Sell me on Barbarian Rage?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 149 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Call me crazy, but I think I liked it better when Rage was based on X/day instead of "X rounds."

I can't help but imagine too many combat scenarios that end up going on longer than you initially expected, and there goes the majority of your class for the day (considering almost everything is tied to Raging.) Also, what if there is a lull in the fight? You either waste Rage rounds or you're stuck fatigued when the fight picks back up (level 17 is a LONG way to wait to stop getting fatigued after all!)

Am I missing something, or does Rage really end up being as fickle as I imagine it might?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Once you get to higher levels you have more rage rounds than you need and "higher level" comes before 10th level.

The faster you kill things the more rage rounds you have left, and the damage done by rage and power attack is really good.

Well, obviously we have a barbarian in town. He’s charging and power attacking. He's beating your people up, and trying to kill 'em
So y’all need to hide your BBEG, hide your minions, and anyone else he don't like cause he be killin' everybody out here.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Being a low-level barbarian is kinda like being a low-level wizard...don't blow your load until you really need to. The difference being that the barbarian is still a competent warrior without rage, while the wizard is pretty much reduced to cowering in a corner and hoping for a chance to spash them with weak acid without getting disemboweled during the attempt.


View rage as a temporary boost that can make the abilities of a already strong combatant even greater. Try to treat the ability as a spellcaster would the spell of the same name.

A barbarian can hold his or her own in most fights without raging; in many cases a barbarian will perform better overall by not raging against lesser opponents. The bonuses provided are usually wasted against such foes, and the penalties can result in damage early in an adventure that otherwise might be avoided. It's tough fights when rage becomes a asset, when the barbarian is taking hits even with his or her normal AC and needs greater offensive strength to power down the opponent.


Neo2151 wrote:
Also, what if there is a lull in the fight? You either waste Rage rounds or you're stuck fatigued when the fight picks back up (level 17 is a LONG way to wait to stop getting fatigued after all!)

Be a human and take heart of the fields OR

Splash Oracle 1 (Lame), and at 9th your immune to fatiuge.


You know rage isn't everything, you can still hit stuff with your greatsword without raging all the time. In reality it isn't all that fickle and if getting forced out of rage is something that regularly happens to you, then your GM is probably doing it on purpose.


Neo2151 wrote:
I can't help but imagine too many combat scenarios that end up going on longer than you initially expected, and there goes the majority of your class for the day (considering almost everything is tied to Raging.)

Obviously it depends on your GM, but I find that fights almost never last more than 3 or 4 rounds. In my experience, I don't know if I've ever seen a barbarian run out of rage rounds or a bard run out of performance rounds (although I've seen players saving them for later, of course).

Dark Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Are you raging right at the start of the fight so that you one-shot mooks? Stop doing that. Are you raging before you even get to the enemy? Don't do that either. Do you rage even after the wizard tells everyone "hold on guys, I've got this fight"? Stop it.


The problem with rage is not it's duration. It provides a nice offensive boost (along with the -2 AC), and you can only rage so long before becoming winded. From a flavor perspective I find that fun and compelling. The problem with rage is that it provides a Con bonus in addition to a Str bonus. I know this sounds weird, but it is a mechanical truth that the Con bonus provided by rage makes it almost a suicidal option. The Con boost grants you additional hitpoints according to your level (or hit die). Because the Con bonus disappears when you drop below 0 HP this means auto-death in many situations, and the higher level you are the bigger the drop in HP at the end of a rage. There is an ability that lets you keep raging while unconscious (which is very, very silly), but that only somewhat mitigates the problem.
As a houserule, I eliminate the Con bonus and instead, the barbarian gains 2x barbarian lvl in temp HP at the beginning of a rage. The current rage system makes Barbarians kamikazes, and that's just not right. It's one of those things that Pathfinder did not fix from 3.5. Oh well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Frary wrote:

The problem with rage is not it's duration. It provides a nice offensive boost (along with the -2 AC), and you can only rage so long before becoming winded. From a flavor perspective I find that fun and compelling. The problem with rage is that it provides a Con bonus in addition to a Str bonus. I know this sounds weird, but it is a mechanical truth that the Con bonus provided by rage makes it almost a suicidal option. The Con boost grants you additional hitpoints according to your level (or hit die). Because the Con bonus disappears when you drop below 0 HP this means auto-death in many situations, and the higher level you are the bigger the drop in HP at the end of a rage. There is an ability that lets you keep raging while unconscious (which is very, very silly), but that only somewhat mitigates the problem.

As a houserule, I eliminate the Con bonus and instead, the barbarian gains 2x barbarian lvl in temp HP at the beginning of a rage. The current rage system makes Barbarians kamikazes, and that's just not right. It's one of those things that Pathfinder did not fix from 3.5. Oh well.

Seems like you can avoid this by not dropping to 0 HP.


The con bonus shouldn't be used to just treat yourself as if you had 2 extra hit points per level. They're not "I'm raging so I'm really hard to hurt because my muscles are so tense blades just bounce", they're "I'm raging so I don't care that I should be dying or dead right now, that's a problem for later, not something to concern myself with now!".

They're a lifeline that might give you a chance to continue fighting for a bit when you'd otherwise be down, but they aren't something to rely on for staying alive.


I am new to Pathfinder and my Barbarian is my first toon. I chose it for it's very straightforward approach.

I'm finding there's not a need to rage constantly in every fight beginning to end. Even so, you start with 4 at least and more likely 6 or 7 rounds of rage at level 1 and so far, during two adventures I've not been in a fight that lasted more than 4 rounds.

While there are some rage powers I think are sub-par (or silly) I am enjoying the class.

Also buy a bow!! Don't run in like a crazed berserker "just because"


Adam Frary wrote:

The problem with rage is not it's duration. It provides a nice offensive boost (along with the -2 AC), and you can only rage so long before becoming winded. From a flavor perspective I find that fun and compelling. The problem with rage is that it provides a Con bonus in addition to a Str bonus. I know this sounds weird, but it is a mechanical truth that the Con bonus provided by rage makes it almost a suicidal option. The Con boost grants you additional hitpoints according to your level (or hit die). Because the Con bonus disappears when you drop below 0 HP this means auto-death in many situations, and the higher level you are the bigger the drop in HP at the end of a rage. There is an ability that lets you keep raging while unconscious (which is very, very silly), but that only somewhat mitigates the problem.

As a houserule, I eliminate the Con bonus and instead, the barbarian gains 2x barbarian lvl in temp HP at the beginning of a rage. The current rage system makes Barbarians kamikazes, and that's just not right. It's one of those things that Pathfinder did not fix from 3.5. Oh well.

+1. I've done exactly the same thing and my players (well, my barbarian players) love it. Except I also give them a +2 bonus on Fortitude saves when raging.

Master Arminas


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Neo2151 wrote:

Call me crazy, but I think I liked it better when Rage was based on X/day instead of "X rounds."

I can't help but imagine too many combat scenarios that end up going on longer than you initially expected, and there goes the majority of your class for the day (considering almost everything is tied to Raging.)

The problem is more acute when Rage is X/day. X rounds per day lets a low-level barbarian at least potentially use his rage in multiple encounters, or spend a round of it breaking through a barrier, or other utility moments when a strength boost is needed.

Scarab Sages

Do any of the Barbarian archetypes offer an uncontrolled form of rage - something that requires a will save to snap out of, etc? I know it makes the rage ability a lot less practical, but it does make is somewhat more entertaining.

Liberty's Edge

Yes, there is one that requires the barbarian to make a will save any time he drops a foe or be confused. Its pretty sweet as a dip but I wouldn't recommend it as a straight barbarian. (DC of the save is level based.)


Adam Frary wrote:

The problem with rage is not it's duration. It provides a nice offensive boost (along with the -2 AC), and you can only rage so long before becoming winded. From a flavor perspective I find that fun and compelling. The problem with rage is that it provides a Con bonus in addition to a Str bonus. I know this sounds weird, but it is a mechanical truth that the Con bonus provided by rage makes it almost a suicidal option. The Con boost grants you additional hitpoints according to your level (or hit die). Because the Con bonus disappears when you drop below 0 HP this means auto-death in many situations, and the higher level you are the bigger the drop in HP at the end of a rage. There is an ability that lets you keep raging while unconscious (which is very, very silly), but that only somewhat mitigates the problem.

As a houserule, I eliminate the Con bonus and instead, the barbarian gains 2x barbarian lvl in temp HP at the beginning of a rage. The current rage system makes Barbarians kamikazes, and that's just not right. It's one of those things that Pathfinder did not fix from 3.5. Oh well.

...which is exactly why there are options like half-orc ferocity and the Diehard feat. I mean, we're talking about a berserker here - it makes SENSE that he's going to be throwing caution to the wind and risking his own death. But the options I mention give you a couple of ways to mitigate this. I'm currently playing a Barbarian with Diehard, which actually makes his Con bonus even BETTER, because the -Con score he has to reach to die is greater thanks to his rage.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Me barbarian. Just hit level 6. Last mission kinda blurry. Me drained wisdom by bad beasty - not remember much after that.

Me had 15 rounds rage at level 5. Never had mission where me run out during day, but almost happen last mission.

First fight easy - just guard doggies. Me not bother raging, even though guard doggies breath fire. Me cut doggies with axe and not need be angry.

Second fight was tough. Me rage whole time. Still only 4 rounds, me think.

Third fight was tough hitter, but quick. Me kill fast. That where me drained wisdom. Only rage 2 or 3 rounds, me think.

Last fight real tough. Me rage lotta rounds. Me have two teammates knocked out during fight. Me almost knocked down, but me keep fightin'. Me mighty barbarian!!! We win in end. Me and friends not die.

After last fight, me was tired. Only have 1 round rage left. Me glad no more fights that mission.

Me point is by level 5, barbarian have lotta rage, even on tough day. Before that, me just not rage every fight. Save best attacks for tough fights, like casty magic friends.


In any game where the GM is savvy enough to regularly drop PCs below 0 HP, but not kill them (and that, my friends, is the table I want to sit at), the current rage rules are suicidal.
Responding to Princeimrahil, if "Barbarian" were a prestige class that required either the Diehard feat, or being a half-orc, I might agree with you.
Responding to Stingburka...at higher levels especially, the 10-30 extra HP granted by rage are not something you can reliably guard. That "lifeline" is actually a "deathline."
Responding to Chobemaster...if you can be assured of not dropping below 0 HP, that is one boring game.


Adam Frary wrote:
In any game where the GM is savvy enough to regularly drop PCs below 0 HP, but not kill them (and that, my friends, is the table I want to sit at), the current rage rules are suicidal.

If X damage is enough to kill a raging barbarian, then it's enough to kill a non-raging barbarian as well. I'm not sure how that counts as suicide, not homicide.


Nope.
When you drop below 0, you also lose your raging con bonus, which can easily drop you to your negative con value.

Dark Archive

Mash wrote:

Me barbarian. Just hit level 6. Last mission kinda blurry. Me drained wisdom by bad beasty - not remember much after that.

Me had 15 rounds rage at level 5. Never had mission where me run out during day, but almost happen last mission.

First fight easy - just guard doggies. Me not bother raging, even though guard doggies breath fire. Me cut doggies with axe and not need be angry.

Second fight was tough. Me rage whole time. Still only 4 rounds, me think.

Third fight was tough hitter, but quick. Me kill fast. That where me drained wisdom. Only rage 2 or 3 rounds, me think.

Last fight real tough. Me rage lotta rounds. Me have two teammates knocked out during fight. Me almost knocked down, but me keep fightin'. Me mighty barbarian!!! We win in end. Me and friends not die.

After last fight, me was tired. Only have 1 round rage left. Me glad no more fights that mission.

Me point is by level 5, barbarian have lotta rage, even on tough day. Before that, me just not rage every fight. Save best attacks for tough fights, like casty magic friends.

I know which scenario you're talking about; I'm running it next weekend.

Don't click if you haven't read through the scenario he's talking about!:
Did you guys manage to find the real one?


Personally, I wouldn't build a barbarian without taking Raging Vitality (the one that lets you continue raging while unconscious). I agree it's mechanically bleah, but without it I would have killed the barbarian in my game several times from hits that take him into negatives (and being 5th level when he took it means another 10 hit points damage, often taking him past his negative CON score).

Having to take the feat doesn't sour me on the class. It's a neat class. What I ultimately find cheesy is the inevitable every round sequence of "enter rage, exit rage" ad nauseum to reuse 1/rage powers every round. I'll just say they are 1/round powers at that point and not mess with the fluff of entering and exiting rage every 6 seconds.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Adam Frary wrote:

Nope.

When you drop below 0, you also lose your raging con bonus, which can easily drop you to your negative con value.

If you're smart about it; when you're raging, if you get to a point where you would be at 0 or less without the con bonus you can always just quit raging and you drop like you'd never gained those extra hp. That's literally the worst thing that can happen to you. Alternatively, you can use that time to go get healing, or kill your enemy, but there's a risk associated with that. If you gamble on that life line, eventually you may loose, that doesn't make the life line bad a bad thing to have.

If you're not smart about it, well then that is one boring game.


So the answer is to be intelligent while raging? That really undermines the fun and flavor of RAGE. Your solution will work in some situations, but like I said before, those extra rage HP can't be reliably guarded (via healing, attack or retreat), especially at higher levels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Frary wrote:

Nope.

When you drop below 0, you also lose your raging con bonus, which can easily drop you to your negative con value.

And without your raging Con bonus, the exact same amount of damage would also drop you to your negative Con value.

Shadow Lodge

Mergy wrote:


I know which scenario you're talking about; I'm running it next weekend.

** spoiler omitted **

Answer to his spoiler question:

Spoiler:

Yes we did, and without any hints from NPCs, either. Our group's monk has WAY too high perception. :D

Adam Frary: With Raging Vitality, that not problem. And me be smart in fight like ShadowcatX say. When me almost pass out, me run to friend for heal. Or me chug heal potion. Chug in fight work well for raging barbarian. Chug beer. Chug potion. Whatever.


For those fights with a lengthy lull in the middle, but you are not sure how soon you need to be at your top game, a potion of lesser restoration will speed your recovery. Drink the potion, and three rounds later, you are no longer fatigued, even if you had raged for 20 rounds beforehand.

Also, fatigued is not the worst of status ailments. (although does carry the danger of being escalated to exhausted)


Barbarian (lvl 8, 14 Con) with 10 HP takes 12 dmg, is now unconscious with a decent chance of stablizing. Most monsters turn their attention to current threats.

Raging Barbarian (lvl 8, 18 Con) with 26 HP takes 12 dmg, attacks, then takes 15. He's at -1 HP, but then loses 4 points of Con, dropping him to -17...dead.

Liberty's Edge

Adam Frary wrote:
So the answer is to be intelligent while raging? That really undermines the fun and flavor of RAGE. Your solution will work in some situations, but like I said before, those extra rage HP can't be reliably guarded (via healing, attack or retreat), especially at higher levels.

So you're one of the people who think that barbarians have to be played stupidly to "stay in character"? That pretty much tells me everything I need to know right there.

Adam Frary wrote:

Barbarian (lvl 8, 14 Con) with 10 HP takes 12 dmg, is now unconscious with a decent chance of stablizing. Most monsters turn their attention to current threats.

Raging Barbarian (lvl 8, 18 Con) with 26 HP takes 12 dmg, attacks, then takes 15. He's at -1 HP, but then loses 4 points of Con, dropping him to -17...dead.

Raging Barbarian (lv 8, 18 con) with 26 HP takes 12 dmg, attacks, then drops rage and falls to the ground. He is unconscious with a decent chance of stabilizing, and got to do more damage than the barbarian without the con bonus.


Forgetting your insult...

Rage is rage and stupid is stupid. I think that raging characters can make tactically sound decisions about movement and targets, but ending your rage because of convenience just kills the flavor.

Edit: Also, the lvl 8 raging Barbarian could easily take 27 points of damage, which would also kill him/her outright instead of just knocking them unconscious.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Me never end rage until fight over. But me do leave front line for heal when things get bad.

Except when me drained to 4 wisdom in last mission. Then me be too stoopid.

Liberty's Edge

Adam Frary wrote:
Edit: Also, the lvl 8 raging Barbarian could easily take 27 points of damage, which would also kill him/her outright instead of just knocking them unconscious.

And your point? Any character can take enough damage to kill them out right, class has no effect on that, nor does rage.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If you don't want to end your rage do to "convenience" because it ruins the flavor for you, you have other options. If you had taken the Guarded Life Rage Power or the Raging Vitality feat (both of which you qualify for already) your Barbarian would still be alive. Heck, if he had Raging Vitality, he would still be in positive HP, and still raging.

So there are three options right there that keep your Barbarian from dying due to dropping out of rage.


My point is that it increases the danger zone for a character to die outright. A raging barbarian will will automatically lose an ADDITIONAL 2x lvl HP when dropped unconscious, while a fighter will simply suffer the damage as normal. My suggestion is to simply remove the Con bonus from the rage mechanic because it doesn't work as is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Frary wrote:
Edit: Also, the lvl 8 raging Barbarian could easily take 27 points of damage, which would also kill him/her outright instead of just knocking them unconscious.

Which would also kill it if it's not raging.

The rage bonus isn't suicidal. Acting like it makes you tougher is suicidal.

It's like saying casting protection from elements is suicidal because when it drops, if you're still in the lava lake, you'll die.

EDIT: Bad analogy on my part. Prot. from E. makes you tougher. It's like saying Delay Poison is suicidal because you'll keep fighting and keep getting more poisoned.


Merkatz, character options should not be designed to "fix" PC classes with obvious flaws. Instead they should enhance their ability in some aspect of play. A 'required' option is no longer an option.

Edit: Strinburka, see my post immediately preceeding yours.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adam Frary wrote:
My point is that it increases the danger zone for a character to die outright. A raging barbarian will will automatically lose an ADDITIONAL 2x lvl HP when dropped unconscious, while a fighter will simply suffer the damage as normal. My suggestion is to simply remove the Con bonus from the rage mechanic because it doesn't work as is.

Arguments of being smart going against the flavor of barbarians aside, there is no mechanical situation where removing the con bonus is better than having it.


Adam Frary wrote:
Rage is rage and stupid is stupid. I think that raging characters can make tactically sound decisions about movement and targets, but ending your rage because of convenience just kills the flavor.

This is a fair criticism. But it's not the same thing as saying barbarian rage is suicide.


ShadowcatX, as any other melee character, dropping below 0 HP is not that bad. For a raging barbarian, it likely means death.

Liberty's Edge

Adam Frary wrote:
ShadowcatX, as any other melee character, dropping below 0 HP is not that bad. For a raging barbarian, it likely means death.

Except that the same amount of damage, had he not had the bonus hp from rage, would also have killed him.


Again, it's that the barbarian has a larger HP danger zone of death. I know he will have a few more HP overall, but they don't mean much with his -2 AC.
It's all about what happens when you reach -1.


Adam Frary wrote:

Again, it's that the barbarian has a larger HP danger zone of death. I know he will have a few more HP overall, but they don't mean much with his -2 AC.

It's all about what happens when you reach -1.

Barbarian level 10 has 140 hit points. Barbarian rages. Barbarian has 160 hit points. Enemy hits barbarian for 138 hit points. Enemy hits barbarian for 23 hit points, dropping his total to -1. Rage ends, barbarian is at -21 hit points. Barbarian dies.

Fighter level 12 has 140 hit points. Enemy hits fighter for 138 hit points. Enemy hits fighter for 23 hit points, dropping his total hit points to -21. Fighter dies.

How is this different?


Adam Frary wrote:

The problem with rage is not it's duration. It provides a nice offensive boost (along with the -2 AC), and you can only rage so long before becoming winded. From a flavor perspective I find that fun and compelling. The problem with rage is that it provides a Con bonus in addition to a Str bonus. I know this sounds weird, but it is a mechanical truth that the Con bonus provided by rage makes it almost a suicidal option. The Con boost grants you additional hitpoints according to your level (or hit die). Because the Con bonus disappears when you drop below 0 HP this means auto-death in many situations, and the higher level you are the bigger the drop in HP at the end of a rage. There is an ability that lets you keep raging while unconscious (which is very, very silly), but that only somewhat mitigates the problem.

As a houserule, I eliminate the Con bonus and instead, the barbarian gains 2x barbarian lvl in temp HP at the beginning of a rage. The current rage system makes Barbarians kamikazes, and that's just not right. It's one of those things that Pathfinder did not fix from 3.5. Oh well.

Am I the only one who realizes that while you could die when your rage ends due to the loss of Con, if you didn't have that extra Con you would already be dead? If you would die due to loss of Con, you were already dead. The difference, now, is you have a chance to get some healing before that dead catches up with you. EDIT: Orc barbarians (and to a lesser extent half-orcs) and anyone with the Diehard feat basically get nothing but good results from this. As long as you're not unconscious, you even get a higher negative HP threshold before you're totally dead.

Con 14, HP 80? Rage! Con 18, Hp 120! take 134 damage? You still have 4 more points to go until you're dead! :P

Liberty's Edge

Ashiel wrote:
Am I the only one who realizes that while you could die when your rage ends due to the loss of Con, if you didn't have that extra Con you would already be dead? If you would die due to loss of Con, you were already dead. The difference, now, is you have a chance to get some healing before that dead catches up with you.

No, you're not the only one. Most of us do realize it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neo2151 wrote:

Call me crazy, but I think I liked it better when Rage was based on X/day instead of "X rounds."

I can't help but imagine too many combat scenarios that end up going on longer than you initially expected, and there goes the majority of your class for the day (considering almost everything is tied to Raging.) Also, what if there is a lull in the fight? You either waste Rage rounds or you're stuck fatigued when the fight picks back up (level 17 is a LONG way to wait to stop getting fatigued after all!)

Am I missing something, or does Rage really end up being as fickle as I imagine it might?

Ok. You're crazy. :)

Here's why. When rage was x/day, it made it harder to decide when to use it. Most people noted that combats in general were less than 3 rounds long in general (going with shared information on forums like Giant in the Playground), with few battles lasting even one minute (10 rounds). Meanwhile, if you did get into a long battle, you were just as likely to run out of juice.

In 3.x, the Barbarian could only rage for a number of rounds equal to 3 + his Con modifier. That means about 5-8 rounds at best at 1st level, and about 13 rounds at 20th level. You were also limited to only raging once per encounter, so having multiple rages per day didn't help you when your first ran out. Additionally, since you can only rage 1/encounter, no matter how many rages you have, additional uses of rage per day are completely wasted unless you have tons of encounters. Bad all the way around.

In Pathfinder, not only do you get to choose when you rage, and for how long you rage, but you can pace yourself. You can also enter a rage multiple times during the same combat for strategic reasons. It is now more viable to play a multiclass Barbarian because you can end your rage during a fight to begin casting spells or using skills on the rounds you're fatigued, then jump right back into the rage when you're done. You also have "rage-cycling" which allows the barbarian to re-activate rage powers by leaving a rage and then re-entering it. This tactic is perfected once you are immune to fatigue in some way (either by barbarian ability, oracle dip, being undead, etc).

Additionally, you get more bang for your buck. In 3.x, your total rage rounds at 20th level is 18 rounds (the base 3 rounds multiplied by the 6 times per day you could enter your rage) plus Con mod * 6. Now most Barbarians could comfortably support a +10 Con by 20th level, so let's assume 78 rounds split into groups of 13 rounds, but no more than 13 per any single encounter. Yet the 3.x game assumes around 4 equal-CR encounters per day, so you're actually only getting about 52 rounds, as additional uses of the ability are redundant unless you are fighting up to 6 groups of much weaker enemies, but no more than 6, because then you're out of rage/day.

Pathfinder gives you 4 + Con modifier, plus an additional 2/level. So with the same +10 Con, you'd have 54 rounds per day to divide as you desire. So you're getting more use out of your rage more often.

Enter a fight with a pair of CR 1/2 orcs? Rage 1 round. Kill one orc. Party kills the other. You win. No wasted rounds. Getting into a big fight that might need you to rage for the entire thing? Good thing you saved up some of your rage to freely unleash to your heart's unbridled content.

The fact you have Rage powers that you can rage-cycle is double the fun. For example, check some of the following Rage powers which benefit from Rage-Cycling.

Quote:

Clear Mind (Ex): A barbarian may reroll a failed Will save. This power is used as an immediate action after the first save is attempted, but before the results are revealed by the GM. The barbarian must take the second result, even if it is worse. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power. This power can only be used once per rage.

Mighty Swing (Ex): The barbarian automatically confirms a critical hit. This power is used as an immediate action once a critical threat has been determined. A barbarian must be at least 12th level before selecting this power. This power can only be used once per rage.

No Escape (Ex): The barbarian can move up to double her normal speed as an immediate action but she can only use this ability when an adjacent foe uses a withdraw action to move away from her. She must end her movement adjacent to the enemy that used the withdraw action. The barbarian provokes attacks of opportunity as normal during this movement. This power can only be used once per rage.

Powerful Blow (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 bonus on a single damage roll. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. This power is used as a swift action before the roll to hit is made. This power can only be used once per rage.

Strength Surge (Ex): The barbarian adds her barbarian level on one Strength check or combat maneuver check, or to her Combat Maneuver Defense when an opponent attempts a maneuver against her. This power is used as an immediate action. This power can only be used once per rage.

Surprise Accuracy (Ex): The barbarian gains a +1 morale bonus on one attack roll. This bonus increases by +1 for every 4 levels the barbarian has attained. This power is used as a swift action before the roll to hit is made. This power can only be used once per rage.

Unexpected Strike (Ex): The barbarian can make an attack of opportunity against a foe that moves into any square threatened by the barbarian, regardless of whether or not that movement would normally provoke an attack of opportunity. This power can only be used once per rage. A barbarian must be at least 8th level before selecting this power.

The above is just in the core rulebook.

Pathfinder Rage is win.

Silver Crusade

And again, Raging Vitality is pretty much mandatory. It sucks that all barbarians are required to waste a feat on one thing, but there it is.

In the mean time, those extra HP keep the barbarian in the fight doing damage for longer. That's the advantage.

And if you don't want the risk, then simply back out of combat as soon as your damage taken gets close to your non-raging HP.


Adam Frary: It's true, by itself, rage DOES increase the chance for a character to die outright. You are correct in saying that. But it's all part of the package. You could feasibly say that it's one of the class's drawbacks (in addition to the -2 DEX penalty). It's also true that there are ways to counter-act the risk (good suggestions have already been mentioned). But the fact remains that this risk is a part of Rage in Pathfinder.

My point is: if you don't like it, don't play barbarian. It's safe to say that most players are either "okay" with the risk, or they're willing to spend resources (or simply take tactical precautions) to deal with it. Obviously, you simply don't like the risk at all. That's your prerogative. However, it's also everyone else's prerogative to accept the risk and play with the RAW. The rules are clearly explained, and if you willingly play barbarian, you're metaphorically signing a contract that says "I understand the risk, and I accept it." If you don't like it, simply don't play it.

The risk was obviously implemented INTENTIONALLY, since they clearly explained what would happen in the case of getting knocked unconscious during a rage. You can either use rage with this risk, or don't use rage at all. Disagreeing with the RAI, however, is something different. I personally don't like the fore mentioned house rule for rage, because it changes a RAI mechanic. However, as long as everyone at the table adheres to it, then I have no reason to dwell more on the subject.


It depends on whether your enemies are just trying to incapacitate you or outright kill you. A fighter that goes below 0 gets knocked out and the enemy usually goes after the still active threats. One cannot incapacitate a raging barbarian (or a character with diehard) without outright killing them.


For raging barbarian...-1 Hp equals death.
For everyone else...you sleep till the end of the encounter.
No other class has death itself as a balancing mechanic for its benefits, and it makes the barbarian impractical for someone who wants to play a character longterm.

1 to 50 of 149 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Sell me on Barbarian Rage? All Messageboards