The Barbarian (3.5 Base Class, PEACH)

[nonsi]

It's really not. It's got a shapeshifter aspect, but that's where the similarities end. Rangers draw their power from nature, not animals or lycanthropy. Barbarians, on the other hand, have always drawn their power from emulating animals.

1. I said sort of.
2. I don't remember Conan emulating an animal.
3. Your class draws its power from emulating animals, plus it has a feature called "Primitive Mind". "Beastheart" seems a perfect fit to me. But it's your creation, so call it what you will.

Tell it to WotC.

Then WotC got this one wrong as well - just as they would, had they invented flying elephants and title it "Animal".

[NeoSeraphi]

1. I said sort of.
2. I don't remember Conan emulating an animal.
3. Your class draws its power from emulating animals, plus it has a feature called "Primitive Mind". "Beastheart" seems a perfect fit to me. But it's your creation, so call it what you will.

Never read anything about Conan. I'm talking about the WotC class, the barbarian, and its totem animals.

Then WotC got this one wrong as well - just as they would, had they invented flying elephants and title it "Animal".

Yes, they did. That doesn't mean I'm going to homebrew an ape and a dire ape just for this class. In D&D, apes have claws. So the ape totem barbarian grows claws.

[DrewVolker]

I really really like this class. (Yes I said really twice, as that is how much I like this class ^^)

It takes the barbarian (one of my favorite character types) to the next level in terms of epicness and flavor.

I plan on trying to ask a DM I might be playing under soon if he'd allow this class, and as part of my plea I want to bring up its power level when compared to other classes. Aka the tier system.
I am horrible at figuring out what classes are in what tier.
So, in your opinion, what tier would this class be and why?

Thanks!

[NeoSeraphi]

I really really like this class. (Yes I said really twice, as that is how much I like this class ^^)

It takes the barbarian (one of my favorite character types) to the next level in terms of epicness and flavor.

I plan on trying to ask a DM I might be playing under soon if he'd allow this class, and as part of my plea I want to bring up its power level when compared to other classes. Aka the tier system.
I am horrible at figuring out what classes are in what tier.
So, in your opinion, what tier would this class be and why?

Thanks!

This class has the same tier as the PHB barbarian, Tier 4. It has interesting options and flavor, but it's still pretty limited to just combat and raging. It has skills and skill points, but it doesn't have a myriad of skills that make it useful like a factotum or a rogue, and though it can Wild Shape, it can only change into a very small handful of forms, unlike the wildshape ranger, who can turn into any Medium or Small animal.

I would say that the Eagle Totem barbarian is pushing Tier 3, but that's mostly because of how useful and versatile flight is. If it does break into Tier 3, it's at the very bottom of it.

I'm glad you like the class. I hope your DM lets you try it.

[NeoSeraphi]

Added some clarification to the Wolf Totem's 18th level Totem Power (gotta love Trip control).

I'd really like to see someone playtest this character in a game. If you are interested and get it approved, please PM me a link to the IC so I can see for myself how it fares.

Edit: Updated Totem Companion to include the Legendary Companion ability.

[SpaceBadger]

I wouldn't want =all= Barbarians in my game to be like this, but I really like it as an option - either an archetype (I play PF) or an alternate base class, maybe call it Totem Barbarian or Beast Barbarian or something like that.

Nice work!

[NeoSeraphi]

The rage class feature's progression was looking a little awkward, so I decided to shift it around a little, moving Mighty Rage up to 14th level and adding a new upgrade, Rage of the Avatar, to 20th. Now the rage feature upgrades every 6 levels (though it takes 7 to get started).

I also added in Tireless Rage at 17th, since that still seems appropriate and needed.

[Deepbluediver]

Something that I've been thinking of: why do the rage bonuses not normally increase as your level improves? The +4 bonus to strength is great at level 1, less impressive at level 15. What if you got an increase to your rage bonuses every couple of levels?

[NeoSeraphi]

Something that I've been thinking of: why do the rage bonuses not normally increase as your level improves? The +4 bonus to strength is great at level 1, less impressive at level 15. What if you got an increase to your rage bonuses every couple of levels?

...Because that would completely break the game? A rare-typed (morale) bonus to two ability scores (one of which determines your hit points and your Fortitude save, the other completely encompasses your existence as a melee character), which stacks with enhancement bonuses, inherent bonuses, racial bonuses, and most importantly, your arbitrarily high base Strength when you Totem Shape or become a lycanthrope? Yeah, that's way too powerful.

As it stands now, getting +10 morale is pretty high. It's not as good as barbarian/frenzied berserker, but combining it with Master of the Wild/Totem Shape results in a very strong base class.

[Deepbluediver]

Sorry, I somehow didn't notice the Greater Rage and Mighty Rage improvements you already had. My bad.

[NeoSeraphi]

Sorry, I somehow didn't notice the Greater Rage and Mighty Rage improvements you already had. My bad.

Oh, well, that makes a lot more sense then.

No worries. Sorry if I sounded a little harsh, my impression from your post was something more like "Hey, your improvements are good, but what if it was like 4+2 Str per odd level, with like 20+ Str at level 20?" and I reacted the way I did. My bad.

[Deepbluediver]

Oh, well, that makes a lot more sense then.

No worries. Sorry if I sounded a little harsh, my impression from your post was something more like "Hey, your improvements are good, but what if it was like 4+2 Str per odd level, with like 20+ Str at level 20?" and I reacted the way I did. My bad.

Haha, no problem; I should have been more detailed in my original post. I definitely understand the need to take stacking bonuses into account for balance. And I was thinking more along the lines of +1 every 4 or 5 levels.

What I was actually considering was that the base bonus at level 1 should maybe be reduced, so that dipping one level of barbarian was less attractive, and the progression for the increasing bonus was smoother.

And like I said, I missed the improvements you already had in place anyway.

[NeoSeraphi]

What I was actually considering was that the base bonus at level 1 should maybe be reduced, so that dipping one level of barbarian was less attractive, and the progression for the increasing bonus was smoother.

I can understand your reasoning there, but ending at +10 is a good goal, and unfortunately I don't really see a level where I could increase it from +2 to +4 between 1st and 8th. Unless I make it +2 at 1st, +4 at 5, +6 at 10th, +8 at 15th, and +10 at 20th. That's always a possibility, I guess.

[DrewVolker]

I have a quick question about the totem companion.
When it gets the legendary animal template, does it also get the extra HD from said template?
I plan on playing a wolf totem barbarian in a upcoming game, and the legendary wolf has 12 more HD than the standard wolf. So when I hit that level, and my companion gets the template, do I add 12 HD to the companion?

[NeoSeraphi]

I have a quick question about the totem companion.
When it gets the legendary animal template, does it also get the extra HD from said template?
I plan on playing a wolf totem barbarian in a upcoming game, and the legendary wolf has 12 more HD than the standard wolf. So when I hit that level, and my companion gets the template, do I add 12 HD to the companion?

Hmm...I suppose so. It's level 17 after all, if you're going to keep your wolf that long instead of upgrading to a dire, you can have your power boost.

[DrewVolker]

Hmm...I suppose so. It's level 17 after all, if you're going to keep your wolf that long instead of upgrading to a dire, you can have your power boost.

Going off of the chart, its level 21st-23rd. Meaning it would be level 18 for a normal wolf companion, correct? Level + 3.

But, considering the dire wolf upgrade would give -6 from the level +3 (so really -3 in the end), wouldn't someone with a dire wolf get the legendary template applied to their companion at level 24? Or is it either a dire OR legendary companion choice?

I am just asking because I don't know.

[NeoSeraphi]

Going off of the chart, its level 21st-23rd. Meaning it would be level 18 for a normal wolf companion, correct? Level + 3.

But, considering the dire wolf upgrade would give -6 from the level +3 (so really -3 in the end), wouldn't someone with a dire wolf get the legendary template applied to their companion at level 24? Or is it either a dire OR legendary companion choice?

I am just asking because I don't know.

The barbarian does not have an epic progression, so there is no "level 24" here. And yes, it would be level 18, my mistake.

[DrewVolker]

The barbarian does not have an epic progression, so there is no "level 24" here. And yes, it would be level 18, my mistake.

Ah, would that mean that the animal companion would stop progressing after level 20? Or simply that once you hit 21st it just improves like the druids. Every three levels it gets +2 hit dice, a trick, +2 nat armor, +1 str and dex?
So if you go with dire wolf, once you hit 21 you stop using the table on the class and just go with what I outlined above?

[NeoSeraphi]

Ah, would that mean that the animal companion would stop progressing after level 20? Or simply that once you hit 21st it just improves like the druids. Every three levels it gets +2 hit dice, a trick, +2 nat armor, +1 str and dex?
So if you go with dire wolf, once you hit 21 you stop using the table on the class and just go with what I outlined above?

The barbarian does not have an epic progression. I didn't make one and I wouldn't endorse one. After level 20, you multiclass, and your new class does not grant you any advancement.

[DrewVolker]

The barbarian does not have an epic progression. I didn't make one and I wouldn't endorse one. After level 20, you multiclass, and your new class does not grant you any advancement.

Oh wow, I honestly don't know why I failed to grasp that the first time around.
I am very sorry about that, haha. Brain fail I guess.

Either way, if my DM lets me just keep going into the epic levels with this class would you say for balance reasons it'd be best to not allow a dire + legendary companion?

Edit: I mean by following the rules set for taking any base class into epic.

[NeoSeraphi]

Oh wow, I honestly don't know why I failed to grasp that the first time around.
I am very sorry about that, haha. Brain fail I guess.

Either way, if my DM lets me just keep going into the epic levels with this class would you say for balance reasons it'd be best to not allow a dire + legendary companion?

Edit: I mean by following the rules set for taking any base class into epic.

I can't say for or against, much for the same reason as to why I would refuse to endorse epic levels in the first place: I've never played an epic game. I don't know anything about the levels past 21, nor the foes you encounter.

I would say, leave it up to your DM. However, with rumors of monsters that can magically age your character, and the mighty paragon template floating around, I can't see why an animal with 30+HD and 40 Str would be particularly unbalancing.

[DrewVolker]

I can't say for or against, much for the same reason as to why I would refuse to endorse epic levels in the first place: I've never played an epic game. I don't know anything about the levels past 21, nor the foes you encounter.

I would say, leave it up to your DM. However, with rumors of monsters that can magically age your character, and the mighty paragon template floating around, I can't see why an animal with 30+HD and 40 Str would be particularly unbalancing.

I appreciate the time you have taken to answer all of my questions.
I will talk about it with my DM.

Thanks again for everything.

[Person_Man]

You constantly shame me with your prolific output of homebrew. I demand that you cut back, or find me a job with less supervision.

Anywho, I apoligize if I missed it or if I'm misreading it, but natural weapons should be based on size, not a flat never-changing number. Otherwise a Huge Barbarian deals the same claw damage as a Tiny Barbarian, and would thus never use his claws over an appropriately sized weapon. For example, page 54 of Magic of Incarnum states that the damage values given in soulmelds are for medium characters, and that smaller and larger characters should adjust the values as normal based on the PHB pg 114. You may wish to include a similar caveat somewhere in your class description.

I would also tone down the Totem Companion to have an effective Druid level equal to your Barbarian level, and not Barbarian +3. Otherwise you could end up with Companions that are stronger then the base class, and with more hit die.

You may also wish to look at the Pathfinder "Beast Shape" rules, and use them in place of the Totem Shape ability. They're weaker then Alternate Forms in many ways, bat are far less confusing to implement, and allow you to keep the benefits of your equipment, which is key for any melee build. They also have some cool archetype abilities you could steal - everything is in their SRD and is open content.

Otherwise, looks spiffy.

[NeoSeraphi]

Anywho, I apoligize if I missed it or if I'm misreading it, but natural weapons should be based on size, not a flat never-changing number. Otherwise a Huge Barbarian deals the same claw damage as a Tiny Barbarian, and would thus never use his claws over an appropriately sized weapon. For example, page 54 of Magic of Incarnum states that the damage values given in soulmelds are for medium characters, and that smaller and larger characters should adjust the values as normal based on the PHB pg 114. You may wish to include a similar caveat somewhere in your class description.

You did miss it. It's at the top of the Totem Rage section. "The damage listed is for a Medium barbarian".

I would also tone down the Totem Companion to have an effective Druid level equal to your Barbarian level, and not Barbarian +3. Otherwise you could end up with Companions that are stronger then the base class, and with more hit die.

I can't do that without moving the Totem Companion feature back to level 7, since lions have an effective -6 level adjustment. Besides, the class is about emulating an animal in order to become stronger. Why would you want to emulate an animal that is physically weaker than you?

You may also wish to look at the Pathfinder "Beast Shape" rules, and use them in place of the Totem Shape ability. They're weaker then Alternate Forms in many ways, bat are far less confusing to implement, and allow you to keep the benefits of your equipment, which is key for any melee build. They also have some cool archetype abilities you could steal - everything is in their SRD and is open content.

It's too vague. +2 Strength for a Medium animal? Wolves are known for their Dexterity, not their Strength. Constrictors have high Str and high Dex, while vipers have low Strength and high Dex.

It doesn't make sense, to me. If you transform into a creature, you should be limited by its physical body, as well as strengthened. If a normal viper only has 8 Strength, why would a barbarian who transforms into that same viper not only retain his 20 Strength, but have it increase by +2? He's almost three times as strong as the creature he transforms into...even though he no longer has his base form's muscular power.

Nah, thanks for the suggestion, but Wild Shape is more realistic.

[Lord_Gareth]

Honest question Neo: Why did you make this? All of its flavor is available in currently-published classes. By your own admission you didn't really fix any of the Barbarian's actual problems and by what I'm seeing you didn't really do much aside from blend it with a nerfed combination of Animal Lord and Wildshape Ranger. I'm honestly wondering why you bothered doing this - and why you produce so many base classes that you aim at T4 or T5 when the game's already flooded with things that can represent their niche much more easily and without creating artificial limits for the player.

If you don't want to answer, that's fine. I just want to know.

[NeoSeraphi]

Honest question Neo: Why did you make this? All of its flavor is available in currently-published classes. By your own admission you didn't really fix any of the Barbarian's actual problems and by what I'm seeing you didn't really do much aside from blend it with a nerfed combination of Animal Lord and Wildshape Ranger. I'm honestly wondering why you bothered doing this - and why you produce so many base classes that you aim at T4 or T5 when the game's already flooded with things that can represent their niche much more easily and without creating artificial limits for the player.

If you don't want to answer, that's fine. I just want to know.

Because, the barbarian has some totem archetypes, but they're all pretty bad. I'd rather play a devoted animal warrior class than some 1st-5th level ACFs.

As for your second question, I think Tier 4 classes are fun to play. I homebrew because I enjoy it, I like to make classes that are based on cool or interesting ideas or flavor. Lycanthropy has always been one of my favorite parts of the game, the ability to transform yourself into some kind of werecreature with amazing strength and rip someone apart? Yes! We need that for a full BAB class that doesn't suck (AKA ranger). And it fits the barbarian so much better than the ranger. What, the ranger is a tracker with a pet, so he can just randomly turn into animals? Nah, that's just kind of generic. Meanwhile, the barbarian draws on the animal's power to increase his own. He reveres the animal, watches it, and then when he releases his inner fury, he takes on that animal's best qualities and uses them to tear his opponents apart!

Transformations like that make melee combat more fun and interesting for me. That's what this game needs. It doesn't need to give melee more options out of combat, it needs to make melee more interesting, instead of just full attacking someone.

And of course I'm going to answer. I'm proud of my homebrew, and all the stuff I make.

[Lord_Gareth]

Of course melee needs more options outside of combat, Neo. Everyone needs options outside of combat, because combat isn't the end-all, be-all of 3.5. Most of my favorite scenes were non-combat encounters in games I play (though admittedly, I do love me some face-breaking). And even with all of that, you haven't gotten rid of the full-attacking problem - all you've done is changed what kind of clothes the Barbarian is wearing when he makes his full attack/pouncing charge.

By the by, your analysis of Wildshape Ranger is, I believe, over-simplified. Assuming you want to use the default fluff (for whatever reason), the difference between Rangers and Druids is this: Druids study nature from the outside, as guardians and custodians that have both power over and responsibility to their charges. Rangers revere nature by becoming part of it - in this case, by living like a predator. Wildshape rangers take that a step further, becoming the ultimate natural predator by taking on perfect camouflage and adaptation to any situation they might find themselves put in. The really smart ones go Master of Many Forms and become a protean hunter that puts even the darkest of natural shadows to shame for its stealth and finesse.

[NeoSeraphi]

Of course melee needs more options outside of combat, Neo. Everyone needs options outside of combat, because combat isn't the end-all, be-all of 3.5. Most of my favorite scenes were non-combat encounters in games I play (though admittedly, I do love me some face-breaking). And even with all of that, you haven't gotten rid of the full-attacking problem - all you've done is changed what kind of clothes the Barbarian is wearing when he makes his full attack/pouncing charge.

That's not true at all. My favorite game I've ever played, I was a barbarian. I had absolutely no out-of-combat abilities, save Intimidate, didn't matter one bit. I had fun roleplaying my character, the storyline was interesting, the combat was awesome. I liked that game much more than I liked it when I was a bard or a beguiler or a wizard. Out of combat options are only necessary if you're incapable of having fun out of combat just by listening to the storyline and interacting with the other players and NPCs.

[Story Time]

Everyone needs options outside of combat, because combat isn't the end-all, be-all of 3.5.

Spoiler

Show

Yes... Yes, it is. I'm...I'm so sorry for saying this, and saying it this way, but the experience system for Dungeons & Dragons is designed to reward defeating opponents. It's about conflict. Conflict is the core component to the mechanism of, "Leveling Up." Some GameMasters can off-set this by personal choice and by house rules, but any system designed around a grid-based, tactical combat, map simulation is about conflict and war...

I hope Gareth can forgive me for being unable to restrain myself...

The Barbarian

...I can't really grow peaches where I'm at. But I keep reading Seraphi home-brew. That should count for something...

Also, I really liked the illiteracy choice. That was very fitting.

[Lord_Gareth]

Spoiler

Show

Yes... Yes, it is. I'm...I'm so sorry for saying this, and saying it this way, but the experience system for Dungeons & Dragons is designed to reward defeating opponents. It's about conflict. Conflict is the core component to the mechanism of, "Leveling Up." Some GameMasters can off-set this by personal choice and by house rules, but any system designed around a grid-based, tactical combat, map simulation is about conflict and war...

I hope Gareth can forgive me for being unable to restrain myself...

Hey, don't feel bad about it. However, in one of the only well-written parts of the Book of Exalted Deeds, it points out that the experience system doesn't reward you just for defeating opponents - it rewards you for overcoming challenges. Disarming a trap is a challenge (and traps have a CR!). So is solving a puzzle, talking your opponents out of fighting, navigating through complex social politics at a royal ball (a ball you desperately need to make an impression at in order to get the aid you require) or even engaging in a riddling contest with a dragon. As it stands, non-ToB melee can only do one of these things (disarm a trap) and can sometimes, on rare occasions, also manage to attend a ball without shaming the party (rogues, paladins). I feel it's important for characters to be able to handle or at least contribute meaningfully to non-combat challenges, even if they're not playing a spellcaster or a bard.