Barbarian Class Preview

Monday, June 11, 2018

Rage consumes you in battle. You delight in carving through your enemies using powerful weapons and wreaking havoc without needing complicated techniques or rigid training, and you rely on your astonishing durability to get you through a fight. You associate your rage with a traditional symbol of affinity known as a totem, which might take the form of an animal, a spirit, or even a part of yourself. To many barbarians, brute force is a hammer and every problem looks like a nail; to others, the dark emotions within them are something to hold back and release only when it matters most.

When it came to barbarians in the playtest, we wanted to take the most popular parts of the original barbarian and the unchained barbarian and brew them together with a few special ingredients to make the class even more flexible to fit even more roleplaying and mechanical concepts. Let's take a look!

Rage

Rage is a barbarian's key class feature. Barbarians aren't super-trained in fancy weapon techniques like most of the other martial classes. Instead, a barbarian can enter a rage that drastically increases her damage and grants her a significant booster shot of temporary Hit Points, in exchange for a –1 penalty to AC and the inability to use concentrate actions unless they specifically have the rage trait (note, this means that somatic-only spells are now possible in a rage!). Unlike in Pathfinder First Edition, rage in the playtest is not limited in rounds per day—let's be honest, in Pathfinder First Edition, our barbarians never ran out of rounds anyway once they had gained a few levels. A rage lasts 3 rounds, followed by a round of fatigue. While you're fatigued, you can't rage again, but once that round has passed, you can enter a new rage, with a shiny brand-new set of temporary Hit Points to go along with it. You can do this as often as you need during the day!

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

Totems

Without a doubt, the most popular element of barbarians in Pathfinder First Edition is the totem, introduced in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Player Guide. These totems are a set of three thematically linked abilities the barbarian can choose, starting at 2nd level. In the playtest, you get a totem right away at 1st level. Your totem is a representation of how and why you rage and grants you an initial ability, access to more totem feats down the line, and, at 9th level, resistance equal to your Constitution modifier against a specific type of damage. Each totem also has its own anathema, most of which are relatively low impact and designed to create roleplaying hooks. For instance, the giant totem's anathema states that you cannot fail to accept a personal challenge of your strength, much like how Amiri accepted the challenging task her tribal fellows set her to slay a frost giant. Some though, are stricter—the superstition totem requires that you never willingly accept the benefits of spells, but grants you some truly astounding antimagic abilities in exchange.

Some of the totems, like animal totem, giant totem, and dragon totem, offer a few abilities that are flat-out magical. For instance, animal totem barbarians can adopt animal features and attacks and even transform into an animal (a great way to represent lycanthrope characters), whereas dragon totem barbarians gain a dragon breath attack can even grow wings. Even though totems are popular and roleplaying opportunities are fun, we recognize not everyone necessarily wants to commit to them, so we also offer the fury totem, which has no anathema or special requirements and focuses more on barbarian feats that aren't tied to any totem, which we'll look at in a bit. But first...

Additional Barbarian Features

Though I called out rage and totems specifically, the barbarian has some really neat abilities beyond those. For instance, at level 3, barbarians gain critical specialization effects when in a rage, even if they don't fulfill the usual proficiency rank requirement for the weapon—they use whatever weapon is most efficient to express their rage! One other thing they have that nobody else does: 12 Hit Points per level. Add that to the substantial temporary Hit Points that they can generate (possibly multiple times in a long fight) and the resistances from their totem that kick in at level 9, and barbarians have incredible staying power. Sure, they don't prevent as many hits as a paladin or a shield fighter might, but they can stand there taking hits long past the point where anyone else could stay standing. This is also a good point to mention one feature barbarians don't have in the playtest: alignment requirements. Barbarians can be whatever alignment they want; for instance, a lawful barbarian might act like one of the concepts I described earlier, controlling and holding back her emotions to channel and release her rage when it matters most.

As many of you have predicted, barbarians also have the best Fortitude proficiency, gaining the juggernaut class feature at level 7 (which grants master proficiency in Fortitude and the ability to count any successes you roll as critical successes instead) and improved juggernaut at 13th (which grants legendary proficiency and removes the chance of critically failing), but they also have a secondary Will focus, gaining indomitable will at 15th level to become masters in Will. Tireless rage comes in at level 17 to allow barbarians to ignore fatigue after ending a rage (though they still must wait the normal amount of time before entering a new rage). Barbarians are all about brutalizing opponents without worrying about carrying lots of different weapons and selecting the right one for the job with their monster knowledge, so it makes sense that they gain the ability to rip through a chunk of resistances automatically with level 19's devastating strikes ability. Possibly my favorite barbarian feature, though, is the level 11 ability mighty rage—whenever you enter a rage, it allows you to immediately use one of your rage-only actions for free. So many possibilities!

Barbarian Feats

In addition to the feats based on totems, there are a variety of other feats available, from the bread-and-butter, low-level Sudden Charge to the devastating Whirlwind Strike (attack everything in your reach), Brutal Critical (your critical hits deal an extra die of damage as well as persistent bleed damage), Vicious Evisceration (you maim the enemy, dealing extra damage, reducing its maximum HP by an amount equal to its level, and giving it a –1 penalty to Fortitude), Contagious Rage (one of your allies gets the benefits and –1 penalty to AC imposed by your rage, but can still concentrate), and Quaking Stomp (you stomp so hard that it creates an honest-to-goodness earthquake). But none caused a playtest GM to raise their eyebrows quite like the superstition totem's Spell Sunder, which really saved us when we faced walls of force, magical trap effects, and more.

To close off, some of you might have expected me to talk about the dragon totem barbarian Linda is playing in my playtest game, who has sometimes been the party's primary healer. She does that through abilities beyond the barbarian class, though certainly Moment of Clarity (which allows a barbarian to use an extra action to use a concentrate ability mid-rage). But if you're wondering why there was a time in my playtest when she was the only one with an area attack, that was because of her barbarian's dragon breath!

Mark Seifter
Designer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Amiri Barbarians Pathfinder Playtest Wayne Reynolds
251 to 300 of 859 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

Rysky wrote:

Can't wait to see the Spirit Totem, also I hope there's a Revenge Totem :3

*forlornly*

Linnorms...

It's a revenge party

a party that ends
with somebody's head on a spike.
It's a revenge party
with your two best friends
it's like a party with revenge is what it's like.


Milo v3 wrote:
Except there is no reason for that restriction to be on everyone that is trained to wield massive weapons.... -.-

If you're gonna shoe-horn a group of Barbarians into a Knightly Order, along with all the training and whatnot, you're already ignoring fluff in the class anyway...

The Blog Post wrote:
You delight in carving through your enemies using powerful weapons and wreaking havoc without needing complicated techniques or rigid training, and you rely on your astonishing durability to get you through a fight.
Milo v3 wrote:
Really happy with everything here except for anathema, but it'll probably be easy to just ignore that in my home games once the playtest is over.

I'd suggest considering making them optional, instead of ignoring, and leave it up to the players to choose to have those roleplay hooks be a part of their character in-world.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Put me down for being confused about somatic components being the only one that doesn't require concentration... So speaking words and... having a material component can't be done when angry, but you can perform subtle gesturing? Care to comment on why this was chosen?


tivadar27 wrote:
Put me down for being confused about somatic components being the only one that doesn't require concentration... So speaking words and... having a material component can't be done when angry, but you can perform [gestures]?

Chanting specific words I could imagine being quite difficult whilst overcome with battlerage, and in the midst of battle.

Reaching into some manner of pouch to remove specific items without ruining everything else there, whilst in the midst of a battlerage... I honestly cannot imagine.

But swinging my arms in a specific manner... I can see that. It makes sense that I'd have the mental acumen to make rude gestures, and swing my arms belligerently in a pattern that I've keyed to some manner of magical effect.

tivadar27 wrote:
somatic components being ... subtle gesturing

Do they have to be subtle? I mean, iconically, a wizard would make subtle hand gestures, sure. But is that strictly necessary...?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One suggestion for keeping track of rage rounds would be to use a 4-sided card. You can mark three of the sides Rage 1, Rage 2, and Rage 3, with the fourth side something like Rest/Fatigue. The card can be on the Rest/Fatigue side by default and rotated through the Rage sides as you go through the Rage rounds.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well, now that Barbarians will be repeatedly counting, "One, two, three," I'm glad that Google turned up this little song.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I do find the Barbarian FUS ROH DAH more evocative than using somatic gestures. Not really a deal breaker for me though.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Superstition totem sounds like the worst party destroying character types of editions past- vow of poverty and the Forsaken remixed into a core book option.

Hoo. Ray.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
mrianmerry wrote:
.Do they have to be subtle? I mean, iconically, a wizard would make subtle hand gestures, sure. But is that strictly necessary...?

Gesticulate Grandly!

On another note, I'd be fine with barbarians using somatic components if those same components were offensive gestures. ;)

Silver Crusade

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Captain Morgan wrote:
I do find the Barbarian FUS ROH DAH more evocative than using somatic gestures. Not really a deal breaker for me though.

Yeah, seeing this the same way.

Problem is likely the way how somatic and verbal actions are tagged (regarding [rage]-trait that has been mentioned in the blog).
Do verbal-only spells all require a concentration-action?

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Re Somatic Components: My understanding is that Somatic components provoke AOOs while Verbal components do not. So Barbarians with spells only at first can use while ragong spells that will provoke. But later might be able to use other spells without provoking by taking extra feats and such. A balance idea, maybe.

I imagine this decision relates to that, and what it might say about the design principles of picking components when designing a spell. But yes, I would love more insight into these decisions, just to understand the playtest design better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:

It's interesting to me the example you picked out, Milo. The Barbarian class is one whose mechanics align with specific flavor very easily. Being a barbarian evokes a stronger image than being a fighter or rogue, and I think for some people it is even more archetypical than the Paladin. An order of knights who take up any challenge directly issued questioning their honor, strength, or bravery also doesn't seem like much of a stretch.

Granted, with your focus on homebrew, there's little reason you can't reflavor or ignore it. Nothing wrong with that. :)

Yep. I can totally see "An order of knights who take up any challenge directly issued questioning their honor, strength, or bravery also doesn't seem like much of a stretch." as being an acceptable thing, doesn't seem like a stretch at all. I just don't see why the group would "need" to be that, the quick houserule just means that such a group is an option rather than me needing to write the group as "who take up any challenge directly issued questioning their honor, strength, or bravery" because of the rules. Instead I'd have the groups personality based on the themes appropriate to that order's purpose in the setting and campaign. Which sometimes might fit "who take up any challenge directly issued questioning their honor, strength, or bravery ", and sometimes it might not.

mrianmerry wrote:
If you're gonna shoe-horn a group of Barbarians into a Knightly Order, along with all the training and whatnot, you're already ignoring fluff in the class anyway...

Shoe-horn? You say that as if I'm forcing barbarians in my games to be part of a knightly order, rather than there just being a group of knights who are trained in the use of massive weapons and Giant Totem Barbarian is the best way to represent that.

And yes I'm fine reflavouring a character who has barbarian levels as a warrior who enter into a battlefocus. I don't really see why that would be a negative.

Quote:
I'd suggest considering making them optional, instead of ignoring, and leave it up to the players to choose to have those roleplay hooks be a part of their character in-world.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? I'm not taking away any roleplaying possibilities from the players.

Shadow Lodge

Joe M. wrote:

Re Somatic Components: My understanding is that Somatic components provoke AOOs while Verbal components do not. So Barbarians with spells only at first can use while ragong spells that will provoke. But later might be able to use other spells without provoking by taking extra feats and such. A balance idea, maybe.

I imagine this decision relates to that, and what it might say about the design principles of picking components when designing a spell. But yes, I would love more insight into these decisions, just to understand the playtest design better.

Despite my (extremely minor) complaints, I do find this line of reasoning compelling. I'd be willing to overlook the somatic/verbal issue if the use of somatic was due to this.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think if youre doing that level of homebrew setting, youd be better making a homebrew class feat that lets fighters wield oversize weapons.

Assuming that doesnt already exist.

That seems much better then "Im complaining about the hypothetical scenario of knightly barbarians still being barbarians"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Somatic action usable in rage.

Moment of Clarity = extra concentration action -> does that include a verbal action?

So... Cast a V/S spell while spending only one action...?

Shadow Lodge

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Skerek wrote:
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Aiken Frost wrote:
Quandary wrote:
graystone wrote:
Take a 1d4 and put it on 1 when you rage and advance the number as you keep raging: when you flip it to 4 you're fatigued. Seems super simple to track.
Line up 4 shot glasses with spirit of choice...
Line up THREE shot glasses with spirit of choice and one empty, quaff one at the start of each turn of Rage. When you get to the forth glass, get sad because its empty. That's how you know this is your Fatigue round.
Actually, I can see getting to the empty 4th shot glass to cause the rage.
Thats why your rage restarts in the round after you realise youve just been handed an empty shot glass!
Come on guys, drink responsibly, have the 4th shot glass be water, you need to stay hydrated.

GREATER RAGE!!


Joe M. wrote:

Re Somatic Components: My understanding is that Somatic components provoke AOOs while Verbal components do not. So Barbarians with spells only at first can use while ragong spells that will provoke. But later might be able to use other spells without provoking by taking extra feats and such. A balance idea, maybe.

I imagine this decision relates to that, and what it might say about the design principles of picking components when designing a spell. But yes, I would love more insight into these decisions, just to understand the playtest design better.

Another balancing element is the fact that somatic components require a free hand.


bookrat wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

Re Somatic Components: My understanding is that Somatic components provoke AOOs while Verbal components do not. So Barbarians with spells only at first can use while ragong spells that will provoke. But later might be able to use other spells without provoking by taking extra feats and such. A balance idea, maybe.

I imagine this decision relates to that, and what it might say about the design principles of picking components when designing a spell. But yes, I would love more insight into these decisions, just to understand the playtest design better.

Despite my (extremely minor) complaints, I do find this line of reasoning compelling. I'd be willing to overlook the somatic/verbal issue if the use of somatic was due to this.

aren't attacks of opportunity gone? So they would generally be provoking reactions right? I am getting a little curious to see how many different kinds of reaction triggers there are and whether they will functionally be the same as the old Attack of Opportunity system or create something quite different.


Unicore wrote:
bookrat wrote:
Joe M. wrote:

Re Somatic Components: My understanding is that Somatic components provoke AOOs while Verbal components do not. So Barbarians with spells only at first can use while ragong spells that will provoke. But later might be able to use other spells without provoking by taking extra feats and such. A balance idea, maybe.

I imagine this decision relates to that, and what it might say about the design principles of picking components when designing a spell. But yes, I would love more insight into these decisions, just to understand the playtest design better.

Despite my (extremely minor) complaints, I do find this line of reasoning compelling. I'd be willing to overlook the somatic/verbal issue if the use of somatic was due to this.
aren't attacks of opportunity gone? So they would generally be provoking reactions right? I am getting a little curious to see how many different kinds of reaction triggers there are and whether they will functionally be the same as the old Attack of Opportunity system or create something quite different.

Any action could trigger a reaction. The actions that could trigger a specific reaction are listed in the reaction itself. For example:

Moving out of a threatened area, somatic spell actions, and (IIRC) manipulating an item will trigger the AOO reaction. Casting any spell may trigger the Counterspell reaction. Only landing a critical hit triggers the storm retribution reaction.


right, so somatic actions provoking attacks of opportunity seems like a very specific condition. Is the fighter's Attack of Opportunity going to list a whole set of conditions, or will there be a general category of actions that often trigger attack-like reactions?


Lucas Yew wrote:
Good to hear I no longer need to count leftover rage rounds. More thematic, at-will raging, fits better for a non-spellcaster's schtick.

I am curious if bard performance stuff works in a similar fashion where you can maintain it so long a round of rest here and there.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that if inspire courage gives a +1 (and eventually higher) to attack to all allies, it is going to take an action every round to maintain.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would definitely trade 1 action per rpund to increase every allies to hit and crit chances by 5%. Especially if that means I can stil move and attack, or cast a spell, or double move. Or attack twice.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
I think that if inspire courage gives a +1 (and eventually higher) to attack to all allies, it is going to take an action every round to maintain.

And with an archer Bard, that could mean their turn is something like:

[A] Inspire Courage, [A] Ranged attack. [A] Single-Component Spell

Now that'd make for a priority target in a fight!


Unicore wrote:
I think that if inspire courage gives a +1 (and eventually higher) to attack to all allies, it is going to take an action every round to maintain.

That would be one of the less objectionable new action costs, I think. Bards maintaining performances as a free action was always kind of funky to imagine, especially when combined with the question of whether or not they need an instrument in hand to perform. I hope that latter point has a graceful solution. I'd imagine it is on Paizo's mind since they made casting components an intrinsic part of the action economy. If bards are pure casters they seem like they could wield an instrument without much issue, but if they are also using weapons it seems impractical.

Silver Crusade

Unicore wrote:
right, so somatic actions provoking attacks of opportunity seems like a very specific condition. Is the fighter's Attack of Opportunity going to list a whole set of conditions, or will there be a general category of actions that often trigger attack-like reactions?

I'm 99% certain that one of the designers said that the AOO reaction was one of the more common (but not universal) generic reactions that monsters get.

And yeah, concentration could be a thing that might trigger a number of reactions or just be hooked into some broader mechanics in a way that explains this choice, but we just don't have the full picture yet.

So I guess my point, at a high level of generality, was more like:

Given what we've seen so far I would guess that the choice to make Somatic-only spells available to raging Barbs who can cast has something to do with background design principles about spells, components, concentration, etc. It's not just a random choice without consequences or ripple effects. So I'd be curious to hear more from the designers about that choice (it would help us learn more about the larger system), and/or will be curious to evaluate the choice in light of the full playtest rules when we see them.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Blave wrote:

Somatic action usable in rage.

Moment of Clarity = extra concentration action -> does that include a verbal action?

So... Cast a V/S spell while spending only one action...?

I think you’ve misunderstood what they mean by “extra action”. You spend an action to allow yourself to use a concentration action while raging. Then, you perform the action as normal. So Barbarian can take a feat to cast V/S spells during rage. Ragemage also seems like good synergy to give you something useful to do on those fatigued rounds.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Joe M. wrote:

Re Somatic Components: My understanding is that Somatic components provoke AOOs while Verbal components do not. So Barbarians with spells only at first can use while ragong spells that will provoke. But later might be able to use other spells without provoking by taking extra feats and such. A balance idea, maybe.

I imagine this decision relates to that, and what it might say about the design principles of picking components when designing a spell. But yes, I would love more insight into these decisions, just to understand the playtest design better.

I have almost never in fiction seen a character ruin a spell or ritual with an incorrect gesture (only once- “swish and flick”), while mispronunciation seems quite common.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wonder if we will get something like Warcaster from 5e. Letting you use a hand holding a weapon for somatic components could be a really powerful general feat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Elegos wrote:
I think if youre doing that level of homebrew setting, youd be better making a homebrew class feat that lets fighters wield oversize weapons.

Huh?

1) Having a Barbarian who isn't a "barbarian" has always been something that is allowed.
2) Why would I make additional content when the houserule is literally "Heh, that anathema doesn't make sense for the character and it's not like it's a magical restriction, lets ignore it"?

Quote:
That seems much better then "Im complaining about the hypothetical scenario of knightly barbarians still being barbarians"

That was just one example because there is an order like that in my setting, another example would be the tiefling barbarian titan-mauler that I have had play in one of my games, the flavour of "you cannot fail to accept a personal challenge of your strength" wouldn't fit that character because they had nothing to prove and actually didn't like drawing attention to themselves.

And I'm not complaining about the scenario... because as I've repeatedly said it's not really an issue because if it ever would come up it takes 2 seconds to remedy. You guys are the ones making out like I'm trying to change the devs mind on it or something. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
I wonder if we will get something like Warcaster from 5e. Letting you use a hand holding a weapon for somatic components could be a really powerful general feat.

I think we are likely to get straight up Spellstrike as a feat, letting you substitute an attack with a weapon for the somatic component of a spell. Although it'd be fair for that to be a two feat chain, with "Warcaster" as a prerequisite to Spellstrike.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:
Elegos wrote:
I think if youre doing that level of homebrew setting, youd be better making a homebrew class feat that lets fighters wield oversize weapons.

Huh?

1) Having a Barbarian who isn't a "barbarian" has always been something that is allowed.
2) Why would I make additional content when the houserule is literally "Heh, that anathema doesn't make sense for the character and it's not like it's a magical restriction, lets ignore it"?

Ultimately, if you want to just remove the anathema entirely (except from Superstitious), just do it. They've already stated elsewhere that alignment and anathema are not actually being used as mechanical balance for any aspect of the game except in one specific instance, and we now know the Superstitious totem is that one specific instance.

I do feel though that anathema are super flavorful, and it's better to replace / reflavor as suited to the setting and character rather than remove in most instances. :)

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aratrok wrote:
Dasrak wrote:
Not a fan of barbarians getting anathema built in by default, I'll say that much. That really feels to me like the kind of thing that should be a strictly RP decision of the player, and not be tied to mechanics. Barbarians aren't paladins, and codes of conduct (even very simple ones) just don't fit with them in my view.
I'd be okay with the idea if the anathema presented as "relatively low impact and designed to create roleplaying hooks" wasn't so crippling- it gives people the ability to force you to agree to a duel (possibly in a remote area or with some other unsafe condition) or lose a chunk of your class features as a free action. If they were optional little prompts like "you like drink a little too much" or they actually hooked into mechanics like Superstition that would be okay, but they can't both be "low impact and designed to create roleplaying hooks" and hand out trivial ways to screw your character or remove a chunk of their abilities. Something has to give in that regard.

It is very similar to Cú Chulainn geasa. It seem appropriate.


mrianmerry wrote:
tivadar27 wrote:
somatic components being ... subtle gesturing
Do they have to be subtle? I mean, iconically, a wizard would make subtle hand gestures, sure. But is that strictly necessary...?

Well no, and Rage could increase your spellcasting abilities rather than your physical ones... Nothing *has* to be anything, but they have been for a very long time, and are in most embodiments of what people think of as a fantasy world. Immersion-breaking changes do actually hurt a system, in the end.

I'm not saying "this is the worst thing in the world", I'm just curious as to why this decision would be made, because it doesn't reflect on the way things have worked in the past, nor does it reflect how people generally expect things to work in a fantasy world.

NOTE: While it would be amusing, pretty sure I've never seen a wizard cast fireball by flippin' the bird.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Icy Turbo wrote:

If it's Druids and Monks that also lose it on the other hand... [/uote]

Personally, I'd expect only overtly supernatural classes to have alignment restrictions this time around. So I'd expect Druid's to stay (to go with the Cleric and Paladin's), but maybe not Monk's.

Druids should have anatemas, not alignment restrictions. Exactly like clerics.

A standard druid is a follower of nature and/or elements. His alignment is mostly irrelevant. What matter is if he respect nature and the elements or not.
Generally he should have a restricted number of alternate sets of anathema and maybe a possibility to combine a druidic anathema with a deity anathema if he is a drudic follower of a god.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Might be worth pointing out that the playtest won't have spell failure from armor anymore. A wizard who spends feats or whatever can cast in full plate. So there's a little evidence the gestures aren't as subtle as they used to be. With somatic being its own action, they might in fact be the opposite-- sweeping flashy motions or what have you. Shrug city man.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
Ultimately, if you want to just remove the anathema entirely (except from Superstitious), just do it. They've already stated elsewhere that alignment and anathema are not actually being used as mechanical balance for any aspect of the game except in one specific instance, and we now know the Superstitious totem is that one specific instance.

Yep. Really not sure why there's so much discussion about this. @_@

Quote:
I do feel though that anathema are super flavorful, and it's better to replace / reflavor as suited to the setting and character rather than remove in most instances. :)

I'd say it can definitely be useful for inspiration.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ohokwy. wrote:
The 3/1 rage thing is also part of this. As previously mentioned, I like the tactical elements of it, and I love that it limits rage without resorting to an annoying rounds/day mechanic. But honestly, is that how bararians work in stories? Rarely, I'd argue.

FWIW, it's rather close to how the barbarian-type hero in Darkest Dungeon plays--her attacks hit hard, but give her debuffs as she overextends and overexerts herself, so as the fight goes on, she has to use her rage-equivalent power to counteract the debuffs with buffs and work herself back into a frenzy.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I really hope we get an option to double dip into totems, perhaps like an eldritch heritage feat line. So many cool concepts get limited by taking old archetypes/feat lines and making them all totems of which you can have one. Without knowing more totems and exactly what they do it is hard to really grasp it.

Some examples:
Giant+Supersticous= You value strength above all else. To fight the giants you have embraced the mentality of fighting fire with fire. Stronger and bigger, power forged through strength not pidly little spells.

(making an assumption that fury may have abilities to double down on the effects of rage ex. reckless attack)
Fury+Giant= The best defense is a good offense, after all, they cant hit you if they're dead.

Dragon+Giant= Your draconic blood feeds your hatred of the giants. Generations they enslaved your ancestors, but no longer. You will see the giants consumed by dragon fire, they will be ash.

Now sure, there has to be balance, but even just a feat tax plus you have to take the anathema should be enough. I mean with a small handful of totems I already can think of this many combinations, imagine when we have all of them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
ENHenry wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
So a totem is mandatory? I wonder how abstract these get, in case someone wants to play an especially scholarly and urbane (or snooty) barbarian. Can't wait to read the book!

”HAH! Some Barbarian! Your totem is a BOOK WORM?!?! That is the stupidest...

...AAAAH! GODS, SOMEONE HELP ME! HE’S BORING THROUGH MY CHEST WITH HIS BARE HAND!!! *Uggghghghlll...*

LOL Not his hand... It's a backhand WITH the book! 'Knowledge is power slap!', 'Insight smash!', 'Knowing is half the battle blast!', 'Thousand papercut slash!.

Conan, the Librarian

Liberty's Edge

Is there a Totem that makes me really good at punching horses?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paladinosaur wrote:
Is there a Totem that makes me really good at punching horses?

The Mongo totem. :D


Unicore wrote:
I think that if inspire courage gives a +1 (and eventually higher) to attack to all allies, it is going to take an action every round to maintain.

They've talked about bards using an instrument as the verbal component for spells, so I'm thinking maybe they have to use an action to maintain inspire courage, but that action can serve double duty as your verbal component for a spell.


Cat-thulhu wrote:
Skerek wrote:
Cat-thulhu wrote:
Weather Report wrote:
Aiken Frost wrote:
Quandary wrote:
graystone wrote:
Take a 1d4 and put it on 1 when you rage and advance the number as you keep raging: when you flip it to 4 you're fatigued. Seems super simple to track.
Line up 4 shot glasses with spirit of choice...
Line up THREE shot glasses with spirit of choice and one empty, quaff one at the start of each turn of Rage. When you get to the forth glass, get sad because its empty. That's how you know this is your Fatigue round.
Actually, I can see getting to the empty 4th shot glass to cause the rage.
Thats why your rage restarts in the round after you realise youve just been handed an empty shot glass!
Come on guys, drink responsibly, have the 4th shot glass be water, you need to stay hydrated.
GREATER RAGE!!

Oh, yeah, water apparently pushes the alcohol through your organs faster, that and the frustration of "...wait, what do you mean, we have no more booze...?" *said in the voice of James Franco in Pineapple Express*, could definitely cause epic Rage levels...at least for me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paladinosaur wrote:
Is there a Totem that makes me really good at punching horses?

Background: Newcastle?

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Cyrad wrote:
As long as the class can do stuff other than rage and stab things...

blank stare


There is a lot to like about the preview. I really like being able to rage all day. It makes it something you can freely do out of combat. Allows a lot of freedom to incorporate it in to your character and play with it during role play. Totems were always a flavorful and fun option, I'm glad to see them get some focus. I'm also glad that an option for totem-less barbarians exists. Overall the class seems to have plenty of flavor options.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber
Revan wrote:
FWIW, it's rather close to how the barbarian-type hero in Darkest Dungeon plays--her attacks hit hard, but give her debuffs as she overextends and overexerts herself, so as the fight goes on, she has to use her rage-equivalent power to counteract the debuffs with buffs and work herself back into a frenzy.

Yeah, I'm 100% building a Hellion once I have the playtest documents. ^_^

Liberty's Edge

Quandary wrote:
graystone wrote:
Take a 1d4 and put it on 1 when you rage and advance the number as you keep raging: when you flip it to 4 you're fatigued. Seems super simple to track.
Line up 4 shot glasses with spirit of choice...

nods in Quandary's general direction

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Isabelle Lee wrote:
In addition (as some of the developers already know), I'd love to see an unarmored combat option. Ideally class-agnostic, but if it had to be class-specific, barbarian would be the one. ^_^

BARBARIANS WEAR ARMOR!?

251 to 300 of 859 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Paizo Blog: Barbarian Class Preview All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.