Player Class Analysis: Barbarian

[AnimeTheCat]

I’ve thought for a long time that I’m not the biggest fan of the Tier system, and I know I’m not the only one. The Tier system isn’t bad, and the community retiering threads were great fun with loads of conversation, arguing, and debate about the placement. This is not a replacement for those tiers by any means. This is something more akin to the ranking thread that put scores for each class in a variety of categories. I wasn’t personally happy with it because I thought that it strongly favored casters a bit much, and I just felt as though I wanted to make an in-depth analysis of why I feel the way I feel for each class. More than anything, this is just my opinion on the PHB classes, their Alternative Class Features, and what I think is a useful way of discussing the classes in a measurable format.

For this analysis I looked solely at the classes, nothing else related to character level. As such, I’m not taking any feats, bonuses, or improvements granted from Race, Character Levels, HD, etc. The only way I’m considering feat is if the class natively gets them. This will inevitably reflect poorly on some classes, but that’s the point. Secondly, I will not be taking any equipment in to consideration. Your character has a weapon, but only in the sense that you have a weapon. For things like Weapon Focus, you’ve got your focused weapon. Wizards have a spellbook. Clerics have a holy symbol. Characters have armor. But the specifics on any of that are unimportant and not accounted for. What you don’t have are magic rings, scrolls of XYZ, Wands of ABC. What is accounted for is capability, and is the primary point of this process for me. “What is this class capable of on its own?”

All this being said, I’ve broken down 10 categories that pretty well capture most things you’ll encounter in a game. This isn’t going to be particularly niche friendly, and honestly that’s ok. The categories are as follows:
Melee Combat – How effective is this character at getting in to melee combat, hitting the enemy, and dealing damage.
Ranged Combat – How effective is this character at hitting and dealing damage from afar?
Defense – How effective is this character at resisting damage of all sorts such as hit point damage, possession, falling rocks, traps, etc.
Stealth – How effective is the class at moving subtly and hiding as well as perform actions undetected.
Scouting – How effective is the class at identifying threats and relaying the information. Scouting and stealth are not necessarily the same function, though they tend to go hand-in-hand, they won’t always.
Socializing – How effective is the class in social situations from getting what you want out of a prisoner or lord, to getting yourself out of a sticky situation without the use of violence.
Battlefield Control – How effective is the class at locking down a battlefield, or at least a part of a battlefield. This can range from shutting down all enemy activity to just making it annoying for the enemy to deal with, and thus they choose another action.
Healing – How effectively does the class restore damage to hit points or ability scores, and how well does the class fare in removing debilitations.
Buffing – How effectively does the class improve the abilities of the party, themselves, and allies. Think of this as a general “team player” category, as most friendly assisting bonuses will be considered here.
Debuffing – How effectively does the class degrade the abilities of the enemy.
Each category is rated on a scale of 0, meaning they have no way to natively do anything in that category, to 10, meaning they are simply the best possible choice in every way for that category. This means a class can receive a score of anywhere from 0 (this is not really possible) to 100 (which, in my opinion, is also not really possible). For the purposes of this beginning experiment, I’m working exclusively on the PHB classes going in alphabetical order. This week, my target is the Barbarian. Without further discussion, here’s my opinion and analysis.
The Barbarian is the first class listed in the Player’s Handbook and is described in the book as:

From the frozen wastes of the north and the hellish jungles of the south came brave, even reckless, warriors. Civilized people call them barbarians or berserker and suspect them of mayhem, impiety, and atrocities. These “barbarians,” however, have proven their mettle and their value to those who would be their allies. To enemies who underestimated them, they have proved their cunning, resourcefulness, and mercilessness.
Here’s what I think.
Melee Combat: 8 - The barbarian is made for melee combat. Its core class feature increases strength (increased damage and to-hit) and constitution (increasing Hit Points). The full suite of martial weapon proficiencies. Full BAB progression. And a whole trough of alternate class features that can make them better at hitting things with the pointy end of the stick, most notably in my opinion the Rage Variant: Whirling Frenzy. Normally, rage is a +4 Strength and Constitution with a +2 will save, traded for a -2 AC. This variant is only bonuses, giving you +4 strength (no constitution bonus), +2 dodge bonus to AC, +2 reflex saves, AND letting you take an extra attack each round (with both attacks taking a -2 penalty). You don’t even have to take a full attack action to do so, so you can really go crazy just within the class alone here. Just looking at the class by itself, you can pick up your two handed weapon of choice, gain an immediate +3 damage and +2 attack and +2 AC from your frenzy, charge for a net +0 to attack and a net +0 to AC, then take your two attacks for a total -2 to attack. Like… This is really good at low levels and is plenty sufficient to carry you in to mid-levels. Just this one ACF. You can add in the Ape Totem ACF (Unearthed Arcana) for Power Attack and be hitting even harder on each of those hits as well, +2 damage for each -1 penalty to hit you take. But, past the early to mid levels is where things do get sticky for the Barbarian.
Natively, they don’t have access to anything that gives them magical attacks to bypass one of the most common forms of Damage Reduction, DR/Magic. For the most part, they have no native way to combat invisible foes, with the exception of a once-per-day ACF that trades Improved Uncanny Dodge at level 5 from Complete Champion (View the Spirit World, page 46). So without any native means to bypass damage reduction, the inability to see invisible/ethereal foes, no native ability to strike incorporeal foes, and no native ability to reach flying foes with their primary function (melee damage), the Barbarian class is really held back from being the total melee powerhouse it’s meant to be.
EDIT (Roofwalker/Roof-Jumper ACF): There's also the Roofwalker ACF from Cityscape Web Enhancement that allows you to trade fast movement for the Roofwalker feat at level 1 and the Roof Jumper feat at level 6, however I don't think that these two feats are worthwhile considering there are far better ACFs that you can take. Lion Spiritual Totem being the first that springs to my mind. I don't think that this ACF is worthwhile for the Barbarian's melee combat ability, even though the Roof Jumper ability can be used to add extra damage, you still take fall damage. Overall, it's just not that helpful.
EDIT (Fangshield Substitution Levels): At first glance, this looks like a pretty good series of substitution levels for Barbarians. On deeper investigation though, this does require you to be a non-humanoid in order to take, making it not available to ALL barbarians and requiring specific races in order to take. For that reason, I'm not going to include it for the same reasons I don't include Gnome or Goliath racial substitution levels.
EDIT (Ferocity): Ferocity is not a bad rage alternative. It gives both Strength and Dexterity bonuses instead of Constitution and Strength, Changes to Sickened after you end it rather than Fatigued, and can be started as an immediate action which normally takes a feat to do (instantaneous rage from Complete Warrior, pg 102). It's good. It's not innately better than normal rage or whirling frenzy rage in my opinion, just different and around the same power level. Can be useful if you're trying to be more dex focused for something like Two Weapon Fighting or similar, in which case it pairs well with Lion Spiritual Totem for pounce on a charge.

Ranged Combat: 6 – The barbarian does have Martial Weapon Proficiency, so they can use Longbows and Composite Longbows. They will usually have high strengths which means they will usually be able to use the more powerful Composite Longbows. If you want to really go hard for ranged combat, you can trade away your rage, greater rage, indomitable will, tireless rage, and mighty rage to pick up Favored Enemy (as ranger), archery combat style, improved archery combat style, and archery combat style mastery (as ranger). So you can be fairly competent as a ranged barbarian, though you’re losing your core class feature to do so, and I don’t think this is a very good trade especially when you don’t really have the skills to back it up and you lack much in the way of bonus damage to add to ranged combat. Either way, it is a thing you can do and you can do it with relative effectiveness.
EDIT: LiquidFormat brought up the Ferocity ACF from the CityScape Web Enhancement, however I'm not able to access it at the moment. I'm not sure if it will meaningfully push the ranged combat abilities higher, but it is good to know that you have options. Check out his post here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?608808-Player-Class-Analysis-Barbarian&p=24404069#post24404069) to check it out for yourself if you don't want to wait until I can check it out and put my thoughts here.

Defense: 6 – Barbarians are surprisingly very resilient. They have native access to Uncanny Dodge and improved uncanny dodge which protects them from flanking and allows them to retain their dexterity modifier even if they’re flat footed, effectively negating the Rogue’s ability to sneak attack them. They also are one of the only base classes to get DR, though they don’t get much over the course of 20 levels. They can be resistant to poisons and other physical saves, but they are not resistant to any others unless they’re raging. They do get Trapsense, so they are less likely to fall prey to traps. Finally, they get the biggest HD in the game and the ability to wear medium armor. Beneficial ACFs for this category include The Bear Totem ACF (Unearthed Arcana) for Great Fortitude, Boar Totem ACF (Unearthed Arcana) for Diehard, Eagle Totem ACF (Unearthed Arcana) for Lightning Reflexes (good one to cover a weakness early on), Beat Spiritual Totem ACF (Complete Champion) at level 7 for an extra 1 HP per HD, and Fox Spiritual Totem (Complete Champion) at level 7 for +1 dodge bonus to AC at level 7/10/13/16/19 (I actually prefer this over DR personally). Overall, I find the Barbarian class to be slightly above average in terms of defense.
EDIT: In the original, I had forgotten about the Spell Sense ACF from Complete Mage. You trade Trap Sense for a scaling bonus to AC vs spells. It does require you to invest 2 skill points in Knowledge (Arcana) at some point before level 3, so YMMV. Useful, but not useful enough to improve the rating I think the Barbarian receives in the Defense Category.

Stealth: 3 – Barbarians are not stealthy characters. They don’t have Hide or Move Silently as class skills. They don’t normally have any class features that improve or grant those skills. The Lion Totem ACF (Unearthed Arcana, pg 49) does give them a hide bonus, and the Serpent Totem ACF does give a Move Silently bonus, but the two are mutually exclusive – you can’t take both. You can, alternatively, take the Fox Spiritul Totem to get a flat +4 to both though. This does not make you a stealthy character though, and still leaves the Barbarian below average in terms of stealth.
Scouting: 5 (formerly 4) – Barbarians can be scouts. They’re not the best, but they can. They have Listen as a class skill, and they have survival as a class skill as well lending them to be useful in some scouting actions. That’s where their innate ability to scout kind of ends. They are a little bit better than the average character at avoiding traps, so I suppose they can run down a hall and trigger all the traps to let the rest of the party know where they are, but this isn’t exactly what I would call effective scouting. One more small feather in the Barbarian’s cap is that they can get improved Search and Spot checks via the Eagle Spiritual Totem ACF (Complete Champion, pg 46), but this doesn’t give you any form of trapfinding which makes any form of trap scouting more difficult. This doesn’t give you any extra ability to spot enemies either, and still doesn’t change the fact that neither spot nor search are class skills, severely capping your ability to scout by sight. Overall, below average scouts.
EDIT: I said I knew I had missed some things and I did. The Trapkiller ACF from Dungeonscape trades away your Trapsense class feature line and gives you Trapfinding as a rogue while also letting you use Survival (at a -5 penalty) and your attack rolls to search for and disarm them, respectively. I would put this higher than 5, but the -5 penalty on the survival check and the fact that you can't use the disarm against most magical traps does kind of take away from the sheer punchyness of this otherwise incredible ACF. Thank you LiquidFormat (and others) for sharing here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?608808-Player-Class-Analysis-Barbarian&p=24404069#post24404069).

Socializing: 3 (Formerly 2) – Barbarians are not socializers. The best they can do to initiate social interaction is intimidate, which can be useful in certain circumstances. When using the Skilled City Dweller ACF from the Cityscape Web enhancement, they can trade their Survival and Handle Animal class skills for Sense Motive and Gather Information, respectively. This does make them useful for digging for information and recognizing when they're being lied to, but the class doesn't innately support too many skills being maintained at relative or high levels. While the Skilled City dweller ACFs to improve the Barbarian's overall social ability simply by opening up more interactions, it's hardly such a massive improvement that the Barbarian class can be considered a social butterfly.
Battlefield Control: 5 – Barbarians can be pretty effective battlefield controllers. They move quickly, so they are better able to position themselves on the battlefield and make themselves the most important target to the enemy. Essentially, they’re using melee combat and the raw damage they deal to get the focus on them. Alternatively, you can pick up the Wolf Totem (Unearthed Arcana ACF) to get Improved Trip, or the Bear Totem or Serpent Totem to get Improved Grapple (with an extra +4 on your grapple checks while raging if you chose Bear Totem) (Unearthed Arcana). Between your options, you’re not bad off when you’re looking at your options to control the battlefield.
Healing: 1 – Nope. Not your thing. Not even native access to Heal, nor any ACFs that improve your ability to use the skill. Leave this to nearly any other class. Not a 0 simply because you're not prevented from putting cross class ranks in the Heal Skill for long-term care.
Buffing: 2 – You can buff yourself however, you’re not a very big team-player when it comes to buffs. In general, you’re very much below average for buffing.
Debuffing: 3 – You’re a below average debuffer. It is a thing you can do because of Intimidate. You won’t be amazing at it, but you can do it. You’ve also got the 7th Level Lion Spiritual Totem ACF (Complete Champion) that gives you an AOE fear effect that is actually not too terrible. Conversely, you’ve got a very bad AOE fear effect that is something you should not take, the Dragon Totem ACF (Unearthed Arcana). One gives you an AOE fear effect that has a DC of 10+1/2 level+your Strength Modifier (this is good! You’ll probably have a good strength AND you can improve it with rage!). The other gives you a Dragon’s Frightful presence, which would be really good, but the DC is 10+1/2 level+your Charisma Modifier. Not something you’re probably itching to bolster, and not something you can innately improve. Overall though, these are just fear effects and aren’t going to be showstoppers for the likes of undead, vermin, constructs, or other mindless creatures nor will it be particularly useful against creatures with good will saves, such as Aberrations, many outsiders, dragons, fey, etc. Ultimately, you can only target will saves with a fear, mind-affecting effect which many creatures will be immune or resistant to.

Total Score: 42 – The barbarian is an average class, coming in above average in their area of strength, but below average nearly everywhere else. If equipment, feats, and other external factors were included, this would certainly be much higher, however as was stated above, this is all about the class itself independent of any outside sources.
I know I’ve missed some things, so if you think I’ve been cruel or harsh, let me know. If you think I’ve missed something that would change this, let me know. If you think that this is bogus, let me know. The idea is to strip everything away and look at just the components of a class without any external influence. This isn’t about full characters or builds, just the class.

EDIT: I chopped off a portion of my defense category critique when copy-pasting into the forum post.

EDIT: I decided to make a table like the ones of the pfsrd that shows when various class features of the barbarian are changed, replaced, or removed by each ACF.



ACF
Fast Movement
Rage
Uncanny Dodge
Trap Sense
Improved Uncanny Dodge
Damage Reduction
Indomitable Will


Berserker Strength (PHB2 - 33)

C







UA Barbarian Class Variant (UA - 58)

X




X


Ferocity (CS - WE)

C







Bear Spiritual Totem (CC - 46)
X




X



Eagle Spiritual Totem (CC - 46)
X




X



Fox Spiritual Totem (CC - 46)
X




X



Lion Spiritual Totem (CC - 46)
X




X



Wolf Spiritual Totem (CC - 46)
X




X



Street Fighter (CS - WE)





X



Ape Totem (UA - 48)
X

X
X
X




Bear Totem (UA - 48)
X

X
X
X




BoarTotem (UA - 48)
X

X
X
X




Dragon Totem (UA - 48)
X

X
X
X




Eagle Totem (UA - 48, 49)
X


X





Horse Totem (UA - 49)


X
X
X




Lion Totem (UA - 49)
X

X

X




Serpent Totem (UA - 49)
X

X
X
X




Wolf Totem (UA - 49)


X
X
X




Trapkiller (DSc - 8)



X





View Spirit World (CC - 46)


X






Whirling Frenzy (UA - 66)

C







C=Changed, X=Removed/Replaced

Not included above is Skilled City Dweller which makes changes to the Barbarians Ride, Survival, or Handle Animal skills.

[Falontani]

I like your rubric. I have one question: feats that require a rather unique ability. While not unique to barbarian, rage is iconically a barbarian ability. And not taking into consideration any feats really screws over fighter.

The reason I bring it up is specifically intimidation, which isn't the best debuff, but applying intimidating rage really allows for barbarian to do better in the debuffing category.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

I think this is a cool idea. I especially like that you mention what ACFs are best for each category; that alone has the potential to make this a handy reference.

[AnimeTheCat]

I like your rubric. I have one question: feats that require a rather unique ability. While not unique to barbarian, rage is iconically a barbarian ability. And not taking into consideration any feats really screws over fighter.

The reason I bring it up is specifically intimidation, which isn't the best debuff, but applying intimidating rage really allows for barbarian to do better in the debuffing category.

Fighter is likely the least screwed in the feat department as they get tons of them innately from their class. Granted, they're not just any feat under the sun, but sufficient to put together something. Lots of somethings actually. When I get to the Fighter (I'm going in alphabetical order doing one class per week starting with the PHB as a pet project) I'll really lean in to my opinions, but Fighters specifically won't be hurting in the feat department because that's all they get.

I struggled not to include mention of feats like that in my analysis. I wanted to so badly because they are uniquely made for Rage, but then I remembered that other classes can get rage via ACFs, like Druidic Avenger (first that comes to mind). That immediately would start muddying the water of a specific class analysis. Though, to be fair, what you've brought up is precisely an an argument to be made for improving classes that seem to be missing something or be behind in comparison to other classes. For instance, if you wanted to round out the barbarian, you could look at what feats, class features, and abilities exist in other classes and see what would fit the theme of the class while rounding out the class, and piece together a more complete fix. I think Barbarians should get regular rage feats and levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20. That is 100% a fix I would throw in to the barbarian class to give them more options and versatility.

To keep myself from rambling through caffeine induced awakedness, I see what you're saying and I struggled with making sure I didn't include those things explicitly because they aren't innate to the class. I really want this to boil down exclusively to the classes and what separates the classes from each other, if anything. If the classes themselves are innately balanced, then maybe that can help people balance their games in other ways.

EDIT:

I think this is a cool idea. I especially like that you mention what ACFs are best for each category; that alone has the potential to make this a handy reference.

Thanks. If you feel differently, feel free to share your own ratings in each category and why. People will think differently from each other, so it's always beneficial when more people share.

[Telonius]

I like the rubric. If you're looking to generalize it to other classes, there are a couple of individual cases where it might break down slightly. Artificer's whole shtick is getting you access to magic items, and Warlock (to a much lesser degree) gets a lot of power and versatility out of scroll crafting. You might need to consider what kind of value to assign to nonstandard "healing" - like Repair Damage spells and infusions for Wizards, Sorcerers, and Artificers (useful mostly for Warforged), or Charnel Touch for Dread Necromancers (mostly for Undead and a few other weird cases).

[Falontani]

If you feel differently, feel free to share your own ratings in each category and why. People will think differently from each other, so it's always beneficial when more people share.

I intend to; however currently Barbarian has the only numbers here, and while I could try comparing to druid (which I expect to be the sole class that gets 80s-90s) I think I'll let you hammer out where you think barbarian is, and then compare future classes to already ranked ones.

[AnimeTheCat]

I like the rubric. If you're looking to generalize it to other classes, there are a couple of individual cases where it might break down slightly. Artificer's whole shtick is getting you access to magic items, and Warlock (to a much lesser degree) gets a lot of power and versatility out of scroll crafting. You might need to consider what kind of value to assign to nonstandard "healing" - like Repair Damage spells and infusions for Wizards, Sorcerers, and Artificers (useful mostly for Warforged), or Charnel Touch for Dread Necromancers (mostly for Undead and a few other weird cases).

Hmm.. I suppose I'll have to cross that mental gap when I get to it. There's nothing stopping a warlock from crafting scrolls as long as that's something innate to the class, and there's nothing wrong with artificers getting access to magic items, again as long as that is a native ability to the class. My base assumption is that the classes have the minimum to make them function, but nothing specific. So if Artificer needs specific magic items in order to function optimally, that will reflect negatively on the class, just as it reflected negatively on the Barbarian.

Good point about non-standard "healing" though. I'm going to be hitting cleric in a couple weeks (after Bard of course), so that will be the first point at which I need to cross that bridge. But I will 100% consider it. I don't think I will favor it as strongly, as most of the time you'll be healing living creature that are healed by positive energy, but I certainly won't discount it. Good catch and thanks for the heads up in the future.


I intend to; however currently Barbarian has the only numbers here, and while I could try comparing to druid (which I expect to be the sole class that gets 80s-90s) I think I'll let you hammer out where you think barbarian is, and then compare future classes to already ranked ones.

For the time being, I'm happy with how I've rated the Barbarian. Average is a 5 and I think the ratings appropriately capture the extent of the innate ability of the class and highlights the innate weaknesses and failures of it. And you may be right, Druid may be the only class that really punches up into the 80's-90's. I think Cleric stands a reasonable chance to as well, but that's all speculative for the moment. I'll know it when I really dive in to it. For now though, if you wanted to share preliminary ratings on just the barbarian, just base everything off of where you see "average", make that your standard "5" and adjust from there. 0 is reserved for things that simply can't be done on a class no matter what. I'm not sure if anything will receive a 0 because cross class skill ranks are a thing and can at least let you try to do most things, though never well.

[liquidformat]

I think you have missed some important elements in your rating.

Ranged Combat:
Ferocity ACF in conjunction with thrown weapons is a pretty common way to go about ranged combat with a barbarian and can be very effective even though you take -2 to attack outside of 30' range.

Defense:
Saving throws seems to have been mostly ignored except for the serpent totem comment. First off not having will being a good save is a definite hit but rage giving a bonus to will saves and indomitable will both help out in patching the issue., Bear totem can give great fortitude which isn't super helpful since fort is a good save and barbarians normally are on the high end of con bonuses; eagle gives lighting reflexes; whirling frenzy also gives reflex bonuses, and Uncanny Bravery gives immunity to frightful presence

Scouting:
I have one word for you Trapkiller, this ACF gives trap finding off of survival skill and disable device through attacking the trap. It is quite a powerful ACF and deserves bringing the barbarian up in this department by at least a couple points.

[AnimeTheCat]

I think you have missed some important elements in your rating.

Ranged Combat:
Ferocity ACF in conjunction with thrown weapons is a pretty common way to go about ranged combat with a barbarian and can be very effective even though you take -2 to attack outside of 30' range.

Defense:
Saving throws seems to have been mostly ignored except for the serpent totem comment. First off not having will being a good save is a definite hit but rage giving a bonus to will saves and indomitable will both help out in patching the issue., Bear totem can give great fortitude which isn't super helpful since fort is a good save and barbarians normally are on the high end of con bonuses; eagle gives lighting reflexes; whirling frenzy also gives reflex bonuses, and Uncanny Bravery gives immunity to frightful presence

Scouting:
I have one word for you Trapkiller, this ACF gives trap finding off of survival skill and disable device through attacking the trap. It is quite a powerful ACF and deserves bringing the barbarian up in this department by at least a couple points.

Yeah, I missed the ACF portion of my defense analysis when I copy-pasted. It's fixed now, but you probably were either already reading or writing your response. Whoops.

Where are the Ferocity and Trapkiller ACFs? I also didn't even consider thrown weapons in ranged combat, which does help when you don't consider the Ranger ACFs, but ultimately I don't think that will raise the overall category rating of ranged combat unless Ferocity really improves it by a lot. The class is just missing the innate access to a lot of what makes ranged combat viable and decent. They can, but they're just a bit better than average at it.

[Maat Mons]

For melee ability, it may be worth noting specifically that Barbarians are excellent chargers. The Spirit Lion Totem ACF gives pounce, the Fanshields substitution levels give a +60-foot enhancement bonus to speed while charging, and the Streetfighter ACF gives the ability to turn while charging, the ability to charge through squares occupied by allies, the ability to move 4x your speed on a charge, and "Cleaving Charge." Theoretically, this could allow a Barbarian to charge 36 different enemies in a single round, thought that requires quite a few things to line up just right.

Personally, I think I would find Barbarians singularly annoying for archery. Your Strength score keeps changing. That leaves you with a few options, none of which are entirely appealing. You can own two different composite bows, one for when you're Raging, and one for when you're not. You can use a bow designed for your full Raging Strength at all times, incurring a -2 penalty to any attacks you make when not Raging. Or you can use a bow that only scales up to your non-Raging Strength at all times, forfeiting the bonus damage from the Strength boost that come with Rage.

In terms of defense, the Barbarian class can be very good if you use the Devil's Luck ACF. You trade your damage reduction for a luck bonus on all saves, eventually gaining a +6 luck bonus to all saves. That very nearly converts Ref and Will into good saving throws. And if you're Raging, you wind up with one of the best Will saves in the game. Your Fort save goes from "great" to "ludicrous."

I'm not certain which category to put it under, but the Skilled City Dweller ACF gives Barbarian Tumble as a class skill, which aids in safely repositioning on the battlefield.

Barbarians can be decent trapfinders. The Trapkiller ACF lets them deal with non-magical traps using Survival and attack rolls, two things the Barbarian was likely already investing in. You don't get the ability to deal with magical traps, but then the party mage can already handle those with Detect Magic and Dispel, so mundane traps were all the "trapfinder" ever really needed to be able to handle anyway.

For socializing, Barbarians can use the Skilled City Dweller ACF to gain Gather Information and Sense motive as class skills. You won't be good at talking, but you'll be hard to put one over on.

[eggynack]

Though, to be fair, what you've brought up is precisely an an argument to be made for improving classes that seem to be missing something or be behind in comparison to other classes. For instance, if you wanted to round out the barbarian, you could look at what feats, class features, and abilities exist in other classes and see what would fit the theme of the class while rounding out the class, and piece together a more complete fix. I think Barbarians should get regular rage feats and levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20. That is 100% a fix I would throw in to the barbarian class to give them more options and versatility.
Is that what that indicates though? After all, barbarians decidedly do get feats, and they can use those feats to do these things without getting anything more than they have at baseline. What if barbarians get a lot of additional utility via these feats (as one might expect of any class), but then the marginal utility of feats on top of that actually aren't that important? Barbarians can certainly do this particular thing without adding on more feats, though it's an open question whether that's actually the route they'd take.

Moreover, I would say that the presence of these unique feature boosting majigs decidedly isn't a case for offering fancy improvement methods that align with those feats. Oftentimes, these class feature boosting feats are major upgrades to class features that are already quite good. I mean, a lot of the better feats in the game are unique to casters, and I would hardly say those classes have some major absence that demands a fix.

For an example of both simultaneously, consider the class closest to my heart, the druid. A standard high op feat load out might look something like aberrant blood, greenbound summoning, natural spell, aberration wild shape, ashbound, gatekeeper initiate, and then the last choice isn't even that great. Maybe a crafting feat? Dragon wild shape? Metamagic of some kind? I dunno. Every single one of those feats is simultaneously excellent and near unique to the class. And yet, as the drop off near the end indicates, there's never a point at which you really need any more feats. Maybe you want some animal companion feats, or wish ashbound were earlier where it could do a bit more, or whatever, but the next few feats you add are gonna be a lot weaker than those already there. And, obviously, the presence of these unique feats does not indicate an absence within the class.

[liquidformat]

Yeah, I missed the ACF portion of my defense analysis when I copy-pasted. It's fixed now, but you probably were either already reading or writing your response. Whoops.

Where are the Ferocity and Trapkiller ACFs? I also didn't even consider thrown weapons in ranged combat, which does help when you don't consider the Ranger ACFs, but ultimately I don't think that will raise the overall category rating of ranged combat unless Ferocity really improves it by a lot. The class is just missing the innate access to a lot of what makes ranged combat viable and decent. They can, but they're just a bit better than average at it.

Trapkiller is from Dungeonscape. Ferocity is from the CityScape web enhancement (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a), it give +4 bonus to Str and Dex for a -2 penalty for ranged attacks beyond 30', entering is as an immediate action which can also be used in intimidation builds.

[AnimeTheCat]

For melee ability, it may be worth noting specifically that Barbarians are excellent chargers. The Spirit Lion Totem ACF gives pounce, the Fanshields substitution levels give a +60-foot enhancement bonus to speed while charging, and the Streetfighter ACF gives the ability to turn while charging, the ability to charge through squares occupied by allies, the ability to move 4x your speed on a charge, and "Cleaving Charge." Theoretically, this could allow a Barbarian to charge 36 different enemies in a single round, thought that requires quite a few things to line up just right.

Personally, I think I would find Barbarians singularly annoying for archery. Your Strength score keeps changing. That leaves you with a few options, none of which are entirely appealing. You can own two different composite bows, one for when you're Raging, and one for when you're not. You can use a bow designed for your full Raging Strength at all times, incurring a -2 penalty to any attacks you make when not Raging. Or you can use a bow that only scales up to your non-Raging Strength at all times, forfeiting the bonus damage from the Strength boost that come with Rage.

In terms of defense, the Barbarian class can be very good if you use the Devil's Luck ACF. You trade your damage reduction for a luck bonus on all saves, eventually gaining a +6 luck bonus to all saves. That very nearly converts Ref and Will into good saving throws. And if you're Raging, you wind up with one of the best Will saves in the game. Your Fort save goes from "great" to "ludicrous."

I'm not certain which category to put it under, but the Skilled City Dweller ACF gives Barbarian Tumble as a class skill, which aids in safely repositioning on the battlefield.

Barbarians can be decent trapfinders. The Trapkiller ACF lets them deal with non-magical traps using Survival and attack rolls, two things the Barbarian was likely already investing in. You don't get the ability to deal with magical traps, but then the party mage can already handle those with Detect Magic and Dispel, so mundane traps were all the "trapfinder" ever really needed to be able to handle anyway.

For socializing, Barbarians can use the Skilled City Dweller ACF to gain Gather Information and Sense motive as class skills. You won't be good at talking, but you'll be hard to put one over on.

Where are the Fanshields Substitution Levels, Street Fighter ACF, Devil's Luck ACF, Skilled City Dweller ACF, and Trapkiller ACFs located?

As for defense, I agree they can be very good at defense, but they also have lots of holes in that defense that you have to plug with ACFs, some of which may not be compatible with each other. For example, if Devil's Luck were to replace Fast Movement (I doubt it does, this is just an example), you're blocked from accessing the Lion Spiritual Totem ACF which very much negatively impacts your capacity to debuff as well as your melee combat rating, just for a potentially higher rating in defense. To me, that would be a big sacrifice and would mean that overall the defense rating should still be only slightly above average.

As for Melee Comba, you're right. All of those things are fantastic, and really quite strong. But, they don't cover any of the innate weaknesses holding a Barbarian back from being a truly perfect combatant. None of those that you mentioned make you able to fly, hit incorporeal enemies, or see invisible enemies more than once per day, and ultimately, the Barbarian isn't being held back by lack of damage of ground maneuverability, they're being held back by the lack of how they engage. Since they can't innately engage with non-physical or flying enemies, that really holds them back from doing their thing a bit too often to give them any higher than an 8, and an 8 is still my way of saying they're really good at that thing they're doing. Once I get the sources and look at them, I'll be sure to link the OP to your post and share them though, because as PoeticallyPsyco said, it would be nice if others can end up using this as a resource as well.

[AnimeTheCat]

Trapkiller is from Dungeonscape. Ferocity is from the CityScape web enhancement (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a), it give +4 bonus to Str and Dex for a -2 penalty for ranged attacks beyond 30', entering is as an immediate action which can also be used in intimidation builds.

Thank you! I'll be updating the OP with a link to your post as well as the change in my opinions because of it. I hadn't heard about this and I definitely think I prefer it over Trapsense anyway.

[Maat Mons]

Fangshields: Champions of Valor, page 40
Street Fighter: Cityscape Web Enhancement (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a)
Devil's Luck: Dragon 349, page 92
Skilled City Dweller: Cityscape Web Enhancement (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a)
Trap Killer: Dungeonscape, page 8

[AnimeTheCat]

Is that what that indicates though? After all, barbarians decidedly do get feats, and they can use those feats to do these things without getting anything more than they have at baseline. What if barbarians get a lot of additional utility via these feats (as one might expect of any class), but then the marginal utility of feats on top of that actually aren't that important? Barbarians can certainly do this particular thing without adding on more feats, though it's an open question whether that's actually the route they'd take.

Moreover, I would say that the presence of these unique feature boosting majigs decidedly isn't a case for offering fancy improvement methods that align with those feats. Oftentimes, these class feature boosting feats are major upgrades to class features that are already quite good. I mean, a lot of the better feats in the game are unique to casters, and I would hardly say those classes have some major absence that demands a fix.

For an example of both simultaneously, consider the class closest to my heart, the druid. A standard high op feat load out might look something like aberrant blood, greenbound summoning, natural spell, aberration wild shape, ashbound, gatekeeper initiate, and then the last choice isn't even that great. Maybe a crafting feat? Dragon wild shape? Metamagic of some kind? I dunno. Every single one of those feats is simultaneously excellent and near unique to the class. And yet, as the drop off near the end indicates, there's never a point at which you really need any more feats. Maybe you want some animal companion feats, or wish ashbound were earlier where it could do a bit more, or whatever, but the next few feats you add are gonna be a lot weaker than those already there. And, obviously, the presence of these unique feats does not indicate an absence within the class.

I'm sorry I missed your response when I was reading through earlier. I would have responded sooner and now it looks like I tried to ignore you. :( Sorry.

To the point though, I just want to reiterate this is solely about classes. This is not about characters. Characters decidedly do get feats at regular intervals. Classes only get feats if specifically dictated. I knew I rambled on too much in that paragraph but let me try at clarify where my rambling was going. If, at the end of this, I discover that classes like Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, and Wizard are just so much more powerful, innately as a class, than classes such as Barbarian, Fighter, and Monk, I would look at what areas those less powerful classes are behind in and consider what class features or abilities would shore up some of the more glaring weaknesses that the class may have. The idea would be to focus on making sure that all of the classes are balanced with each other. If, for some reason, the Druid ranks particularly low in some area and doesn't perform well in many of the other rating areas (unlikely), then maybe a potential solution would be to include a series of feats that the Druid can choose from to improve their Wild Shape or Summoning, or Animal Companion. If the class needs it. For the time being, just looking at the ratings of one class is meaningless, and I acknowledge that.

In short, "Is that what that indicates though?" Maybe? I'm not actually sure yet as I don't know how this class falls in relation to the other classes, nor do I really know if that sort of enhancement to the class would even do anything to shore it up when compared to other classes. Not every class needs to be everything. That paragraph was speculation at best, and exhausted ramblings at worst.

EDIT:

Fangshields: Champions of Valor, page 40
Street Fighter: Cityscape Web Enhancement (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a)
Devil's Luck: Dragon 349, page 92
Skilled City Dweller: Cityscape Web Enhancement (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a)
Trap Killer: Dungeonscape, page 8

Thanks for those. I'll update the OP when I get the chance, though I'm going to need to wait until I get home to dig in to the web enhancements, Dragon Mag, and Fangshields. I don't have access to any of the sources at the moment.

[MeimuHakurei]

I like this rating, and now I want to do my own class analysis on the Wizard. I'm not the most experienced optimizer and struggle to make use of non-core spells (save for a few infamous ones like Ice Assassin and Love's Pain) but I should understand what makes the class powerful.

As for the analysis, the Barbarian is kind of the typical WotC martial - strong in melee, mediocre to bad at almost everything else.

[Troacctid]

It seems like you've reinvented the Niche Ranking System (www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?314701-Person_Man-s-Niche-Ranking-System) here, but with more in-depth explanations.

[AnimeTheCat]

It seems like you've reinvented the Niche Ranking System (www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?314701-Person_Man-s-Niche-Ranking-System) here, but with more in-depth explanations.

YEAH! That's the one I was talking about in the OP. I couldn't for the life of me remember what it was called nor could I find it in searches. This was absolutely inspired by it, but that system still accounted for equipment and character level and racial benefits, which I am excluding at all costs. This is purely about the class, not builds or characters. Thank you for linking it though because I really did want to link it because I do like it and it was the inspiration for my concept.

[InvisibleBison]

This is purely about the class, not builds or characters.

This strikes me as a kind of odd methodology. Classes don't exist in isolation; they have skills, feats, equipment, etc. I'm not sure what the point of an analysis that deliberately leaves those out. It's like trying to find the world's best pizza but not paying any attention to toppings.

[AnimeTheCat]

This strikes me as a kind of odd methodology. Classes don't exist in isolation; they have skills, feats, equipment, etc. I'm not sure what the point of an analysis that deliberately leaves those out. It's like trying to find the world's best pizza but not paying any attention to toppings.

Except it's not. It's like comparing the dough from 10 different pizza joints to see which one tastes the best. The dough is one component of a pizza just like class is one component of a character. To have balance across characters, it's best to understand each fundamental ingredient or component that makes up the character.

As I said up in the earlier parts of the thread, ultimately you should be able to round out a class to cover some weaknesses or give them a stronger class identity with house rules. There will be distinctly stronger classes and distinctly weaker classes. This helps directly identify issues with individual classes while not taking outside influence into consideration.

[Maat Mons]

And anyway, everybody knows that the best pizzas have no toppings. Toppings just get in the way of enjoying the bread, cheese, and sauce.

Cheese pizza all the way! Deepdish cheese pizza. That gets you the right crust-to-cheese ratio. ... Unless you get it with extra cheese. (Don't get it with extra cheese.)

[AnimeTheCat]

And anyway, everybody knows that the best pizzas have no toppings. Toppings just get in the way of enjoying the bread, cheese, and sauce.

Cheese pizza all the way! Deepdish cheese pizza. That gets you the right crust-to-cheese ratio. ... Unless you get it with extra cheese. (Don't get it with extra cheese.)

I like this, and I concur with this assessment of pizzaing.

[nedz]

It seems like you've reinvented the Niche Ranking System (www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?314701-Person_Man-s-Niche-Ranking-System) here, but with more in-depth explanations.

Hmm, it seems I actually posted on that thread — I had forgotten all about it.

I tend to view this stuff more atomically these days, at least when I'm playing a character.
e.g.
How will I deal with being webbed ?
How will I deal with incorporeal foes ?
How will I deal with being grappled ?
How will I deal with undead ?
What can I do in melee ?
How can I target one foe ?
How can I target many foes ?
What can I do at long range ?
etc.

[NigelWalmsley]

To have balance across characters, it's best to understand each fundamental ingredient or component that makes up the character.

But it isn't fundamental. Context matters. Most classes have some kind of selectable abilities beyond their class features. Wizards get spells, Fighters get feats, and so on. The class isn't actually a fundamental element, and the notion that it is was one of the worse assumptions baked into typical tiering efforts. Take, for example, the Wizard and the Druid. They are, roughly, equally powerful as classes. But the Wizard gets more from PrCs (because they have less actual class features). Your analysis can and should account for that.

[eggynack]

I'm sorry I missed your response when I was reading through earlier. I would have responded sooner and now it looks like I tried to ignore you. :( Sorry.

To the point though, I just want to reiterate this is solely about classes. This is not about characters. Characters decidedly do get feats at regular intervals. Classes only get feats if specifically dictated. I knew I rambled on too much in that paragraph but let me try at clarify where my rambling was going. If, at the end of this, I discover that classes like Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, and Wizard are just so much more powerful, innately as a class, than classes such as Barbarian, Fighter, and Monk, I would look at what areas those less powerful classes are behind in and consider what class features or abilities would shore up some of the more glaring weaknesses that the class may have. The idea would be to focus on making sure that all of the classes are balanced with each other. If, for some reason, the Druid ranks particularly low in some area and doesn't perform well in many of the other rating areas (unlikely), then maybe a potential solution would be to include a series of feats that the Druid can choose from to improve their Wild Shape or Summoning, or Animal Companion. If the class needs it. For the time being, just looking at the ratings of one class is meaningless, and I acknowledge that.

In short, "Is that what that indicates though?" Maybe? I'm not actually sure yet as I don't know how this class falls in relation to the other classes, nor do I really know if that sort of enhancement to the class would even do anything to shore it up when compared to other classes. Not every class needs to be everything. That paragraph was speculation at best, and exhausted ramblings at worst.

I guess my issue here is that you're missing out on holes that are already filled. It's possible that a standard barbarian already has debuff powers, via fear rage, and that granting the barbarian native fear rage powers is thus redundant. If the barbarian has few enough necessary feats, then this fix could straight up fail to increase utility.

[noce]

I want to thank you for this interesting read. I'm looking forward for the other classes.


I really want this to boil down exclusively to the classes and what separates the classes from each other, if anything. If the classes themselves are innately balanced, then maybe that can help people balance their games in other ways.

I'd like to suggest you to take into account also how much the class is supported by feats and PrCs specifically tailored for the class.
For example, while it's true that Divine and Domain feats are not class-specific, it's also true that a Cleric's Turn Undead should be evalued taking into account those feats, and not merely its ability to interact with undeads.

You could, for example, add an 11th category called "Feats/PrCs support", just saying.
Anyway, it's your evaluation method, and I'm obviously fine with your rules. It's just a suggestion. :smallsmile:

[NigelWalmsley]

You could, for example, add an 11th category called "Feats/PrCs support", just saying.

That seems like adding epicycles. Also, if the goal is to figure out how classes are balanced, I think the methodology is bad. Not all classes need to have an equal overall score across niches for balance to be achieved. I'm almost certain that e.g. the Bard will end up with a higher overall score than the Dread Necromancer, yet the latter class is more powerful. It's actually totally okay for a class to be very good at a couple things, because if you can solve all your problems by hitting them in the face, it doesn't actually matter if you could also solve them by controlling the battlefield instead. The problems are still solved.

[AnimeTheCat]

But it isn't fundamental. Context matters. Most classes have some kind of selectable abilities beyond their class features. Wizards get spells, Fighters get feats, and so on. The class isn't actually a fundamental element, and the notion that it is was one of the worse assumptions baked into typical tiering efforts. Take, for example, the Wizard and the Druid. They are, roughly, equally powerful as classes. But the Wizard gets more from PrCs (because they have less actual class features). Your analysis can and should account for that.

how is one of the character level selctions not a fundamental part of the total character? Do you or do you not select a class at each level? Yes context matters, but you can look at JUST feats and determine how feats that have a similar number of prerequisites or similar power point compare to each other. The class the the primary source of power for every character. It determines what abilities you get at a certain level. More so than feats or race, your class determines how you interact with the game world by dictating your core ability set (class features), your training (weapon/armor proficiencies and skills), and sometimes alignment (which is silly but it's a thing). So much about the core concept of a character is bound to class, so I completely disagree with you. The character class is absolutely a fundamental element of a character. If class wasn't a fundamental element of a character, there would be no difference between the classes, but there is. I want to reiterate what I said in my original post,

The Tier system isn’t bad, and the community retiering threads were great fun with loads of conversation, arguing, and debate about the placement. This is not a replacement for those tiers by any means. This is something more akin to the ranking thread that put scores for each class in a variety of categories. I wasn’t personally happy with it because I thought that it strongly favored casters a bit much, and I just felt as though I wanted to make an in-depth analysis of why I feel the way I feel for each class. More than anything, this is just my opinion on the PHB classes, their Alternative Class Features, and what I think is a useful way of discussing the classes in a measurable format.
I'm not trying to retier anything and this isn't even a tier list. It is nothing more than an analysis of a very important part of what makes a character a character. This has nothing to do with prestige classes, though the concept can be used to compare prestige classes in the same way. This is little more than a codefied method of identifying weaknesses and strengths of classes and, when coupled with other analysis of the classes, you can identify trends, make corrections if desired, and address issues if needed. The analysis is accounting for exactly what it needs to, things granted by strictly class features that can, and will, identify shortfalls and strengths of each class.


I guess my issue here is that you're missing out on holes that are already filled. It's possible that a standard barbarian already has debuff powers, via fear rage, and that granting the barbarian native fear rage powers is thus redundant. If the barbarian has few enough necessary feats, then this fix could straight up fail to increase utility.

I can see your point, but to me, that just means that either one of two things is necessary, a) the barbarian is a perfectly balanced class and does not need any additions to bring the core abilites of the class up to a more balanced point in comparison to other classes, or b) the barbarian is an imbalanced class in comparison to other classes and addressing an area native to the class that could be improved will increase the power/versatility/ability of the class to perform at a more balanced level in comparison to other classes. If a class is not innately as capable as another class, it stands to reason that the class can be improved by shoring up areas that it is lacking in which is a double improvement in the case of the Barbarian because other bulid resources (for a characte) are thus freed up to further improve the abilitie of the character, thus making the class self-containing in terms of ability.


I want to thank you for this interesting read. I'm looking forward for the other classes.

I'd like to suggest you to take into account also how much the class is supported by feats and PrCs specifically tailored for the class.
For example, while it's true that Divine and Domain feats are not class-specific, it's also true that a Cleric's Turn Undead should be evalued taking into account those feats, and not merely its ability to interact with undeads.

You could, for example, add an 11th category called "Feats/PrCs support", just saying.
Anyway, it's your evaluation method, and I'm obviously fine with your rules. It's just a suggestion. :smallsmile:

I'm really trying to avoid looking at things that are not provided from the class itself. The whole thing will be ugly, I know it will be, but it will highlight the actual issues in the system I think. Things that we all know, like Wizards getting ACFs that are just a simple "no you didn't" (looking at you Abrupt Jaunt), Druids getting a personal fighter plus spells plus being able to turn themselves into anything under the sun (basically), etc. I think these are innate flaws in specifically the class system and I think an analysis that solely looks at the class by itself is the only way to adjust classes to have them be more balanced. After a class specific balance is achieved, then further analysis can be done on feat/prestige class suppport to see where that leaves characters as a whole.

EDIT: Response came in while I was replying

That seems like adding epicycles. Also, if the goal is to figure out how classes are balanced, I think the methodology is bad. Not all classes need to have an equal overall score across niches for balance to be achieved. I'm almost certain that e.g. the Bard will end up with a higher overall score than the Dread Necromancer, yet the latter class is more powerful. It's actually totally okay for a class to be very good at a couple things, because if you can solve all your problems by hitting them in the face, it doesn't actually matter if you could also solve them by controlling the battlefield instead. The problems are still solved.

Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to make every class a 5+ in every category. In fact, I'm not trying to DO anything other than codify the abilities innate to each class into a more measurable view. if the Bard ends up with a higher overall score, it will be because the bard can do either a) More things (in general), b) Fewer things, but all better, c) nearly everything competently, d) everything, just better in comparison to the Dread Necromancer. But, I haven't even begun to tackle bard yet, I'm still enjoying discussion about the barbarian and this idea as a whole. When I start researching and writing up my analysis on the bard, I'm sure that the overall process will come more in to focus.

In fact, in the analysis of the barbarian I even highlighted that for battlefield control the Barbarian can simply make themselves the most threatening thing on the battlefield by using ther Melee Combat ability, or they have options to go another route an trip things up. Where it fails is its ability to solve problems when they can't hit them really hard, which is accurately highlighted in the analysis. They have little to no form of social interaction ability (not really a problem), they have no way to improve their allies (not necessarily a problem), they have no real way to be stealthy or meaningfully improve their stealth (can be a problem for a combat focused character), and their ability to debuff the enemy is not particularly good with what they do get being mediocre at best (definitely can be a problem for a combat focused character).

These shortcomings can be patched up by character level feats as others have pointed out, but that is no good when compared to other classes that are not patching holes in their class but are rather improving their abilities with their character level feats. When some classes are so well off that they literally need nothing else to function well, but other classes require resource expenditure to simply function at the most basic of levels, that's a problem, and it's a problem that can easily be fixed.

[NigelWalmsley]

how is one of the character level selctions not a fundamental part of the total character? Do you or do you not select a class at each level?

You select a feat at regular intervals. Does that mean feats have a fundamental value that is separate from the rest of your character? Of course not. Power Attack is worth something different to a ranged Rogue, a Fighter, a melee Cleric, and a BFC Wizard.


The class the the primary source of power for every character.

Not for the Wizard. Its primary source of power is spells. The Fighter's primary source of power is feats. And, yes, you get those through your class. But they're still a big list of selectable abilities that seem to me exactly analogous to the process of choosing feats, or PrCs, or items. If you can evaluate the Fighter (a class that has no self-contained class features), you can evaluate the impact of non-class resources.


So much about the core concept of a character is bound to class, so I completely disagree with you.

I mean, maybe you do, but that's not really what I said. It's not about how large the impact of class is, it's about if you can separate that from other things. And you can't. Moreover, you shouldn't. People don't play classes, they play characters. If you want to understand how to balance the game, you need to look at characters.


If class wasn't a fundamental element of a character, there would be no difference between the classes, but there is.

Doesn't this make every mechanically-defined element of a character fundamental? There are differences between feats, and spells, and skills, and PrCs, and races, and flaws, and magic items, and teamwork benefits, and those organization things from the PHBII.


This has nothing to do with prestige classes, though the concept can be used to compare prestige classes in the same way.

Let's talk about prestige classes for a second. Specifically, let's talk about the Rainbow Servant. Assume the Rainbow WarSnake interpretation (e.g. full casting, gives Warmage-type characters all Cleric spells). How good is this PrC? Well, that depends a lot on what class you are before entering. If you were a Warmage (or Beguiler, or Dread Necromancer), it's great. You get a huge number of spells to cast from spontaneously. But if you were a Sorcerer, it kinda sucks. You have to spend spells known on the Cleric spells, and they aren't particularly better than the Wizard spells you could already take. Since you're limited primarily by number of spells know, you've gained relatively little. The Wizard is a little better, but he's still not really all that enthused about getting a bunch of spells he can learn, since he was already probably not learning all the spells on his list. The value of the PrC is not separable from the character taking it.

[AnimeTheCat]

You select a feat at regular intervals. Does that mean feats have a fundamental value that is separate from the rest of your character? Of course not. Power Attack is worth something different to a ranged Rogue, a Fighter, a melee Cleric, and a BFC Wizard.

why does this matter? If a class can't function without patching a hole, how does it compare to a class that doesn't have to expend character level resources to perform basic functions. Again, this simply is not about characters, this in fact has nothing to do with characters at all. This is purely about classes and finding issues or good points about only clases. I don't know how to be any more emphatic about that.


Not for the Wizard. Its primary source of power is spells.

How is the wizard getting access to the spells? That's a bit of a pedantic statement if you ask me. So, if the primary source of power for the wizard class is the wizard spell list, how are all the other classes getting access to that wizard spell list? Oh, they're not because that spell list is uniqe to the class and is almost like a *gasp* class feature...


The Fighter's primary source of power is feats. And, yes, you get those through your class. But they're still a big list of selectable abilities that seem to me exactly analogous to the process of choosing feats, or PrCs, or items. If you can evaluate the Fighter (a class that has no self-contained class features), you can evaluate the impact of non-class resources.

I'm really not sure what your argument is here other than you feel like this is something its not. This is purely an analysis of classes with no outside influence. Because the fighter's only source of power is feats, it is important to identify those limitations and see how that can compare to other classes. I suspect the answer is not well, but I'm not even there yet. Just because I can evaluate more than just the class doesn't mean that it will meaningfully add to a discussion of just a class, and this is intended to be purely a discussion of just classes, what those classes get, and how those classes compare to each other on a very raw level.


I mean, maybe you do, but that's not really what I said. It's not about how large the impact of class is, it's about if you can separate that from other things. And you can't. Moreover, you shouldn't. People don't play classes, they play characters. If you want to understand how to balance the game, you need to look at characters.

Doesn't this make every mechanically-defined element of a character fundamental? There are differences between feats, and spells, and skills, and PrCs, and races, and flaws, and magic items, and teamwork benefits, and those organization things from the PHBII.

Yes, but not in the way you defined it. Skills, spells, class features, BAB, Saves, and HP are all determined by one choice, Class. So all that leaves after that is Race and Character level determined features like Character Level feats and Equipment. Class makes up such a huge portion of what makes a character a character, that it's actually quite easy to look at them in a vaccuum. You're right that people don't play classes, but that's not what this is about and never has been. The title of the thread is "Player Class Analysis". This isn't about characters so stop trying to make it about them.




Let's talk about prestige classes for a second. Specifically, let's talk about the Rainbow Servant. Assume the Rainbow WarSnake interpretation (e.g. full casting, gives Warmage-type characters all Cleric spells). How good is this PrC? Well, that depends a lot on what class you are before entering. If you were a Warmage (or Beguiler, or Dread Necromancer), it's great. You get a huge number of spells to cast from spontaneously. But if you were a Sorcerer, it kinda sucks. You have to spend spells known on the Cleric spells, and they aren't particularly better than the Wizard spells you could already take. Since you're limited primarily by number of spells know, you've gained relatively little. The Wizard is a little better, but he's still not really all that enthused about getting a bunch of spells he can learn, since he was already probably not learning all the spells on his list. The value of the PrC is not separable from the character taking it.

For one thing, why are we talking about prestige classes in a thread devoted to the analysis of the abilities on a singular base class, the Barbarian? You're muddying the waters by discussing anything other than the subject here. This tangent is not constructive because it's not even a consideration. If you want to compare the relative strengths and weaknesses of prestige classes, you may have to adjust the ruberic to account for the differences in base classes and prestige classes, and one of those adjustments might be the inclusion of an "Entry" score that not only evaluates the difficulty/ease of entry, but also codifies the power swing when entered by different classes. Or, perhaps it has a fluid score that is based on the entry of different classes entirely, so it would look something more like "Rainbow Servant (Warmage)" and "Rainbow Servant (Sorcerer)" where each individual class that can meet the entry requirements changes the overall versatility of the class. Even then, I don't know how beneficial either of those would be because how you enter the class doesn't change what the class does in any way. The class grants access to the cleric spell list at level 10. This is a huge boone regardless of what class enters it because it grants you access to a whole host of healing spells as well as buff spells and debuff spells. This is a really good prestige class, and as such it would score very high in the healing, buffing, and debuffing categories. Regardless of how a character enters the class, the class is still capable of granting very powerful healing, buffing, and debuffing spells. The "value" of the prestige class is relative to the character, but the rating is not because the class grants what it grants.

I really don't know how I can explain it any better. This has nothing to do with characters. This only has to do with classes. This is not a build guide. This is not a tier list. This is not a character evaluation. This is an analysis of the abilities granted to a class strictly by the class.

[ShurikVch]

Stealth: 3 – Barbarians are not stealthy characters.Halfling Barbarian variant in Dragon #341 gets Hide bonus equal to half of their Barbarian levels (min. +1); give them Fox and Serpent totems, max their Dex, maybe take some cross-class ranks in Hide and Move Silently...


Healing: 1 – Nope. Not your thing. Not even native access to Heal, nor any ACFs that improve your ability to use the skill. Leave this to nearly any other class. Not a 0 simply because you're not prevented from putting cross class ranks in the Heal Skill for long-term care.Fangshields Barbarian can spend their daily use of Rage to heal 2xHD hp (7th-level CF Raging Vigor)
Gnome Barbarian variant in Dragon #341 gets, instead their usual SLAs, Cure Minor Wounds, Guidance, Jump, and Resistance (self only)

[AnimeTheCat]

Halfling Barbarian variant in Dragon #341 gets Hide bonus equal to half of their Barbarian levels (min. +1); give them Fox and Serpent totems, max their Dex, maybe take some cross-class ranks in Hide and Move Silently...

Fangshields Barbarian can spend their daily use of Rage to heal 2xHD hp (7th-level CF Raging Vigor)
Gnome Barbarian variant in Dragon #341 gets, instead their usual SLAs, Cure Minor Wounds, Guidance, Jump, and Resistance (self only)

This analysis was in the abscense of any racial choice, so I won't be considering the two racial substitution levels. I did just find out about Fangshields yesterday, so I will be adjusting that to include, however I don't know how heavily I feel a setting specific, loction specific, organization specific substitution level will apply to adjust, but probably from healing 1 to healing 2. It's not a good ability by any means, but should be included for use as a resource if people desire to do so.

To touch on it though, even with all of those methods of getting bonuses to Hide, you're not going to perform as well as a rogue that does nothing more than maintain (edited portion) maxed ranks. You'll have +1/2 level (max 10 if you go Barbarian 20), +2 Hide from Fox Spirit Totem OR +2 Move Silently from Serpent Totem (Both replace standard Fast Movement, so they are mutually exclusive), maximizing Dexterity runs counter to your Melee Combat ability, so perhaps if you focused on doing everything to improve your Ranged Combat that could be beneficial, and cross class ranks from your 4+int in move silently and hide... You're just not going to be very efficient at it and many of the other parts of the class suffer as a result. If there were a way for the class (without racial influence) to get them as class skills, this would become worlds more viable. As it stands though, there is not.

EDIT: Clarified the second paragraph.

[ShurikVch]

To touch on it though, even with all of those methods of getting bonuses to Hide, you're not going to perform as well as a rogue that does nothing more than maintain (edited portion) maxed ranks.Sure, but again - Rogue is already among the best stealthers in the game
My point wasn't to dethrone the skillmonkeys as "the most stealthy class", but just to bump the results a bit (at the very least, to "Stealth - 4", maybe "5")


+2 Hide from Fox Spirit Totem OR +2 Move Silently from Serpent Totem (Both replace standard Fast Movement, so they are mutually exclusive)My bad!
But in that case, Fox Spirit Totem is definitely better, since - contrary to what's you saying - it gives +4 bonusi


maximizing Dexterity runs counter to your Melee Combat abilityDex-focused Melee is doable via Shadow Blade feat or Fierce magical weapon
I mean: if somebody would take Ferocity ACF on their Barbarian, they as well could go all the way and get from the Dex as much as possible


Also:
The other gives you a Dragon’s Frightful presence, which would be really good, but the DC is 10+1/2 level+your Charisma Modifier. Not something you’re probably itching to bolster, and not something you can innately improve.Unless the Barbarian in question is Incoporeal Undead... :smallamused:

[AnimeTheCat]

Sure, but again - Rogue is already among the best stealthers in the game
My point wasn't to dethrone the skillmonkeys as "the most stealthy class", but just to bump the results a bit (at the very least, to "Stealth - 4", maybe "5")

Rogue is one of the best stealthers not just because of skill ranks though. Rogues also have access to innate access to things that improve their ability to stealth such as, but not including, the rogue special ability skill masterythat lets them take 10 on move silently and hide checks even under stressful situations, access to bonus feats that can improve stealth (again from rogue special abilities) opening up innate access to all of the feats that drastically improve stealth such as darkstalker and similar.

I would say that an "average" stealther is one that simply can maintain maxed ranks in hide and move silently. Nothing more, nothing less. That's all they're doing. They still fall victim to scent, tremmor sense, blind sight, etc. Beating those are what makes you a good or great stealther. If you can't maintain high ranks in hide or move silently, you're going to be behind enemies that have maxed ranks in listen or spot which means you'll be behind the bell curve. Being able to be below average foes with your abilities do not make your abilities average.


My bad!
But in that case, Fox Spirit Totem is definitely better, since - contrary to what's you saying - it gives +4 bonusi

You're right, but still not earth shatteringly good, especially since you again give up pounce from Lion Spiritual Totem and every other standard totem except for Wolf Totem. Taking that in to account, how such a move would limit your primary ability, I don't think that's a particularly huge merit for the stealth of the class, and still a +4 bonus on a non class skill with a class that has very limited skill points and little reason to have high levels of intelligence is not a particularly huge boone.


Dex-focused Melee is doable via Shadow Blade feat or Fierce magical weapon
I mean: if somebody would take Ferocity ACF on their Barbarian, they as well could go all the way and get from the Dex as much as possible

Also:Unless the Barbarian in question is Incoporeal Undead... :smallamused:

Yes, when looking at Ferocity you can be more dexterity based, but you don't have innate access to the Shadow Blade feat, nor is this accounting for any particular or specific magical item. You could go 100% dexterity focused and be a ranged barbarian, though the class lacks the real support to be an efficient ranged attacker and you'll run in to many of the ranged combat shortfalls. There is no innate method of getting Dex to Damage, nor is there any way to get innate weapon finesse to maximize your attack rolls based on Dexterity. There's just no particularly good way to use your high dexterity without sacrificing your combat ability without either relying on abilities outside of your class or specific equipment.

Also, again not taking in to account any form of specific race. Just the class.

It's OK if classes have weaknesses. All I'm doing is analyzing them to find the weaknesses so that maybe I can come up with some idea of class balance as a whole before anything else is taken in to context.

[NigelWalmsley]

why does this matter? If a class can't function without patching a hole, how does it compare to a class that doesn't have to expend character level resources to perform basic functions.

Because it makes the answers you give more useful. I understand that you want to do a "No Items, Fox Only, Final Destination" ranking. My point is that such a ranking isn't actually that useful, because it omits a large portion of what people care about. "How good is the Barbarian in an abstractly defined way that only includes the Barbarian" is not a question people care about. "How effective is a character who is a Barbarian" is a question people care about.


How is the wizard getting access to the spells?

The point isn't how you get access to it, it's about how you measure it. If you can assign a value to "some selections from this giant list" when it's spells, you can do that for feats, or skill tricks, or PrCs. And if you do that, you generate more useful results.


So, if the primary source of power for the wizard class is the wizard spell list, how are all the other classes getting access to that wizard spell list?

Well the Sorcerer just picks off it. And the Warlock and Artificer can craft magic items. And the Cleric gets that ACF that lets them take some spells. Certainly access to the Wizard spell list is limited, but it's not actually something only the Wizard gets.


I'm really not sure what your argument is here other than you feel like this is something its not. This is purely an analysis of classes with no outside influence.

My question is why you are so adamant about answering a question that people are not asking. If you just want to know "how good are classes", Eggynack's list tells you that. Adding a bunch of categories doesn't really add any useful information, because the categories aren't equally valuable.


Yes, but not in the way you defined it. Skills, spells, class features, BAB, Saves, and HP are all determined by one choice, Class.

But those aren't determined by your class. You get bonus skill points for a high Intelligence, add various bonuses to skills, and can take cross-class ranks. You get more spells from a high casting stat, and can learn spells from feats, items, or PrCs. Your class features come from your class, but that's just another way of saying "class". BAB mostly comes from class, but there's Divine Power and you can get all the constituent parts other places. Saves get various non-class bonuses, as does HP. Class influences a lot of things, but it decides very little.


For one thing, why are we talking about prestige classes in a thread devoted to the analysis of the abilities on a singular base class, the Barbarian?

Well, that would be the part of your post that I quoted, where you said you could do this for PrCs. My point is that you can't do this for PrCs, because your mode of analysis doesn't work. Warmage is a pretty mediocre class, taken in a vacuum. Rainbow Servant is a pretty mediocre PrC, taken in a vacuum. But the interaction between them produces an enormously powerful character. What are we getting for ignoring that? It's not simplicity or brevity.


This is a huge boone regardless of what class enters it because it grants you access to a whole host of healing spells as well as buff spells and debuff spells.

Except it isn't. The Sorcerer does not get anything for being able to pick healing spells or buff spells. The Sorcerer gets three to five spells know of each level (above 0th). It doesn't matter how wide a list he is picking from, it matters what the best spells on that list are. And adding the Cleric list to the Wizard list doesn't move the needle that much. Certainly not enough to make Rainbow Servant a top-tier Sorcerer PrC. You could add a million spells to the Sorcerer list, and if none of them were better than the spells Sorcerers were taking now, it would not effect the power of the class at all.

[AnimeTheCat]

Because it makes the answers you give more useful. I understand that you want to do a "No Items, Fox Only, Final Destination" ranking. My point is that such a ranking isn't actually that useful, because it omits a large portion of what people care about. "How good is the Barbarian in an abstractly defined way that only includes the Barbarian" is not a question people care about. "How effective is a character who is a Barbarian" is a question people care about.

The point isn't how you get access to it, it's about how you measure it. If you can assign a value to "some selections from this giant list" when it's spells, you can do that for feats, or skill tricks, or PrCs. And if you do that, you generate more useful results.

Well the Sorcerer just picks off it. And the Warlock and Artificer can craft magic items. And the Cleric gets that ACF that lets them take some spells. Certainly access to the Wizard spell list is limited, but it's not actually something only the Wizard gets.

My question is why you are so adamant about answering a question that people are not asking. If you just want to know "how good are classes", Eggynack's list tells you that. Adding a bunch of categories doesn't really add any useful information, because the categories aren't equally valuable.

But those aren't determined by your class. You get bonus skill points for a high Intelligence, add various bonuses to skills, and can take cross-class ranks. You get more spells from a high casting stat, and can learn spells from feats, items, or PrCs. Your class features come from your class, but that's just another way of saying "class". BAB mostly comes from class, but there's Divine Power and you can get all the constituent parts other places. Saves get various non-class bonuses, as does HP. Class influences a lot of things, but it decides very little.

I did two things with this post.
1. Posed a simple question that I wanted the answer to, "how effective is this class on its own" implying no outside influences from any other source.
2. Analyzed the class without any outside influence, and posted my findings.

Here are things I did not do.
1. Claim this was a big question asked regularly by many forum posters.
2. Call this a ranking of the classes. In fact I said "More than anything, this is just my opinion on the PHB classes, their Alternative Class Features, and what I think is a useful way of discussing the classes in a measurable format." Distinctly not calling this a class ranking, rather an analysis. What you choose to do with that analysis is up to you.
3. Claim this was ever about characters.
4. Claim that I was sharing this for the benefit of anybody except myself. If you dont find any benefit to this, ignore it, it's not for you. I do, however, think there is benefit in looking at the classes in this way.
5. Claim this was a replacement for or better than the tier lists or other ranking models, specifically because my goal is not to create some new ranking system rather to analyze them and transfer my analysis into a measurable format to promote discussion.

Your class determines so much more than your ability scores do. Saves are a difference of 4 points. Usually in 2 ability scores. Skill points are a difference of anywhere between 4 and 12 ability points different! It's insane to say that your class isnt a deciding factor when looking at skills or saves. The difference between a D4 and a d6 HD is one hp on average and that's another 2 ability points. In fact, I would propose that your class dictates what your target ability scores should be rather than vice-versa.

With skills, I discussed various bonuses to skills and they weren't enough to really make meaningful differences. I even discussed cross class ranks, again deciding they weren't decisive. Cross class skills are expensive and rarely worthwhile.

I think the root of our discussion comes from this. You think I'm asking, "How good is the Barbarian in an abstractly defined way that only includes the Barbarian?" When in reality I'm asking, "what are the strengths and weaknesses of a barbarian independent of any outlying influence?" We're asking similar questions, but you're trying to posit that I'm asking a question to influence in game decision making while I am not doing that.



Well, that would be the part of your post that I quoted, where you said you could do this for PrCs. My point is that you can't do this for PrCs, because your mode of analysis doesn't work. Warmage is a pretty mediocre class, taken in a vacuum. Rainbow Servant is a pretty mediocre PrC, taken in a vacuum. But the interaction between them produces an enormously powerful character. What are we getting for ignoring that? It's not simplicity or brevity.

Except it isn't. The Sorcerer does not get anything for being able to pick healing spells or buff spells. The Sorcerer gets three to five spells know of each level (above 0th). It doesn't matter how wide a list he is picking from, it matters what the best spells on that list are. And adding the Cleric list to the Wizard list doesn't move the needle that much. Certainly not enough to make Rainbow Servant a top-tier Sorcerer PrC. You could add a million spells to the Sorcerer list, and if none of them were better than the spells Sorcerers were taking now, it would not effect the power of the class at all.

I'm not interested in discussing this tangent anymore at the moment or in this thread. It's not relevant to the OP and if you do want to discuss it further, just PM me.

[Dalmosh]

Just wanted to second Skilled City Dweller Social Barbarian, one of my players has one in my current campaign loosely inspired by Brad Pitt's character in Snatch, he's heaps of fun and able to do a lot of stuff with gather information, knowledge local and sense motive that really mixes up what you'd expect out of the class. I've been pleasantly surprised by how the character plays so far.

[AnimeTheCat]

Just wanted to second Skilled City Dweller Social Barbarian, one of my players has one in my current campaign loosely inspired by Brad Pitt's character in Snatch, he's heaps of fun and able to do a lot of stuff with gather information, knowledge local and sense motive that really mixes up what you'd expect out of the class. I've been pleasantly surprised by how the character plays so far.

For sure I'm planning on an adjustment. I haven't had time yet, but there will be some minor changes.

[AnimeTheCat]

I made some changes to include some ACFs that I had missed but still hadn't addressed, such as Fangshield (which ultimately requires specific races by way of needing to be non-humanoid), ferocity, and skilled city dweller. I created a little table to help visualize what ACFs restrict others, as a reference.

[Maat Mons]

I'm starting the get the impression that you're not working off a per-compiled ACF list (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=8732).

[AnimeTheCat]

I'm starting the get the impression that you're not working off a per-compiled ACF list (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=8732).

You're not wrong. When I started this I did not, however I know about it now for when I start digging in to Bard. Barbarian has basically turned in to catch up lol. Thanks for sharing that though, it is very appreciated.

[Troacctid]

You should probably be aware of the more complete version (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?444354-3-5-Alternative-Class-Features-(ported-from-Wizards-community-boards)) and the Dragon Magazine version (https://web.archive.org/web/20170217191237/http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=9028.0), then.