[4E]What roles do you think iconic D&D classes will have in the upcoming supplements?

[Zid]

As the "core" books of 4E are coming out during the year (and some in 2009, I understand), how do you think that the core classes will be reborn, or what roles will they take? My thoughts/hopes below:

Bard: Most probably a leader, though I would hope controller.

Sorcerer: Methinks the sorcerer has been outdated in 4E, with the new rules for magic and the new Wizards.

Barbarian: Striker

Druid: Controller

Monks: Useless as always. (though I would like the thought of a martial controller)

[Ecalsneerg]

Apparently the Druid will be a sort of hybrid controller/defender. not sure where this was said, though.

[Rockphed]

Isn't there already a thread about this?

Otherwise:

I hope they make the Druid a controller, but they will probably make it a leader.

If there was ever doubt that the bard will be a leader, whoever is doubting needs help. In 3rd edition they already do all the things a leader needs to do(a bit of attacking combined with healing and buffing).

Somewhere there is a quote practically declaring the Sorcerer an Arcane Controller.

Monk will probably be either a striker or a defender. Depending on what other classes they throw into the Ki(what kind of lame name is that anyway) powersource, it could go either way.

Barbarian could also go either way. In many ways it could actually go all 4. Just think what havoc an entire party that can rage would cause.

Hmmm, now that I think of it, looking at the conversion guides will give us a much better idea of how the 4th edition developement team will go.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Bards are almost certainly Leaders. Buffing their allies seems to be most of their job, no?

Monks, however, are almost certainly the Ki Striker. They fit so well with the high-damage-but-low-HP role that Strikers seem to fit.

Druids, I can't really figure out. If they go the "Friend of Nature" route, then Controller makes the most sense, but if they go the "Shapeshifter" route, then Striker or Defender would make good sense. I'm thinking they'll split the "druid" into a Shifter Class and a Entangling Class, personally - with "Druid" being the name of the Controller.

Sorcerers seem like they're being completely reflavored as "Elemental" power sources, probably Strikers. Something having to do with persistent damage and perhaps an elemental affinity?

Also: man, that's a long title for a thread :smalltongue:

[OneFamiliarFace]

I actually have been thinking about this to see if I can homebrew it. I was trying to divide up the classes into what I see as primary and secondary roles to see what gaps need filling. (For example, a cleric is primarily a leader with some control abilities, whereas a Fighter is primarily a defender with some striker capabilities.)

So Bard will have some mix of leader and controller abilities. It may lean heavier on the controller side, as they already have a leader with control.

For Druid, I imagine they will be focusing on shapeshifting, so then you'd be looking at a striker or defender (probably a striker with some defending abilities).

Barbarian would have to be a striker or defender. This one would be tough though, because it seems like the Fighter already has a number of Barbarian-like striking abilities.

Monk is also tough, but it seems like Striker with some control would be feasible.

A lot of the various power-source/class-roles will probably be being filled by new classes (like the Artificer and the Swordmage).

[Colmarr]

Barbarian would have to be a striker or defender. This one would be tough though, because it seems like the Fighter already has a number of Barbarian-like striking abilities.

Barbarians and Fighters have always been thematically similar. The difference ultimately comes down to one focusing on defence (Fighter) and one on attack (Barbarian). As such I agree with the OP that the barbarian will likely be a striker, but with some defenderish powers, likely involving spending healing surges to represent barbarian toughness.

Such a designation would give the dedicated "melee guys" of 3e distinct roles in a 4e party:

Paladin: Defender (leader)
Fighter: Defender (striker)
Barbarian: Striker (defender)
Rogue: Striker (controller)

[Kurald Galain]

I believe there has already been official news from WOTC on these.

Bard -> arcane leader
Sorcerer -> arcane controller
Barbarian -> primal striker
Druid -> primal hybrid (then again, most existing classes are already technically hybrids anyway, so this is probably just more smoke-and-mirrors advertising)
Monks -> martial striker

IIRC.

[OneFamiliarFace]

Druid -> primal hybrid (then again, most existing classes are already technically hybrids anyway, so this is probably just more smoke-and-mirrors advertising)

Yeah, I would think it would have to be smoke-n-mirrors, as the only way I could see it would be to give the druid MAD dependency for each build so that he couldn't dip into the others. Otherwise, why not just make it two classes? (Like Druid and Nature's Warrior or something.) Well, I've been happy with the classes so far, so I guess I'll just have to wait and see. I do like the Elves are set up to be good druids now!

[Ashtar]

For barbarians, I really look forwards to stuff that kicks in when you are blooded. Berserker rage and other nice goodies!
They should be Strikers when bloodied, maybe Leaders when not blooded? Sadly that would be too complex...

[Dhavaer]

Bards: Primal or Arcane Leader
Barbarians: Primal Striker
Druids: Primal Leader or Controller
Monk: Ki Striker
Sorcerer: Arcane or Elemental Striker or Controller

[Kurald Galain]

Bards: Primal or Arcane Leader
Druids: Primal Leader or Controller
Sorcerer: Arcane or Elemental Striker or Controller

It's funny how people keep guessing about these when their roles have already been confirmed (http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-rules/224280-compiled-info-upcoming-classes-races.html) by WOTC...

[Zid]

It's funny how people keep guessing about these when their roles have already been confirmed (http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-rules/224280-compiled-info-upcoming-classes-races.html) by WOTC...

Oh. My bad.

[Kaihaku]

Sorcerer: Methinks the sorcerer has been outdated in 4E, with the new rules for magic and the new Wizards.

Sorcerer was made to allow for lazy casters after 2e, now in 4e every class basically works like Sorcerer. So, yeah. I'm kind of curious how'll they manage to do anything unique with them.

Ah...that's how... I'm disappointed but not all that surprised. (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=15934651&postcount=38)

Edit: Also...

Um... You told us it was better not to roll up characters anymore? Make up your mind. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20080702&authentic=true)