Good idea or bad idea?

[StickMan]

Right now I'm looking at a making a level human 1 barbarian/3 rogue. Barbarain is using lion totem. I'm taking two weapon fighting, power attack and cleave and am thinking about taking improved cleave. Idea being charge in sneak attack kill lots of people using cleave and Improved cleave later on to try to kill lots of people who are close together.

Bad idea or good idea.

[Talya]

Idea being charge in sneak attack kill lots of people using cleave and Improved cleave later on to try to kill lots of people who are close together.

You forgot "totally flip out" in that sentence.

[Zenos]

You forgot "totally flip out" in that sentence.

And you totally forgot to put "ninja" before that sentence.

[marjan]

I have to say first that rogue/barbarian doesn't make much sense. Second Cleave/Great Cleave is very bad idea if your DM doesn't constantly throw bunch of low HP opponents at you and even then it is debatable if those two feats are worth it.

[Frosty]

Power Attack doesn't work well with 2-weapon fighting. As a rogue, you'll probably be relying on sneak attack for the damage anyways.

If you want to be charging and pouncing, either go with a two-weapon fighting Scout (who relies on movement rather than flanking or flat-footedness for extra damage) who charges and gains skirmish damage with each hit, OR you go with someone who uses a 2-handed weapon who leap attack and shock-troopers his way to ridiculous amount of damage because he'll get +4 damage for each -1 to his AC.

[cupkeyk]

I have to say first that rogue/barbarian doesn't make much sense. Second Cleave/Great Cleave is very bad idea if your DM doesn't constantly throw bunch of low HP opponents at you and even then it is debatable if those two feats are worth it.

Why doesn't a Barbarian Rogue make sense?

I second the cleave/great cleave comment.

[Zenos]

I have to say first that rogue/barbarian doesn't make much sense. Second Cleave/Great Cleave is very bad idea if your DM doesn't constantly throw bunch of low HP opponents at you and even then it is debatable if those two feats are worth it.

Oh yeah? Never read any Conan stories? He's both barbarian and thief, so I second the barbarian/rogue concept.

[marjan]

Why doesn't a Barbarian Rogue make sense?

I second the cleave/great cleave comment.

Brute force of Barb and subtle ways of rogue.

[StickMan]

Notably I only took power attack to get to cleave.

[marjan]

Notably I only took power attack to get to cleave.

And that's your first mistake. PA is much better feat than cleave. If you want extra dmg on charge forget rogue levels and get Powerful/Improved Powerful Charge from MH. It's much better dmg since it works on crit immune opponents unlike SA dmg and with two-level dip into fighter you can get them both "for free" without losing BA.

[cupkeyk]

Brute force of Barb and subtle ways of rogue.

So this is a fluff issue? Rogue make excellent thugs. You can still flank using a greatsword.

A Barb/Rog with UMD can use wand chamber weapons and get full use of SA with wands of gravestrike and golemstrike, and maximum use of PA with wraithstrike.

[daggaz]

nothing wrong with powerattack, it is just optimal with a 2hander (1.5x return rather than 1:1).

Great cleave is gonna be gimped no matter what, even IF your DM constantly throws low level mooks at you because if he does

a)anything that dies fast enough to be great cleaved with ease wont threaten you anyhow and

b)various AoE spells (even batman knows one or two) will smite them/stop them faster than you can anyhow

c)there are other feats out there that will give you better returns

I third the motion that there is nothing wrong with a barbarian/rogue, conceptually.. Sneaking goes hand and hand with hunting in my book.

[cupkeyk]

nothing wrong with powerattack, it is just optimal with a 2hander (1.5x return rather than 1:1).

Which makes twf with a two hander and armor spikes all that yummy for
pa returns of 3x.

[marjan]

So this is a fluff issue? Rogue make excellent thugs. You can still flank using a greatsword.

A Barb/Rog with UMD can use wand chamber weapons and get full use of SA with wands of gravestrike and golemstrike, and maximum use of PA with wraithstrike.

Mechanically there's nothing wrong with them, but those wands won't work since the wands are standard action to cast and all of those are 1 round duration + he can't use them while raging.

nothing wrong with powerattack, it is just optimal with a 2hander (1.5x return rather than 1:1).

It's 2:1 for 2H weapons.

I third the motion that there is nothing wrong with a barbarian/rogue, conceptually.. Sneaking goes hand and hand with hunting in my book.

As you like it. But in my book barbarians are not hunters, they are beaters. Rangers are hunters. I know you can make it to sound reasonable to multiclass barbarian ad rogue but it's to much of a trouble.

[Talya]

Power attack: 1 hander adds damage at a ratio of 1:1
Power attack: 2 hander adds damage at a ratio of 2:1
Power Attack: two weapon fighting adds damage at a ratio of 2:1 (+1 to each hand). Note that you are experiencing TWF penalties already, so you can't power attack for quite as much as you can with a 2 hander and still expect to hit. Secondly, you cannot use a light weapon in your off-hand, meaning you are either experiencing even more attack penalties, or have spent an extra feat on Oversize TWF.
Power attack: TWF Greatsword + Spiked armor adds damage at a ratio of 2:1 (+2 to greatsword, armor spikes are light and get no bonus.)

[cupkeyk]

Mechanically there's nothing wrong with them, but those wands won't work since the wands are standard action to cast and all of those are 1 round duration + he can't use them while raging.

Page 85 of Rules Compendium clarifies that spell trigger items with spells whose casting times are swift, free or immediate use the spells casting times to trigger. Trigger then rage. ^_^

It's 2:1 for 2H weapons.

Yup, 2:1 for the 2h weapon and 1:1 for the armor spikes.
EDIT:
Oh snap, Oh well use unarmed strikes then. Let's you get snapkick later too.
Wraithstrike+flanking alleviates the twf/pa penalties.

As you like it. But in my book barbarians are not hunters, they are beaters. Rangers are hunters. I know you can make it to sound reasonable to multiclass barbarian ad rogue but it's to much of a trouble.

Oh, Barbarians traditionally meant foreigner. -_-

[StickMan]

As you like it. But in my book barbarians are not hunters, they are beaters. Rangers are hunters. I know you can make it to sound reasonable to multiclass barbarian ad rogue but it's to much of a trouble.

In other words in your book barbarians are just the hulk smash stereo-type.

Any way thank for the feedback, I'm likely going another route.

[marjan]

Rules Compendium

Is there a chance to see that online?

Oh, Barbarians traditionally meant foreigner. -_-

That's true. Though I don't imagine D&D barbarians that way.