Fighter vs Barbarian, by the numbers.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

351 to 400 of 401 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I mean Barbarian might seem overpowered to you and is probably overpowered compared to the Fighter, but I don't think you want to match the Barbarian up against say the Druid.
When did I say overpowered? I called them broken. These are different things.

Hrm, I assumed you were using "broken" in that context to mean "overpowered" since they get +20 to lots of stuff. My bad. Could I possibly request a clarification of what you are going for?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
The 1-10 fighter only seems weak in comparison to other classes.

Um... that pretty much says they are weak... If something is weaker than other things you are comparing it to... that means it is a weak option.. unless you are setting the bar at commoner...


AndIMustMask wrote:
(rage talents largely surpass every other class' 'equivalent' while we're at it--magus arcana, most revelations, rogue talents, etc.)

AAAAAANNNDDDDD.... FALSE! xD

Hexes are NOTORIOUS for their power level, Arcana allows the magus to do some crazy things (why do you think Magi are the #1 NOVA class), Discoveries may not have teh most obviously powerful effects but havint eh ability to hand out personal potions and create a Mutagen/Cognitagen for every stat is powerful...


Discoveries are vastly more versatile than Rage powers and allow you to take your character in multiple directions with little to no prerequisites required.


Scavion wrote:
Discoveries are vastly more versatile than Rage powers and allow you to take your character in multiple directions with little to no prerequisites required.

True. I am simply stating that Alchemist Powers tend not to be as "OMG WTFERMAHGERD!!!" as certain barbarian powers. Their power tends to be much more subtle (unlike say... superstitious..)


K177Y C47 wrote:
Scavion wrote:
Discoveries are vastly more versatile than Rage powers and allow you to take your character in multiple directions with little to no prerequisites required.
True. I am simply stating that Alchemist Powers tend not to be as "OMG WTFERMAHGERD!!!" as certain barbarian powers. Their power tends to be much more subtle (unlike say... superstitious..)

Subtle indeed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.


As subtle as a new pair of arms, wings and a tentacle growing on the alchemist?


Wolfgang Rolf wrote:
As subtle as a new pair of arms, wings and a tentacle growing on the alchemist?

Wel wings are wings...

The arms and the tentacle though are a little less obvious in power until someone goes and decides to grab 2 oversized basterd swords...


Anzyr wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
I mean Barbarian might seem overpowered to you and is probably overpowered compared to the Fighter, but I don't think you want to match the Barbarian up against say the Druid.
When did I say overpowered? I called them broken. These are different things.
Hrm, I assumed you were using "broken" in that context to mean "overpowered" since they get +20 to lots of stuff. My bad. Could I possibly request a clarification of what you are going for?

It's not that the +20 is overpowered for barbarians, since it is all they do, but they are breaking the mechanics. In certain parts of the game the barbar is unassailable aka any effect that requires a saving throw and any encounter that can be solved via hitting things.


K177Y C47 wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
The 1-10 fighter only seems weak in comparison to other classes.
Um... that pretty much says they are weak... If something is weaker than other things you are comparing it to... that means it is a weak option.. unless you are setting the bar at commoner...

Or you compare to the encounters the fighter is expected to handle.

Also pre 11-ish the extra feats the fighter has are actually pretty useful. Higher than that and other martials are getting all the feats they want/need and the fighter's advantage closes to 0.


Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.

No. Paladins are only rendered unplayable by house rules and ridiculously super literal no context reading of vaguely worded guidelines. If you pay the paladin as written without paying hoagie to the literalist genie, they work just fine.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure which is more troubling, the idea that Barbarians are "broken" because they have actual competent defenses (which come at a not inconsiderable cost) against magic, or that there's a very good chance that the people who crane wing'd Crane Wing really are thinking that way.


Ninja in the Rye wrote:
I'm not sure which is more troubling, the idea that Barbarians are "broken" because they have actual competent defenses (which come at a not inconsiderable cost) against magic, or that there's a very good chance that the people who crane wing'd Crane Wing really are thinking that way.

You can have competent defenses against magic without invalidating the saving throw mechanic.


hey, at least they're able to pick a fight with a wizard and stand even a partial chance (before the wizard decides 'screw it' and uses the pillars of god tactic). not many other classes can say that.


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
I'm not sure which is more troubling, the idea that Barbarians are "broken" because they have actual competent defenses (which come at a not inconsiderable cost) against magic, or that there's a very good chance that the people who crane wing'd Crane Wing really are thinking that way.
You can have competent defenses against magic without invalidating the saving throw mechanic.

Other than flat-out immunities, how, exactly?


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
I'm not sure which is more troubling, the idea that Barbarians are "broken" because they have actual competent defenses (which come at a not inconsiderable cost) against magic, or that there's a very good chance that the people who crane wing'd Crane Wing really are thinking that way.
You can have competent defenses against magic without invalidating the saving throw mechanic.

Superstition gives Barbarians a bonus of 2 + 1/4 level (that's a max of +7 at 20th level) to saves against spells/SLA/SU. Eater of Magic gives them a reroll once per rage. Considering how easy it is to pump up save DCs, and that the bonus is often not active in the first round of combat if the Barb is surprised or the caster wins initiative) that's not invalidating anything in and of itself. On their two poor saves it puts them slightly ahead of classes with a full save, only in a rage, and at the expense of having to save against buffs and heals from allies. IMO that's a good boost for martial classes at a not inconsiderable cost.

The only way you get in to invalidating territory IMO is with the human favored class bonus pumping up superstition for an extra +1/3rd level (and, to a lesser extent, slapping it on a Dwarf who invests in Glory of Old and Steel Soul).

TL;DR The "problem" isn't superstition, it's the human FC bonus which is nearly doubling the bonus of the Rage Power.


I am also going to throw something else out there....

You know what that makes the barbarian? A GOLEM...

If you are having issues with their saves, think of them as golems and act accordingly. Turns out that barbs still can't fly naturally (unless they took the Celestial Totem... which means they don't have pounce and stupid AC) so things like Reverse gravity still works on them...

Or just makes force walls... that still works...


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.

It is possible to get 16+ smites/day you realize?


K177Y C47 wrote:

I am also going to throw something else out there....

You know what that makes the barbarian? A GOLEM...

If you are having issues with their saves, think of them as golems and act accordingly. Turns out that barbs still can't fly naturally (unless they took the Celestial Totem... which means they don't have pounce and stupid AC) so things like Reverse gravity still works on them...

Or just makes force walls... that still works...

IMHO dragon totem is better.

More DR + flight vs a pounce ability that the GM is likely to negate by editing encounters (cause he/she doesn't like bosses getting one-round)

It's the saves plus auto success spell sunder is what I mean by "negate magic" getting +16 from superstition is just part of the overall broken-ness.

Barbarians aren't golems though, if they were immune to magic like that it would be better. Because then they would have an actual downside to their ability by preventing buffs. (NOTE: better in that sense of one broken ability not as in the class would be less over-power BECAUSE I'm not saying the class is overpowered. I'm taking a moment to clarify that since I notice people like to assume that just because I dislike the barbar busting mechanics that I somehow think it's stronger than a wizard)


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.
It is possible to get 16+ smites/day you realize?

Do you only fight 16 enemies?

I know plenty of groups only go 3 encounters a day, but surely 16 smites isn't enough to cover everything you run across.


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.
It is possible to get 16+ smites/day you realize?

Do you only fight 16 enemies?

I know plenty of groups only go 3 encounters a day, but surely 16 smites isn't enough to cover everything you run across.

Actually the recommended by paizo is 4 encounters per day of 4 opponents. And most scenarios and such actually use less than that, only going 2-3 encounters per day.

Published material would generally mean that you have extra smites left over with that many smites.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.
It is possible to get 16+ smites/day you realize?

Do you only fight 16 enemies?

I know plenty of groups only go 3 encounters a day, but surely 16 smites isn't enough to cover everything you run across.

You are aware that you don't need to smite EVERYTHING... Funny thing is, a lot of encounters are made up of mooks... and mooks don't really matter much (Paladins are tough as crap...)

Oh and don't get me started on the dumb loradin crap xD (Sometimes oracles just make things even more stupid)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Superstition should only be toned down if>

A- Save DCs didn't reach the stratosphere. By 13th level, many characters need a 15 or more to hit with their weak save, and aren't much better on their good saves, unless they are Con/Dex/Wis-based.

B- Spells didn't target touch AC. Here is the martial, investing a freaking fortune on armor and amulets of natural armor... And here is the casters, simply ignoring it as he casts nasty effects as enervation. This is much closer to invalidating/breaking mechanics than Superstition ever will be.

You can't target the Barbarian's save? Use one of your bazillion other options!

CWheezy wrote:
Marcus are you marthkus? Serious question, since another poster says similar things which are false (invalidating saving throw mechanic is demonstrably false, etc)

I'm pretty sure he is.


K177Y C47 wrote:

I am also going to throw something else out there....

You know what that makes the barbarian? A GOLEM...

If you are having issues with their saves, think of them as golems and act accordingly. Turns out that barbs still can't fly naturally (unless they took the Celestial Totem... which means they don't have pounce and stupid AC) so things like Reverse gravity still works on them...

Or just makes force walls... that still works...

Does not spell sunder work for this?


Lemmy wrote:

Superstition should only be toned down if>

A- Save DCs didn't reach the stratosphere. By 13th level, many characters need a 15 or more to hit with their weak save, and aren't much better on their good saves, unless they are Con/Dex/Wis-based.

B- Spells didn't target touch AC. Here is the martial, investing a freaking fortune on armor and amulets of natural armor... And here is the casters, simply ignoring it as he casts nasty effects as enervation. This is much closer to invalidating/breaking mechanics than Superstition ever will be.

I'm not sure about A, I play non-barbar classes at those levels and still manage to consistently pass saves, but I haven't really crunched the math on that.

As for B, I really like how in psionics almost all the the touch AC targeting powers are damage only.

I think the barbar then could also get some other spell counters, like increased movement options and utility abilities. I wouldn't even mind the totem thing being explored more with the barbar getting more cool animal abilities like flight, cheaper enhanced senses, increased movement speed, trample, ect.


Heading for work soon and so I haven't read the full thread (I know FATAL!) but two points.

I actually like to play Fighter/Barbarian multi-classes (but play mostly low level games) - they are easily viable and have the best of both worlds offset against slightly slower class progression (never had a 20th level character so that's an over-stressed aspect of the game in my opinion, you spend most of your characters game-time at much lower levels).

And...

Where does this leave the Viking Archetype? I've been curious about this as it potentially gets the best of both worlds BUT is probably best done as a sword and board (or a two weapon) combat style, both of which have their limits (especially with no bonus to movement)...


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Lemmy wrote:

Superstition should only be toned down if>

A- Save DCs didn't reach the stratosphere. By 13th level, many characters need a 15 or more to hit with their weak save, and aren't much better on their good saves, unless they are Con/Dex/Wis-based.

B- Spells didn't target touch AC. Here is the martial, investing a freaking fortune on armor and amulets of natural armor... And here is the casters, simply ignoring it as he casts nasty effects as enervation. This is much closer to invalidating/breaking mechanics than Superstition ever will be.

I'm not sure about A, I play non-barbar classes at those levels and still manage to consistently pass saves, but I haven't really crunched the math on that.

As for B, I really like how in psionics almost all the the touch AC targeting powers are damage only.

I think the barbar then could also get some other spell counters, like increased movement options and utility abilities. I wouldn't even mind the totem thing being explored more with the barbar getting more cool animal abilities like flight, cheaper enhanced senses, increased movement speed, trample, ect.

By level 13 Its entirely possible for DC's to have hit 28 on certain spell types (compulsion and such most notably) with only a +4 to stat booster.

Casting Stat
18 Base + 2 racial + 3 leveling + 4 casting item = 27 (8 mod)

Level 6 spells are available by then for spontaneous casters.

10+ 8 Mod + 6 level + 2 spell focus and greater + 2 fey bloodline = 28

This is just an example but at level 14 level 7 spells come on line, boosting it to 29. Level 15 spell perfection comes on line, doubling spell focus and greater spell focus for 31. Not to mention by then you should have a +6 casting stat item for 32. Level 16 you get another stat bonus, pushing it to 33. Level 18, wish comes online and you boost the stat by 4 more, pushing it to 35. Level 20 you wish and stat boost for level, pushing it to 34.

After level 13, dc's for save or suck focused casters explode because:
1) gold becomes much easier to come by, pushing up casting stats.

2) spell perfection allows you to double any bonus to spells, including the bread and butter of save or sucks, the spell focus spells.

3) Wish eventually comes online, jumping your casting stat again like mad.


What we did in our games was to combine Fighter and Barbarian into one class.


Anarchy_Kanya wrote:
What we did in our games was to combine Fighter and Barbarian into one class.

If you're going to do that, you might as well just combine the Fighter with all full BAB classes and non-caster 3/4 BAB classes. At least it'd take some sting off the length of feat chains.


Athaleon wrote:
How many combat feats are actually good? Good enough to compare to class features like Rage Powers? How wide a variety of abilities do they actually give you? And how many of the good feats are Fighter-only?

There are no real fighter only feats because all feats so called can be taken by a variety of other classes, as well. And not only obscure archetypes as is with getting rage powers without being a barbarian.


Anzyr wrote:
insaneogeddon wrote:

People say zen archer is a specific build and archetype so should not be included but then include the highly specific beast totem superstitious invulnerable raging come and get me barbarian.. please explain?

And a martial artist monk with mantis style and ability focus can pretty much stun anything.

A strength of fighters is feats - use them to get supernatural powers ! I am strongly of the opinion to get real joy from a fighter only fighter feats should be used for fighter feats and fighting. All general feats should be used for racial heritage and wings or spell casting foxtails, elritch heritage, wild psionics,true name powers or any such thing supplements bring.

Its been mentioned tactician fighters are boss. Combine their 11th level ability with the feats bodyguard, arcane strike and combat reflexes and the items: gloves of arcane striking, benevolent armour, and a ring of tactical precision oh and the helpful trait - boost EVERY-ONES AC !

A few quick things. Superstitious isn't an archetype. Nor is Raging. Nor is Come and Get Me. Even Beast Totem is a rage power (though one that will close off other options). Those are things Barbarians can just *do*. Zen Archer Monk is an archetype that turns the class built around getting up close and punching people with your fists, into the class that hides in the back and shoots a bow. See the difference? Especially considering the number crunch doesn't take invulnerable rager into account.

Second while a Fighter may get *more* feats then a Barbarian, thanks to the Extra Rage Power, a Barbarian gets more *valuable* feats, since Rage Powers put feats to shame. And in this case quantity won't overcome quality since Combat feat chains are long drug out affairs in PF seemingly created to punish the Fighter.

It would help your argument if you stopped using archetypes, since neither of the number crunched builds do. And do you really want to have to compare against an Invulnerable Rager? I think that will end badly, no...

Thats arguing semantics archetypes are FAR less specific then the cookie cutter lawful build 'BEAST TOTEM, come and get me, superstitious' ! The class is very different.

You say monks are changed by the specific build for archery (even though its western bias/blindness and kyudo is a thing) but I accept that and using the same logic barbarians are are changed by the specific build for beast totem come and get me superstitious.

I mean really growing long claws ? Getting all bony and hairy when raging? Pouncing like an animal? TRYING to get hit? these are about as far from conan or ANY barbarian in fantasy literature or even film as poss.

Real barbarians fight many the pouncing clawed hairy beasts of an elder or a degraded degenerate inbred age and overcome with STEEL and human wit and uncivilized passions and survival instinct but NEVER by becoming the beast or degenerate.

Such travesties are as far from barbarians as possible.

Now if you want to not even be a human but a bipedal animal in human guise fair nuff you are wolverine, sabretooth, or really any of lupines the progeny of Romulus ('a species resembling humans that evolved from canines instead of primates through convergent evolution').

But that makes you quite DIFFERENT from a REAL barbarian.

Its really an unspoken berserker (specifically a 'Úlfhéðnar' animal skin wearer) archetype so people can delude themselves their barbarians while being animals.

As said druids and alchemists make better animals and butchers (and don't need to follow the rules or barbarian school) if you really want to be a beast. I prefer my barbarians: chaotic, humanoid, heroic, clean.


Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I'm a bit confused. Paladins have just as good saves as Barbarians, except they're vs everything. Divine Grace + Bestow Grace = +20 to all saves by 20th level, easy. No special magic items, no specific race, no special feats, nothing. Just two in-class features used.

EDIT: And while I realize that Divine Grace requires Charisma and Supersitition doesn't require an ability score, that's like saying Superstitution would be way worse if it used the barbarians Strength modifier as a key component. It's not an ability tax when you already want to max that ability.

Eh paladins are like barbarian light when it comes to numbers. They more than make it up with additional class features, but things like bestow grace and smite are limited enough that you don't waste it on mooks or at least things that appear to be mooks. That second group can be quite the pain for a paladin. The big downside to paladins is that they require house-rules to be playable (code nonsense). As far as balance goes it's difficult to compare when you have to alter the RAW. If we compare paladins to barbars as they appear to be intended (falling every other fight or whenever the GM feels like it), then they have trouble comparing at all when half the time they are fighters without bonus feats, armor training, or weapon training.

Bestow Grace lasts 10 rounds per caster level (minimum 30 rounds), and you can effectively buy more uses of it with pearls of power, which you can craft yourself thanks to your class features (Paladins = Caster Level = Qualified for Craft Wondrous Item). Meanwhile, Paladins innately have better saves and defenses; because while it's nothing to get a +10 Charisma at 20th level, you also have a perfect Will save to boot (so another +6 to your Will before feats); and then if you're fighting really bad you can drop a Bestow Grace for another +10 or so, and at high levels, 10 rounds/level can last multiple encounters. That's before accounting for immunities to fear, charms, compulsions, negative levels (death ward is on the Paladin spell list btw), etc.

Meanwhile, you don't smite mooks. There is no need. Paladins fight just fine without using smites. I demonstrated this in another thread where I engineered a series of encounters against enemies specifically chosen to deny the Paladin the advantages that he had (all were neutral, some had lots of hardness, etc). Paladin wrecked faces just fine.

Paladins also have a lot of smite alternatives. For example, bless weapon is a 1st level Paladin spell (pearls are cheapsauce for that level) that allows you to auto-confirm all critical-threats vs evil enemies (holy crap, Fighters gotta be like 20th level to get something that cool, and you're doing it at 4th level with any melee weapon you want). They also have access to divine favor which gives them up to a +3 bonus to hit and damage for 10 rounds (again, 1st level spell), and through Unsanctioned Knowledge has access to divine power for a +6 to hit and damage, +1 attack, and +CL HP, for 1 round/level, or could pick up greater invisibility instead (I prefer divine favor since it's always good). Then you have the Paladin's weapon bond or pet (I prefer the weapon bond usually) which is pretty stellar too.

Most of these easily fill in for a smite when you're just doing general purpose stuff, if you even need to burn one at all. If you really hate someone, you can go martial-nova on them, because all of that stuff stacks, so if you can break off from combat or ambush a foe, they are going to be so much red mist.

Rangers are very similar, except Rangers are generally more hardcore offense and CC, and function more as strike-vanishers. They are the softest of the three martials (yes, three) in the core rulebook, but they make up for it in utility, combat options, and skill stuff, whereas the Paladin and Barbarian are more robust.

The three are well balanced against each other.

Scarab Sages

Rynjin wrote:

Any class in Unchained that is "nerfed hard" will probably never see any use. They definitely won't be at my table, since I see no reason to purchase or even look over content that doesn't add something to the game rather than taking it away.

Nerfing classes defeats the purpose of a book about making ALTERNATE VERSIONS of a class. These aren't replacements, they're alternates.

So if one alternate is better, and better designed...

I expect summoners and barbarians to be nerfed.

I expect rogues and monks to be buffed. Most likely gaining full BAB in addition to anything else.

The only way it becomes relevant is if PFS adopts the alternate rules. I expect the updates to monk and rogue will be PFS legal and popular. Summoner may be forced on society players. Barbarian will be treated as a sacred cow and permitted to continue as is.


Ashiel wrote:
The three are well balanced against each other.

In terms of power, I agree (well the barbarian might fall behind the ranger and the paladin at higher levels).


Amusingly, if you compare fighter and barbarian by just core rulebook, the gap in their combat abilities is much, much narrower, and actually lands in the fighter's favor - greater weapon focus and greater weapon spec putting the fighter +1 to hit and +2 to damage ahead of the barbarian, assuming the barbarian took weapon focus and is using a two-handed weapon.

Since that time, barbarians have been given numerous rage powers that completely outstrip nearly everything offered them in the core rulebook, and apparently a huge number of magic items that synergize with those abilities really well. Seriously, superstition reaching a +16 when it originally capped at +7 or so indicates something went wonky.

Meanwhile, fighters have gotten gloves of the duelist, and that's about it. Which are a nice little item, and my fighter certainly got his money's worth, but those don't hold a candle to anything that's on display in this thread.

Also, new "fighter only" feats and new rogue talents are, by and large, in line with the abilities offered in the Core Rulebook.

But it appears that starting with the APG, barbarian design went in a completely different direction. Newer Rage powers feel completely out of line with what was provided in the Core Rulebook, and some of those rage powers are even completely out of line with each other. (See, for example, Beast Totem or Witchhunter compared to just about everything else.)

A fighter built allowing every book out to date is only slightly stronger than a fighter built with just the Core Rulebook. A barbarian built allowing even just the APG is completely and utterly superior to a barbarian built with just the Core Rulebook.

Fighters would probably be in better shape if there'd been a similarly aggressive push in ramping up the power of "fighter only" feats, and magic items that combo with those. Like enchants that specifically kicked in if the wielder has Weapon Training, Greater Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, or Spellbreaker.

Of course, the designers have been spreading the "fighter only" feats around into other classes (usually through archetypes, though barbarians actually get some through rage powers). Which means that anything that actually boosts the fighter is going to indirectly boost any "superior" class that's been given fighter class abilities through whatever method. So even more numbers inflation for classes that don't need it.

(Also, if fighters actually got something amazing, I'd fully expect barbarians to get it or an even better version of it through a rage power =P)

Disclaimer: My own past experience is that a well-run fighter will kick an amazing amount of ass, and one of my recent characters was a fighter that went from 1 to 16 in Jade Regent. The fact that a properly optimized barbarian would be so much better raises a huge red flag with me. No one in my group's seriously expressed interest in playing a barbarian (to my surprise, actually), but I'll need to keep an eye out for that stuff if someone does.

I'm also under the impression that barbarian numbers don't actually take off until you're (a) high level and (b) have really, really nice custom-tailored gear.

Paizo Glitterati Robot

Removed some derailing posts. Let's keep this on topic, please.

Shadow Lodge

insaneogeddon wrote:
Anzyr wrote:
insaneogeddon wrote:

People say zen archer is a specific build and archetype so should not be included but then include the highly specific beast totem superstitious invulnerable raging come and get me barbarian.. please explain?

And a martial artist monk with mantis style and ability focus can pretty much stun anything.

A strength of fighters is feats - use them to get supernatural powers ! I am strongly of the opinion to get real joy from a fighter only fighter feats should be used for fighter feats and fighting. All general feats should be used for racial heritage and wings or spell casting foxtails, elritch heritage, wild psionics,true name powers or any such thing supplements bring.

Its been mentioned tactician fighters are boss. Combine their 11th level ability with the feats bodyguard, arcane strike and combat reflexes and the items: gloves of arcane striking, benevolent armour, and a ring of tactical precision oh and the helpful trait - boost EVERY-ONES AC !

A few quick things. Superstitious isn't an archetype. Nor is Raging. Nor is Come and Get Me. Even Beast Totem is a rage power (though one that will close off other options). Those are things Barbarians can just *do*. Zen Archer Monk is an archetype that turns the class built around getting up close and punching people with your fists, into the class that hides in the back and shoots a bow. See the difference? Especially considering the number crunch doesn't take invulnerable rager into account.

Second while a Fighter may get *more* feats then a Barbarian, thanks to the Extra Rage Power, a Barbarian gets more *valuable* feats, since Rage Powers put feats to shame. And in this case quantity won't overcome quality since Combat feat chains are long drug out affairs in PF seemingly created to punish the Fighter.

It would help your argument if you stopped using archetypes, since neither of the number crunched builds do. And do you really want to have to compare against an Invulnerable Rager? I think

...

So Barbarians should mimic "real" fantasy barbarians then, aye? You mean, like someone who gets so mad they stop caring about damage[DR], stop caring about using defense[CaGM], only care about hitting the enemy as many times as possible[Pounce,CaGM], becomes willing to bite and scratch the enemy to death[Claws and Bite], and becomes naturally tougher while mad like this [Natural Armor, Con boost]? How about someone who mimics fighting styles he has seen in animals when he gets angry, because they seem like the most efficient way to kill the enemy[Beast Totem]? Or perhaps someone who gets so mad they go into a raging frenzy that forgoes all hope of avoiding attacks or damage, and just tries to rip the enemy apart limb from limb with whatever is in hand[CaGM]? These seem totally thematic, and like no less valid descriptions of the CaGM Beast Totem Barbarian then yours of him becoming hairy and bony and a beast and a degenerate, but makes a little more sense thematically.

Also, give up on the Invulnerable Rager Beast Totem Superstition CaGM Barbarian, you still have options that are largely better then what fighters have. Fighters have feats. There are some cool feats that hide behind prerequisite shields[supposedly to make fighters feel better about being the only ones who can use them]. Barbarians, however, can get things like the ability to auto-confirm critical hits a whole 8 levels before the fighter, the ability to follow someone withdrawing from him while raging, extra attacks of opportunity, self-healing capability, a reroll with will saves, and other neat goodies from the CRB. Now, several of these are 1/rage, but then, barbarians get rage cycling built-into the class, and can invest resources in several different ways to get it sooner.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's also the fact that super high saves don't do anything but provide a 95% avoidance vs save or die effects, or offer you a chance to survive a debuff bomb attempt. You're still quite vulnerable to spells, especially those with save (partial), save (halves), save none, or save (partial) with stacking conditionals.

For example, a barbarian can do nothing against twin fear spells, magic missile, scorching ray, cloudkill, waves of fatigue, acid fog, various wall and shape spells, a surprising amount of conjuration, enervation, energy drain, most ray spells, etc.

It's far from an unbeatable defense. This idea that having good defenses is somehow gamebreakingly super is mind boggling to me. You can even still wreck a barbarian with save effects, but it requires teamwork (a debuff bomb), more easily than you can with even a Paladin.

Most spells that allow saving throws either still do something on a failed save, or was a spell that was so bad that save (negates) is the balancing factor (because it's all or nothing, but if it's all, it's big winnin').


Zhangar wrote:

Disclaimer: My own past experience is that a well-run fighter will kick an amazing amount of ass, and one of my recent characters was a fighter that went from 1 to 16 in Jade Regent. The fact that a properly optimized barbarian would be so much better raises a huge red flag with me. No one in my group's seriously expressed interest in playing a barbarian (to my surprise, actually), but I'll need to keep an eye out for that stuff if someone does.

I'm also under the impression that barbarian numbers don't actually take off until you're (a) high level and (b) have really, really nice custom-tailored gear.

Ehhh, the gear helps somewhat, but really it just takes teh gap and runs with it.

20th level is the only level the Fighter definitively outstrips the Barbarian sans gear. Drop Courageous and you really only lose 2 hit/damage (and saves), likewise Furious.

Even with a -4 to hit/damage and a -2 to saves, the Barbarian outstrips the Fighter by a good bit, having slightly less to-hit but still waaaay more damage.

The Fighter only wins at (and this is a quick eyeball here) 5th level, 10th level (right before Greater Rage kicks in, and this is just pure numbers here: At this level the Barbarian can attack on a full attack), and 20th level (because Weapon Mastery is a BAMFing damage booster.).


"So Barbarians should mimic "real" fantasy barbarians then, aye? You mean, like someone who gets so mad they stop caring about damage[DR], stop caring about using defense[CaGM], only care about hitting the enemy as many times as possible[Pounce,CaGM], becomes willing to bite and scratch the enemy to death[Claws and Bite], and becomes naturally tougher while mad like this [Natural Armor, Con boost]? How about someone who mimics fighting styles he has seen in animals when he gets angry, because they seem like the most efficient way to kill the enemy[Beast Totem]? Or perhaps someone who gets so mad they go into a raging frenzy that forgoes all hope of avoiding attacks or damage, and just tries to rip the enemy apart limb from limb with whatever is in hand[CaGM]? These seem totally thematic, and like no less valid descriptions of the CaGM Beast Totem Barbarian then yours of him becoming hairy and bony and a beast and a degenerate, but makes a little more sense thematically."

DR is not caring about damage (thats what temp HPs from a con boost are) its not taking any.

Not caring about defense is fine its just not the realm of fantasy barbarian tropes, they have STRONG survival instincts and evade with preternatural 'wild' skill - a rabid animal however, a false human dog boy like wolverine is legit its just not 'typical' barbarian and may as well be an archetype like a 'archer' monk.

'Bite and scratch' lolz - d3 unarmed subd damage yes. d8 CLAW damage NO! Its still legit its just becoming a BEAST legit and growing claws magically.

Cause and effect and logic - natural armour is natural armour not skin, claws are claws not nails, DR = some kind of padding that negates damage or a lack of vitals (as you gain no elemental immunities its likely padding - be it bone and hair or just plain fat).

If your doing things your linage was doing further back in its evolutionary tree = degenerate.

Not saying its not legit just that its a specific trope - sometimes its nice to play a degenerate beast man pretending to be a hero and mimicking humanity but lets not pretend that that looks normal any more than the 4 armed beast form mutated mumiffied bat winged alchemist covered in 'countless eyes', 'thorn body', 'eruptive pustules' and 'barkskin'.

Be proud of who you are even if your a degenerate mass of eyes and spikes pus and claws that would scare Cthulhu or be something else. Simples!


insaneogeddon wrote:

"So Barbarians should mimic "real" fantasy barbarians then, aye? You mean, like someone who gets so mad they stop caring about damage[DR], stop caring about using defense[CaGM], only care about hitting the enemy as many times as possible[Pounce,CaGM], becomes willing to bite and scratch the enemy to death[Claws and Bite], and becomes naturally tougher while mad like this [Natural Armor, Con boost]? How about someone who mimics fighting styles he has seen in animals when he gets angry, because they seem like the most efficient way to kill the enemy[Beast Totem]? Or perhaps someone who gets so mad they go into a raging frenzy that forgoes all hope of avoiding attacks or damage, and just tries to rip the enemy apart limb from limb with whatever is in hand[CaGM]? These seem totally thematic, and like no less valid descriptions of the CaGM Beast Totem Barbarian then yours of him becoming hairy and bony and a beast and a degenerate, but makes a little more sense thematically."

DR is not caring about damage (thats what temp HPs from a con boost are) its not taking any.

Not caring about defense is fine its just not the realm of fantasy barbarian tropes, they have STRONG survival instincts and evade with preternatural 'wild' skill - a rabid animal however, a false human dog boy like wolverine is legit its just not 'typical' barbarian and may as well be an archetype like a 'archer' monk.

'Bite and scratch' lolz - d3 unarmed subd damage yes. d8 CLAW damage NO! Its still legit its just becoming a BEAST legit and growing claws magically.

Cause and effect and logic - natural armour is natural armour not skin, claws are claws not nails, DR = some kind of padding that negates damage or a lack of vitals (as you gain no elemental immunities its likely padding - be it bone and hair or just plain fat).

If your doing things your linage was doing further back in its evolutionary tree = degenerate.

Not saying its not legit just that its a specific trope - sometimes its nice to play a degenerate beast man...

One, DR is tough skin just as much as natural armor. They both carry that description. Natural armor is thicker hair, skin, scales, just naturally tough skin.

DR doesn't even have to negate the damage. It is also described as supernatural healing, another thing barbarians are capable of.

And yeah, I'm sorry, fingers are capable of way more than subdual damage if you've every really seen someone with strong fingers put to use. Realistically a person whose quite strong can tear muscle.

351 to 400 of 401 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Fighter vs Barbarian, by the numbers. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.