Are Barbarians Bad without rage?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

1 to 50 of 93 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Silver Crusade

I just kind of had a revelation and sort of realized that outside of rage....barbarians aren't that good.
Inflexible in combat style, Lack of bonus feats and are really only super kings of dpr when they are raging which you don't have many rounds of.

Compare that to their arcane counterpart the bloodrager, who has access to bonus feats is just as capable of dishing out pain, doesn't "need" rage to be effective and when they DO rage its more then just a damage and health boost.

Idk could just be something that's either obvious or im totally wrong about.


It really is like their only real class feature.. I guess trap sense but that is not gonna bring home the orc bacon. If you take away most of any classes class features I'm sure their gonna turn terrible pretty fast. (and yes spell casting is a class feature I realize an caster is probably almost just as effective without any other class features!)


9 people marked this as a favorite.

LANCEPOUNCE AM ALMOST AS GOOD AS RAGELANCEPOUNCE, BUT BARBARIAN FIND THAT 'RAGE' AM JUST ADDING EXTRA ZEST TO MAJOR ATTACK ITERATION.

AM WHY BARBARIAN RULE AM ABC, FOR ALWAYS BE RAGING.

C AM SILENT. AND INVISIBLE. LIKE SCARED CASTY.


AM BARBARIAN wrote:

LANCEPOUNCE AM ALMOST AS GOOD AS RAGELANCEPOUNCE, BUT BARBARIAN FIND THAT 'RAGE' AM JUST ADDING EXTRA ZEST TO MAJOR ATTACK ITERATION.

AM WHY BARBARIAN RULE AM ABC, FOR ALWAYS BE RAGING.

C AM SILENT. AND INVISIBLE. LIKE SCARED CASTY.

Hmm no rage well then you would practically be a warrior then. Lance pounce sounds like the important part so maybe you should change your name to AM LANCEPOUNCE! AM MARTIAL!


"Don't have many" rage rounds?

I've been running a pathfinder group for pushing ten years now, and I cannot remember the last time a Barbarian ran out of rage rounds in a day.

Combats just don't last long enough to burn through all of them, especially after the party has gotten past the first couple of levels. The Barbarian keeps getting more rage rounds as he/she rises in level, but the duration and number of combats the party sees per day doesn't really change. Yes, the opponents get tougher, but so does the party. So, the barbarian gets less and less likely to run out of rage rounds as he/she rises in level.


tbh, I think I'd be OK with a barb losing rage if it gained another 10 ft of run speed or could use it with armor, its other abilities are awesome, but without rage they just don't make the #'s a PC martial should have.


Rage rounds are not really that much of an issue out of the first levels- fights are just too short. Even if the number is an issue, you could use a single feat to get 6 more of them- a rather large amount.

And while they don't have much outside of rage powers... you could dump a single round of rage in order to access them. There are plenty of rage powers that have utilitarian purposes- ones that do climbing, swimming, limited flight, DISPEL, and scent.


A barbarian not using Rage is like a ranger fighting against something else that his favored enemies, a fighter using another weapon that which one he specialized in or a paladin against neutral enemies.

You don't do as much damage than usual but you are still a class with lots of HP and full BAB.


Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

Silver Crusade

Friend of mine is running an Urban Barbarian in a game I'm running. The way I built his character he's got some decent skills beyond just rage-smash. Of course, he's a newbie, so he doesn't use them. Still, very decent Dex-barb.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

Yeah, that sounds like something is up with your parties. Depending on the fight, the MAX range of some people's average fights is the same as your MIN range (excluding the occasional debacle which just drags on).

You might just want to avoid round/level classes and abilities entirely if your table(s) tend towards a drawn out style. Barbarians are better for rocket parties- they jump forward and get right to doing damage.

In rocket parties, they would usually last 7 or more battles before running out.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

I have a couple of gaming groups I run with some college students who have never played Pathfinder before. Their combats often run 5+ rounds, but I mostly attribute it to not really knowing what they're doing with either character building or in-combat tactics.

My regular group that I reference above will only go above 4-5 rounds on significant boss fights. A typical CR = APL encounter will be around 2 rounds unless they start far enough apart that a round is spent maneuvering. (Edit: Or if I spam them with a bunch of small critters, but those don't require the martial characters to use resources like Rage rounds to defeat.)

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
AM BARBARIAN wrote:

LANCEPOUNCE AM ALMOST AS GOOD AS RAGELANCEPOUNCE, BUT BARBARIAN FIND THAT 'RAGE' AM JUST ADDING EXTRA ZEST TO MAJOR ATTACK ITERATION.

AM WHY BARBARIAN RULE AM ABC, FOR ALWAYS BE RAGING.

C AM SILENT. AND INVISIBLE. LIKE SCARED CASTY.

But how does a barbarian lance pounce without rage?

No rage means no beast totem pounce.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm sort of weird, then, I guess?

I built my three (current) barbarians for nice damage/survival bracket, THEN factor in what rage does to that?

So they aren't *great* without it, but they can handle not using it and in most cases the rage is more of an either 'something done pissed them off' boost or a 'oh, this is an opponent that's actually worthy of my wrath' type situation

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

I'm sort of weird, then, I guess?

I built my three (current) barbarians for nice damage/survival bracket, THEN factor in what rage does to that?

So they aren't *great* without it, but they can handle not using it and in most cases the rage is more of an either 'something done pissed them off' boost or a 'oh, this is an opponent that's actually worthy of my wrath' type situation

Yeah thats kind of the direction im going with my bloodrager build


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

My fights are about 3 rounds, and when this question comes up most people in the forum say it's 3 to 4 rounds for their groups.

Generally the damage dealers types kill things within 2 rounds of contact. That plus the rest of the party leads to short fights.

How are the bad guys surviving 5 to 10 rounds against a raging barbarian?

Silver Crusade

wraithstrike wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

My fights are about 3 rounds, and when this question comes up most people in the forum say it's 3 to 4 rounds for their groups.

Generally the damage dealers types kill things within 2 rounds of contact. That plus the rest of the party leads to short fights.

How are the bad guys surviving 5 to 10 rounds against a raging barbarian?

Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.

So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.

Well, if you choose to stay with this GM, I guess you just need to adapt to their style. I guess you should just avoid classes with really important round/lvl systems.

This is hardly a problem with the barbarian- most games are designed with shorter, more intense fights. You are just playing in a setting which does not play to their strengths.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.

Is it a problem, though? I know I'd rather have an interesting and challenging encounter with multiple waves and enemy tactics we have to anticipate and mitigate, then have four encounters, each of which boils down to telekinetically charging the toughest PC at the ugliest monster and watching it die. Maybe barbarians are less useful in the more interesting scenario, but they probably aren't so bad that if it fits your character concept you can't make it work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

This varies heavily by GM style, party composition, and general player builds. With that said, Barbarians and their high damage output are one of the factors that tend to push combat towards its resolution more quickly.

On the one hand, player optimization is huge here. More optimized player builds tend to output a lot more damage, and that means ending combats sooner. So experience plays heavily there. The other side of the coin is encounter design; published adventures especially tend not to include foes with battlefield control abilities. Battlefield control spells are, at their most basic application, about preventing your enemies from spending their turns to attack you. That will slow down the rate at which HP is being lost and draw out the fight longer. There are lots of ways to draw out fights if you want to (keep in mind that's often not desirable!) and an experienced GM can draw out a longer and more cinematic battle when they want to.

Grand Lodge

Ask yourself if wizards are bad without spells. Though that's a much worse scenario, it's the same in that you're taking away the core feature of the class.

So in short, yes, most classes are pretty bad if you take away their most defining feature.


Asmodeus' Advocate wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.
Is it a problem, though? I know I'd rather have an interesting and challenging encounter with multiple waves and enemy tactics we have to anticipate and mitigate, then have four encounters, each of which boils down to telekinetically charging the toughest PC at the ugliest monster and watching it die. Maybe barbarians are less useful in the more interesting scenario, but they probably aren't so bad that if it fits your character concept you can't make it work.

It isn't always a problem. I can see it as an appropriate choice when you are on the final stretch against the mastermind of the campaign.

However, Malik here seems to indicate that this is a CONSTANT condition. Enough so that certain, normally fantastic, classes are being rendered ineffective since they cannot keep up.

In that case, the GM is pushing the system in ways it was not intended to go, and it is upsetting the balance assumptions of some classes.

Anyway, advice for Malik: have you tried gorefiend on a half orc? This feat allows you to get 1 rage round back if you hit an enemy with a crit (or get hit with a crit). If you are pouncing around with a falchion, then that would allow you to get back a fair number of rage rounds over the course of these drawn out fights.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is barbarian chew too. Several barbarians of mine have some but beyond the first few levels they've never had occasion to use it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Asmodeus' Advocate wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.
Is it a problem, though?

In game balance terms, it's probably an improvement. The weakest classes tend to be the ones with unlimited-use abilities (Fighter, Rogue) because in a typical game the other classes can nova for a few rounds per day, and then get to rest because all the enemies are dead.

If combats are longer, the classes with limited daily abilities have to conserve their powers, and the Fighter gets a chance to shine.

Then again, if you're fighting thirty plus rounds of combat on the average day, it might get pretty boring.

Silver Crusade

Matthew Downie wrote:
Asmodeus' Advocate wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.
Is it a problem, though?

In game balance terms, it's probably an improvement. The weakest classes tend to be the ones with unlimited-use abilities (Fighter, Rogue) because in a typical game the other classes can nova for a few rounds per day, and then get to rest because all the enemies are dead.

If combats are longer, the classes with limited daily abilities have to conserve their powers, and the Fighter gets a chance to shine.

Then again, if you're fighting thirty plus rounds of combat on the average day, it might get pretty boring.

No it would be more like....You would fight 1-2 waves of enemies per average fight and then the big fights would be around 3-4

On top of that the enemies would be more tactical, blindsiding the wizard crippling the frontliner with tanglefoot bags. Just making it more so that the party has to be more clever in how they fight.


Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:


No it would be more like....You would fight 1-2 waves of enemies per average fight and then the big fights would be around 3-4

On top of that the enemies would be more tactical, blindsiding the wizard crippling the frontliner with tanglefoot bags. Just making it more so that the party has to be more clever in how they fight.

You could consider the cleave feat chain, so you can clear through those waves faster.

Also a reach weapon can be very handy, as they will be much more likely to provoke attacks of opportunity against you due to movement.

Also you look mightily familiar.


Saldiven wrote:

"Don't have many" rage rounds?

I've been running a pathfinder group for pushing ten years now, and I cannot remember the last time a Barbarian ran out of rage rounds in a day.

If a GM is motivated to deny a barbarian their rage, they can also go for a spell like calm emotions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:

I just kind of had a revelation and sort of realized that outside of rage....barbarians aren't that good.

[...] when they are raging which you don't have many rounds of.
Compare that to their arcane counterpart the bloodrager, who has access to bonus feats is just as capable of dishing out pain, doesn't "need" rage to be effective and when they DO rage its more then just a damage and health boost.

That's like saying "a Fighter without feats" or "a Wizard without spells".

A bloodrager isn't close to what a Barbarian peaks at with rage, the number of extremely good rage powers makes sure of that.

Also, as people already have said; they have well enough rounds of rage. Since entering rage is a free action, enter rage when you actually need it, not at first sight.


SheepishEidolon wrote:
Saldiven wrote:

"Don't have many" rage rounds?

I've been running a pathfinder group for pushing ten years now, and I cannot remember the last time a Barbarian ran out of rage rounds in a day.

If a GM is motivated to deny a barbarian their rage, they can also go for a spell like calm emotions.

Babarians have a good enough will to save against that and it doesn't automatically end rage. As long as someone is outside of the 20ft range of calm emotion or made the save, they can break the concentration of the caster within 1 round.


Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:

No it would be more like....You would fight 1-2 waves of enemies per average fight and then the big fights would be around 3-4

On top of that the enemies would be more tactical, blindsiding the wizard crippling the frontliner with tanglefoot bags. Just making it more so that the party has to be more clever in how they fight.

POSTERITY NOTE: I'm one of those style of GMs where it isn't a 3-4 round fight as typical fodder. My combats usually have more movement, tactics, terrain, foes, thought, etc. Barbarians can and have run out of rage in my games.

Here's the basic trick to solve your problem: a barbarian does not need to rage every round in every fight.

In most fights, barbarians don't need raging DPS and can get away with a nice 2d6+4 Great Sword attack (@ 1st) just fine. They also don't have to keep raging when the fight is effectively over and the party is mopping up the last couple of schmucks. A barbarian can hit plenty hard even when fatigued.

Also, consider getting some supplies that can really extend your day on doing close-to-rage damage.

- Potions of Enlarge Person (50gp) is a major boost on damage
- Potions of Bull's Strength (300gp)

Scrolls of those are half-price. They are useful for the fights you can pre-buff and have the appropriate caster in the party.

At level 6+, getting an ioun of spell storing (level 1 spell), a few Pearls of Power (also level 1) and getting the party cleric to charge up a Divine Favor in the ring is an excellent boost. If you have the trait Fate's Favored... even better.


Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

Grab the Community Minded regional trait then. Rage for 1 round, use Community Minded to extend the morale bonuses for two rounds. You'll still be fatigued for those two rounds, but mathematically, you always come out ahead, and can effectively triple your rage rounds.


Asmodeus' Advocate wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.
Is it a problem, though? I know I'd rather have an interesting and challenging encounter with multiple waves and enemy tactics we have to anticipate and mitigate, then have four encounters, each of which boils down to telekinetically charging the toughest PC at the ugliest monster and watching it die. Maybe barbarians are less useful in the more interesting scenario, but they probably aren't so bad that if it fits your character concept you can't make it work.

It is for the OP. That doesn't mean it's an objective problem for everyone, but for the barbarian class it can be a problem since the game was not designed to use resources against waves. If the class was built to have powers that worked per encounter, not per round that would changes things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.

In my regular group, for important fights, I play the enemies with an appropriate level of intelligence for the creatures involved, and use realistic environmental reactions.

It is not uncommon for the group to agro the entire dungeon if they are not quiet enough, quick enough in the kill, or allow enemies to flee.

Despite this, the majority of combats run in the 2-3 round range. The party has learned to use battlefield control spells to prevent enemies from fleeing, combined with hard hitting tactics and strong offensive capabilities to end combats very rapidly.

Occasionally, they do make a mistake or just barge in for funsies and agro the whole stinking place, which results in a much longer combat, but then they don't have to worry about conserving resources because there aren't going to be any more significant fights. In fact, one of the players feels this is a completely viable tactic for taking on enemy encampments, which is kind of crazy to me. But, they keep managing to pull it off with a combination of well crafted characters, good tactical thinking, and a good understanding of the game mechanics.

And the funny part is that my play group almost always avoids the generally accepted "most powerful" builds from the internet. I'm the only person in the group that has played a Wizard in the last 10 years, for example, and even he was a blaster. The only archery focused player we've had was a newbie running an archery slayer.


Saldiven wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.

In my regular group, for important fights, I play the enemies with an appropriate level of intelligence for the creatures involved, and use realistic environmental reactions.

It is not uncommon for the group to agro the entire dungeon if they are not quiet enough, quick enough in the kill, or allow enemies to flee.

Despite this, the majority of combats run in the 2-3 round range. The party has learned to use battlefield control spells to prevent enemies from fleeing, combined with hard hitting tactics and strong offensive capabilities to end combats very rapidly.

That seems fair. Unless you are dealing with a relatively high up boss (I think we all can agree that boss fights can be amped up), I think that a battle longer than 5 rounds means "someone in the party messed up". If there are waves due to carelessness, then that can be reasonably be seen as the party's fault.


Matthew Downie wrote:

In game balance terms, it's probably an improvement. The weakest classes tend to be the ones with unlimited-use abilities (Fighter, Rogue) because in a typical game the other classes can nova for a few rounds per day, and then get to rest because all the enemies are dead.

If combats are longer, the classes with limited daily abilities have to conserve their powers, and the Fighter gets a chance to shine.

Unless the casters realize that they're fighting against a large number of weak enemies and start using damage over time spells. Seriously, I do not want to play a martial in a 10 round combat where I have to fight through hordes of enemies while the Summoner sets up a (Dazing) Wall of Fire, have his Eidolon pounce the boss, and relaxes on a deck chair the rest of the fight.


Derklord wrote:
QUOTE]Unless the casters realize that they're fighting against a large number of weak enemies and start using damage over time spells. Seriously, I do not want to play a martial in a 10 round combat where I have to fight through hordes of enemies while the Summoner sets up a Dazing Wall of Fire, have his Eidolon pounce the boss, and relaxes on a deck chair the rest of the fight.

If the campaign is high enough level for the summoner to be casting a Wall of Fire, much less a Dazing Wall of Fire, it is high enough level to have opponents that routinely fly, dimension door, and/or teleport.

That wall should be only a minor obstacle as opponents bypass it and head straight the source.


Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Derklord wrote:
Unless the casters realize that they're fighting against a large number of weak enemies and start using damage over time spells. Seriously, I do not want to play a martial in a 10 round combat where I have to fight through hordes of enemies while the Summoner sets up a Dazing Wall of Fire, have his Eidolon pounce the boss, and relaxes on a deck chair the rest of the fight.
If the campaign is high enough level for the summoner to be casting a Wall of Fire, much less a Dazing Wall of Fire, it is high enough level to have opponents that routinely fly, dimension door, and/or teleport.

Summoner can cast Wall of Fire at 7th level, that's not high. A Lesser Rod of Dazing costs 14k, affordable (or craftable) soon after. The "dazing" should be in parantheses though, fixed that.

If the enemy mooks (!!!) are able to fly, dimension door, and/or teleport at single digit levels, martials will be even more outclassed.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Kaouse wrote:

Generally combat lasts an average of 4 rounds, and there are generally 4 combats per day. Thus, a Barbarian only needs 16 rounds of rage in order to rage effectively every round.

Even with a CON of 10 and no enhancement/level boosts, the Barbarian gets to this number by level 7 at the latest. Beyond that point, you generally start having more rage rounds than you could ever really need.

Then maybe I'm doing something wrong, Cause in my time playing both this and 3.5 combats usually range from 5-10 rounds at the least.

No, it means your DM is doing something right.

For all that people argue otherwise, the game is not supposed to be rocket tag. Sure, people can play that way, and plenty have fun doing so, but it not how the game is designed.

Take a look at a wizard. Even completely unoptimized, at mid level (say 11) they are going to have 32 or so spells per day. Many duplicate party buffs will be pearl’d. They are not supposed to simply allowed to go nova every combat, and unless you are using the system as designed (you know, for non-optimized characters) they will go nova every fight.

Fun for some? Sure. Nothing wrong with it, if everyone is having fun. The problem comes when people constantly give advice with the belief that the system was intended to be played that way (it wasn’t) and try to enforce the thought in people that it is the correct way (it’s not.). It is A way. Not the ‘correct’ way.

Rage is something you use when it is needed. Not something you should expect to have every round of every fight every day.

Sovereign Court

Derklord wrote:
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Derklord wrote:
Unless the casters realize that they're fighting against a large number of weak enemies and start using damage over time spells. Seriously, I do not want to play a martial in a 10 round combat where I have to fight through hordes of enemies while the Summoner sets up a Dazing Wall of Fire, have his Eidolon pounce the boss, and relaxes on a deck chair the rest of the fight.
If the campaign is high enough level for the summoner to be casting a Wall of Fire, much less a Dazing Wall of Fire, it is high enough level to have opponents that routinely fly, dimension door, and/or teleport.

Summoner can cast Wall of Fire at 7th level, that's not high. A Lesser Rod of Dazing costs 14k, affordable (or craftable) soon after. The "dazing" should be in parantheses though, fixed that.

If the enemy mooks (!!!) are able to fly, dimension door, and/or teleport at single digit levels, martials will be even more outclassed.

Um... using a class with a spell access list that they have admitted they screwed up on as your example doesn’t really help your case.

Liberty's Edge

The King In Yellow wrote:
Um... using a class with a spell access list that they have admitted they screwed up on as your example doesn’t really help your case.

It's a 4th level Wizard spell...so they get it at 7th level, too.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"I am not in the finding that glorious battle rage is the running out. But many fights are not in the requiring of mighty rage for the victories. Only against most worthiest of foes should be using."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
The King In Yellow wrote:
Um... using a class with a spell access list that they have admitted they screwed up on as your example doesn’t really help your case.
It's a 4th level Wizard spell...so they get it at 7th level, too.

But the Wizard would couldn't use a Lesser Dazing rod so would need to find an extra 40,000gp to turn it from a 'small amount of ongoing damage' spell to a 'small amount of ongoing damage plus you are unable to fight for several rounds' spell.


let's face it, barbarians are defined by their rage and rage powers, take that away, or choose to do without it (like if you don't want to spend rage rounds on a bunch of lesser mooks), and the barbarian is a meh type of fighter, bull BAB with a lot of hit points, but not that efficient or flexible.


Also depending on class archetype, a barbarian can be an interesting strategic character. For example, Invulnerable Rager gets DR/- equal to half their class level. Not a major reduction against those big hits, but nonetheless a significant boost to defenses, especially against 'death by a thousand cuts' TWF enemies. I know I've played one using a flail and shield before, holding tactical locations using the defensive fighting option to boost AC, though this is at low level play when other options are limited.

Still, rage is the cornerstone of the barbarian's toolbox. 'I have higher combat stats than any other class' is their warcry. Especially at lower levels, when hitting enemy AC isn't a guaranteed deal, a raging barbarian adds +2 to hit with their weapon, better than any other class in terms of melee accuracy. And given they're probably swinging a greatsword for 2d6+1.5xStr, any hit is likely a guaranteed kill. I honestly wonder sometimes when I see a first level barbarian using power attack. Seriously, the penalty to hit is just not worth the bonus damage when your average enemy has less than 10 hit points.


Derklord wrote:
Volkard Abendroth wrote:
Derklord wrote:
Unless the casters realize that they're fighting against a large number of weak enemies and start using damage over time spells. Seriously, I do not want to play a martial in a 10 round combat where I have to fight through hordes of enemies while the Summoner sets up a Dazing Wall of Fire, have his Eidolon pounce the boss, and relaxes on a deck chair the rest of the fight.
If the campaign is high enough level for the summoner to be casting a Wall of Fire, much less a Dazing Wall of Fire, it is high enough level to have opponents that routinely fly, dimension door, and/or teleport.
Summoner can cast Wall of Fire at 7th level, that's not high. A Lesser Rod of Dazing costs 14k, affordable (or craftable) soon after. The "dazing" should be in parantheses though, fixed that.

Wall of Fire is a 4th level spell for the unchained summoner. It requires 10th level to cast. A Dazing Matamagic Rod costs 54K out of the 10th level summoners ~62K WBL


Barbarians are bad even with rage. Their a tier 4 class at best and only worth a couple dip levels and nostalgia. You want to have fun try paladin 4 with the mercy to negate fatigue as a swift action and 2d6 self heal, this heal can be enhanced with a phylactery, the trait opportunistic gambler for +1d4 rage rounds. I hope Divine grace doesn't need to be pointed out to you. The rest of your levels are going to be Bloodrager for the same rage mechanic as a barbarian plus self buffing.

Let's not forget having a cha score to keep you from going "I'm bored! when are we going to have combat?" That gets you killed in my games. It's the players choice to ham string their rp potential.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.

Is that the word you meant to use? Its less of a problem, and more of a play style.


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Malik Gyan Daumantas wrote:
Multiple Waves and DM's that play their npc's like tactical generals.
So this is more of a problem with the GM's style.
Is that the word you meant to use? Its less of a problem, and more of a play style.

A player is currently left feeling his class is useless, despite the fact that it is a fairly powerful class. The GM has neither adjusted fights so there can be a more variable pace, nor has he talked with the player and encouraged the player to seek classes that better fit with the group's preferred pace (such as a per encounter class).

Thus- yes, there is a problem with his playstyle.

1 to 50 of 93 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Are Barbarians Bad without rage? All Messageboards