completely out the window.
Detailed enough?
Yes it is, thank you. I can certainly see that concern coming up. I honestly was thinking that the powers would be more powerful then the equivelent for another class, but I guess that would just go into power creep teritory.*shrugs* Oh well I still think the principle is a good one, it just needs to be tweaked a lot considering I spent a grand total of five min while walking between classes to come up with it and psuedo balance it, so it hardly has months and months of playtesting behind it.
Incidently, the barbarian playtest article might have been pushed back as it is no longer listed in the table of contents.
Anyone know what the primal powers will be called....
Martial have exploits
Divine have prayers
Arcane have spells
Primal characters have?
Instincts? Reflexes? Behaviors? Drives? Callings? Rites? Lore? Anima? Totems? Boons? Semiotics? Mysteries?
Instincts? Reflexes? Behaviors? Drives? Callings? Rites? Lore? Anima? Totems? Boons? Semiotics? Mysteries?
Lulz?
Instincts? Reflexes? Behaviors? Drives? Callings? Rites? Lore? Anima? Totems? Boons? Semiotics? Mysteries?
Animalities?
Incidently, the barbarian playtest article might have been pushed back as it is no longer listed in the table of contents.
I would hope not ("The cover is a lie!").
I'm hoping it's not on there as a side effect of them getting it ready to publish.
I noticed this today, it confused me. I'm worrying about not getting to see the Barbarian, though I understand that it is their material which they can release when they want.
I just feel jipped. I mean I was going to pay the membership fee every month for the magazines. Now I'm not going to. I'm sure the only reason they are holding it back is that so next month they can get more people to pay money for it. I'm only going to pay for a single month at a time once per year just to get all of the tools and books and stick it to them for renegging on the barbarian.
I'm just P*ssed because I have a player who desperately wants to play a barbarian. I just don't want to have to tell him that he has to wait until the end of next month as well.
I just feel jipped. I mean I was going to pay the membership fee every month for the magazines. Now I'm not going to. I'm sure the only reason they are holding it back is that so next month they can get more people to pay money for it. I'm only going to pay for a single month at a time once per year just to get all of the tools and books and stick it to them for renegging on the barbarian.
I'm just P*ssed because I have a player who desperately wants to play a barbarian. I just don't want to have to tell him that he has to wait until the end of next month as well.
I really to not get all these "Let's go grab our pitchforks" reactions that I'm seeing over this. I mean we don't even know that a) the barbarian is delayed yet(I'm thinking it is, but I really don't care too much) or that b) we switch over to the pay model next month. Even if that is the case, that is hardly a large enough pull for them to try and get more people to sign up with, so I doubt they would do it for that reason.
Good points. I think also that the underlying issue may be the consumer base's adjustment to the new staggered model for rolling out books (and thus classes, options, etc.). That's got a lot of people on edge for various reasons. It's an adjustment. I'm not intending any judgment on the new "core" or on annoyed gamers, but I do think both elements lend themselves to strong feelings.
But again, to your points, speculation is just speculation. We'll have to wait and see what happens.
We don't even know the barbarian is delayed yet? Are you serious, why else would they go out of their way to remove it from the table of contents, maybe they want to surprise us.
The truth is that I just discovered that they took the barbarian off of the table of contents when I wrote that. I'm not 100% committed to the idea that it's a grand conspiracy, but I'm wouldn't put it past them. The truth is I'm just fed up with all the empty promises.
I do hope you mean 'frenzied berserker' not in reference to the pain-in-the-butt 3.5 Prestige Class. If there's even a hint of party-killing stupidness in the 4e Barbarian, it goes on the banlist in a hurry.
Gotta admit, though, if you were to ever stat out one of those Shell-shocked 'Nam war vets, he'd have levels in Frenzied Berserker.
I do hope you mean 'frenzied berserker' not in reference to the pain-in-the-butt 3.5 Prestige Class. If there's even a hint of party-killing stupidness in the 4e Barbarian, it goes on the banlist in a hurry.
Gotta admit, though, if you were to ever stat out one of those Shell-shocked 'Nam war vets, he'd have levels in Frenzied Berserker.
We don't even know the barbarian is delayed yet? Are you serious, why else would they go out of their way to remove it from the table of contents, maybe they want to surprise us.
The truth is that I just discovered that they took the barbarian off of the table of contents when I wrote that. I'm not 100% committed to the idea that it's a grand conspiracy, but I'm wouldn't put it past them. The truth is I'm just fed up with all the empty promises.
There were mistakes in the original table of contents for the issue. It is entirely possible that they introduced a new one(removing the barbarian article by accident) when they were trying to fix the table of contents.
Also unless I'm mistaken, they haven't had very many empty promises, just ones which......their timing has been horribly off on. *shrugs*
There were mistakes in the original table of contents for the issue. It is entirely possible that they introduced a new one(removing the barbarian article by accident) when they were trying to fix the table of contents.
Also unless I'm mistaken, they haven't had very many empty promises, just ones which......their timing has been horribly off on. *shrugs*
To be honest, I'm crossing my fingers in the hopes that they meant to remove roll vs role: trolls instead of the playtest article.
I think that while not getting the half-orc shortly after launch, not having digital insider availible shortly after launch, and having both the barbarian and martial power pushed back, may not be empty promises, these things are at the very least completely dissapointing. When money is involved these things trancend the realm of disapointing failures to broken promises, and I'm certainly not willing to invest money on a monthly feature that fails to deliever the bang for its buck.
At this point I'm very glad that wizards has given us a preview glimpse at their business model.
All that said, every six months or so I'm going to pay for a single month, download all of the updates, books, and magazines and be on my way. I'm afraid that by saying this they will change thier ddi business model to keep me from being able to jump on every few months to get my digital copies.
Looks like I was right. Check out this picture of a Barbarian charging like the badass mother****er that he is. Note the fire.
Are you refering to the two characters in back? The one in back with the fire hair is more likely a fire genasi swordmage than anything in my opinion. There's an article on genasi in the issue that's already been released. Likely a swordmage because the genasi is weilding a one handed weapon with the other hand free - and as we know, the genasi is geared towards being a good swordmage.
The character to the right looks like a Barbarian, and isn't nearly as bad ass as the fire... but most of the character is covered up by the creatures getting zapped by the drow. The barbarian looks to be in a more defensive stance than anything in that picture, not charging.
I do think tha barbarian is probably in the realm of a striker or defender, but the striker more likely. I can see a more defender like barbarian being one that does dazing blows and knocks targets back and/or prone. If the opponent is hit hard it may be hard to fight back sort of thing.
Are you refering to the two characters in back? The one in back with the fire hair is more likely a fire genasi swordmage than anything in my opinion. There's an article on genasi in the issue that's already been released. Likely a swordmage because the genasi is weilding a one handed weapon with the other hand free - and as we know, the genasi is geared towards being a good swordmage.
The character to the right looks like a Barbarian, and isn't nearly as bad ass as the fire... but most of the character is covered up by the creatures getting zapped by the drow. The barbarian looks to be in a more defensive stance than anything in that picture, not charging.
I do think tha barbarian is probably in the realm of a striker or defender, but the striker more likely. I can see a more defender like barbarian being one that does dazing blows and knocks targets back and/or prone. If the opponent is hit hard it may be hard to fight back sort of thing.
You may be being facetious, but if not, there was a previous picture (a bunch of half-naked dragonborns, running screaming across a field of skulls, wielding big blades and being on fire). They took down that picture and replaced it with the one you currently see.
You may be being facetious, but if not, there was a previous picture (a bunch of half-naked dragonborns, running screaming across a field of skulls, wielding big blades and being on fire). They took down that picture and replaced it with the one you currently see.
Thank you, as I was uninformed of the picture change.
Sounds like a fun picture!