Barbarian: Good or Bad?

[Sartharina]

Now tell me how many feats does a Fighter get over a Barbarian and rethink your argument.

The fighter is Short several feats over the Barbarian, because all his Fighter Bonus Feats and then some are spent on trying to keep up with the Barbarian's basic class features.

Also - a feat is worth about 4 skill points: 2 skill points = 1 skill trick, 2 skill tricks ~ 1 feat. So, a barbarian gets 1 feat worth of skill points more than the fighter every 2 levels. So... the Fighter's bonus feats are barely keeping up with the Barbarian's skill points alone.

[emeraldstreak]

The fighter is Short several feats over the Barbarian, because all his Fighter Bonus Feats and then some are spent on trying to keep up with the Barbarian's basic class features.

Also - a feat is worth about 4 skill points: 2 skill points = 1 skill trick, 2 skill tricks ~ 1 feat. So, a barbarian gets 1 feat worth of skill points more than the fighter every 2 levels. So... the Fighter's bonus feats are barely keeping up with the Barbarian's skill points alone.

yeah yeah

and people play Humans because of the skill point, not the feat

[Amphetryon]

yeah yeah

and people play Humans because of the skill point, not the feat

Quite often, people play Humans for both. It's not as if they need to pick one or the other.

[PolymeraseJones]

I have a barbarian-related question - I've been planning on playing one in my group's next pathfinder campaign, and since it's going to take place almost entirely inside a city I was considering the Urban Barbarian archetype. I love it flavour-wise, but I've never played a Barb before, though, so I'm not sure if the tradeoffs there are worth it.

[aleucard]

I have a barbarian-related question - I've been planning on playing one in my group's next pathfinder campaign, and since it's going to take place almost entirely inside a city I was considering the Urban Barbarian archetype. I love it flavour-wise, but I've never played a Barb before, though, so I'm not sure if the tradeoffs there are worth it.

There's several Barbarian things available, so I'll go over them from the enhancement here.

Ferocity changes the Constitution bonus into a Dexterity one, and adds a few more things for mobility. Depending on how much the added AC matters, it could be a vaguely even trade.

Roofdweller trades fast movement for a free feat in Roofwalker and the option to take Roofjumper later without needing the prerequisites, both which have minor to moderate utility (including a poor man's Leap Attack in the latter). Probably not worth it, but if you're either not going to stick to Barbarian that long or would prefer using other enhancement bonus givers to speed, sure.

Skilled City Dweller may be useful, depends on where you want to put your skill points. Tumble's objectively better than Ride, Sense Motive is more useful than Survival for non-Trackers (and the more standard uses are easily within an untrained skillcheck's grasp), and neither Handle Animal nor Gather Information are going to see much use (and you're nearly guaranteed to be in a party with someone who can do either better), so it doesn't much matter which you pick; Handle Animal's more flavorful for Barbarian, though.

Streetfighter is a flat-out direct upgrade for a Barbarian, even if Charging isn't your primary method of attack. If it's available and you do not take it, then I feel sorry for you.

[atemu1234]

yeah yeah

and people play Humans because of the skill point, not the feat

Some people do. Some people see the extra feat and say, "Great!", but some see the extra skill points and say, "Awesome!"

[Red Fel]

There's several Barbarian things available, so I'll go over them from the enhancement here.

I think he was talking about this Barbarian (and this archetype).

Poly, this thread has been focused on 3.5, for the most part. (Or possibly for the entire part.) I'd suggest starting a new thread about your PF-related question.

[aleucard]

I think he was talking about this Barbarian (and this archetype).

Poly, this thread has been focused on 3.5, for the most part. (Or possibly for the entire part.) I'd suggest starting a new thread about your PF-related question.

In that case, I'd have to say that it is situational, but more solidly an upgrade. Since Fast Movement is only +10, it matters much less. Controlled Rage makes your bonuses more granular and adds Dexterity and some more versatility, but has a smaller total bonus and doesn't boost Will saves, which is a nasty thing to deal with as the main party beatstick. All in all, take it if you think it fits, it doesn't matter THAT much.

[Lans]

The fighter is Short several feats over the Barbarian, because all his Fighter Bonus Feats and then some are spent on trying to keep up with the Barbarian's basic class features.

Also - a feat is worth about 4 skill points: 2 skill points = 1 skill trick, 2 skill tricks ~ 1 feat. So, a barbarian gets 1 feat worth of skill points more than the fighter every 2 levels. So... the Fighter's bonus feats are barely keeping up with the Barbarian's skill points alone.

Or a skill point per level is equal to less than a feat, 1 point of essentia=1 sp< 1 Feat

Ley me address each of those.

How reliably are you gonna be able to trigger K. Devotion when you have 2+Int skills and all knowledges are cross-class skills?
How are you "negating" Power attack, especially when Shock Trooper is a thing for someone not particularly invested in AC?
If one side has magic weapons, both probably will, and the Barb. might have a better one, or some other item, as he isn't dropping money on a shield.
Dungeon Crasher will even things out somewhat, but only situationally, and not completely.

You only need have ranks to get +1 to hit and damage, and I thought we were comparing the combat styles more than specifically fighters that are using the style.
I figure Elusive Target is at least as available as Shocktrooper

Using a shield in combat, if your doing it right is behind the greatsword wielder by 1 feat, 4000 gp and a worse crit. Using a weapon with your shield is just silly

[eggynack]

You only need have ranks to get +1 to hit and damage, and I thought we were comparing the combat styles more than specifically fighters that are using the style.

It's better than weapon focus, but it's not really all that good. Yeah, if both characters take knowledge devotion, then minor advantage sword and board guy, but I don't think they would take it, so it's not all that important.

I figure Elusive Target is at least as available as Shocktrooper.

I don't know what you mean by "available". Yes, many characters can take it, if they want, but that doesn't mean that all that many will. It's a feat with two awful prerequisites that provides a decent benefit against a small section of the population, where that small section might be the easiest to defend against otherwise. The availability of shock trooper isn't really important, by contrast, because my character is the one taking it, and I don't care what other characters have it. This seems like a negligible factor, to be honest.

[Extra Anchovies]

I don't know what you mean by "available". Yes, many characters can take it, if they want, but that doesn't mean that all that many will. It's a feat with two awful prerequisites that provides a decent benefit against a small section of the population, where that small section might be the easiest to defend against otherwise. The availability of shock trooper isn't really important, by contrast, because my character is the one taking it, and I don't care what other characters have it. This seems like a negligible factor, to be honest.

Also, what DMs actually give their NPCs tactical feats? They add more bookwork to a character for it to be worth it for one-encounter baddies.

[Lans]

It's better than weapon focus, but it's not really all that good. Yeah, if both characters take knowledge devotion, then minor advantage sword and board guy, but I don't think they would take it, so it's not all that important.

They might depending on skill lists, and ability scores. +5 to hit and damage is nothing to sneeze at, and it gives your character out of combat utility.

Again are we talking about the fighter class using these styles or the styles them selves? THF vs 1 handed matters a lot less for a warblade backed up by an inspire courage optimized bard than it does for a barbarian.

I don't know what you mean by "available". Yes, many characters can take it, if they want, but that doesn't mean that all that many will. It's a feat with two awful prerequisites that provides a decent benefit against a small section of the population, where that small section might be the easiest to defend against otherwise. The availability of shock trooper isn't really important, by contrast, because my character is the one taking it, and I don't care what other characters have it. This seems like a negligible factor, to be honest.

It severely mitigates damage from charges and gishes, I can see it being picked up and mattering, by monsters and boss type encounters

[Mato]

An out-of-core Barbarian effectively does double-duty as the party meatshield AND party trapkilller AND is also a functional scout.

The barbarian doesn't obtain hide or move silently so he's not a scout. Trapkiller doesn't function on none-mechanical traps making it worthless against spell traps, and it has an imposed penalty to your "search" check. Reasonably, you can just sunder mechanical traps to begin with too.

Meat shield also suggests the barbarian has a better chance to survive. The fighter has higher ac, heavy adamantine armor (dr 3/-), and can use a tower shield to block several kinds of traps such as targeted spells & attack roll based. His additional feat slots means he has open room to invest in what is normally considered subpar feats that add nothing to damage like improved toughness (+3+hd hp per), roll with it (stacking dr 2/-), or actual spell-trap disabling trapfinding and an apprentice feat.

Let's stop the nonsense right there. Battle jump? The Taer feat from Unapproachable East? So the fighter is always managing to drop from a height 5' above his opponent? Your premise is fantastical and thus the conclusion is flawed.

Not really, dire bats cost 100gp so it's 100% successful at the 2nd level. At the 1st, you have 4 ranks & +4 strength so you can make a "hop up" on a roll of 2 (95%) allowing you to run up rocks and tables for additional starting height significantly lowering the high jump DC (even 5ft is dc 20 for 50%, so every other round you're successful with a single hop up). Your premise is based on an open and flat plain and fantastical empty parking lots didn't exactly exist nine hundred years ago.

And when you get to races (like eggy instead of me) you can easily obtain more bonuses if you dislike flying mounts.

How often do you carry around multiple of the same weapon (other than daggers)?

All the time. Only one of them is enhanced of course, but having a spare just in case is basic adventuring knowledge.

The big gist of T4-T5 separation is competency. The Fighter suffers if you take him out of whatever comfort zone he's built for himself, the barbarian generally doesn't.

The under-optimized example I used is specifically focused in ubercharging but would have ranged daze and martial study by the 9th level. That's ko-damage, crowd control, and utility roles respectively and it still has eight feat slots left.

the Barbarian hp advantage is worth a feat; the Barbarian skill advantage is worth 1-2 feats;

No it's not. Half-elf fighter gets 4 skill points per level (with x4 at the 1st level) and he gets a special version of weapon focus that applies to two different weapons instead of one. The fighter gains a feat by increasing his skill points. Only 3 levels of course and racially specific, but once you obtain enough use magic device ranks a wand of guidance of the avatar teaches you how little skill ranks matter outside of requirements anyway.

The barbarian hp is also a new player trap, if you lose more than your normal hp you must have a reliable source of healing or you are bleeding out or outright slain when rage ends. The options available if someone else isn't playing a cleric are limited until your wealth limitations allow you to afford none-wands in bulk.

Also - a feat is worth about 4 skill points: 2 skill points = 1 skill trick, 2 skill tricks ~ 1 feat.

A skill trick granting feat also increases your limitation on known skill tricks which you ignored. Also using feats to obtain skill tricks is an example of poorly using your resources.

I wish skill points could be converted to feats. Even the best skill trick ever printed, collector of stories, is only worth +1 to attack and damage because of a Feat.

The math seems pretty THF favorable. For the sake of argument, let's assume a pair of water orcs (because that's what the big fellow is doing, and I figure the 1HF guy would want to keep up), one with a tower shield and longsword, the other with a greatsword. Off of a strength of 22, the THF fellow is thus doing 2d6+9 damage, for an average of 16, while the 1HF fellow is doing 1d8+6, for an average of 10.5. Thus, the THF fighter is doing a bit over 50% more damage than the 1HF fighter, and I think that a tower shield, the obvious best situation, represents a basic 20% reduction most of the time, maybe less.

Sword and board is the least offensive method you can choose, it forwards a bit of focus in defense which in your model is entirely ignored. Like calculating rage, you need to expand on your model in order to fully understand it.

To accurately measure thf, twf, and s&b, your need to compare against the mean of an opposing creature's attack bonus and damage output. This is a so called round 2 of charger builds, what do you do if the creature doesn't die in one hit? You get hit back of course. A thf charger with shock trooper has no ac to speak of and suffers the greatest hp loss potentially disabling or killing them (total loss of damage per round) while twf or s&b users would continue to attack.

There is also a special 4th category that can be called shield specialists. By using your shield as your weapon to reap the defensive benefits of s&b, the offense of thf, and the utility of feats like shield slam to stun opponents. It is heavily feat extensive to set up making it an option best used by the fighter class.

[eggynack]

Sword and board is the least offensive method you can choose, it forwards a bit of focus in defense which in your model is entirely ignored. Like calculating rage, you need to expand on your model in order to fully understand it.

My model didn't ignore defense at all, or rather, defense was factored in in a speedy and rudimentary fashion. I'm not going for a hyper-accurate scientific model to start with. In any case, the basic idea of the model is that each of the characters will hit each other the same number of times, and then I measure who deals more damage on average. A +4 to AC means approximately a 20% drop in the opponent's accuracy, which means about a 20% drop in damage/round. Based on the numbers I presented, even with that drop in damage, the THF fellow is still out damaging sword and board.

To accurately measure thf, twf, and s&b, your need to compare against the mean of an opposing creature's attack bonus and damage output. This is a so called round 2 of charger builds, what do you do if the creature doesn't die in one hit? You get hit back of course. A thf charger with shock trooper has no ac to speak of and suffers the greatest hp loss potentially disabling or killing them (total loss of damage per round) while twf or s&b users would continue to attack.

Shock trooper would indeed change the numbers some, but I didn't even include it on the THF fellow's side. Nor did I include power attack at all. I've gotta figure, however, that using these tools would make things even more THF favorable, due to their sheer raw power. I didn't even include the possibility that the THF fellow's damage could just drop the opponent, which does indeed seem like a relevant factor. Point is, the numbers as they stand seem to support my conclusion, and it looks like even more fleshed out numbers would support my conclusion even more.

In any case, I don't really have perfect data here. I just ran some off the cuff calculations to see if some of the basics match my calculations. They seemed to do so, and to be perfectly honest, it feels like the onus is rather on Vogonjeltz to prove the superiority of S&B even in his chosen encounter type, given the general assumption that the other path is superior. If you have some actual evidence for S&B's superiority in a given situation, that'd be a pretty interesting thing, I think. Pretty sure there's some data on creature power out there somewhere.

[bekeleven]

Also, you still can't take battle jump level 1.

[Gwendol]

Dire bats and jumping up on furniture? On every single attack in every fight? Your premise still doesn't hold under any kind of scrutiny.

Furthermore, the feat explicitly states the character needs to begin the charge at a height above the enemy, so that jumping really high (which includes an upward and downward movement) doesn't count. Charging means direct, straight line movement.

Regardless, the barbarian fares well in a match-up vs the fighter, despite getting access to fewer feats.

[Gwendol]

Also, you still can't take battle jump level 1.

Battle jump has no pre-requisites that I know of.

[Karnith]

Battle jump has no pre-requisites that I know of.

And it's a regional feat, which (in 3.5) means that if you want to take it, you must select it at level 1.

[Gwendol]

Yeah, Taer region no less.

[Marlowe]

I now have a mental image of the fighter jumping up and down in an ineffective fashion screaming; "I'm better than you! See! See! I'm better than you! I'm from Taer, Toril, honest and for true. And I'm better than you!!!", while the Barbarian munches on a Dire Bat drumstick and wonders who the armoured clown is.

[Karnith]

Battle Jump was updated in 3.5 to be an Icerim Mountains regional feat, as part of the 3.5 region revision.

[ace rooster]

My model didn't ignore defense at all, or rather, defense was factored in in a speedy and rudimentary fashion. I'm not going for a hyper-accurate scientific model to start with. In any case, the basic idea of the model is that each of the characters will hit each other the same number of times, and then I measure who deals more damage on average. A +4 to AC means approximately a 20% drop in the opponent's accuracy, which means about a 20% drop in damage/round. Based on the numbers I presented, even with that drop in damage, the THF fellow is still out damaging sword and board.

Speedy, rudimentary, and fundamentally wrong. In worst case that AC matters at all, a +4 to AC will reduce damage by about 18% (changes a 2 to hit to a 6 to hit), but in the best case it reduces damage by 80% (changes a 16 to hit to a 20, ie 4 out of 5 attacks that hit you before do not with the +4). You are misunderstanding the effect of extra AC. Extra AC is more valuable if you already have a 'high' AC (enemies must roll high to hit you already), which is why fighters get more benefit from a shield that a barbarian.

I'm not saying your conclusion is wrong, as I have not done the numbers, but you are consistently underestimating the effect of extra AC.

[eggynack]

Speedy, rudimentary, and fundamentally wrong. In worst case that AC matters at all, a +4 to AC will reduce damage by about 18% (changes a 2 to hit to a 6 to hit), but in the best case it reduces damage by 80% (changes a 16 to hit to a 20, ie 4 out of 5 attacks that hit you before do not with the +4). You are misunderstanding the effect of extra AC. Extra AC is more valuable if you already have a 'high' AC (enemies must roll high to hit you already), which is why fighters get more benefit from a shield that a barbarian.

I'm not saying your conclusion is wrong, as I have not done the numbers, but you are consistently underestimating the effect of extra AC.

In that case, basic instantiation time. I'll keep the same basics as before, and do things initially at level three, after the effects of starting gold have smoothed out some, and before score changes or wealth by level have started to impact things. We are talking now about a +9 to hit, again with 16 and 10.5 average damage, though now with the additional factor of AC. Let's set it at, say, 19 versus 23, for full plate with and without a shield, and assuming some dexterity modifier. According to the power attack calculator, this would leave us with 5.77 damage for the S&B character, and 6.15 damage for the THF character.

That's a good distance from the initial check, admittedly, but it's still THF favorable. Moreover, and here's the critical thing, I'm pretty sure that adding complexity favors the THF character. Increasing level tends to boost attack bonus faster than AC, especially if you're pushing that factor, which means that a higher level assessment would likely be even more THF favorable. Similarly, granting more realistic armor which doesn't eat up half of our character's WBL would boost the THF character's advantage even more. Thus, even in what currently looks like the best circumstances for sword and board, THF is still the best option.

Edit: Looks like level two would also be an even more favorable comparison, as you have to drop the AC by at least two by ditching the full plate. How much you'd need to drop for the switch from 2nd to 1st depends on dexterity, but as long as you're holding parity the numbers still hold up.

[Lans]

Edit: Looks like level two would also be an even more favorable comparison, as you have to drop the AC by at least two by ditching the full plate. How much you'd need to drop for the switch from 2nd to 1st depends on dexterity, but as long as you're holding parity the numbers still hold up.

If a character has ranks in craft armor, he could atempt to get the full plate for 1/3 cost

[eggynack]

If a character has ranks in craft armor, he could atempt to get the full plate for 1/3 cost

I guess, but that's running pretty expensive compared to WBL, and the chance of failure seems reasonably high. You're running maybe a +5 or +6, if you're unusually good at crafting, and that's against a DC of 18. So, it's vaguely plausible, but it's also probably unrealistic.

[geekintheground]

this argument reminds me of in-combat healing. the reason its sub-par is because killing the opponent faster increases survivability more than preventing/healing damage. sure, AC is more constant and doesnt cost actions, but isnt AC all or nothing needing something like level+23 to be competitive with monsters to-hit?

[eggynack]

this argument reminds me of in-combat healing. the reason its sub-par is because killing the opponent faster increases survivability more than preventing/healing damage. sure, AC is more constant and doesnt cost actions, but isnt AC all or nothing needing something like level+23 to be competitive with monsters to-hit?

Sure on all counts, but those issues only apply when you start complicating things. If you stop needing to protect a party, and instead just need to win a duel against a melee foe, then things get a lot simpler. In that context, it's theoretically possible that sword and board would lead to a higher average damage against THF than THF would have against sword and board, which would likely make it a superior style in that circumstance. It looks like THF is victorious, however, even with reasonable force acting against the style.

Better, I think, to prove the point in the worst possible situation. I've gotta say though, even if things somehow turn out in favor of sword and board over THF, there's no way in hell this is worth a feat. We're still talking about a minuscule margin against what ranges from a tiny sliver of potential encounters, to no potential encounters at all. Tower shield proficiency could very easily be a thing worth having, as so many things are, but it's not more worth having than any number of actually good fighter feats.

[bekeleven]

Battle Jump was updated in 3.5 to be an Icerim Mountains regional feat, as part of the 3.5 region revision.

Which is still only inhabited by Taer unless you get DM permission.

The Icerim Mountains: Bands of ferocious taer haunt the freezing slopes and mists of the Icerims of the East.

And it's a regional feat, which (in 3.5) means that if you want to take it, you must select it at level 1.

Yep. You could select regional feats of other regions by taking ranks in knowledge in 3.0. But even that had to be done after level 1. In 3.5, if you want battle jump, you're asking the DM for an exception or taking it at ECL 3.

[Mato]

{{scrubbed}}

this argument reminds me of in-combat healing. the reason its sub-par is because killing the opponent faster increases survivability more than preventing/healing damage. sure, AC is more constant and doesnt cost actions, but isnt AC all or nothing needing something like level+23 to be competitive with monsters to-hit?

Healing, unfortunately, requires standard actions which means your opponent has another chance to strike again, often for a value higher than the amount healed. Benefiting from your shield's bonus to AC does not.

Optimize by numbers doesn't have an attack bonus entry. But 23+ suggests you are aiming for a 95% rate of failure. Compared to someone who has dumped their ac, the survivability is almost ten times higher which could equal to an additional nine rounds of effort. The potential there is high, but subjective of the fact that many attacks target saves instead of ac which would drop it. It would be interesting to see all the data compiled and presented one day.

[Lans]

I guess, but that's running pretty expensive compared to WBL, and the chance of failure seems reasonably high. You're running maybe a +5 or +6, if you're unusually good at crafting, and that's against a DC of 18. So, it's vaguely plausible, but it's also probably unrealistic.

At level 2, you got 5 ranks, +2 masterwork item, and if you get somebody else to use aid other, and you take 10 to hit a DC 19