Since it will be a while before the druid or barbarian see the light of day why not design our own. Here are my thoughts so far, I don't have the books yet so I don't know how much of this is viable, but here they are:
Barbarian:
Striker (or would defender be better?)
Uses Animal Totem system similar to Warlock's Pact system. Powers give him the traits of his totem animal. Some that make him a little harder to kill.
Druid:
Controller
Powers are plant oriented. Terrain manipulation a big part of the encounter abilities.
Animal Companion's provide some bonus, but share HP with their masters(I got the idea from the Golden Compass)
Each Wildshape form is a Daily power, or would a class restricted Ritual be better?
Thoughts? Suggestions? Again I don't have my books so I don't really have any idea what is what. :D
I didn't see any rules on familiars or animal companions in the books, makes me wonder how it would be possible since there isn't a precedent.
My guess is that animal companions in 4e are going to be a lot more like characters, where you'd only have one (maybe two at most) and they'd advance as you do. It might also work like Wizards/Warlocks/etc. sustain their powers: in order to keep using them, you might have to give up certain actions per round depending on what you want your companion to do in order for it to act.
Quote from: WickedTrollMy guess is that animal companions in 4e are going to be a lot more like characters, where you'd only have one (maybe two at most) and they'd advance as you do. It might also work like Wizards/Warlocks/etc. sustain their powers: in order to keep using them, you might have to give up certain actions per round depending on what you want your companion to do in order for it to act.
Such as using a minor action each round to command the animal companion? 'Twould be interesting. It'd still seem to be an overall gain, considering the animal would then get to make it's own actions. . .
Druid Ideas...
Just calculate in the pets damage, special abilities, and health into the "Class." Albeit the pet is not the character, but does effect how powerful a character is. You'll also need a chart showing how the pet advance in level as well as the Druid. I'd also suggest making a couple of different types of pets... Wolf, Bear, some magical beast?
Things to calculate in for the druid.
HP with Pet.
Damage with Pet in consideration.
Skills/Spells with pet in consideration.
The problem with the damage/health etc. getting calculated into the class is it will force you to take a pet, whether your character wants it or not... make a distinction between a pet less druid, and a druid with a pet. I don't think the pet should share hp with it's controller however.
Barbarian Ideas...
Barbarians to me were the idea of I'm going to have a high amount of hp, wield a big two handed weapon, and get angry... a lot.
Totems are not that interesting to me. Seems too much like wow shamans >.<...
Rage when bloodied? The whole gain temp hp, and deal more damage because you've made me bleed my own blood sounds better.
They should cause fear in their enemies.
They might be a striker with control... knocking down enemies, grappling enemies, fighting dirty...
Actually... a defender with a mix of control might work better for the "Rage..." Or maybe have skills that would allow a barbarian to either go Striker/Defender, Defender/Control, Controler/Striker....
An example Paragon path could be the Tattoo/Scarification (Better name?) Barbarian. Where the barbarian will scar himself to represent past encounters, battles, memories, and ties to important events through his life. These tattoos would grant him special powers tied to them... most of the tattoos have some form of spiritual tie to them to explain how they work....
Just my Two Cents...
Didn't races and classes say that Barbarians will have various powers that center on their ability to Rage in different ways? Also, they should definitely be Strikers!
I always wanted to see the Druid be a Controller, using his Animal Companion like a sheep dog, gathering the enemies together then blowing them up with big elemental and nature spells.
The 4E designers have already said that the Druid's role is "Hybrid", that it has the capacity to fill multiple roles (but not all). The description of the types of magic they're looking at for them seem to be Controller (weather stuff), but I feel they should be Leaders due to their historical precedence. Their shapeshifting, we assume, will give them the ability to take on the Defender or Striker roles, but probably just Striker.
As for animal companions, the "summons" in the PHB work like this: Conjurations have your defenses (I don't remember how their HP is calculated, if it is), they get to attack on their turn (Sustain: Minor), and it takes a move action to move them (you have to direct it).
I personally want to see the Barbarian as a Defender, not a Striker. I admit that I want them to sub-striker, as they are fast and high damaging, but I believe their main importance is to run into a group of enemies and draw all their attention; ignoring a barbarian should get you killed.
Barbarians have tons of HP. Perhaps they won't be heavily armored, but they should have plenty of damage mitigation utility powers.
Kapn Xeviat, I was thinking the opposite, make them hit fast and hit hard, using their speed and HP as their only real defense. Sort of Strikers who sub Defender.
As for the Druid, I honestly think they should just split the class up into a Shape Changing Striker/Defender and a Elementalist Controller, both of which can have Animal Companions. Split the Druid in the same manner in which Wizards split the Elf.
Quote from: Elemental_ElfKapn Xeviat, I was thinking the opposite, make them hit fast and hit hard, using their speed and HP as their only real defense. Sort of Strikers who sub Defender.
As for the Druid, I honestly think they should just split the class up into a Shape Changing Striker/Defender and a Elementalist Controller, both of which can have Animal Companions. Split the Druid in the same manner in which Wizards split the Elf.
It's true, 4e is splitting up all the classes into sub-classes. Shapechanger and Elementalist sound like they'd be Paragon Paths to me.
The problem with those two paths being paragon classes is that gives you 10 levels of playing druid without doing a damn thing. ;) My thoughts are that the Heroic Tier for druids will be a combination of possibly synergetic skills, where one can choose either a shifter skill or an elemental (which I'm calling "primal") skill - you could combine them if you wanted, but you'd lose synergies. At least, that's how my redesigned druid (can it be redesigned if they haven't come out with the "original" yet?) will be, assuming we stick with 4E.
Quote from: IshmaylAt least, that's how my redesigned druid (can it be redesigned if they haven't come out with the "original" yet?) will be, assuming we stick with 4E.
"Predesigned."
Quote from: IshmaylThe problem with those two paths being paragon classes is that gives you 10 levels of playing druid without doing a damn thing. ;) My thoughts are that the Heroic Tier for druids will be a combination of possibly synergetic skills, where one can choose either a shifter skill or an elemental (which I'm calling "primal") skill - you could combine them if you wanted, but you'd lose synergies. At least, that's how my redesigned druid (can it be redesigned if they haven't come out with the "original" yet?) will be, assuming we stick with 4E.
Oh, I wasn't suggesting that they would get none of either before their paragon paths, I meant that there would be some additional benefit gained from these that would augment specialization. Kind of like the Warlock's three paragon paths coincide with its three Eldritch paths. Those who had been specializing in fire, earth, etc. spells would probably take "Elementalist" as their paragon path, granting them new special abilities and powers associated with the elements.
I've read through this thread and now that I have my books to compare the other classes, I will try to come up with some more concrete ideas.
I'm going to rename the classes so that they do not match the WotC names (though I don't know if using Barbarian and Druid in a roleplaying context is owned by them, I'm not willing to find out.)
The Barbarian I will call Tribalist, and the Druid I don't know...
They can't place a trademark on the terms Barbarian and Druid. I mean, they've been around long enough . . . Now, things like "Wildshape" they might have trademarks on, but they can't say "We're the only ones allowed to reference an ancient priest class in our games" and "Barbarian" is pretty general. Regardless, I refer to my "Barbarians" by the Viking term of Berserker.
Quote from: Seraphine_HarmoniumRegardless, I refer to my "Barbarians" by the Viking term of Berserker.
I was thinking of splitting the Barbarian into two paths Berserker (focuses on a rage ability) and Totemist (Focuses on three or so animals at first). I don't know I haven't sat down and played with the ideas yet.
Quote from: Seraphine_HarmoniumOh, I wasn't suggesting that they would get none of either before their paragon paths, I meant that there would be some additional benefit gained from these that would augment specialization. Kind of like the Warlock's three paragon paths coincide with its three Eldritch paths. Those who had been specializing in fire, earth, etc. spells would probably take "Elementalist" as their paragon path, granting them new special abilities and powers associated with the elements.
However, if you look at the PH each class gets 4 paragon paths (except the warlock, but he's overpowered--at least at the first couple levels--and is, thus, the exception). Perhaps the Barbarian's other paragon paths could also include one that's a Defender of some sort and one that's...well...something else.