Barbarian vs fighter

[ocato]

Which is stronger? Obviously its about build and player and stronger does not equal better blah blah etc etc. But I wonder, in the opinions of all you folk, which has more potential.



and the answer is not Wizard/codzilla so please don't muddle this thread with that garbage because I will be sorely disappointed in you if you do.

[Neon Knight]

Are we talking Core or Non Core?

[ocato]

I don't believe it's terribly relevant. Just remember that it's the core classes, no variants.

[Chronos]

I don't believe it's terribly relevant.Introducing non-core material would help the fighter much more than the barbarian, since he's in a better position to take advantage of non-core feats.

Another relevant question would be who the opponents are. Are we talking a straight-up fight between the fighter and the barbarian, or are we asking how each would fare against other opponents? And if the latter, which opponents?

[ocato]

Let me clarify. You're playing a new campaign. Pretty much if it's WotC it's allowed. Your class choices are barbarian or fighter, which do you think is better/more potentially potent and why.

[Hectonkhyres]

The barbarian, with its happy box full of rages, has a clear advantage over the fighter. At least in the short term... which, admittedly, is what most DMs stage their battles in. But everything changes after that rage wears off.

That aside: The barbarian is stronger, harder to kill, and faster than the fighter. The fighter has more flexibility and can fight at full power all day long. And, hell, the right stack of feats (and fighters positively ooze feats) can make up for a lot. The right feats and fighters are the gods of melee and range.

I would say that barbarians are easy to do well. Their awesomeness is inbuilt. Fighters need to be built carefully... not just stuck with whatever feat sounded cool at the time and whatnot.

[kpenguin]

I say fighter, if only because the power attack/shock trooper/leap attack chain takes only four feats, a paltry amount compared to the amount of feats a typical fighter gets. A barbarian, on the other hand, can't get all those feats until level 9.

[Thinker]

Barbarian can get a better damage output, but really multiclassing is the way to go for these classes. Both are generally dip classes.

[ocato]

Well, not everyone dips. That's definately a valid play style but I for one usually play a class and then a prestige class (or not) and call it a day.

[yango]

Well, not everyone dips. That's definately a valid play style but I for one usually play a class and then a prestige class (or not) and call it a day.

Then you'll probably want a Barbarian. A fighter's "class features" don't improve dramatically when you increase in levels, so unless you're dipping it, its going to fall behind rather quickly. A fighter gets feats faster, but when the Barbarian starts catching up on feats, its much more solid.

Plus a Fighter can't qualify for Frenzied Berserker on its own. :smallbiggrin:

[Stephen_E]

The Barbarian is better general purpose combat adventurer with his mix of decent skill points, trap sense, inbuilt DR.

The Fighter is a better combat build (although it should be noted they gain a lot from 1 level of Barb - Rage, if it doesn't cause xp penalties). The Fighter feats means that you can explore a number of feat heavy options that aren't really available to the Barbarian.

Stephen

[Hectonkhyres]

Plus a Fighter can't qualify for Frenzied Berserker on its own. :smallbiggrin:
Most DMs will murder you the instant you say those two words together in the same sentance.

[Thinker]

Most DMs will murder you the instant you say those two words together in the same sentance.

Really? Most of the DMs I know wouldn't.

[Citizen Joe]

I mentioned this over in the Poison thread...

If you make a tough character that is a combat god, the DM is just going to up the danger level to compensate. It's an escalation battle so making your character superpowerful is counterproductive.

[Quietus]

Most DMs will murder you the instant you say those two words together in the same sentance.

The rest will let you murder yourself.

[Stephen_E]

Let me clarify. You're playing a new campaign. Pretty much if it's WotC it's allowed. Your class choices are barbarian or fighter, which do you think is better/more potentially potent and why.

Depends so much on what stats I have, what the other PCs are, what level the campaign will go to.

Non-combat Barbarian all the way. The Fighter simply sucks. Minimum skill points, limited class skills, no non-combat abilities.
The Barbarian has moderate skill points, a few decent class skills (Listen) and Trapsense is of some use.

Pointman Barbarian again. Better hps against the surprise strike, as well as Uncanny dodge stops the "surprise sneal attack, you're dead" attack. Listen isn't ussually as good as spot, but it's better than nothing. The Fighter essentailly has nothing.

Big Monster combat Slight edge to the Barbarian. The higher damage output combined with there been less feat chains that help Big Monster killing means they can catch up to the Fighter. The Fighter can tank to the point that even big monsters have to work to hit, and the big monsters can't afford to Power Attack.

Medium and smaller combat The Fighter wins. Huge amount of battlefield control stuff out there which the Fighter can afford to pickup. The Barbarian simply doesn't have the feats. He can manage 1 control chain by 20th level but doing so will limit his other options.

Ease of design Barbarian wins. Aside from your feat every 3 levels and skill points there is no decisions to make.

Stephen

[Kaelik]

The rest will let you murder yourself.

No the rest will let you murder your party. [Insert cheese about willfully failing saves against people you would otherwise attack making attacking party obsolete.]

I say Barbarian. And since it isn't a Variant at all but rather an "Alternative class feature" grab Spirit Lion Totem. Pounce for the Win, makes Power Attack, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper That much better.

Feats before level 9 (Flaws).

And also, Frenzied Berserker=/=Broken.

[Thinker]

No the rest will let you murder your party. [Insert cheese about willfully failing saves against people you would otherwise attack making attacking party obsolete.]

I say Barbarian. And since it isn't a Variant at all but rather an "Alternative class feature" grab Spirit Lion Totem. Pounce for the Win, makes Power Attack, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper That much better.

Feats before level 9 (Flaws).

And also, Frenzied Berserker=/=Broken.

Maybe its unfortunate they put a crappy "drawback" on a decent PrC. That doesn't mean failing saves is cheese. It just means its a good option. Others include making sure the wizard prepared Grease.

[Kaelik]

Maybe its unfortunate they put a crappy "drawback" on a decent PrC. That doesn't mean failing saves is cheese. It just means its a good option. Others include making sure the wizard prepared Grease.

Wizard preparing Grease=Good.

Person who wants to kill Wizard voluntarily falling over so that he doesn't hurt Wizard=Stupid Cheese.

He can fail his save anyway. A good Wizard should have plenty of spells that can incapacitate him with a very good chance of success (IE failure on a 15 or maybe more.) This means a Frenzied Berserker isn't hard to take down after the fight. But every time someone brings up choosing to fail a save against a Wizard casting at you who you consider hostile...well my gut doesn't like talk like that.

[Hectonkhyres]

I'm sure your partymates will have so much fun impotently dodging the godlike abominations the DM is now chucking at you like they were going out of fashion. I'm sure they will enjoy dodging your crazy ass as you try to eat them every other battle. And I'm sure everyone is going to really love you for showboating and stealing their glory. Every. Single. Battle.

The Frenzied Berserker makes everyone feel like a bard or a samurai.

[Thinker]

I'm sure your partymates will have so much fun impotently dodging the godlike abominations the DM is now chucking at you like they were going out of fashion. I'm sure they will enjoy dodging your crazy ass as you try to eat them every other battle. And I'm sure everyone is going to really love you for showboating and stealing their glory. Every. Single. Battle.

The Frenzied Berserker makes everyone feel like a bard or a samurai.

Its really not that powerful. Yay it can one shot most level-appropriate BBEGs if they're stupid enough to give him the opportunity.

[Chronos]

The Fighter is a better combat build (although it should be noted they gain a lot from 1 level of Barb - Rage, if it doesn't cause xp penalties).For that matter, it doesn't really hurt much to take equal amounts of fighter and barbarian (or fighter/barb/ranger, or fighter/paladin, or...), since the BAB stacks. And anyone can do that without xp penalties.

[Seffbasilisk]

I've played pure barbarians, but never a pure fighter.

Fighter's good for dips, barbarian's better in the long haul.

A barbarian if it goes out of core, can also snag the feat 'Extend Rage' which gives +5 rounds...as most barbarians put con as one of the top three, that's extending rages to ten rounds or so. That's most fights.

Also, going out of core, you can pick up 'Whirling Frenzy' varient rage, and 'Lion-Totem' from Complete Champion to get pounce.

Level 1 barbarian in one game delt > 40 damage in one round. Level 1 people. Str 18 and greataxe. No crits.

Also...the flavor's more fun, the play is more fun, you get some nifty stand-out abilities, and can work it in from almost any walk of life.

Fighters? How many do you know who's backstory does not include A) An army, B) An academy, or C) Some hideously expensive personal trainer.

It's good for a dip, but barb's better.

[JaxGaret]

The Frenzied Berserker makes everyone feel like a bard or a samurai.

Hey, don't slam the Bard. Bards are plenty powerful themselves. A well-built Bard can outclass a well-built FB.


On topic now - it all depends on the splatbooks available (whether due to DM allowing access, or just plain existing); Barbarians had it better for a long while, then a few books came out powering up Fighters to at least on par with Barbarians. Then the Pounce variant came out - bringing the edge squarely back to the Barbarian.

[kpenguin]

Also...the flavor's more fun, the play is more fun, you get some nifty stand-out abilities, and can work it in from almost any walk of life.


Um... how exactly can you get a barbarian from all walks of life. I mean, the background is written right there in the class name.

[Thinker]

Level 1 barbarian in one game delt > 40 damage in one round. Level 1 people. Str 18 and greataxe. No crits.


How without crits? Was he within WBL?

[Kaelik]

Um... how exactly can you get a barbarian from all walks of life. I mean, the background is written right there in the class name.

By changing the fluff but making sure that the fluff still fits the mechanics. (And spending two skill points on literacy.)

[Machete]

In a straight up fight, if the Fighter draws it out long enough using tactics and defensive fighting to outlast the Rage of the Barbarian then the Fighter WINS.

Keep in mind that a Barbarian is only a tiny fraction less battle competetant than the Fighter and is a much better general adventurer.

[Kaelik]

In a straight up fight, if the Fighter draws it out long enough using tactics and defensive fighting to outlast the Rage of the Barbarian then the Fighter WINS.

Keep in mind that a Barbarian is only a tiny fraction less battle competetant than the Fighter and is a much better general adventurer.

Defensive Fighting? Useless. Tactics? Useless against a guy who only needs to charge you once, and probably has greater movement speed. I'm not claiming a fighter couldn't win, depending on the build. Just that those aren't the ways he could do it.

[Stephen_E]

I've played pure barbarians, but never a pure fighter.

Never done either under 3.x.
Closest was a Orc Barb 1/Fighter 8 before I prestige classed.


Also...the flavor's more fun, the play is more fun, you get some nifty stand-out abilities, and can work it in from almost any walk of life.

I've never had a problem with either Fighters or Barbs for that.


Fighters? How many do you know who's backstory does not include A) An army, B) An academy, or C) Some hideously expensive personal trainer.


The previous mentioned Fighter example didn't include any of the above in his backstory. In general my Fighters get their training from experiance and personal dedication to their art.

Stephen

[Kioran]

The Main Edge the Barbarian has are his better HD - he simply can do a lot more out of combat and profits in combat. Which is a crying shame. Why they have made the Fighter the second most inept out-of-combat man available (less useful than a friggin Wizard!) I´ll never understand........

[ocato]

Well, the feat arguement is a little questionable because of the high base attack bonus on Shock Trooper and the 8 ranks of jump needed for Leap attack. So saying that Barbarians can't get that combination as fast may be marginally true, but it isn't the speed of which you get them that is a factor. It's the fact that the Fighter has a handful of other feats and still gets it at roughly the same time. I think I prefer barbarians. Better HD, neat abilities, and something outside of combat to do. I mean, I could (kinda) see being a L20 barbarian. L20 fighter? It might be nice to have every feat in the book but you'd probably really have to multiclass. However, how strong is that fighter at high levels with all the fighter only feats? That's a bonus good all of the time (that you're using your weapon of choice, sure hope a greatsword doesn't drop when you're great axe 'specced') compared to raging from time to time (and getting good and tired too). There's still much to be said, but it should boil down not to min/maxing but character story. I asked this because I usually sorta stayed away from Barbarians when I went that route and now that I've thought about it, I really want to try one. Now I just need a campaign.

[Behold_the_Void]

You know, now that I think about it there may be a viable overpowering build that a 20th level Fighter can use against a 20th level Barbarian.

The fighter can easily afford the feats to pick up Improved Grapple, something the Barbarian cannot. Assume that they're both specializing in strength moderately equally, the Fighter will have a slight edge over the Raging Barbarian in a grapple.

This favors the fighter in two ways. First, it wastes rounds the Barbarian might be using during rage. Second, the fighter can still attack with his weapon of choice in a grapple due to Weapon Supremacy. That may not be a bad way to go about doing it.

[ocato]

True, though if I were a Barbarian of that level, I'd certainly invest in Improved Initiative. Especially since Shock Trooper also allows a number of other manuevers besides heedless charge. The Barbarian can move further and can power throw the fighter around with a good bull rush. I'm going to do some research actually because a high level barbarian who's life involves turning his enemies into human projectiles and then leap attacking the life out of them and the pile of their team mates. They're all on the ground when you hit the guy and then you can cleave his prone friend. Or, while your AC is in the dumps from the heedless charge, your enemies are still getting up from you throw-tripping them. Just might work... *strokes chin* and it makes for some absolutely epic battle scenes.

[AtomicKitKat]

The Main Edge the Barbarian has are his better HD - he simply can do a lot more out of combat and profits in combat. Which is a crying shame. Why they have made the Fighter the second most inept out-of-combat man available (less useful than a friggin Wizard!) I´ll never understand........

To be fair, the Wizard has the largest Bag of Tricks(not just the crappy item either) of any class, and can fill just about any role, given the right selection.

Fighter is good until you can qualify for any Prestige class that grants Bonus Feats at 1st/2nd level. Or even Monk 2(2 Bonus Feats, plus IUS, and some other stuff) Barbarian, Druid and Monk are designed with the most thought towards staying in the class(ie, incentive to stay from 1-20 rather than PrCing out ASAP. Slightly less so for Druid if you can advance both Wild Shape AND spellcasting. See Sorceror). It's just that the Monk's abilities are a big mess that doesn't quite coordinate with itself.

[Zincorium]

I personally tend towards barbarian, as it tends to make more of an out-of-the-box impression as to what you intend to accomplish. Unless you've developed the backstory and character of your fighter to the point where people forget what class you took for the sheer awesomeness of it, there is a general tendency to link fighter with 'meh'.

And to be honest, barbarian powers are far more unique than a fighter's feats. With the exception of weapon specialization and several of the PHB 2 feats (possibly others), most feats can be taken with anyone of a specific bent. On the other hand, rage is unique to barbarians, and paragon/prestige classes. When you add in fast movement and DR, barbarians in core have a range of powers that isn't really replicated by anything.

Granted, the divide has become mostly irrelevant with the addition of more and more material, and the name of the class has always been a little bit misleading. Berserker would have occupied the same spot in the PHB, been more descriptive, and had less connotations as to civility. On the other hand, I can understand the nostalgia aspect of it.

[Ikkitosen]

Thog build best. 2 Fighter levels for bonus feats :thog:

[Harold]

I would go for the fighter. Only for weapon specialization and greater weapon specialization if you have both of those you get +4 on damage rolls, and they get other pretty good bonus feats too, like improved initiative weapon focus, and greater weapon focus.

[Zincorium]

I would go for the fighter. Only for weapon specialization and greater weapon specialization if you have both of those you get +4 on damage rolls, and they get other pretty good bonus feats too, like improved initiative weapon focus, and greater weapon focus.

Erk. You realize that that entire chain is probably the least bang for the buck available? In the words of Admiral Ackbar "It's a trap."

With power attack and high strength, a fighter that uses a two handed weapon will get very good damage returns, especially if he goes charge monkey (doing hundreds of damage in a single hit). The things you really need feats for are mobility and battlefield control, damage is only useful if you can dish out a lot with a single hit in the later game.

[UglyPanda]

Pounce puts the situation overwhelmingly in the hands of the barbarian in straight-up combat, but what about a fighter with a spiked chain? Reflex is a weak save for barbarians, which puts them at a disadvantage for Stand Still, yet their strength would end up higher than the fighter's when it comes to trips. If it were spiked chain vs. spiked chain, pounce again gives an overwhelming advantage to the barbarian. Pounce is absurd.

[Person_Man]

They're about equal, although the power level tends to swing back and forth depending upon the precise ECL.

For example:

Variant Kobold (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060420a) Barbarian 1 with Complete Champion variant to gain Pounce and the Touch of Golden Ice (Book of Exhalted Deeds) feat. Three attacks every round. Natural Attacks count for Power Attack and Weapon Finesse. With Touch of Golden Ice, each hit against an Evil enemy forces them to Save or take 1d4 Dex damage. Take a Flaw so that you can also take the Draconic Tail feat (Races of the Dragon), and now you have 4 attacks. Or you can take Draconborn (to gain the Dragon type) and then take Draconic Wings at 3rd level.

Goliath Fighter 6 (ECL 7) with Dungeonscape Dungeoncrasher varant and Knock-Back feat. Every hit gives you a free Bull Rush attempt with a bonus equal to your Power Attack. Any time you Bull Rush an enemy into a wall or other solid object, you deal an additional 8d6 + 3x Str mod damage to your enemy. Make sure your friends have a Wall spell memorized, or just buy them a wand.

I could go on with other examples. But as a rule of thumb, I rarely see anything beyond Barbarian 4 or Fighter 6. Yet if I had to pick Barbarian 20 or Fighter 20, I'd go with Fighter 20. I know some retardedly useful feat chains that I rarely see outside of 1 shot dungeon crawls because they require such a heavy feat investment. The Fighter is pretty much the only class that can pull them off.

[WhiteHarness]

Ignore both the Fighter and the Barbarian; play a Knight-he's got the hit points of a barbarian, and the potential to have a higher Armour Class than the Fighter, plus he has more battlefield control stuff than both of those classes put together. Just remember to have a high Constitution and take the Great Fortitude feat to make up for the lower Fort Save, which is the Knight's only real weakness.

[Neon Knight]

Ignore both the Fighter and the Barbarian; play a Knight-he's got the hit points of a barbarian, and the potential to have a higher Armour Class than the Fighter, plus he has more battlefield control stuff than both of those classes put together. Just remember to have a high Constitution and take the Great Fortitude feat to make up for the lower Fort Save, which is the Knight's only real weakness.

Only the play the Knight if you want to be reduced to a glorified punching bag to be put between the casters and the nasties. And don't mind playing a class taken straight from an MMORPG. *grumbles about Knight's Challenge*

[tainsouvra]

In general my Fighters get their training from experiance and personal dedication to their art. Strictly speaking, those should be Warrior levels instead, but I doubt many DM's would stick to that given the Fighter isn't exactly overpowered in the first place.

[Starbuck_II]

Only the play the Knight if you want to be reduced to a glorified punching bag to be put between the casters and the nasties. And don't mind playing a class taken straight from an MMORPG. *grumbles about Knight's Challenge*

Don't hate him because he can do the Tank role.

Really, other than Mindless Rage (the magic version of knight's Challenge spell from Complete Adventurer), no one can hold hate but knight.

[tainsouvra]

Don't hate him because he can do the Tank role. I believe that's exactly why he would be hated, because "the tank role" is much more of an MMORPG concept than a heroic-fantasy concept:

"I sneak through castles and steal the crown right off a tyrant's head!"
"I directly channel the power of the gods to perform miracles several times daily!"
"I can tell the laws of physics to sit down and shut up and still move thirty feet in the span of six seconds!"
"I yell at people and use minimally-effective attacks while they pound me with clubs!"

Which of these seems a little out of place? Yeah, that's the problem.
Really, other than Mindless Rage (the magic version of knight's Challenge spell from Complete Adventurer), no one can hold hate but knight. The very concept of "holding hate" is so MMO rather than roleplaying that I'm honestly surprised you can use it in defense of a Knight in D&D without laughing aloud. "Hate" isn't a D&D stat, it's an MMO stat.

[Neon Knight]

Don't hate him because he can do the Tank role.

Really, other than Mindless Rage (the magic version of knight's Challenge spell from Complete Adventurer), no one can hold hate but knight.

The traditional MMORPG tank role is one I despise. Take all the damage so someone else can have all the fun of actually killing him. If I wanted to do that, I'd play WoW. What I want to do is assault my foe with melee weapons, render great pain and damage upon him, and kill him in such a way as that he is not easily unkilled.

The Knight class if futile because Wizards eventually move beyond the need for any protection from a melee class in DnD. Seriously. MMORPG style tanking does not work in DnD.

[Kaelik]

The very concept of "holding hate" is so MMO rather than roleplaying that I'm honestly surprised you can use it in defense of a Knight in D&D without laughing aloud. "Hate" isn't a D&D stat, it's an MMO stat.

NO!:smallfurious: It's called aggro:smallyuk: everyone knows that.:smallwink: :smallwink:

No Hate in MMOs.

:smallfurious: <--------aggro

[Orzel]

To me: The barbarian is the better adventurer. The fighter is the better warrior.
Fighter builds usually require set ups and conditions to work. Barbarians tend to just want to rage when close enough to hit the target. It quickly becomes 2 feat combos vs 1 feat comb and rage in many cases. The fighter tend to better in a fight but if a feat combo is negated (can't grapple, flying target, no full attacks), barbarians tend to do better since rage is always on and passive if you use it. Fighters favor normal fights, barbarians favor crazy fights.

[Starbuck_II]

The traditional MMORPG tank role is one I despise. Take all the damage so someone else can have all the fun of actually killing him. If I wanted to do that, I'd play WoW. What I want to do is assault my foe with melee weapons, render great pain and damage upon him, and kill him in such a way as that he is not easily unkilled.

The Knight class if futile because Wizards eventually move beyond the need for any protection from a melee class in DnD. Seriously. MMORPG style tanking does not work in DnD.

Without the Knight you mean.

Any other tank class (people refer to Fighters and such) can't hold the monster directly. They have to indirectly do so: trip, etc.

But DM play monsters with any intelligent will go: forget this guy, I'll go after the rest.
So Challenge is needed.

[Dausuul]

I mentioned this over in the Poison thread...

If you make a tough character that is a combat god, the DM is just going to up the danger level to compensate. It's an escalation battle so making your character superpowerful is counterproductive.

However, if you make a tough character that is a combat god, you might conceivably be able to keep up with the wizard and cleric at high levels. Sorta. Sometimes. If the DM is nice to you.

[Kaelik]

Without the Knight you mean.

Any other tank class (people refer to Fighters and such) can't hold the monster directly. They have to indirectly do so: trip, etc.

But DM play monsters with any intelligent will go: forget this guy, I'll go after the rest.
So Challenge is needed.

Who refers (other then WotC, who are absolutely wrong because they never think of playing D&D like it is actually played) to Fighters as Tanks? Why would you need a Tank? Wizards are flying. Clerics and Druids are just as good in melee (or better) then the "Tank" and sneaky types move away from the enemy/misdirect it. Nope, no need for tanking in D&D.

D&D is better then MMOs because monsters fight intelligently. If someone ever played a Knight in my games I would give them nothing but undead all day, every day. I would send so many of them that the Knight would end up Hiding behind the Cleric all day.

(I probably wouldn't actually do that. But damn I hate the concept of aggro.)

[Rachel Lorelei]

The Knight is nothing really new. Consider the Goad feat, or all the spells that make people do something. The Knight's ability is more mundane, but also more limited. I'm not sure why Bluff and Diplomacy checks are okay, but the knight's challenge isn't.

[ocato]

I am obligated to agree. Don't get me wrong, attacking the most potentially dangerous enemy is definately 'intelligent', but a taunt monkey in D&D sounds weird and almost sacreligious. Besides, intelligence is a complicated concept. It's intelligent to attack the powerful wizard, but 'intelligent' beings would also be prone to fighting the barbarian hacking at his face over the wizard blasting his friends. But we're getting off topic.

[AtomicKitKat]

Knight isn't just about the challenge. His ability to make terrain difficult for anyone beginning their turn in his reach is also useful. He may not directly benefit from Flanking(not without losing a use of his Challenge, at least), but he can still Flank for other people.

I like to think of him as "Learning from the mistakes of the CW Samurai". They actually make some of his abilities not require the opponent to be weaker than him.

[ocato]

I like the 2 levels of fighter if you're so inclined feat-wise but full Barbarians is pretty good, I say. In fact, I'd consider making a Goliath Barbarian for an upcoming game for no other reason than to see someone leaping charge with a large great axe while raging with a +4 racial to STR. Well, not no other reason, other reasons are there, but that'd be pretty sick damage. Actually I am submitting a human barbarian to the forum game section that will hopefully be pretty fun to play.

I miss real, in person D&D.