PDA

View Full Version : shouldn't barbarians be tier 3?



grimbold
2010-08-20, 01:03 AM
So according to the tier system tier 3 is

Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when

that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as

classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that

can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with.

Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too

difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.


listed a tier 3 characters are Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psionic Warrior

The barbarian can do all of these things, He is capable of fighting quite well, and is always useful. I think that the reason the barbarian is tier 4 and not tier 3 is that the author was not considering uses for rage outside of combat.

For example- cant break down the door? Rage
stuck in jail with your barbarian friend? (like thog in oots) Rage
Trying to stop an assassinnation but the only way to stop it is to run several miles?
rage get boosted constitution and be able to stop the assassination.

Now there are classes that could do this better but rage is still pretty useful, his mechanical ability to solve the encounter is, great cleave and he is usually able to mow down 8 opponents a round if he can place himself properly, improved uncanny dodge makes him not have to worry about flanking

if he takes the frenzied berserker prestige class he can get supreme cleave and run around the battle field as a killing machine, i have taken out 30 some zombies in a round this way.
Also as a frenzied berserker he can inspire frenzy in others, frenzy is much like a rage and for non spellcasting classes is extremely usefull.
That is why that i think that barbarians are at least tier 3 maybe even tier 2 with the frenzied berserker prestige class.

ps. frenzied berserker is found in MotW

Tinydwarfman
2010-08-20, 01:15 AM
So according to the tier system tier 3 is

Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when

that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as

classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that

can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with.

Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too

difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.


listed a tier 3 characters are Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psionic Warrior


Yes, it should also be noted that whatever the Barbarian can do, the Psionic Warrior, Duskblade, Warblade, and Wildshape Ranger can do better.


The barbarian can do all of these things, He is capable of fighting quite well, and is always useful. I think that the reason the barbarian is tier 4 and not tier 3 is that the author was not considering uses for rage outside of combat.

For example- cant break down the door? Rage
stuck in jail with your barbarian friend? (like thog in oots) Rage
Trying to stop an assassinnation but the only way to stop it is to run several miles?
rage get boosted constitution and be able to stop the assassination.

Now there are classes that could do this better but rage is still pretty useful, his mechanical ability to solve the encounter is, great cleave and he is usually able to mow down 8 opponents a round if he can place himself properly, improved uncanny dodge makes him not have to worry about flanking

I honestly have no idea where you are getting this from. Rage only boosts you strength by 4-8, and Con to the same degree. In no way does that let you break out of jail when you couldn't have anyway, or run that little bit further, (especially since rage doesn't last nearly long enough, besides that point that the difference is negligible in the first place.)

As for combat, as stated before, MANY other classes do it better and with more versatility than the Barbarian.

Your argument only makes sense if you DM doesn't play the game using it's mechanics, but rather like a free-form game where you can simply do things provided you have some thematically relevant ability. It also requires that DM exactly tailor your challenges so that the small boost you get from rage is enough to overcome them, or even be useful at all.


if he takes the frenzied berserker prestige class he can get supreme cleave and run around the battle field as a killing machine, i have taken out 30 some zombies in a round this way.
Also as a frenzied berserker he can inspire frenzy in others, frenzy is much like a rage and for non spellcasting classes is extremely usefull.
That is why that i think that barbarians are at least tier 3 maybe even tier 2 with the frenzied berserker prestige class.

ps. frenzied berserker is found in MotW
Which is why FB is a +2 tier class, often considered too powerful. This has very little to do with the actual barbarian.
EDIT: It's also in Complete Warrior, not whatever that acronym is. (Masters of the Wild? Isn't that 3.0?)
{Scrubbed}

DeltaEmil
2010-08-20, 01:16 AM
Rage is good, but at higher levels doesn't scale that fast. Frenzied berserker, which was updated with Complete Warrior is also lackluster. The supreme cleave is worthless (you can only take one 5 ft. step once when cleaving), and for a bunch of weak-ass enemies, your wizard or cleric-pals mop them up without having to move around.
Also, if you win and are still in frenzy, then you start killing your own friends (and if you induced frenzy in your friends, and they accepted it for whatever insane reason, they might start killing you with their best spells too).

Breaking doors is not important, that's the job of the rogue, or the wizard with all his prepared knock-spells and scrolls, and if the door's dc is really huge (like being made of adamantium or reinforced by arcane lock), then the strength bonus doesn't help that much from rage or frenzy.
It's not bad, but it doesn't have such great skills like spot and listen, no search either, can do nothing but rely on his strength really.
A warblade can just do that much more with his ability to choose from the nine disciplines, and has better skill selections.

Zaydos
2010-08-20, 01:17 AM
For example- cant break down the door? Rage
stuck in jail with your barbarian friend? (like thog in oots) Rage
Trying to stop an assassinnation but the only way to stop it is to run several miles?
rage get boosted constitution and be able to stop the assassination.


Rage is, unless you take destructive rage, unlikely to make much of a difference in breaking down a door. Either you already could with a few tries, or now need a 19 or 20 to break it. Without some serious templating or other means to get Str bonuses you won't be breaking down the difficult doors till high levels by which point you can hack them down with adamantine weapons. When dealing with wooden doors you either don't need rage or can just use swords to break through them. Actually wasting one of your daily uses of rage on breaking a door would be rather foolish (the only reason to take Destructive Rage is the Frenzied Berserker PrC).

The jail one I'll give you, that is the kind of situation you might actually need the extra strength from rage to break down a door (or bend bars in this case) and even then it is going to be difficult and without some means to keep the guards from noticing you not a good idea. Or else you simply don't need the +2 to +4 on the check rage gives (again Destructive Rage can change this, but then you are using one of your feats which you need for combat on this).

Your third example just doesn't work. Rage is 3 + Con modifier rounds and leaves you fatigued until "end of encounter". In battle it's easy to determine when "end of encounter" is, when running that's until you stop running. Actually raging makes it harder for you to run those several hours, and if you don't trade Fast Movement for Pounce you've gimped your melee capabilities.

So no these are not useful out of combat abilities.

As for Frenzied Berserker: they just hit things better. Also you're still limited to 1 5-ft step with Supreme Cleave so you need reach to get through that many zombies and even then mowing down 8 enemies a round only happens if you're fighting some rather weak enemies. Actually if you're fighting 30 zombies that probably means they're so far under leveled that it's not worth wasting frenzy on them. Regardless this still leaves barbarian in Tier 4, able to do one thing well (kill things).

Also: Frenzied Berserker is in Complete Warrior for the 3.5 stats.

Zaakar
2010-08-20, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by JaronK:

Q: Why is my favorite class too low? It should TOTALLY be much higher!

A: Remember, you're probably more experienced with your favorite class than with other classes. Plus, your personality probably fits well with the way that class works, and you probably are better inspired to work with that class. As such, whatever your favorite class is is going to seem stronger for you than everyone else. This is because you're simply going to play your favorite class in a more skillfull way... plus you'll be blinded to the shortcomings of that class, since you probably don't care about those anyway (they match with things that you as a player probably don't want to do anyway). As such, if I did this right most people should think their favorite class is a little too low, whether that class is Fighter or Monk or Rogue or whatever else.

grimbold
2010-08-20, 03:54 AM
point taken zakaar
thank you

Person_Man
2010-08-20, 09:17 AM
Lets review the Barbarian:

Full BAB, d12 hit die, simple and martial weapons: Can't ask for better then that.
Skills: Nothing useful other then Intimidate and Jump.
Light Armor, Medium Armor, Shields: Lack of Heavy Armor means your AC will be running a few points behind many other tank classes until you can afford Mithril or magic armor.
Fast Movement: Basically the same as one bonus Feat. And it limits you to Medium Armor, so even if you pick up Heavy Armor from multi-classing or a PrC, you'll have to either give it up or keep your AC lower.
Rage: A poorly scaled bonus to Str, Con, and Will Saves that can be used limited times per day.
Uncanny Dodge: Somewhat helpful on the first round of combat. But it's pointless if you win Initiative.
Trap Sense: A highly situational, poorly scaled bonus.
Improved Uncanny Dodge: Useful, but highly situational. How often do you fight Rogues?
DR X/-: Useful, but it scales so poorly that it barely has an impact on combat. By mid levels enemies can deal 20-50 points of damage per hit. So DR 2/-ish is mostly pointless. Also has no effect on damage from spells, psionics, spell-like abilities, vestiges, etc.


And that's it.

Now lets compare that to the Warblade:

Full BAB, d12 hit die, simple and martial weapons: Same as Barbarian.
Skills: Intimidate, Jump, plus Diplomacy and Tumble. Advantage Warblade.
Light, Medium, and Heavy Armor and Shields: Advantage Warblade.
Blade Magic: A huge variety of ALL DAY buffs (stances) AND boosts to attacks (maneuvers) which can be used 3 out of every 4 rounds in combat (at level one, it goes up to 7 out of 8 by level 20). Rage and Fast Movement looks like a joke compared to this. Advantage Warblade.
Battle Clarity: Int bonus to all Reflex Saves, at level 1. Compare this to Trap Sense, which only applies to traps, and will almost always be lower. Advantage Warblade.
Uncanny Dodge -> Improved Un Dodge: Same as Barbarian.
And then there are 6 other useful class abilities: Discipline Focus, 4 bonus Feats, Battle Ardor, Battle Cunning, Battle Mastery, and Stance Mastery.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 09:21 AM
Warblade doesn't get all martial weapons nor heavy armour proficiency.

Vangor
2010-08-20, 09:31 AM
I stand corrected. I had never noticed "melee" in there, probably because we never have anyone using ranged weapons.

Snake-Aes
2010-08-20, 09:32 AM
warblades don't get heavy armor. They also get no ranged (or no martial ranged).

Lucid
2010-08-20, 09:47 AM
Warblade doesn't get all martial weapons nor heavy armour proficiency.

Barbarians don't gain heavy armor proficiency:

Barbarian:
A barbarian is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, light armor, medium armor, and shields (except tower shields).

Warblade:
You are proficient with simple and martial melee weapons (including those that can be used as thrown weapons), light and medium armor, and all shields except tower shields.
The Warblade loses out on projectile weapons, but the rest is the same.

edit:swordsage'd

Person_Man
2010-08-20, 10:03 AM
Whoops, right you all are. I shouldn't have tried to do it all from memory.

So the Barbarian and Warblade are the same on armor, and the Barbarian can use a bow or crossbow, which he never does. I think the larger point of Warblade > Barbarian is still pretty obvious though.

Greenish
2010-08-20, 10:10 AM
So the Barbarian and Warblade are the same on armor, and the Barbarian can use a bow or crossbow, which he never does. I think the larger point of Warblade > Barbarian is still pretty obvious though.Well, barbarian archers aside, I wasn't trying to deny the point.

valadil
2010-08-20, 10:40 AM
Would the variant that gets Pounce be tiered any higher? Or does the tier system take into account the whole class and not just one awesome level?

Zaydos
2010-08-20, 10:42 AM
Would the variant that gets Pounce be tiered any higher? Or does the tier system take into account the whole class and not just one awesome level?

The tier system assumes you're optimizing, so I'm guessing it assumes you'll trade Fast Movement for something useful like Pounce.

Gnaeus
2010-08-20, 10:55 AM
Pounce doesn't alter the barbarian's tier at all. A barbarian who does 30 damage per round is tier 4. A barbarian charge build that does 2000 damage per round is.... still tier 4. He is a guy with a trick. It is a really good trick, but if he is prevented from charging or more damage isn't helpful he is still just a guy. He can't fly, hide, create minions, heal himself, block enemy magic, buff his allies, break the action economy,etc. Tier 3 characters are likely to be able to do at least 2-3 of those things, and still be effective in combat.

There is a much better case to be made for rogue being in tier 3. It is almost there.

Person_Man
2010-08-20, 11:09 AM
Would the variant that gets Pounce be tiered any higher? Or does the tier system take into account the whole class and not just one awesome level?

Nope. There are 80 something different ways to get Pounce or free movement (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=103358). Although Barbarian 1 is often the quickest way to get it, most other builds can get access by mid levels with a modest investment. Anyone with Turn/Rebuke Undead can take Travel Devotion, Psychic Warriors get Psionic Lion's Charge and Hustle, Rangers and Druids (and anyone with UMD) get the Lion's Charge spell (buy a wand and a wand chamber), Binders have Paimon and Chupoclops vestiges, Totemists get Pounce with natural weapons via Sphinx Claws (which anyone can get access to with 2-3 feats), anyone with access to Wildshape, Alter Self, Polymorph, etc, can change into a form that offers Pounce, and so on.

Caphi
2010-08-20, 11:29 AM
If a warblade finds range a big issue, he'll spend a maneuver on that Iron Heart technique that lets him throw his weapon. Or Martial Study it. Or Martial Study (fan the flames) or Martial Study (shadow garrote).

Pechvarry
2010-08-20, 01:46 PM
Warblades don't get Survival or Listen (seriously, Wizards. You were still doing this crap at the end of your design cycle?) as class skills.

Not much, but it does help Barbarians with being useful outside of combat.

...

And now I want to see a ToB discipline with Listen as its key skill.

Mongoose87
2010-08-20, 02:50 PM
And now I want to see a ToB discipline with Listen as its key skill.

The Daredevil Discipline?

shadow_archmagi
2010-08-20, 03:06 PM
Barbarians, it is true, CAN do fighting quite well. But they can't do much in situations where fighting isn't appropriate.

Here's some example situations:

1. Invading Castle Trapland: Barbarian can detect traps, but not do anything about them. Not very useful.

2. Fighting Count Dragonula: Barbarian can fight. Useful.

3. Attending the king's fancy dinner that he throws to celebrate: Not useful at all.

4. Breaking out of jail when he turns on you: It's unlikely that the bars will be breakable even with your rage. Breaking out will be up to someone who can trick the guard into walking over or something. Maybe a little useful.

5. Preparing the city to defend from invasion: Barbarian could... maybe.. I dunno, teach the guards something? Oh wait he probably doesn't have CHA or INT. Not useful at all.

6. Fighting in the siege: Barbarian can fight, but can't do groups efficient unless you invested feats into it, leaving him vulnerable in other areas. Moderately useful.

7. Tracking down cultists: Whoop no information skills

Curmudgeon
2010-08-20, 03:37 PM
1. Invading Castle Trapland: Barbarian can detect traps, but not do anything about them. Not very useful.
The Barbarian can't detect traps ─ just survive them a bit better. They've got trap sense, but not trapfinding.

Saintjebus
2010-08-20, 03:41 PM
And now I want to see a ToB discipline with Listen as its key skill.

If you check the homebrew forum, you may find one. I know that there was a big project with homebrew disciplines.

Thrice Dead Cat
2010-08-20, 03:41 PM
Also, in the jail scenario, anyone who picks up mountain hammer can break free, which is more of a boon to the warblade than the barbarian as hardness and iron bar HPs are both too high without some form of mitigation.

tyckspoon
2010-08-20, 04:16 PM
The Barbarian can't detect traps ─ just survive them a bit better. They've got trap sense, but not trapfinding.

In this particular instance Barbarian benefits a lot from being a Core class, so there's a lot of splat support; Dungeonscape offers the Trapkiller ACF, which lets him trade Trapsense for actual Trapfinding and the ability to apply his signature "hit it until it breaks" problem-solving method to mechanical traps.

Riffington
2010-08-20, 11:07 PM
The barbarian can benefit from multiclassing/dips much more easily than the warblade can, since he's not dependent on keeping his initiator level up.
Not sure if that applies to the tier list though.

Tyndmyr
2010-08-20, 11:17 PM
The barbarian can benefit from multiclassing/dips much more easily than the warblade can, since he's not dependent on keeping his initiator level up.
Not sure if that applies to the tier list though.

Eh, ALL other classes count half toward initiator level. You can dip quite a bit as a ToB class and still have a decent initiator level.

TheAzrael
2010-08-21, 04:57 AM
look a normal 20 barbarian will not be a tier 3 ( the right feats can make him a charge killing machine but still that aplies to all melee). but there are many options for a barbarian and you can trade many of the abilities for more usefull. here is a link http://www.giantitp.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=9189439 that shows that a barbarian can be a tier 3 class if built correctly.

Greenish
2010-08-21, 05:08 AM
look a normal 20 barbarian will not be a tier 3 ( the right feats can make him a charge killing machine but still that aplies to all melee). but there are many options for a barbarian and you can trade many of the abilities for more usefull. here is a link http://www.giantitp.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=9189439 that shows that a barbarian can be a tier 3 class if built correctly.The link shows nothing of the kind! (Because it just loops on to making comments to this thread.)

true_shinken
2010-08-21, 08:07 AM
Well, barbarian archers aside, I wasn't trying to deny the point.

Actually, my party recently faced a few weretiger Barbarian archers. It surprised the heck out of them. Large Arrows and Str 30, while other weretigers lock the battlefield with Attacks of Opportunity.

Eldariel
2010-08-21, 08:11 AM
Actually, my party recently faced a few weretiger Barbarian archers. It surprised the heck out of them. Large Arrows and Str 30, while other weretigers lock the battlefield with Attacks of Opportunity.

Whirling Frenzy makes Barbarian Archers really scary. Especially Barb/Fighter multiclass with Ranged Weapon Mastery.

true_shinken
2010-08-21, 08:13 AM
Whirling Frenzy makes Barbarian Archers really scary. Especially Barb/Fighter multiclass with Ranged Weapon Mastery.

Oh, the look in their faces... "they hit for 2d8+10 damage". "Wow, that's quite a it from a mook... wait, why are you rolling more attacks?!"

Greenish
2010-08-21, 08:24 AM
Actually, my party recently faced a few weretiger Barbarian archers. It surprised the heck out of them. Large Arrows and Str 30, while other weretigers lock the battlefield with Attacks of Opportunity.That's why I mentioned them. Whirling Frenzy is excellent for archers who often can't lower their to-hit for damage via more direct methods, and even better with a bow that adjusts to your strength.

Soranar
2010-08-21, 09:22 AM
Why is a barbarian tier 4

mostly the grease spell, chasms in your way, the web spell, the fly spell or any other thing which prevents you from reaching your target (there are many many ways to do that)

why is a barbarian archer tier 4

again, wind wall , cover , etc

thing is , at lower levels (when a barbarian should dominate the battlefield) your class can easily become utterly useless if you can't fly (now if you can do that, somehow, I would say your tier goes up a point)

The barbarian is tier 4 for the exact same reason most melee classes are

the exceptions are those with other options included in their design (swordsages can airwalk, warblades can throw their weapons) or simply with things to do outside combat (bard ,etc)

shadow_archmagi
2010-08-21, 10:07 AM
What's so bad about Grease for barbarians?

Jack Zander
2010-08-21, 10:16 AM
What's so bad about Grease for barbarians?

They trip and can't do anything for a turn, or the grease is directly in front of the mage so the barbarian can't charge through it.

Mongoose87
2010-08-21, 10:41 AM
What's so bad about Grease for barbarians?

Are you not unable to use Dex-based skills in a rage?

Greenish
2010-08-21, 10:42 AM
Are you not unable to use Dex-based skills in a rage?Balance (and a few others) get an exception.

"While raging, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except for Balance, Escape Artist, Intimidate, and Ride), the Concentration skill, or any abilities that require patience or concentration…"

Gnaeus
2010-08-21, 10:54 AM
Are you not unable to use Dex-based skills in a rage?

You are thinking about frenzy. FB's can't balance when angry.

Jack Zander
2010-08-21, 01:35 PM
Still, how many barbarians have 5 or more ranks in balance?

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-21, 01:42 PM
Still, how many barbarians have 5 or more ranks in balance?
Being vulnerable to sneak attacks isn't usually a game-ender for Barbarians.
Balancing doesn't have any other notable effect on them.

Being unable to balance at all does reduce a Frenzied Berserker to an angry immobile mess on the floor.

Balance was brought up here because the two were being confused.

Greenish
2010-08-21, 02:26 PM
Being vulnerable to sneak attacks isn't usually a game-ender for Barbarians.When balancing with less than 5 ranks in Balance skill, you're flat-footed, but Uncanny Dodge means you don't lose your dex modifier to AC even when flat-footed, and thus aren't a valid target for SA.

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-21, 02:34 PM
When balancing with less than 5 ranks in Balance skill, you're flat-footed, but Uncanny Dodge means you don't lose your dex modifier to AC even when flat-footed, and thus aren't a valid target for SA.

Whoa. I thought that was just another of the "denied Dexterity bonus" conditions. Iajitsu just became more interesting.

JaronK
2010-08-21, 05:20 PM
Most people have summed things up quite well, but I'll weigh in. The Barbarian is not T3 because he's not flexible. He's great at hitting stuff in combat... stuff like Lion Totem and Whirling Frenzy give him great abilities to just smack stuff. Intimidating Rage even gives him an attack at their will save (but is negated by fear). And that's awesome. But that's pretty much it, meaning his very good in his strong area (melee and ranged combat) but weak everywhere else. It's quite easy to make things hard for a Barbarian... enemies that can't just be hit hard to solve the problem, for example, or a diplomatic challenge. Stock T4.


The barbarian can do all of these things, He is capable of fighting quite well, and is always useful. I think that the reason the barbarian is tier 4 and not tier 3 is that the author was not considering uses for rage outside of combat.

Well... Rage doesn't actually have uses outside combat, not really. Let's look at your examples:


For example- cant break down the door? Rage
stuck in jail with your barbarian friend? (like thog in oots) Rage

The mountain hammer line that all the ToB classes get works for this. Rage? No. It's not that big of a boost to strength, especially if you're unarmed (as you would be in jail). Simply having higher strength or more damage would be better than Rage. Even Weapon Specialization gets you most of the Rage bonus to damage anyway.


Trying to stop an assassinnation but the only way to stop it is to run several miles?
rage get boosted constitution and be able to stop the assassination.

No, Rage will give you a small bonus to con for a short time, then you'll be fatigued. It'll make you actually worse at this. You do get a movement bonus (if you didn't trade that out for Lion Totem) but let's be honest here... a horse is a much better plan, and all classes can just purchase one of those really cheap.

So yeah, none of your examples were factored into the Tier standing of the Barbarian, because they don't actually work.

Barbarians are strong in hp damage combat. That's... well that's about it. It's a common thing (that's why they're T4) but it's the only thing they really do well. Intimidate does a little in diplomatic situations but it doesn't go that far and bluff/diplomacy is usually a much better route. And yeah, you can optimize them up a tier with a bunch of work, but they're actually solidly in T4 (if anything, they're on the lower end... look at what a Warlock can get away with with their magic item abilities!).


if he takes the frenzied berserker prestige class he can get supreme cleave and run around the battle field as a killing machine, i have taken out 30 some zombies in a round this way.

Overrated PrC, honestly. Supreme Cleave is cute and all but you're getting that around what, level 16? Do you really think most combat classes have trouble knocking out random zombies at that level? How many Zombies can a Factotum deal with at level 16 using Opportunistic Piety and a few Turn Resistance reducers? How many can a Dread Necromancer gain control of and turn back against his enemy? And either way, do you believe that the ability is a Barbarian ability or a Frenzied Berserker ability?


Also as a frenzied berserker he can inspire frenzy in others, frenzy is much like a rage and for non spellcasting classes is extremely usefull.

Yes, it's nifty. Also, it's not a Barbarian ability. It's a Frenzied Berserker ability.


That is why that i think that barbarians are at least tier 3 maybe even tier 2 with the frenzied berserker prestige class.

ps. frenzied berserker is found in MotW

It's updated in Complete Warrior. And the FB keeps it VERY solidly in T4. You lose control of your character at times and become NOTHING but combat. Even all your examples for the FB are nothing but straight forward hack and slash combat.

JaronK

true_shinken
2010-08-21, 05:32 PM
that all the ToB classes get works for this. Rage? No. It's not that big of a boost to strength, especially if you're unarmed (as you would be in jail). Simply having higher strength or more damage would be better than Rage. Even Weapon Specialization gets you most of the Rage bonus to damage anyway.
That... that I'll have to disagree with. Breaking out of jail is not about damage, it's about Strenght checks. And indeed, except for Factotums and polymorphed stuff, nothing can beat a Barbarian when it comes to this.
Bending bars is a DC 24 Str check. A 1st level half-orc with Str 20 only succeeds on a 19. A 1st-level raging half-orc now succeeds on a 17. That's an extra 10% of success. If the example half-orc was chained, he would have no chance of bursting the chains (DC 26), but while raging he has a 10% chance of actually escaping. Rage does have it's uses out of combat - they are even mentioned in the barbarian class description, I believe. It's not an extra option, but it is an added chance of success.
Also, considering ACFs, barbarians gain added defenses (like spell sense), utility (like trapkiller, which is also hilarious) and mobility (Tumble from skilled city dweller).
They are still solidly in tier 4, though.

JaronK
2010-08-21, 05:52 PM
That... that I'll have to disagree with. Breaking out of jail is not about damage, it's about Strenght checks. And indeed, except for Factotums and polymorphed stuff, nothing can beat a Barbarian when it comes to this.

So, also Druids (Wild Shape) and any other class that offers similar tricks (Wild Shape Variant Ranger w/Master of Many Forms). Also the ToB classes. And since the casters can polymorph, them. Also teleporting people. Pretty much most of the casters are quite good at this.


Bending bars is a DC 24 Str check. A 1st level half-orc with Str 20 only succeeds on a 19. A 1st-level raging half-orc now succeeds on a 17. That's an extra 10% of success.

Only for one or two attempts. That's really not much. Meanwhile, a ToB class just Mountain Hammers through on the first try. If your strength was higher or lower it would matter less... what if you weren't playing a point buy where you could afford 18 Str, and weren't a half orc (which is a pretty weak race in general)? At Str 16 you can't get out at all, and when Raging you get an amazing 10% chance once. In your next example, it wouldn't help at all. If you were some huge nasty monstrosity (Half Minotaur Orc?) you could just bust out anyway.


If the example half-orc was chained, he would have no chance of bursting the chains (DC 26), but while raging he has a 10% chance of actually escaping. Rage does have it's uses out of combat - they are even mentioned in the barbarian class description, I believe. It's not an extra option, but it is an added chance of success.

It's really very little. It's like the Fighter's ability to help diplomatic situations with intimidate. Yes it can happen, but he's hardly good at it. Your Orc with one 10% shot to get out (who's then fatigued afterwords and has blown his only rage of the day) is hardly getting a significant bonus.


Also, considering ACFs, barbarians gain added defenses (like spell sense), utility (like trapkiller, which is also hilarious) and mobility (Tumble from skilled city dweller).
They are still solidly in tier 4, though.

They do have nice variants. I'm a big fan of that +1 critical range variant...

JaronK

true_shinken
2010-08-21, 07:22 PM
So, also Druids (Wild Shape) and any other class that offers similar tricks (Wild Shape Variant Ranger w/Master of Many Forms). Also the ToB classes. And since the casters can polymorph, them. Also teleporting people. Pretty much most of the casters are quite good at this.
Yes, mundane jails are only hazards at very low levels. With Mountain Hammer you have to break stuff by dealing damage, which will attract a lot of attention. Bending bars is more discreet. (Wait, the Barbarian is the sneakier type in this situation? That is funny).
The options you presented, other than Mountain Hammer, are only available at higher levels (well, there are some teleportation spells/powers, but spellcasters should always be jailed in ways to prevent this from happening anyway).
I'm not saying Barbarians are the kings of breaking out of jails, just that they can get it done by bending bars quite more easily than most other classes at lower levels.



Only for one or two attempts. That's really not much.
Well, since your rage lasts around 5-6 rounds, you'd get about that much attempts.



Meanwhile, a ToB class just Mountain Hammers through on the first try. If your strength was higher or lower it would matter less... what if you weren't playing a point buy where you could afford 18 Str, and weren't a half orc (which is a pretty weak race in general)? At Str 16 you can't get out at all, and when Raging you get an amazing 10% chance once. In your next example, it wouldn't help at all. If you were some huge nasty monstrosity (Half Minotaur Orc?) you could just bust out anyway.
Yes, I see your point. You are right, of course. I was just pointing a perhaps too specific case. But as I mentioned before, Mountain Hammer makes such a racket that you'd be noticed an probably recaptured.
Also, Mountain Hammer can't get you out of chains, since you can't move.




It's really very little. It's like the Fighter's ability to help diplomatic situations with intimidate. Yes it can happen, but he's hardly good at it. Your Orc with one 10% shot to get out (who's then fatigued afterwords and has blown his only rage of the day) is hardly getting a significant bonus.
It is very little, but the 10% adds up because you roll 5 or 6 times (more with Extended Rage). I'm too lazy to do the exact math, though.

TaintedLight
2010-08-21, 07:45 PM
Maybe I'm missing the larger point here, but this argument about breaking objects seems, at least to me, to be more or less a corner case.

Not every campaign will include numerous encounters where the party is required to smash something with incredible force. WHEN those tactics are required or appropriate, few smash face as well as the barbarian without some form or preparation. But take a moment to consider what one polymorph spell can achieve. If you need burly, hulking muscles, you are a minotaur or a dragon away from having just that. The rogue could probably slip through the bars or loosen them given the proper tools. The larger point is that if there is a way to break something, there is almost always a better way to interact with that same thing, which could be just bypassing it altogether and saving your limited use resources.

What about times when the barbarian can't just destroy obstacles? Illusions and traps? You probably failed that will save, and your pitiful trapsense provided a minor, situational benefit that probably did not mitigate the damage or other conditions imposed enough for you to really notice.

You need to convince warring factions to come together and end a generations-long war that has devestated the countryside? You're better suited to helping one side fight that war. That may or may not be appropriate as determined by the specific details of the world and the campaign structure.

What if your goal is to really impress someone who bores at displays of strength or martial skill? You need to win the heart of the princess or the queen so that you can get close enough to warn her of impending danger, since she is notoriously mistrustful of foreigners and strangers. Whoops, your pillow-talk probably stinks, so that's out of the question.

How about times when book learnin' would be valuable? You're in court being tried on charges of public endangerment or somesuch, but you can't so much as read a law book. I'm sure the judge and jury will be impressed by your big muscles. Maybe impressed enough to let you go :smallamused:.

Now, some people chalk all of that non-combat stuff up to player creativity and immersion. If you allow the barbarian to be as charming as the bard just because the barbarian's player happens to be very charming, you are robbing the bard of what makes that CHARACTER special. The bard has spent his career perfecting his stage presence and vocal technique, and the barbarian has probably never so much as worn fancy dress.

The short of it is this: A barbarian can be a very effective killing machine. There is very little else he can do to contribute to the party's success outside of this narrow role that cannot be done better by somebody else. And yes, it is a deliberately subpar choice to play a class that is mediocre at something when you fully intend to use that skill or engage in a certain type of behavior. Don't cry when your full-plate fighter goes clank when he's sneaking around even though he has max, cross-class ranks. You knew he was not going to be good at it but you did it anyways.

true_shinken
2010-08-21, 08:08 PM
Maybe I'm missing the larger point here, but this argument about breaking objects seems, at least to me, to be more or less a corner case.
Sure it is a corner case, both me and JaronK said it a few times. It keeps the Barbarian rooted in T4 quite solidly.
I was just discussing that specific corner case, that's all.

TaintedLight
2010-08-21, 08:15 PM
Sure it is a corner case, both me and JaronK said it a few times. It keeps the Barbarian rooted in T4 quite solidly.
I was just discussing that specific corner case, that's all.

Well, that particular point seems to have been made, unmade, remade, and flipped over several times by now (by me as well). What else, if anything, can be said for the barbarian's non-killing capabilities?

I personally like the barbarian ideal a lot, despite its mechanical inadequacy at higher levels. Earth-shattering strength and force of will should have a powerful effect that reflects the might of the character who is riding that wave of fury. As it is, the rage spell pretty much duplicates the good bits and does not cost a spellcaster ANYTHING in terms of permanent resources (unless they are a spontaneous caster) to achieve. They can even do it a similar number of times per day if they so choose. And when rage isn't appropriate, they can prepare any number of other spells that can help them confront and overcome challenges of any conceivable nature.

true_shinken
2010-08-21, 08:18 PM
As it is, the rage spell pretty much duplicates the good bits and does not cost a spellcaster ANYTHING in terms of permanent resources (unless they are a spontaneous caster) to achieve.
But casters in D&D can do that with anything, anyway. It's not a Barbarian problem, it's a caster problem.

Tiki Snakes
2010-08-21, 08:20 PM
But casters in D&D can do that with anything, anyway. It's not a Barbarian problem, it's a caster problem.

Uh, that's kind of the idea? Casters being the whole point of the top tier, after all. The high-water benchmark.

TaintedLight
2010-08-21, 08:24 PM
But casters in D&D can do that with anything, anyway. It's not a Barbarian problem, it's a caster problem.

Is it really a problem? Why should magic not hold an answer to most kinds of questions? Spellcasters have the unique place in the world of being able to sculpt their tools. I'll bet that Melf wouldn't have bothered created the Acid Arrow spell if he didn't have need of a weapon like it. Similarly, Leomund created the Secret Chest spell because he needed to hide something, and knock exists because there was once upon a time a wizard who needed to unlock something and had no lockpicking experience or a rogue friend. Other spellcasters run into the same problems, and thus magic exists to confront them.

I think the problem is with non-casters. The barbarian isn't bad at what he does, just not good enough to consider when you compare his capability to achieve a task to that of a wizard. Make the barbarian simply the best at what he does. THEN you will have a compelling reason to play a barbarian rather than a wizard masquerading as one. Magic should be omni-useful but not a complete replacement for true skill and dedication like a barbarian or fighter can theoretically achieve with a lifetime of work.

EDIT: @Tiki Snakes
I don't think the point is for casters to be all-powerful compared to everyone else, but for them to have tools to deal with a multitude of problems. Those tools just happen to be better than real skill at a task as represented by other class abilities, so those classes need to get ramped up.

Coidzor
2010-08-21, 08:29 PM
EDIT: @Tiki Snakes
I don't think the point is for casters to be all-powerful compared to everyone else, but for them to have tools to deal with a multitude of problems. Those tools just happen to be better than real skill at a task as represented by other class abilities, so those classes need to get ramped up.

Come to think of it, yeah.

Tiki Snakes
2010-08-21, 08:34 PM
EDIT: @Tiki Snakes
I don't think the point is for casters to be all-powerful compared to everyone else, but for them to have tools to deal with a multitude of problems. Those tools just happen to be better than real skill at a task as represented by other class abilities, so those classes need to get ramped up.

As far as what needs to be done to fix things, I agree entirely, but I was of the understanding that this thread was about the Tier System specifically? Which is to say, a particular attempt at codifying the existing situation where they are essentially all-powerfull in comparison to everything else. Or rather, All-Competant, perhaps.

Though I can't help but wonder how much the non-casters would need to be bumped up to compete, tier-wise, with the Tier-1 classes without them also being altered.

Given that even the tier 3 ToB types are often called 'overpowered' I'd be facinated to see a homebrew tier-1 non-casting martial melee type. :smallsmile:

Coidzor
2010-08-21, 08:40 PM
Given that even the tier 3 ToB types are often called 'overpowered' I'd be facinated to see a homebrew tier-1 non-casting martial melee type. :smallsmile:

It'd require class features out of the wazoo. And quite prossibly things like 8-Bit's Fighter's ability to block the ground and cut magic in half and such.

Tiki Snakes
2010-08-21, 08:42 PM
As I said, I'd genuinely like to see such a thing. :smallbiggrin:

TaintedLight
2010-08-21, 08:42 PM
As far as what needs to be done to fix things, I agree entirely, but I was of the understanding that this thread was about the Tier System specifically? Which is to say, a particular attempt at codifying the existing situation where they are essentially all-powerfull in comparison to everything else. Or rather, All-Competant, perhaps.

Though I can't help but wonder how much the non-casters would need to be bumped up to compete, tier-wise, with the Tier-1 classes without them also being altered.

Given that even the tier 3 ToB types are often called 'overpowered' I'd be facinated to see a homebrew tier-1 non-casting martial melee type. :smallsmile:

It's true that this side discussion is off topic, but I'll just indulge this last point.

If a character has a narrow focus like the barbarian's focus on combat (especially rage), there needs to be a compelling reason to want to be so narrow. That means the focus needs to grant that character skill that is difficult if not impossible to match without the dedication of a single-classed barbarian. Rage needs to be mighty. Spectacular even, striking fear into the hearts of his enemies and spears into their skulls in a way that nobody else can match. Rage doesn't have to just be better than spells that do the same thing, it also has to be unique. What if rage granted a range of options rather than just some flat bonuses? What if rather than a CON bonus you could choose to augment your speed, representing increased adrenaline in a different way that suits your playstyle and your needs in the moment? What if you could trade that Will save bonus for immunity to mind affecting effects at higher levels, representing your tough-as-nails body rubbing off on your mind as you gain experience?

What makes casters SO much more powerful than non-casters, above all else, is the sheer range of options that is available to them. Give non-casters some new and worthwhile options and you do a lot to make them a compelling choice. After all, how many adventurers realistically expect to run into only one kind of problem over and over again? Do they just assume that they can sit on their bums and watch someone else deal with it when the inevitable locked door shows up?

Hand_of_Vecna
2010-08-21, 11:23 PM
The problem with all of the miscellanious applications of rage strengh is that while their measurable their not huge bonuses. Sure every now and then it could make the impossible possible or triple your chances going from needing a nat 20 to an 18 but this will generally be inferior to say the or right feat or skill combination for the job. Contribute meaningfully is of course a vauge and relative term but when you're trying to break into top 3 tiers it should mean more than do better than a fighter with no applicable feats.

And I'm sorry but, anti-magic prisons than be escaped by a DC 20-something strengh check just plain shouldn't exist because it's cheaper and simpler to make a mundane prison with a DC 40ish break DC than to have a permanent antimagic field. And sure you could have a guard staring at the mage 24 hours a day smacking them whenever they try to speak or wiggle their fingers but, then you should also whack the barbarian with a club when he flexes his muscles. The same logic can be applied to other all too common responses like disfiguring mages.

I also put forward that unnaturally strong characters can be hella fun to play and can contribute to alot of situations if you think outside the box and the DM occaisionally uses the rule of cool. Of course this is

a) not a typical barbarian; this is Finn youngest ever chieftan of his tribe Feral Human/Were-Bear/Barbarian 6/Berzerker 4 plus a few aquired bonuses with a non enraged str in the mid 40's and

b) rule of cool and houseruling are not integrated into the tier system.

Let's see how a crazy strong character might contribute to a some different situations posted on the first page as opposed to a standard barbarian being played by the book.

1. Invading Castle Trapland: Barbarian can detect traps, but not do anything about them. Not very useful.

Assuming I don't have trapkiller. I smash through the puny walls.

2. Fighting Count Dragonula: Barbarian can fight. Useful.

Duh

3. Attending the king's fancy dinner that he throws to celebrate: Not useful at all.

Not useful but probably amusing.

4. Breaking out of jail when he turns on you: It's unlikely that the bars will be breakable even with your rage. Breaking out will be up to someone who can trick the guard into walking over or something. Maybe a little useful.

No prison can hold me!
well you know except one sufficiently magical to hold my wizard ally.

5. Preparing the city to defend from invasion: Barbarian could... maybe.. I dunno, teach the guards something? Oh wait he probably doesn't have CHA or INT. Not useful at all.

Do the work of a dozen men building fortifications. Move huge bolders to block off narrow passes.

6. Fighting in the siege: Barbarian can fight, but can't do groups efficient unless you invested feats into it, leaving him vulnerable in other areas. Moderately useful.

Singlehandedly hold the gates shut. Break up formations with thrown objects; use stats for oversized improvised cabers if you have brutal throw you'll still easily hit the area you aim for and if not I'm pretty sure it uses scatter rules if you miss so it's still useful.

7. Tracking down cultists: Whoop no information skills

I'm Feral so I have scent and of course max ranks in survival as well as intimidate.

Some of the above examples are a little extreme but I think they show the kind of Outside the box/Rule of cool thinking that isn't reflected in the tier system but that we've all probably seen in action at a gaming table and I think that's at the core of most arguments for classes to have higher tiers or supporting mundanes hanging with castersin effectivness.

DragoonWraith
2010-08-21, 11:30 PM
As I said, I'd genuinely like to see such a thing. :smallbiggrin:
Look up Frank & K's Tome series. It's far from perfect, but on some level that was the design goal (though even they did have to rein in the casters somewhat, but not too much - the series as a whole assumes, for example, infinite Wishes by 17 at the latest, probably by more like 15).

TaintedLight
2010-08-21, 11:33 PM
The problem with all of the miscellanious applications of rage strengh is that while their measurable their not huge bonuses. Sure every now and then it could make the impossible possible or triple your chances going from needing a nat 20 to an 18 but this will generally be inferior to say the or right feat or skill combination for the job. Contribute meaningfully is of course a vauge and relative term but when you're trying to break into top 3 tiers it should mean more than do better than a fighter with no applicable feats.

And I'm sorry but, anti-magic prisons than be escaped by a DC 20-something strengh check just plain shouldn't exist because it's cheaper and simpler to make a mundane prison with a DC 40ish break DC than to have a permanent antimagic field. And sure you could have a guard staring at the mage 24 hours a day smacking them whenever they try to speak or wiggle their fingers but, then you should also whack the barbarian with a club when he flexes his muscles. The same logic can be applied to other all too common responses like disfiguring mages.

I also put forward that unnaturally strong characters can be hella fun to play and can contribute to alot of situations if you think outside the box and the DM occaisionally uses the rule of cool. Of course this is

a) not a typical barbarian; this is Finn youngest ever chieftan of his tribe Feral Human/Were-Bear/Barbarian 6/Berzerker 4 plus a few aquired bonuses with a non enraged str in the mid 40's and

b) rule of cool and houseruling are not integrated into the tier system.

Let's see how a crazy strong character might contribute to a some different situations posted on the first page as opposed to a standard barbarian being played by the book.

1. Invading Castle Trapland: Barbarian can detect traps, but not do anything about them. Not very useful.

Assuming I don't have trapkiller. I smash through the puny walls.

2. Fighting Count Dragonula: Barbarian can fight. Useful.

Duh

3. Attending the king's fancy dinner that he throws to celebrate: Not useful at all.

Not useful but probably amusing.

4. Breaking out of jail when he turns on you: It's unlikely that the bars will be breakable even with your rage. Breaking out will be up to someone who can trick the guard into walking over or something. Maybe a little useful.

No prison can hold me!
well you know except one sufficiently magical to hold my wizard ally.

5. Preparing the city to defend from invasion: Barbarian could... maybe.. I dunno, teach the guards something? Oh wait he probably doesn't have CHA or INT. Not useful at all.

Do the work of a dozen men building fortifications. Move huge bolders to block off narrow passes.

6. Fighting in the siege: Barbarian can fight, but can't do groups efficient unless you invested feats into it, leaving him vulnerable in other areas. Moderately useful.

Singlehandedly hold the gates shut. Break up formations with thrown objects; use stats for oversized improvised cabers if you have brutal throw you'll still easily hit the area you aim for and if not I'm pretty sure it uses scatter rules if you miss so it's still useful.

7. Tracking down cultists: Whoop no information skills

I'm Feral so I have scent and of course max ranks in survival as well as intimidate.

Some of the above examples are a little extreme but I think they show the kind of Outside the box/Rule of cool thinking that isn't reflected in the tier system but that we've all probably seen in action at a gaming table and I think that's at the core of most arguments for classes to have higher tiers or supporting mundanes hanging with castersin effectivness.

I think this may be taking the rule of cool too far.

Firstly, your proposed ability to contribute goes far beyond what is feasible for one man. You may be able to lift a lot of weight to build fortifications, but you can't literally do the work of twelve men. Your solutions, while rule of cool worthy, are too far outside of the rules to reasonably assume that all playgroups will extrapolate out that far. Holding the gates shut alone? Sorry, but just think about the combined force of a pair of battering rams slamming into a gate. Compare that to your cheesy strength score that exists mostly as a function of being a feral (broken) were-bear (atypical), both of which are unrelated to your status as a barbarian. Then look at your maxiumum lift/drag. Not happening, no way no how.

Secondly, none of this is exclusive to a barbarian. Any fighter with high strength could do it, and in fact you might hurt delicate efforts like building with the unfocused mind of a raging barbarian. The wizard can polymorph into a strong beast and do it, or summon/clone creatures to do more work at once. No matter what the barbarian could potentially do in your examples, there are lots of ways to do it as well or better.

Hand_of_Vecna
2010-08-21, 11:50 PM
Actually that was exactly my point. It wasn't a barb doing all those things really it was a crazy high strengh. The real point was that stuff like this flies at gaming tables sometimes and that leads to false ideas of how powerful/versatile a class is.

It feels kinda like you ignored the first 2 paragraphs and read the rest as an argument for barbarians being broken.

On an aside depending on how you define it work of a dozen men is easy with a high enough str. Yes you need support to do this like say you wanted to build a quick wall your crazy strengh probably couldn't be brought to bear digging holes but you could certainly cut down trees, carry them back and stand them up in the hole really fast.

TaintedLight
2010-08-21, 11:53 PM
Actually that was exactly my point. It wasn't a barb doing all those things really it was a crazy high strengh. The real point was that stuff like this flies at gaming tables sometimes and that leads to false ideas of how powerful/versatile a class is.

On an aside depending on how you define it work of a dozen men is easy with a high enough str. Yes you need support to do this like say you wanted to build a quick wall your crazy strengh probably couldn't be brought to bear digging holes but you could certainly cut down trees, carry them back and stand them up in the hole really fast.

How does the fact that a high physical strength could conceivably create powerful effects with a lenient enough DM address the problem of the utterly uncompelling chassis in question? Any wizard can achieve feats of great strength. Just cast a few buffs or telekinesis and the problem is solved. And, again, there's no reason to play a barbarian if that's all you're setting out to achieve.

Ashiel
2010-08-22, 12:49 AM
A few things I wanted to add...

Someone mentioned were-tiger barbarians using whirling frenzy as mooks, who could deal 2d8+10 damage with their archery. This is cute, and it's nice, but it's not the barbarian, it's the were-tiger; and can be matched or exceeded by less mutated characters with more mundane means.

As to the "escape the cell" thing; breaking bars through HP damage is no louder than breaking them with a raw strength check. In fact, it's arguable that the strength check would be louder since breaking the hinges or other important parts of the door would likely make less noise than actually tearing metal; but it doesn't really matter. All that does matter is that Mountain Hammer deals weapon damage +2d6 and ignores hardness. Assuming hardness 10, 5-10hp, the Warblade could kick his way out of a cell in 1 or 2 good kicks; with near certainty. The barbarian could to it, with a 10% chance for success, with a good chance of getting no-where, and ending up fatigued in his cell and down his rage 1/day.

Assuming they get out of the cell (and are unarmed and unarmored), the warblade is less helpless than the barbarian. He can charge into an armored guard and throw him to the ground, kick him in the cajones (using the same mountain-hammer technique), or catch a guard's arm before his weapon strikes (using Wall of Blades with an unarmed strike). The barbarian likely has little option other than Rage and Unarmed Strike or Rage and Grapple/Disarm/Trip; all things he may or may not have the feats for.

Barbarians are also limited by their nature. The main reason to be a barbarian is Rage (except for some specialty builds); and Rage disallows a lot of critical skills, spellcasting, manifesting, or all but a narrowly defined set of options. This means that barbarians are both the official cherry picking class, and also less compatible with a lot of classes. Long story short, their main class feature - Rage - bans more actions than it grants you, meaning by its very nature you are giving up versatility and options for raw power.

Greenish
2010-08-22, 08:31 AM
Finn youngest ever chieftan of his tribe Feral Human/Were-Bear/Barbarian 6/Berzerker 4 plus a few aquired bonuses with a non enraged str in the mid 40's and…

2. Fighting Count Dragonula: Barbarian can fight. Useful.

DuhI'm not sure how useful that character would be against level-appropriate foes. 14 BAB at ECL 20 for a melee bruiser…


A few things I wanted to add...

Someone mentioned were-tiger barbarians using whirling frenzy as mooks, who could deal 2d8+10 damage with their archery. This is cute, and it's nice, but it's not the barbarian, it's the were-tigerWell, barbarians do make nice archers, which was the point, not that it would raise barbarian's tier (it's still just hp damage after all). It was just an off-topic remark.

Ashiel
2010-08-22, 09:01 AM
I'm not sure how useful that character would be against level-appropriate foes. 14 BAB at ECL 20 for a melee bruiser…

Agreed. Also, if you need all that extra stuff, it's not really the barbarian that's making them strong. It's like playing particular anthromorphic characters does not make a monk good, for example.


Well, barbarians do make nice archers, which was the point, not that it would raise barbarian's tier (it's still just hp damage after all). It was just an off-topic remark.

I can agree with this; especially with Whirling Frenzy (since stacking +hit with archery usually isn't that hard, so the extra attacks are nice). The context it was mentioned in made it sound more impressive; which seemed a bit dishonest to me since most of the power was actually coming from their were-tiger heritage (large size, +12 racial strength bonus, etc).

I've actually become fond of Pathfinder Fighters or Pathfinder Paladins for archers, due to their new upgrades. PF Fighters can stack huge amounts of +hit and +dmg onto their ranged attacks thanks to the stacking of Weapon Training and Weapon Specialization; pickup the Deadly Aim feat (-6 hit, +12 dmg at 20th), the bracers of archery, and picking up a bow with some nice abilities (like seeking). Pathfinder Paladins are great since Bows + Smite Evil = Win.

But I'm just musing out loud now. :smallredface:

lord_khaine
2010-08-22, 10:01 AM
I'm not sure how useful that character would be against level-appropriate foes. 14 BAB at ECL 20 for a melee bruiser…

What the heck does this have to do with anything?

The Str bonus he gets more than make up for the missing AB, and it also increases his damage.

Ashiel
2010-08-22, 11:09 AM
What the heck does this have to do with anything?

The Str bonus he gets more than make up for the missing AB, and it also increases his damage.

Fewer attacks, and less power attack fuel would be a good start. Also the level adjustment in combination with your racial HD will generally mean your HD and saves are a bit low for your level; which in turn also makes you easier to drop with Save or Suck, or spells like Blasphemy.

No biggies though. The raw strength alone should help with both +hit and +dmg, and perhaps keep it a bit more normalized than using Power Attack.

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 11:14 AM
Frenzy would give him one more attack at his highest BAB.

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-22, 11:28 AM
Couldn't the Character reach ECL 10 as a Feral Barbarian 6/Berserker 4 before contracting lycanthropy?

It would have the Blackguard's sweet-spot syndrome, but I don't see why it wouldn't be a playable character.

I'm not sure why so many builds use Berserker, though. Self-buffs are almost never worth the action.

Greenish
2010-08-22, 11:36 AM
Couldn't the Character reach ECL 10 as a Feral Barbarian 6/Berserker 4 before contracting lycanthropy?I gathered him to be a natural lycanthrope. Anyway, feral barb6/FB4 would be ECL 11 without LA buyoff.

But yes, if he had ECL 20 (or 19, actually, if he contacted lycanthropy at ECL 10) character when the other players were still ECL 10, he'd obviously kick some ass until they'd catch on.

Absurd strength is not worth 10 levels of class features, however (unless you're Hulking Hurler or perhaps a Warhulk).

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 11:43 AM
I'm not sure why so many builds use Berserker, though. Self-buffs are almost never worth the action.

Frenzy is a free action to activate, it has other... more hilarious problems... but in this case, is just a free action.

Hand_of_Vecna
2010-08-22, 12:23 PM
Ok, people still not getting the point. I wasn't defending barbarians as a high tier class/character. I was giving an example of the kind of things that can lead to a individual thinking a particular class (or anything else) is more powerful/versatile than it is. I'm sure most of us have played in games where this kind of stuff would fly or maybe not; it could e a generation gap thing. I find that groups that started with 3.5 are alot more by the book than groups that have played lots of different games streching back to 1stED.

I wasn't even playing devils advocate I was just showing how an individual could come to have a skewed view.

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-22, 12:30 PM
Frenzy is a free action to activate, it has other... more hilarious problems... but in this case, is just a free action.

The Frenzied Berserker uses Frenzy. That's a free action to activate.
The Berserker Berserk uses Battle Fury. That's a standard action to activate.
Both are popular in Barbarian builds.

EDIT:
Ohp. The Deities & Demigods class is the Berserk, not Berserker. I guess I don't know which is being used here. Stupid names.

Ok, people still not getting the point.
I think it's not "missing the point" so much as "quibbling over small stuff, because that's what we do around here."

Ashiel
2010-08-22, 12:31 PM
Frenzy is a free action to activate, it has other... more hilarious problems... but in this case, is just a free action.

Humorously, my group loved our frenzied berserker. By the time he was dangerous, one of the wizards in the party could pop resilient sphere pretty much whenever, so if the 'serker proved too troublesome, he'd sphere himself and the rest of the party; leaving the 'serker on the outside to deal with the meddlesome badguys.

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 12:40 PM
Oh, Berserk is a class oO.

In my group we have sorta the same working, though we have marbles... lots and lots of marbles.

Greenish
2010-08-22, 12:47 PM
The Frenzied Berserker uses Frenzy. That's a free action to activate.
The Berserker Berserk uses Battle Fury. That's a standard action to activate.
Both are popular in Barbarian builds.

EDIT:
Ohp. The Deities & Demigods class is the Berserk, not Berserker. I guess I don't know which is being used here. Stupid names.I haven't seen Berserk mentioned or recommended often (or played ever), and looking it up I'm not surprised. It's a rather lackluster PrC.

I think it's not "missing the point" so much as "quibbling over small stuff, because that's what we do around here."No we don't!

TaintedLight
2010-08-22, 01:24 PM
Humorously, my group loved our frenzied berserker. By the time he was dangerous, one of the wizards in the party could pop resilient sphere pretty much whenever, so if the 'serker proved too troublesome, he'd sphere himself and the rest of the party; leaving the 'serker on the outside to deal with the meddlesome badguys.

I have no doubt that your FB was great at what he did. But what did he do above and beyond slaughtering enemies who happened to fall within his range of "I have the weapon enchantments/battlefield advantage/caster support to do something about it"?


On an unrelated topic that is still relevant to this discussion, I have yet to see a compelling argument for why the wizard should feel compelled to babysit the martial types. He could buff them, yes. Alternatively, he could just fight the encounter in whatever way seems best to him.

Now, just to deflect this point of contention early, I do believe that D&D is a cooperative game. Players should work together to achieve their goals (whether those goals happen to be the campaign goals or not) if their characters would have a vested interest in doing so. The great issue with this is that cooperation, from a character's perspective, is only worthwhile if both parties feel that cooperation will yield them a benefit. The benefits of such an arrangement for the fighter are obvious. What does the fighter do for the wizard with his help?

1. The fighter becomes a scary beast and murderizes the encounter. This is not an outcome that the wizard could not have achieved alone, but it does save the wizard from having to enter the fray if he feels like his defenses are not going to be good enough.

2. The fighter is more willing to do things that the wizard asks of him. This could be compelling but also dangerous; the fighter's player could easily become resentful that his character is now the wizard's caddy/butler/fetch- boy.

3. The wizard gets to feel all warm and fuzzy inside like he just adopted an orphaned puppy. This may or may not be worthwhile depending on the particular wizard.

None of those reasons seem like they produce a good working relationship. Better yet, why has the wizard not created a loyal construct who can serve the same role as the fighter (maybe not quite as well, but that's what buffs are for) and who he knows and is comfortable with? In short, there is only a compelling reason to sustain such an obligation from the perspective of the obligee, which frankly won't fly for long.

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 01:31 PM
Who said a player should be babysat? We know casters can outdo martial types on a regular basis, some people just like swinging a sword more than casting a spell.

Sounds like your asking why the wizard bothers traveling with the fighter?

Greenish
2010-08-22, 01:33 PM
On an unrelated topic that is still relevant to this discussion, I have yet to see a compelling argument for why the wizard should feel compelled to babysit the martial types. He could buff them, yes. Alternatively, he could just fight the encounter in whatever way seems best to him.Because battlefield control, buffs and the like are usually the most efficient way. (Which is the point behind, say, god wizards.)

And yes, the large differences in power between the PCs require metagaming to gloss over and even then can be problematic. That was one of the points behind tier system: to help make PCs whose capabilities more closely matched each other.

WinWin
2010-08-22, 01:48 PM
Give the barbarian an artifact weapon and then they will be tier 2 or 3. Without a DM care package, they simply do not bring options to the table.

A barbarian can use blunt force in order to acheive their goals. That may be cool and all, but it is not subtle, nor is it versatile.

A druid is just as capable of using force, in many instances far greater than a barbarian can manage. They can also be subtle and versatile in the use and scope of their abilities.

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-22, 01:49 PM
On an unrelated topic that is still relevant to this discussion, I have yet to see a compelling argument for why the wizard should feel compelled to babysit the martial types.
Resource efficiency.

It's resource-intensive for a Wizard to actually end a fight. It's cheap for the Wizard to win it with a Slow/Glitterdust/BC effect and let the Fighters/Rogues/Warblades/Whatever suckerpunch enemies to death.

Polymorph is often more effective on Fighters because their job is typically BC. They're the ones who will usually have the lockdown effects or damage generators to use a Huge form to shut down/kill enemies without further resource costs.

If the Fighter doesn't have those abilities, it's a bad target for the effect.
If the Wizard doesn't have these abilities, it's also a wasteful recipient.

TaintedLight
2010-08-22, 01:51 PM
Who said a player should be babysat? We know casters can outdo martial types on a regular basis, some people just like swinging a sword more than casting a spell.

Sounds like your asking why the wizard bothers traveling with the fighter?

The player does not need to be babysat per se. It's just that they often sit and do nothing while other players with less narrowly focused problem solving skills do their thing contributing to more than one type of combat or other encounter. And there is no reason why a caster cannot also be a melee type. Check out Complete Mage for the official WotC statement on why fighters are obsolete:



Warrior (Arcane Archetypes)
If you have ever felt like you couldn't keep up with fighters before, this spell not only closes the gap, but it leaves fighters in the dust. Be sure to keep that magic greatsword handy--you know, the one you specifically crafted for this spell.
-in reference to Tenser's Transformation

I don't care whether you think that the particular spell is good, the point is that the game's designers acknowledge that they intended to have magic users function in the same capacity as melee characters. And to do it better than the melee casters can without external help. Primary agency is a huge deal to a lot of players. If you can't be good at what you strive to be good at without significant external aid, you could very well feel bad about that.


Because battlefield control, buffs and the like are usually the most efficient way. (Which is the point behind, say, god wizards.)

And yes, the large differences in power between the PCs require metagaming to gloss over and even then can be problematic. That was one of the points behind tier system: to help make PCs whose capabilities more closely matched each other.

As I said before, then buff yourself and proceed to the BC step afterwards if you so choose. The same number of actions are wasted either way for the wizard. And, in theory, you won't buff yourself in such a way that you are completely open for a full round thereafter. You are encouraged to be intelligent about this!

The metagame explanation is clumsy. REALLY clumsy, because it asks the players to acknowledge that there is a hierarchy in place even if they choose to have their characters ignore that fact and continue on with their lives.

When a character's ability to contribute to a scenario is so limited that it does not meaningfully impact the outcome, that character will inevitably feel left out, especially if it happens more than just a few times. Real campaigns tend to consist of a number of different scenarios in my experience, because too much predictability produces cookie-cutter encounters which the players can easily overpower with optimization. This is a headache for DMs because the players will eventually get bored of bulldozing everything. Then, the DM throws out a situation which is totally different and calls for the players to respond in an appropriately different manner. Suddenly, the barbarian is in fancy dress at a party that he's probably better off not going to and getting kicked out of in the first place.

Ultimately, the weaknesses of martial types are made painfully clear when you look at their place in an adventuring context. They have ONE skill. Maybe moderate competency in a few others, but they are really only good for one thing. Adventuring, but its nature, often requires more than one skill. That's where the big guys fall down.

Greenish
2010-08-22, 01:59 PM
As I said before, then buff yourself and proceed to the BC step afterwards if you so choose. The same number of actions are wasted either way for the wizard.I don't get what you're saying. If you buff the beatstick, you're free to handle other things such as BC, while the beatstick actually makes use of the buff. It's action economy.

The metagame explanation is clumsy. REALLY clumsy, because it asks the players to acknowledge that there is a hierarchy in place even if they choose to have their characters ignore that fact and continue on with their lives.

<snip>

Ultimately, the weaknesses of martial types are made painfully clear when you look at their place in an adventuring context. They have ONE skill. Maybe moderate competency in a few others, but they are really only good for one thing. Adventuring, but its nature, often requires more than one skill. That's where the big guys fall down.What's your point? Is someone here advocating mixing fighters and wizards in the same party, or what are you railing against?

TaintedLight
2010-08-22, 02:06 PM
I don't get what you're saying. If you buff the beatstick, you're free to handle other things such as BC, while the beatstick actually makes use of the buff. It's action economy.

This might constitute an acceptable strategy, but why bother traveling with a beatstick who breathes and complains and eats and imposes on your personal living space? A construct will sit quietly and keep watch while you snooze and will never impose on you. You could just buff him instead.


What's your point? Is someone here advocating mixing fighters and wizards in the same party, or what are you railing against?

The standard model of 3.5 (that is the core assumptions made about the game state) include a party that includes artillery, heal/buff, beatstick, and skillmonkey. I'm not the one advocating here, it's the entire premise of the game. I'm just saying that it does not make any internal sense when you consider the reasoning for keeping everyone together. Yes, the rogue has some skills that the wizard would rather save his skills than deal with. This makes travelling with the rogue a good idea. Similarly, the cleric can bring the wizard back from the brink of death should something unfortunate happen. Also a good thing to have around. The fighter? Meh. All he does is kill things, and I can do that juuust fine. Or let the cleric do it. Or let the rogue do it. And on and on.

DeltaEmil
2010-08-22, 02:07 PM
You could instead of buffing the fighter buff yourself, and then defeat the enemy by yourself anyway, instead of first buffing the fighter, and then defeating the enemy yourself.
Depending on the spells that are used, you could just skip buffing either yourself or the fighter, and defeat the enemy yourself anyway.

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 02:17 PM
Does anyone enjoy playing a non-caster? I know I do. Do I enjoy playing the game with my group? Yes.

So while I do know that the Wizard could do it better, and that yes, even Wotc might have said, casters are better than martial types, it doesn't bother me all that much.

As far as the roleplaying aspect for the Wizard? Yes, your right, he has no reason to keep around a sack of meat which does any of the things you mentioned. Friends/Allies just don't exist I guess.

DeltaEmil
2010-08-22, 02:35 PM
Friends/Allies just don't exist I guess.Sure they do. The wizard calls them sorcerors, clerics and druids.

Roderick_BR
2010-08-22, 02:39 PM
If a warblade finds range a big issue, he'll spend a maneuver on that Iron Heart technique that lets him throw his weapon. Or Martial Study it. Or Martial Study (fan the flames) or Martial Study (shadow garrote).
Or, if he's willing to spend a (bonus) feat, get that darned Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longbow), and use his Weapon Adaptability (sp?) ability to change it to any other weapon he may need (short bow, any crossbow).

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 02:42 PM
Sure they do. The wizard calls them sorcerors, clerics and druids.

:smallconfused:

I wasn't aware your class/abilities dictated the only people who could be a friend.

TaintedLight
2010-08-22, 03:37 PM
:smallconfused:

I wasn't aware your class/abilities dictated the only people who could be a friend.

You can have in character reasons to form a bond of loyalty with a low tier class like friendship, love, or somesuch, but beyond specific in character events and instances, the model of the game does not make sense for the wizard and the fighter is explicitly told he needs someone else to help him do his job right.

Greenish
2010-08-22, 03:40 PM
This might constitute an acceptable strategy, but why bother traveling with a beatstick who breathes and complains and eats and imposes on your personal living space? A construct will sit quietly and keep watch while you snooze and will never impose on you. You could just buff him instead.Warforged. :smallcool:
The standard model of 3.5 (that is the core assumptions made about the game state) include a party that includes artillery, heal/buff, beatstick, and skillmonkey. I'm not the one advocating here, it's the entire premise of the game. I'm just saying that it does not make any internal sense when you consider the reasoning for keeping everyone together.Ah, if you just wanted to rant on something off-topic, you could've created a new thread for it.

[Edit]:
Or, if he's willing to spend a (bonus) feat, get that darned Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longbow), and use his Weapon Adaptability (sp?) ability to change it to any other weapon he may need (short bow, any crossbow).Nah, if you burn a feat on a proficiency, might as well make it Exotic (Greatbow). Though I seem to recall that warblade's bonus feats don't include proficiency feats, but I might be wrong (I might just have ignored MWP as a matter of course).

Awnetu
2010-08-22, 03:42 PM
Well, sadly that's a consequence of the system, Fighters aren't even close to wizards and can have a really hard time, if you don't like that, homebrew a fix for it or just don't play those classes.

In the end, while mechanically the fighter is bad at his job, (compared to casters) its up to the DM to figure out how to keep the fighter at least on par with his party, and to figure out how to incorporate the fighter into the adventure.

TaintedLight
2010-08-22, 03:51 PM
Warforged. :smallcool:

I like the way you think :D. (Mindless) undead work too, though.


Ah, if you just wanted to rant on something off-topic, you could've created a new thread for it.

It's related, though. One of the OP's original offerings in this thread was the notion that the barbarian is more useful than as just a killing machine. The discussion progressed through pages into a debate over whether the casters are obligated to buff the party and why that's a good or bad idea. This point comes up because it illustrates that the barbarian/fighter is not that good at his job anyways without the wizard's help. That same wizard has no particularly good reason to help the fighter type out without an in character incentive beyond the skills of the fighter in question. Without that help, the fighter/barbarian is not tier three, and that is perfectly relevant to the OP's topic.

true_shinken
2010-08-23, 01:24 PM
You could instead of buffing the fighter buff yourself, and then defeat the enemy by yourself anyway, instead of first buffing the fighter, and then defeating the enemy yourself.
Depending on the spells that are used, you could just skip buffing either yourself or the fighter, and defeat the enemy yourself anyway.

So you should not play D&D, because it is a group based game. Runing the fun of others is never a good way to play a game.
Also, action economy.

shadow_archmagi
2010-08-23, 02:04 PM
Also, action economy.

Man, Action Economy sounds way cooler than it is.

Greenish
2010-08-23, 02:09 PM
Man, Action Economy sounds way cooler than it is.I dunno, it' kinda cool when you can bend it over your knee and spank it like it's the proverbial red-headed stepchild.

Though some of the more extreme methods get old fast.

TooManyBadgers
2010-08-23, 05:01 PM
You can have in character reasons to form a bond of loyalty with a low tier class like friendship, love, or somesuch, but beyond specific in character events and instances, the model of the game does not make sense for the wizard and the fighter is explicitly told he needs someone else to help him do his job right.Now I want to try to manipulate a game devoid of all that friendship, love, &c. I'm not really sure how I'm going to make it happen, but I'm pretty sure it'd be a total mind**** if I do.

DeltaEmil
2010-08-23, 05:44 PM
So you should not play D&D, because it is a group based game. Runing the fun of others is never a good way to play a game.
Also, action economy.I wouldn't play D&D, if I played wizards and clerics. ;)
Also, it's always better to buff yourself, because the enemies will go after the seemingly squishy wizard, and not the imbecile fighter with his 2 skill points per level (a warblade on the other hand is also really ouchy and needs to be dealth with). In a group based game, the sensible players wouldn't use weak-ass classes, unless they're Twilight-fans or something equally abominable.
Fighters can't block nor keep agro, so play a knight, or play an adept of the sublime way.

Endarire
2010-08-23, 09:19 PM
A Warblade is proficient with martial weapons that can be used as thrown weapons. I can throw a longbow, despite penalties and suboptimalness. Thus, a Warblade is proficient with all simple and martial weapons. A Swordsage is too.