Cross-archetyping- skinshifter barbarian?

[PotatoGolem]

So the discussion about Druids taking the Beastmaster archetype (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?427555-Druid-with-a-beast-companion-Help for those interested) got me thinking about using archetypes from one class on another chassis to get a concept that isn't currently supported to work. More specifically, how balanced would Moon Druid's wildshape be on a barbarian (obviously including the generic druid ability to use wildshape 2/rest and swim/fly restrictions)? I like the idea of a skinshifter/shapechanger who's not a spellcaster, and there's no real way to do that as-is.

Here's my thoughts so far, but I'd love to hear other people's opinions:

Thoughts in favor of balance:
* Barbarians get a lot of their power from the primal path. Especially totem barbs. So you're giving up a lot.
* On the shifter end, you give up full casting and eventual endless shifting, both of which are very strong.
* Beasts are pretty darn weak past a certain point.
* Aside from the first time, subclass abilities for both are at the same level.

Thoughts against:
* Much more utility than a normal barbarian (which I don't mind, but some might)
* Probably a better combatant in animal form than a real moon druid, even with giving up your buffs
* Buckets of HP. Possibly more resilient than a Bear Totem Barb, depending on what you fight.

Ideas? Concerns? Criticisms? I'm basically spitballing on this one, so I admit I may not have thought it through. Also, I'd be interested in people's ideas of other ways to cross-archetype to build a concept that isn't really supported as of now.

[Naanomi]

The struggle for me is twofold:
1) you are not just giving the archetype abilities: they rely on getting wildshape from the class already then modifying it. The proposed archetype gives its own stuff plus a primary class feature of another class

2) one of the balancing factors of wild-shape is the inability to cast spells until higher level... A big drawback for a full caster, giving up 1/2 you class features while one other is active. No draw back for a barbarian at all.

[djreynolds]

I see him like Beorn from the Hobbit. If you wanted to, you could have him only rage when he shapeshifts and otherwise he has spells and such and fights like a druid. You can give him a more limited spell selection. On WOTC there are several barbarian/druid builds. But I do like the idea of cross-archetyping, and though others hate the idea, skin-shifter barbarian would be a cool prestige class in which you gain levels in druid and barbarian and upon selecting skin-shifter you lose some spell selections.

But since you cannot cast spells in beast form til 18th level as a druid it doesn't really matter for a long time.

All said give me a link to your build because it sounds cool.

[CyberThread]

Have you thought of instead breaking down the werewolf into class levels and adding it as a sort of dual class option ?


They can be a barbarian, they get no spellcasting or the like and the werewolf curse slowly comes into options with the ability coming into furtation . Another option may be just giving them the eberron shifter race as an option for flavor?


If they REALLY want to shapeshift and do the rage thing, nueter the spell casting and they can only shapechange while raging.

[Joe the Rat]

I haven't tried this combination, but I've tinkered with "hot-swapping" archetypes. Used dragonblooded (sorcerer) as the basis for an elemental specialist (wizard), and I am currently running a group that includes a Monk with Battlemaster maneuver options as part of his path features.

This is an interesting idea, though. It may take a little work to get the beast forms comparable to the human form's combat prowess... unless shapechanging is less about fight power and more about utility.

[PotatoGolem]

Naaomi- It's a base class feature, but not one that's very good unless you go Moon Druid. Land druids only ever use it for minor scouting/utility. The way I see it, it's sort of like Channel Divinity or Inspiration Dice- the base class has it as a niche ability, but archetypes are where the real power comes in. And the drawback for a Barbarian wouldn't be lack of spells, it'd be the fact that beasts aren't that good in combat. I'd need someone who's better at math to confirm, but a Str 20 Barb with a greataxe and GWM should be doing more damage than pretty much any beast.

Djreynolds- That's exactly what inspired this! I wanted a beorn-style shapechanger, not a spellcaster. As of right now I've been kicking around a barbarian 5/ druid 2 as my backup character for the campaign I play in, but the fact is that druid levels are dead levels if I don't cast spells. I'm also considering for NPCs in the campaign I run, and while I could use an NPC statblock, I prefer to have things I make available to other humanoids be PC options too.

Cyber- that's an interesting idea. I hadn't thought of that. Using lycanthrope as a subclass, with some minor tweaks? That's a cool thought

Joe- how did those work out? Both seem like a cool idea. And yeah, I don't think the bear form is necessarily optimal for combat, but it is flavorful and gives the barbarian a lot of utility.