Tulkash
|
Hello everybody, after analyzing the fighter and barbarian classes I think I found out the barbarian class is substantially better at doing what the fighter should be doing... i.e. dishing out damage and kill stuff in melee. On top of this the barbarian class seems more versatile (more skill points) in out of combat situations.
Now I realize most people already know this, but I think this is quite wrong. The fighter class is very limited in what it can do, it's a one trick pony if you want, and being worse than another class at doing its sole job makes the class itself pretty unappealing (imo). After all I can have a human barbarian hit with combat bonus of +8 (1+5+2) and cause 2d6+12 (5+2+2+3) dmg while raging at lvl 1 (Using a greatsword and with power attack and furious focus as feats, 20 points stats), something no fighter builds can hope to emulate at lvl 1 (imo).
While it's true the fighter gets more feats and therefore more customization, the core advantage of the barbarian stays mostly the same through all levels and to even have a chance a fighter would have to put everything in increasing AC hoping to wear out the barbarian.
I usually don't care if different classes doing different things are considered having different power levels (example wizard vs fighter, wizards do very different things than fighters and the 2 classes have very different roles) but I find that classes doing similar things and having similar roles shouldn't be this imballanced.
