Assumptions: Elite Array, Standard HP, CR or EL = level => 50% chance of winning on average
I'm also going to mostly be ignoring criticals unless a creature has an ability related to them, since they make the math on expected damage far harder to calculate.
Baughdvnleob, Dwarf Barbarian
S 15 +2
D 13 +1
C 16 +3
I 10 +0
W 14 +2
C 6 -2
Racial Traits: Slow and Steady, Dkvis 60', stonecunning, keen senses, Greed, Hearty, Weapon Familiarity, Hatred, Defensive Training, Stable
Languages: Common, Dwarven
Level 1:
BAB: +1
Skills: Perception, Acrobatics, Climb, Survival
Class Features: Rage (+4 str/con, +2 will, -2 AC, 7 Rage points), Fast Movement
Feats: Power Attack
Equipment: Greataxe, 3 Throwing Axes, Chain Shirt, 50' rope, grappling hook, portable ram, 3 bags of caltrops, flint and steel, 2 vials of oil.
Combat Statistics:
Senses:
Perception +6 (+8 taste/touch or stonework traps)
Darkvision 60'
Initiative: +1
Mobility:
Move: 30'
Climb +4 (incl. -2 ACP, +2 rage)
Acrobatics +3 (incl. -2 ACP)
Defenses:
HP: 15
AC: 15 (13 rage, +4 vs. giants)
CMB: +3 (+4 vs. bullrush/trip, +2 rage)
Fort +5 (+7 rage) / Ref +1 / Will +2 (+4 rage)
+2 vs. spells, poison
Offenses:
Great Axe +3 (1d12 + 3) (+2/3 rage)
Throwing Axe +2 (1d6 + 2) (+2 rage)
CMB +3 (+2 rage)
Option: Powerattack (-1 attack, +1 damage)
Option: Rage (7 pts)
EL 1 Challenges
A locked and trapped door
A 20' deep pit trap
A pair of Orcs
Three Celestial Dogs
An Elf Wizard 1
A Lemure
A Ghoul
A pair of human zombies
A pair of stirges
A spider swarm
Locked and Trapped Door
Baughdvnleob finds the door is locked. He can't pick the lock, but he uses his trusty portable ram to bash it down (making a lot of noise in the process). Fairly trivially bypassed, but likely makes his life more difficult in the near future. Trap is never triggered, but is avoided by destroying the door. Certain win.
A 20' deep pit trap
Baughdvnleob has a decent chance of noticing it (45%) because its likely made of stone, and doesn't even have to be actively searching to find it. If he does notice it, he can jump it - a 10' jump is probably sufficient, and he makes that 75% of the time. Obviously, falling *into* the pit should probably be considered losing, although he survives doing so. The odds that he spots it and jumps it are 3/4*9/20, or 27/80, which makes this a probable loss.
A pair of Orcs
Orcs have Perception +1 and 60' darkvision, meaning any encounter underground is going to involve no surprise most of the time (both sides spotting each other simultaneously). 60' is also at charge range, which means winning initiative is important - and Baughdvnleob expects to lose initiative to one of them if they roll separately. Probable initiative order is Orc, Baughdvnleob, orc.
Indoor Scenarios:
Rough cavern, some ground is difficult terrain, charging 60' is unlikely. First orc opts to throw a javelin, which hits flatfooted Baughdvnleob 40% of the time with an average of 6.5 damage, or .4*6.5 = 2.6 expected damage. Baughdvnleob takes a full defense action and advances >=30' (keeping some difficult terrain between him and the orcs if possible and trying to get within a move action of an orc). Orc #2 moves up to attack Baughdvnleob, but only hits 20% of the time for an expected damage of (.2*9) 1.8 damage.
Round 2 starts, and Orc #1 also moves up to take a swing at Baughdvnleob, with the same results. Baughdvnleob expects to be down 6.2 hp at this point, and has no need to power attack or Rage (in fact, Rage is provably bad for him here), and takes a swing at an orc for (.6*9.5) 5.7 expected damage, killing orc #2.
Round 3 has Orc #1 swing at Baughdvnleob, now hitting 50% of the time for (.5*9) 4.5 average damage. Baughdvnleob expects to be down 10.7 hp at this point, and kills the remaining orc on average.
An indoor scenario in a constructed dungeon likely features no difficult terrain, and thus Orc#1 gets to charge Baughdvnleob, which inflicts .6*9 = 5.4 expected damage. Baughdvnleob kills Orc #1 and gets charged by Orc #2 for another 5.4 damage. He then kills orc #2, and has taken 10.8 expected damage.
Outdoor scenario:
Orcs are native to temperate hills, which means the maximum spot distance is on average 110 ft (2d10 x 10). Baughdvnleob is substantially likely to spot the Orcs before they spot him, which means he can ambush them and go first (possibly within charge distance, terrain depending.) If he can't attack first, this devolves to one of the indoor scenarios. If he can, he escapes with even less damage.
Overall, this is a close combat where the standard deviation in the RNG will have a dominating effect on the result. Baughdvnleob could well lose if the orcs hit a little better than average or do a little more damage than average.
Three Celestial Dogs
The dogs and Baughdvnleob have similar sensory capabilities, so its unlikely anyone is surprised.
On average, two dogs will act before Baughdvnleob because of their slightly superior initiative.
With their high AC and weak attack, Baughdvnleob almost certainly wants to rage.
Round 1: 2 dogs charge Baughdvnleob, each expects to inflict (.45*3.5) 1.575 damage. Baughdvnleob rages and expects to inflict (.55*11.5) 6.325 damage, killing it. He uses the other dog to prevent a charge from the last one, who probably has to double move into position. He proceeds to kill the other two dogs over 2-3 rounds, likely taking a pittance of additional damage.
Clear winner: Baughdvnleob. The dogs just don't inflict enough damage to really threaten him with death.
Elf Wizard
The elf wizard has low-light vision, is likely to be found outdoors (native to Temperate Forests), and has a 1st level spell DC of 14 (17 int with elite array). She also takes Improved Initiative as her first level feat, because she's not stupid, has 7 hp (con 12 after racial), and may have Mage Armor up.
Combat really depends on whether or not Baughdvnleob can go first and get a lethal (ie, melee) attack off before the elf acts, although the throwing axe may be sufficient, it isn't likely to be. If the elf gets to act, the following spells will all utterly hose you if you fail a save: Charm Person, Sleep, Hypnotism, Color Spray. As you fail your saving throw ~50% of the time, its not pretty. Expeditious Retreat + longbow is also an excellent strategy against Baughdvnleob.
This fight really depends on Baughdvnleob's ability to close and inflict a lethal hit on the mage. If the mage gets surprise its curtains for Baughdvnleob, and even the wizard just going first is likely a losing event. And if the wizard chooses run and gun its certain curtains for Baughdvnleob. Almost certain loss assuming the wizard isn't terminally stupid.
A lemure
Baughdvnleob has superior perception and may notice the Lemure first. However, while it has annoying DR for its CR, it has a mere 9 hp and deals little damage with weak attacks. Baughdvnleob closes with the creature, rages, and pulverizes the thing.
Certain victory: Baughdvnleob
A ghoul
The ghoul has equal detection capabilities, similar AC and hp, and does less damage per hit. As long as Baughdvnleob doesn't succumb to its paralysis, he's good, and with a mere DC12 fortitude save, Baughdvnleob's raging Fort +7 will probably see him through. He expects to kill the thing in two hits, in which time it will get ~3-6 attacks, about 2 of which will hit, and Baughdvnleob fails his save 20% of the time. So 64% of the time he should clobber the ghoul and the other 36% of the time he should end up paralyzed. (The more hits it gets, the worse things are for Baughdvnleob)
Probable win.
Pair of Human Zombies
He penetrates their DR, and they have weak low damage attacks. He rages and wipes up. The only possible problem is killing them fast enough, as it takes 2 hits per zombie to kill them, but they're easy to hit.
Almost certain win.
Pair of Stirges
Our first ambush monster, Baughdvnleob is almost certainly surprised. They make a touch attack to hit at +7, which is an almost guaranteed hit. Thus Baughdvnleob loses 2d4 constitution before he even knows what's happening. The Stirges have a mild advantage on initiative, meaning one almost certainly preceeds him in round one for another 1d4 constitution damage. At which point Baughdvnleob probably kills Stirge 2, and Stirge 1, likely sated, flies off to digest.
Baughdvnleob does kill one, but he basically loses the encounter as he's now down an expected ~7 constitution at this point. (The stirges cannot kill him as they'll take a maximum of 8 constitution, only weaken him for future encounters).
A Spider Swarm
Baughdvnleob is probably surprised by the swarm dropping onto him from above. Baughdvnleob cannot attack it with his weapons, he'll have to try burning them with oil. In all likelihood, Baughdvnleob simply flees because he's faster, or at least tries to through the thick jungle foliage, because his options for fighting them aren't very appealing.
Almost certain loss.
Performance Review:
Almost Certain Wins: 1111
Probable Wins: 1
Even:1
Probable Losses:1
Almost Certain Losses: 11
Which is in the ballpark of a 60% success ratio, slightly better than expected.
Level 4:
Str 15 -> Str 16 (level pump) -> 18 (item)
BAB: +4
Skills: Perception 4, Acrobatics 4, Climb 4, Survival 4
Class Features: Rage (+4 str/con, +2 will, -2 AC, 22 Rage points), Fast Movement, Uncanny Dodge, Trapsense +1, 2 Rage Powers (Strength Surge, Powerful Blow)
Feats: Power Attack, Overhand Chop
Character wealth: ~5.4k gp
Equipment: Greataxe +1, Composite Longbow (+3), Chainmail +1, Belt of Strength +2, 50' rope, grappling hook, portable ram, 3 bags of caltrops, flint and steel, 5 vials of oil, 40 arrows.
Combat Statistics:
Senses:
Perception +9 (+11 taste/touch or stonework traps)
Darkvision 60'
Initiative: +1
Mobility:
Move: 30'
Climb +8 (incl. -3 ACP, +2 rage)
Acrobatics +5 (incl. -3 ACP)
Defenses:
HP: 43.5
AC: 17 (15 rage, +4 vs. giants)
CMB: +8 (+4 vs. bullrush/trip, +2 rage)
Fort +6 (+8 rage) / Ref +2 / Will +3 (+5 rage)
+2 vs. spells, poison
Offenses:
Great Axe + 9 (1d12 + 7) (+2/3 rage)
Composite Longbow +5 (1d8 + 3)
CMB +8 (+2 rage)
Option: Powerattack (-4 attack, +4 damage)
Option: Overhand Chop (x2 Str instead of x1.5, full round action)
Option: Rage (22 pts)
Option: Strength Surge (3 Rage for +4 to CMB for one check or to one strength check)
Option: Powerful Blow (6 Rage for +4 damage on one hit)
EL 4 challenges
A Water-Filled Room Trap
An Aranea
A Five-Headed Hydra
A Centipede Swarm
A Pair of Blink Dogs
A Pair of Huge Monstrous Centipedes
A Pair of Quasits
An Elf Wizard 4
A Sea Hag
An Endless Sea of Rats (ok, not endless, but a freaking huge number of them)
A Water-Filled Room
Ok, this thing has a delayed onset of 5 rounds, which means the doors slam shut and we know something bad is going to go down. Now, this is a CR 4 trap, so they better be decent doors, like stone (break DC 28, hardness 8, hp 60). Even raging we can't break 28, so we've got 5 rounds to hack at this thing while raging. Its a door, its hard to miss, meaning we just deal damage while power attacking overhand chopping and raging (because our life is seriously over if the room fills with water while we're in it). That's five swings at 1d12 + 18, or an average of 24.5, subtract 8 for hardness and multiply by 5 swings = we break through on round 4.
Honestly, he can strength surge on the break DC check or use Powerful Blow, but its not needed and he'd rather burn just 4 rage points.
Almost certain victory. (And probably a soaked dungeon, but we like slip'n slide.)
An Aranea
Found in forests, it also has darkvision and Baughdvnleob actually beats it at Perception, but it has low-light which means its taking fewer penalties at spotting things. Its also like to get the drop on him from a tree. It casts a small number of spells which typically includes sleep - unfortunately that means Baughdvnleob's a valid target. And if the Aranea gets surprise or just first action (likely with its initiative advantage), we've only got +5 against a DC of 13, which is a 40% chance to just be dead. Fortunately that's its only great offensive option, but it can also toss a web that will force Baughdvnleob to burn a round or two breaking it (and burning some rage points), likely buying time for it to try to sleep him again (admittedly at a lower success rate, because we start raging and our will improves). Of course, to actually melee the aranea we have to get to it, likely in a tree, though we can try shooting arrows at it. Fortunately, once it runs out of 1st level spell slots its got nothing threatening it can do. Its poison DC isn't scary and poison takes too long to kick in, and it doesn't hit remarkably often dealing otherwise low damage. It also has a weak 22 hp - we can one-hit kill it on average without burning excessive rage points. And its AC isn't especially exciting either. But we have to make it passed 5 sleep saves, up to two of which could be before we act (we'll assume one for simplicity). With a 40% chance of failing the first and a 30% chance of failing each subsequent save, the odds of making all of them are .6*.7^4 = .14406. If it wasn't for the web ability we could likely reduce the number of sleep spells the Aranea could get off, but its web virtually guarantees it'll get to cast all 5. (It gets 6 webs per day which act as a net, prevent movement, and have a break DC of 17 which takes us an expected 2 rounds to break without strength surge, and 3 rounds per 2 webs with strength surge - and we don't have enough rage points to break all 6 with strength surge even if we break every one on the first try.)
Almost certain loss.
A Five-Headed Hydra
Lets not kid ourselves, this is a straight out slugfest. Its got approximately equivalent senses, better mobility in its native habitat because of its swim speed, and is wicked in close combat. While we're faster than it, it can move and attack with all its heads, and it can cut across pools of water we'd drown in. So we might as well just brawl. We're going to rage, bringing our AC down to 15, which it needs a 9 to hit for an expected damage/head of (.6*8.5) 5.1, and thus 25.5 expected damage per round - killing Baughdvnleob in 2 rounds. This means Baughdvnleob gets at best 2 actions before death. We've got to burn the rage points on Powerful Blow and since we've only got one attack/round anyway, we're going to overhand chop. Power attack is less clearly beneficial. Of course, even adding power attack to that and assuming we hit both times we expect to deal insufficient damage to kill the hydra. (1d12 + 21 is 27.5 expected damage given a hit, which is just enough to kill the hydra, but we haven't taken into account that we miss 40% of the time while power attacking).
Certain loss. The hydra is much more efficient at dealing damage.
A Centipede Swarm
Baughdvnleob runs from this, because he can't do 31 points of non-weapon damage. Fortunately, he's faster than it is.
Certain loss.
A Pair of Blink Dogs
Blink dogs are ambush monsters, which means they're going to try to surprise Baughdvnleob. Unfortunately for Baughdvnleob, despite low Hide and worse perception, they live on the plains, which means LLV dominates perception checks because they suffer fewer negative modifiers at long distances. And Dim Door as an 8th level wizard is a long distance. Blink dogs pop in and get a surprise round. Of course, they have a relatively weak attack at a low attack bonus, and so expect to deal (.4*3.5) 1.4 damage per attack, while Baughdvnleob dispatches the pair in 4-5 rounds of combat fairly trivially.
Certain win. Blink dogs deal insufficient damage to be worrying. They just don't have quite enough punch to make their great defenses pay off.
A Pair of Huge Monstrous Centipedes
Baughdvnleob and the centipedes probably notice each other simultaneously, so no surprise. Distance is within 60', meaning either side can charge. The centipedes miss 55% of the time, but deal a noticeable 11 average damage per hit for approximately (.45*11) 5 expected damage per attack, and additionally inject poison with a DC 14, which isn't notably threatening but losing 1d6 dex could be a big deal. They also take 2 hits on average to drop each, which means ~3 rounds per centipede, over which time the centipedes expect to inflict 45 damage if Baughdvnleob doesn't rage, and more if he does, which would kill him either way. Baughdvnleob probably expects to fail one or more poison saves from this.
Even - good rolls on Baughdvnleob's part make this a win, he barely loses on average.
A pair of Quasits
These demons will get splatted if they get hit in close combat. Unfortunately, they almost certainly get surprise (Hide +17! and invisibility, of course), have a 50' fly speed, and initiative +7 for likely going first in round 1 immediately after their surprise round. They can cause fear 1/day, with about a 15% chance per Quasit of making Baughdvnleob run like a little girl. They also can choose to melee with a +8 claw attack that has a DC 13 poison with decent stat damage, and their armor class is good for their CR. Assuming Baughdvnleob doesn't run like a little girl, he probably beats them in close combat, but he may fail a poison save or two.
Probable win, although if he's unlucky at saves he could either run away or get his dex dropped to zero - either of which is a loss.
An Elf Wizard 4
If Baughdvnleob can get the drop on the wizard, he's in great shape. But that's not an especially likely event. And a 4th level wizard in a forest setting can introduce Baughdvnleob to the joys of Web (targets his weak save), glitterdust, Hideous Laughter, Blindness, or just levitate with Protection from Arrows and plink him with her own longbow. And the wizard can always surprise Baughdvnleob using Invisibility, or be harder to hit due to spells like Blur. Not to mention 1st level spells like Colorspray and Sleep still work. The elite-array elf's Int is 15+2 race + 1 level = 18, giving her a DC of 16 on 2nd level spells, which is enough to make failing a save a real problem for Baughdvnleob, and levitate or expeditious retreat makes meleeing the mage exceedingly difficult.
Almost Certain Loss.
A Sea Hag
With a low AC and low hp, the hag isn't a real melee threat, but she has a speed and maneuver ability in her environment (aquatic), and competitive sensory abilities. If Baughdvnleob fails the save vs. the Hag's horrifying appearance (~20% fail rate), he's in for even a tough melee because of the massive 2d6 str hit. She also has 3 death gaze attacks at Fort DC 13, meaning the chance he fails one of these fortitude saves is reasonably decent (.8^4 = 41% chance of passing all 4 saves), and that's not accounting for the DC 13 will save to avoid being *dazed* for three days, which is also instant death. As the hag can unleash all this from 30', an encounter in her element leaves Baughdvnleob hoping he can deal 19 points of damage before he fails a save, not a likely occurrence. (Baughdvnleob's expected damage output per attack with the bow is .6*7.5 = 4.5 damage per hit, or 5 rounds to kill the hag).
Almost Certain Loss.
An Endless Sea of Rats
So, we're actually talking about ~30 rats here. Each one needs a 13 to hit and deals 1 damage per hit, so .4*1*30 = 12 damage/round. There's simply no way Baughdvnleob can kill them fast enough (in fact, even cleave is insufficient). Baughdvnleob's best option is to run away and set fire to whatever they're in. Seriously.
Certain Loss.
Performance Review:
Almost Certain Wins:11
Probable Wins: 1
Even:1
Probable Losses:
Almost Certain Losses: 111111
Ouch, performance really tanked and its *only 4th level*. Not promising for this barbarian rendition, and we're looking fairly underpowered. Despite Dwarven bonuses to saving throws, Baughdvnleob is still vulnerable to spell and spell-like ability spam and poison attack spam because he'll eventually fail one, usually before he can kill the opponent. Its especially bad against creatures like the Aranea or a wizard who have options to either limit his mobility or massively improve theirs to the point where Baughdvnleob cannot melee them. And he notably falls short of the best of the bruisers the MM has to offer.
Level 7:
Wis 14->16 (item)
BAB: +7
Skills: Perception 7, Acrobatics 7, Climb 7, Survival 7
Class Features: Rage (+4 str/con, +2 will, -2 AC, 37 Rage points), Fast Movement, Improved Uncanny Dodge, Trapsense +2, 3 Rage Powers (Strength Surge, Powerful Blow, Swift Foot), DR 1/-
Feats: Power Attack, Overhand Chop, Backswing
Character wealth: ~19k gp
Equipment: Adamantine Greataxe +1, Composite Longbow +1 (+6), Chainmail +1, Cloak of Resistance +1, Belt of Strength +2, Headband of Wisdon +2, Dust of Dryness, 2 vials of universal solvent, 50' rope, grappling hook, portable ram, flint and steel, 5 vials of oil, 40 arrows.
Combat Statistics:
Senses:
Perception +13 (+15 taste/touch or stonework traps)
Darkvision 60'
Initiative: +1
Mobility:
Move: 30'
Climb +11 (incl. -3 ACP, +2 rage)
Acrobatics +8 (incl. -3 ACP)
Defenses:
HP: 71
AC: 17 (15 rage, +4 vs. giants)
CMB: +11 (+4 vs. bullrush/trip, +2 rage)
Fort +9 (+11 rage) / Ref +4 / Will +6 (+8 rage)
+2 vs. spells, poison
Offenses:
Great Axe +12/+7 (1d12 + 7) (+2/3 rage)
Composite Longbow +9/+4 (1d8 + 7 rage only)
CMB +11 (+2 rage)
Option: Powerattack (-4 attack, +4 damage, +-6 with rage)
Option: Overhand Chop (x2 Str instead of x1.5, full round action)
Option: Backswing (iff full attack + 1st att hits, get extra attack at full bonus w/ *1/2 str mod damage)
Option: Rage (37 pts)
Option: Strength Surge (3 Rage for +7 to CMB for one check or to one strength check)
Option: Powerful Blow (6 Rage for +7 damage on one hit)
Option: Swift Foot (+10/20/30 ft for 3/6/9 rage)
EL 7 challenges
40 ft spiked pit trap with a proximity trigger Fireball (8d6) at the bottom.
A Chimera
A Succubus
An Huge Air Elemental
A Lillend
A Spectre
A pair of Achaierai
A pair of Green Hags
Six Chokers
An Elf Wizard 7
Pit Trap with prox fireball
Detect DC is 21, so Baughdvnleob can't spot it. He falls in. 12d6 + up to 4 spike hits is a decent chunk of damage, over half Baughdvnleob's hp before the spikes. Admittedly he gets a save vs. the fireball, but reflex is his weak save.
Certain Loss, it won't kill him, but it will accomplish its goal of weakening him.
A Chimera
Ignoring for the moment that it flies and has a breath weapon, it has marginally more hp than Baughdvnleob, the same attack bonus on most of its attacks, a higher AC, and decent damage output with 5 attacks per round. This is going to be a brutal straight up fight.
Baughdvnleob's expected damage per round while raging and full attacking is .8*16.5 + .8^2*10.5 (backswing) + .55*16.5 = 29 damage, to which he can add 7 with a successful hit for 36. He kills the Chimera in slightly more than 2 rounds.
The Chimera expects to do .9*11 + 2*.9*8.5 + 2*.8*5.5 = 34 damage/round, taking slightly more than 2 rounds to kill Baughdvnleob.
Even fight, depending on who goes first.
A Succubus
Lets face it, the succubus attempts to seduce our dwarven barbarian and succeeds easily. Bluff +19 ftw. And that Will DC 21 is problematic for baughdvnleob's +6 will save, especially as he'll take a negative level before he gets his first save (and more negative levels will follow quickly on it). If he does manage to make a save, he'll be crippled under the weight of negative levels and having to get damage past a DR 10/he doesn't have it against a great AC (20). And the Succubus likely resorts to Suggestion spells to get him back into kiss-lock, or a charm monster spell (admittedly he actually gets his +2 racial bonus here, for all the good it does him). This just can't end well.
Certain Loss.
An Huge Air Elemental
At 139hp with a +19 slam attack, things are not looking good, especially when you consider its 15' reach => AoO to be avoided with Acrobatics. It goes first and probably gets surprise. (Seriously, its just a mass of animate air, its fricking hard to see). It can also pick Baughdvnleob in a Whirlwind barring a DC22 reflex save, which is painfully hard for him, and drop him from 100' up. Repeatedly.
Certain Loss.
A Lillend
With competitive sensory abilities, its real advantage lies in its 70' fly speed, which can keep it out of Baughdvnleob's reach. It than can spam Charm Person with a reasonable chance of success per casting fairly easily. It can also try a DC 16 Hold Person, which could let it engage Baughdvnleob in melee as it does decent damage and can grapple his unmoving form automatically if he's held. Swift Foot just isn't fast enough to keep up (much less pursue into the air).
Probable Loss, it can avoid melee and hit Baughdvnleob with save or lose spells while baughdvnleob is forced to use his (suboptimal) ranged attack mode. If Baughdvnleob is lucky, he'll make all his saves and kill it with his bow.
A Spectre
It seriously comes out of the wall and surprises Baughdvnleob. Not only that, it probably wins initiative. At which point Baughdvnleob likely has 4 negative levels, and he's got to deal with an incorporeal creature (50% chance to totally ignore any hit Baughdvnleob gets) that has 2+ hits worth of hp to deal before it touches him twice more. Game over.
Certain Loss.
A Pair of Achaierai
In addition to being powerful combatants, they can also spam a DC 15 fortitude save for which failure means insanity for 3 hours. They have a good AC (20), decent to hit with good damage, and require more than one hit each to kill. As they can limit Baughdvnleob to one attack by moving away after releasing their cloud, and they get 6 chances to make him fail a combat-winning DC 15 fort save (fails 20 % of the time even while raging), they can eat him while he's insane like 60% of the time. In a straight up melee he has a better chance, but its not a clear win in his favor.
Probable Loss.
A Pair of Green Hags
Green hags are ambush monsters, and could possibly get the drop on Baughdvnleob. Their best option is a melee touch attack to deal 2d4 Str damage if a Fort DC 15 save is failed, and they can spam this as long as they live. If Baughdvnleob makes his saves, he clobbers them, though it takes on the order of 6 rounds. If he starts failing saves its curtains. Given how long it takes to finish them because of their high (22) AC, he probably starts failing some which means he misses more, it takes longer, and eventually he has 0 str and they eat him.
Probable Loss.
Six Chokers
Chokers have few hp, equal AC, and half the attack bonus. They also have a low damage output. Baughdvnleob doesn't rage for the AC advantage and sucks up whatever damage they do deal.
Certain Win.
Elf Wizard 7
Baughdvnleob is finally fast enough to deal with Expeditious Retreat, and has a magical bow to stop Levitate/Protection from Arrows from working. Unfortunately, the wizard can have (DC18) Phantasmal Killer, Black Tentacles, Charm Monster, Confusion, Greater Invisibility, Rainbow Pattern, Fear, Enervation, Fly, Ray of Exhaustion, Wind Wall, Suggestion, and Hold Person among their good choices in addition to all their previous options. Avoiding Baughdvnleob in melee has never been easier, and blocking ranged attacks is still possible. Not to mention spamming save or lose spells with a high enough DC that Baughdvnleob really does need to be worried.
Probable Loss.
Performance Review:
Almost Certain Wins:1
Probable Wins:
Even:1
Probable Losses:1111
Almost Certain Losses: 1111
And the Barbarian has totally tanked by 7th level. This barbarian write-up cannot compete at mid levels, and is certainly unable to do so at high levels (rage powers do not scale that well - the ones that scale are just numbers). He fails to be relevant against most level appropriate challenges at 7th level, a condition that will only get worse as the opposition ramps up in power exponentially.
Observations
Rage Powers were not exceptionally useful most of the time. Powerful Blow just doesn't have enough payoff at low levels for 6 rage points. Strength Surge is a small effect below ~6th level, and the one time it could have been critically useful it just wasn't enough. Swift Foot could be useful tactically, but monster speeds ramp up too fast to be good for chasing down faster opponents who don't want to engage you in melee much of the time, especially as many of them will be flying, and at 9 rage points for 30', its almost too expensive unless you can be certain of killing what you're chasing in one blow.
Overhand Chop is an awful feat whose only use is to get into Backswing. For a feat, it should just give 2x str mod to all attacks with a two-handed weapon, and it would still be a weak feat - requiring a full round action is punitive.
Dwarf racial characteristics, notably Hearty and Stonecunning, were more useful than most of Baughdvnleob's class features. Only Rage was possibly their equal.
I did find that Rage wasn't a no-brainer choice. There were many instances where keeping AC high was more important than spiking damage, especially when the damage increase was unlikely to change the number of hits required to kill the monster. Of course, not being in a rage means no access to rage powers.
In terms of damage output/hp, the Barbarian is slightly below the high end of the monster curve - the place where he seems to want to be. There are also a disturbingly large number of monsters for which massive damage dealing potential is simply insufficient to deal with them, because actually getting to attack them is hard for whatever reason.
Despite relatively good saves, save or lose spamming was still a serious issue - even 20% fail rates become critically high when forced to make 3 or 4 such saves.
Ultimately, the barbarian needs ways to deal with things he can't just hit repeatedly, as there are quite a few of those in the MM.
I'll note that there are a few things I could have taken for items which may have marginally improved his performance. A potion of fly would help on occasion, most notably. However, this would have a rather small effect, possibly moving one or two definite losses to probable losses or even fights, and not changing the overall nature of the conclusions. And what he really wants is a more permanent source of flight like a flying mount (which is pretty standard by 10th level, but not so much by 7th level).
I should note that I grabbed monsters off a list of monsters by CR without looking at their stat blocks before hand. I had a vague idea if it was a meleer, ranged attacker, caster, or puzzle monster, but i wasn't always right (i figured green hags were casters!), but generally remembered nothing specific about any of them. Traps were chosen off the Traps by CR list in the SRD. Thus this is probably as close to a random encounter list by EL as I think anyone is going to get that also tries to contain a variety of monster types at each EL.
Here's the problem with your assumptions. The barbarian is not supposed to face those challenges alone. No class is. Any class would fail in this test. The game just isn't meant to be played as a solo game.
WotC's Nightmare wrote: Here's the problem with your assumptions. The barbarian is not supposed to face those challenges alone. No class is. Any class would fail in this test. A fully charged wizard or cleric might pass.
The issue I have with these playtests is that tactics and equipment make a huge difference in success rates. For instance, if the barbarian has a bunch of alchemist's fire or acid, the spider swarm is no problem. If he drinks a potion of Protection from Evil, he's immune to mind-influencing abilities and the succubus becomes a good sight weaker. If he forces the huge hydra to squeeze into a narrow spot, he gets a decent advantage. Smart use of tanglefoot bags, reach weapons, potions of Enlarge Person, etc. can help a lot.
The other issue I see is that we assume that CR is an adequate measure of a creatures power.
I operate under the assumption that an encounter of EL = a 4 member party's average level should use up 25% of the party's resources.
Or rather, fighting an EL = average party level+4 should be a very close fight.
CR's are tricky things as well. Certain combos of creatures are much more powerful than others (and even some creatures are just badly CR'd. Huge earth elemental?). And certain combos of PCs are much weaker or stronger as well.
That is the entire point of CR, as a specific guage of a creature's power. Every monster has a variety of strengths and weaknesses, which having a party allows for a variety of fighting styles (read: classes) to be brought to bear. What these playtests are showing is that the fighting style of "smack it with a sword" is almost never a fighting style that brings home dinner.
Strategy can also be used by the opposition, which means bad things when that barbarian is going against a tanglefoot bag, so be careful trying to argue from that position.
Also, because of the range of abilities of a particular monster, we want to playtest the player under the same range. That way, we can excuse minor variance within the same CR for any particular monster. But when you routinely find yourself at the losing end of an encounter, you lose the ability to blame the CR of a monster, and instead have to admit that the class is lacking. To paraphrase an old relationship adage, "when the sole constant is you, maybe you are the problem".
EDIT: Oh, operating under the assumption that EL = APL+4 is not just a close fight, but a 50/50 TPK (which definitely makes it close). That's because the EL of a party of players is APL+4, & four equal CR (CR=Level) creatures is an EL four higher than their individual CR. Thus, when the party is fighting a EL=APL+4, they are fighting something equally as strong as them.
Oh, in regards to your barbarian, Squirreloid, you need to look at some better choices. When I did my 5th level playtest HERE, I noticed that many of the rage powers were crap. Surprising Accuracy is actually quite good, and very helpful for power attack.
hogarth wrote: A fully charged wizard or cleric might pass.
The issue I have with these playtests is that tactics and equipment make a huge difference in success rates.
I agree. The trick here, I think, is that even "default" assumptions about a playtesting combat influence available tactics. And choices are tied into the Encounter Level.
We never face monsters outside of an encounter. So Challenge Rating, although a useful term to compare monsters "on the shelf," fades into the background when you place them in any encounter, including the infinite featureless plains of playtesting.
Another note about CR versus EL, and this has to do with your first point. A party of four fighters doesn't have the same range of options as a well-balanced party of four, no matter what level. A single-flavor party wouldn't change the CR of the monsters, but it would increase the EL of the fights, perhaps by a considerable amount.
And a party of a solo character has the same single-flavor disadvantage as the party of four same-class fellows. So that increases the Encounter Level, regardless of what tactics the environment allows.
Did you not read Squirreloid's playtest notes? He used several types of encounter scenarios (just look at the pair of orcs). I don't know why you consider terrain this magic variable that, in your eyes, raises the EL of everything but the player by one or two. They can both hinder and help Team Monster, and frequently do so in equal amounts to the player.
Having four of the same class just means that their distribution of successes and wins are more polarized. The areas their classes are strong in are resoundingly beaten, while the areas they're weak against continue to be unbeaten. Which is something you'll see with solo characters as well.
EDIT: I do admit that equipment and tactics in character design (and spell memorization) do make the difference. This is why my playtesting is done with what many call 'min/max' characters. Played to their full potential, how well does a particular class operate?
Virgil wrote: Strategy can also be used by the opposition, which means bad things when that barbarian is going against a tanglefoot bag, so be careful trying to argue from that position. That's true...but none of the creatures listed above is described as having a tanglefoot bag in the Monster Manual/SRD. You could give them better equipment, but that would probably increase the CR.
In the Core Coliseum message board (on WotC's web site), solo characters sometimes get pitted against monsters (with CR = character's ECL). If there's one thing I learned, it's that certain monsters require specialized abilities to defeat (swarms, flying creatures, incorporeal creatures, etc.). Now in a 4-person party, you can generally assume that someone in your party will have the necessary ability, but to have a fighting shot at beating most equal CR creatures you must have all of that specialized equipment yourself.
So a "fair" solo evaluation will involve a barbarian with a potion of Fly, potions of Protection from Evil, potions of Enlarge Person, oils of Bless Weapon/Curse Weapon, tanglefoot bags, alchemical items, silver/cold iron weapons, reach weapons, etc. Otherwise, it's like having a wizard without any spells -- of course an unprepared character will do poorly!
We are not expecting the barbarian to have the same chance of success as a party of four, because they are expected to take on these same encounters without a chance of failure.
We want a 50% success rate for the soloists, on average, which means we expect and want the barbarian to just flat-out die half the time in these tests and we don't mind if he wins by the skin of his teeth.
Notice that a wizard or rogue doesn't require a giant pile of magic items, that would likely exceed his expected wealth, in order to actually pull his own weight? When a class requires buffs from their utility belt or other classes in order to play the same game, is it really the class pulling its weight, or the buffs/items?
Virgil wrote: We are not expecting the barbarian to have the same chance of success as a party of four, because they are expected to take on these same encounters without a chance of failure. We want a 50% success rate for the soloists, on average, which means we expect and want the barbarian to just flat-out die half the time in these tests. Right, but increasing a solo character's chances of dying by under-equipping him doesn't help.
did you actually playtest any of these or did you just cruch the numbers?
Also I've always disagreed with the CR=50%win rate vs. one PC but lots of people opperate under this assumption.
Honestly, the tests seemed a bit slanted to me.
The level 4 test seems very suspect.
There were several fighter hosers on the list and the wizard was always equipped with lots of anti-fighter spells. Worst of all the fight against the wizard took place outdoors. Non-flying opponent against a wizard outdoors just a plain rigged match.
Also I mean, a hydra is basically another fighter hoser. That's the kind of thing that you specifically don't want to melee, because it's a slow melee master, so you really should lose against the hydra.
For the level 7 tests...
honestly the guy is only losing to flying stuff pretty much, which is highly terrain situational. At this point the barbarian may decide to take cover and use a bow or something, or just plain take cover in a doorway. This is a part where I think tactics can really prove to even the score, as well as better equipment. Even something as simple as a potion of invisibility or fly can even that score.
But on a terrain-less matchup, fliers are obviously going to win, because that terrain favors them so much. Try throwing in some dungeon corridors and a smart barbarian and things may turn out a bit differently there.
I guess my problem is that these scenarios all seem to come down to "If he can't hit it, he can't kill it."
Duh.
For example, against most adult or better dragons, you want a wizard or cleric. Now if the dragon throws up an antimagic shell and walks in, then of course the Barbarian will go to town in toe to toe combat. The dragon's mean and scary, but most of the barbarian's tricks will still work in that AMF, the wizard not so much.
Same thing for undead. Of course the Barbarian is threatened, alone there's no cleric to cast spiritual weapon, or just try to turn.
When fighting a wizard, the Barbarian (and fighter) are to guard their own casters and soak up effects. If the 7th level wizard is blasting the fighter (or the fighter and the cleric) then he's not blasting the wizard, or the rogue/monk sneaking up.
Some of the things I use when playtesting (monsters).
- Fliers land at the end of their movement.
- Always give the PCs a "just in case" ranged weapon.
- Factor in equipment. Don't specificially gear equipment to defeat the monster/PC, but try to sport equipment that is overall effective against a wide variety of opponents the PC will face.
- Use a featureless terrain battlefield. Start both sides 60 ft. apart (average Medium-sized creature charge range).
- No surprise on either side (unless the monster is specifically an ambusher, in which case check monster's Hide vs. Spot to see if can ambush the PCs).
- Don't pit a single PC against a lone monster. There are just some battles that can't be won that way.
Ok, a lot of stuff to cover.
hogarth wrote: WotC's Nightmare wrote: Here's the problem with your assumptions. The barbarian is not supposed to face those challenges alone. No class is. Any class would fail in this test. A fully charged wizard or cleric might pass.
The issue I have with these playtests is that tactics and equipment make a huge difference in success rates. For instance, if the barbarian has a bunch of alchemist's fire or acid, the spider swarm is no problem. If he drinks a potion of Protection from Evil, he's immune to mind-influencing abilities and the succubus becomes a good sight weaker. If he forces the huge hydra to squeeze into a narrow spot, he gets a decent advantage. Smart use of tanglefoot bags, reach weapons, potions of Enlarge Person, etc. can help a lot. First of all, passing = scoring 50% wins on average. That's the sweet spot of balance. You want them to lose half of them. So the level 1 results here are plausibly balanced.
Wizards, Clerics, and Rogues all pass pre-Paizo - i can only imagine they still do with the buffs they've gotten (Cleric excepted, and he probably still passes). A sorceror can pass with good spell selection. Rogue actually does the best in general, because he's just so versatile.
As to build: I'll confess, i threw together a simple build with simple equipment because (1) I don't think everyone should have to spend 5 hours building a level 1 character, especially not a Barbarian, (2) It shouldn't require a hyper optimized build that tracks every last mundane item to perform at balanced. Possibly my rage power choices weren't the best - I think Swift Foot and Strength Surge *could* have been incredibly useful - they just turned out not to be. I could also have gone through and spent an hour on mundane equipment, but that's not the Barbarian's role - yes, the optimizer in me could have nailed a few of those if i'd been psychic or just generally prepared, but the average player should be able to contribute in a level-appropriate manner to a party of characters. I don't mind *some* system mastery, too much is mind-numbingly stupid. And carrying things like alchemists fire says nothing about the *Barbarians* ability to handle a swarm, just that any character can pack expendable explosives and deal with swarms - its a poor playtest of the Barbarian.
I suppose I'll respond to people separately as this board doesn't let me look at other posts so i can make one massive thread of doom...
WotC's Nightmare wrote: Here's the problem with your assumptions. The barbarian is not supposed to face those challenges alone. No class is. Any class would fail in this test. The game just isn't meant to be played as a solo game. Ok, your EL+4 encounter for a level 7 party is 4 CR 7 monsters. How are you going to measure the contribution of each individual party member?
By looking at the performance of one character you (1) minimize the number of variables being measured, which leads to more rigorous measurement and (2) See if that character can meaningfully contribute to level-appropriate challenges. (3) The DMG specifically tells us that a single character is APL -4, and thus a CR = APL is an EL+4 encounter. This is a basic rule of the CR/EL rules. (4) Finally, a Bbn 7 is a CR 7 encounter for the characters, and it makes sense in the Bbn 7 v. Bbn 7 grudge match that the outcome should be 50-50. If a Bbn 7 isn't as good as CR 7 monsters, he shouldn't be a CR 7 encounter.
And since the rules tell us 3+4 are supposed to be true, that's the only balance standard supported by the rules. That many classes fail to meet this standard is a failure of the classes, not that standard.
Really, the entire encounter system is designed around a PC being roughly equivalent to a monster of the same level/CR. An even fight can literally be mirror images of the party fighting each other, because their respective ELs are the same. This also means, the way EL & CR is designed, that a group of four barbazu are roughly as tough as four players of level 5 (if tactically vulnerable).
If one of the level 10 players went rogue and attacked the party, then he should be as tough as a CR 10 monster. Ignore the EL of level X characters from the Paizo document, because NPCs are supposed to have less gear, which influences their power noticeably. However, there's something wrong when I'm glad to be fighting a level 10 PC barbarian instead of a fire giant, because those are two encounters that serve the same purpose and have the same tactics and the same weaknesses/strengths. And yet, a level 6 rogue PC is about as dangerous as a babau. Notice virtually every monster with spellcasting is the same CR as their caster level?
Fully raging, my 5th level playtest barbarian has numbers about equal to the following...
* Full Attack +12 (2d6+29), AC 16, HP 63
This is leaps better than the above barbarian, and should be something to be accounted for, because mine is closer to what the class's potential can reach. And in fact, said barbarian does quite well for himself in the playtesting (being on the high side of balanced). Squirreloid's playtesting shows what happens when you don't play to a barbarian's full potential.
Now, that brings up its own concerns. Namely, when a martial character is designed poorly, they are quite likely going to remain crap for the rest of their career. And it's easy to be made poorly in the face of such a pile of options and with players that don't feel like analyzing. If the player wants to improve his barbarian after making poor choices, it's an uphill battle over several levels that he can never fully recover from unless he lets the character die and makes a new one.
If a spellcaster's underpowered, then he can memorize a different set of spells the next morning. A rogue has a very simple job to maintain combat efficiency, flank and/or wield acid flasks as an opener, and reaches near full potential with a single feat (two-weapon fighting).
But fixing that disparity would likely involve more change than many are willing to accept.
Pygon wrote: I operate under the assumption that an encounter of EL = a 4 member party's average level should use up 25% of the party's resources.
Or rather, fighting an EL = average party level+4 should be a very close fight.
CR's are tricky things as well. Certain combos of creatures are much more powerful than others (and even some creatures are just badly CR'd. Huge earth elemental?). And certain combos of PCs are much weaker or stronger as well.
The problem with the EL=APL standard for a party is that measuring 20% resource expenditure (and its 20%, not 25%) is hard. A 50-50 win chance is easily measured in aggregate by looking at how many encounters were won and how many lost.
In theory, each class capable of filling an iconic role should have somewhat discrete CR N monsters they defeat at level N so that when you put 4 together they not only cover each other's weaknesses but can also beat all CR N encounters.
Chris Mortika wrote: hogarth wrote: A fully charged wizard or cleric might pass.
The issue I have with these playtests is that tactics and equipment make a huge difference in success rates.
I agree. The trick here, I think, is that even "default" assumptions about a playtesting combat influence available tactics. And choices are tied into the Encounter Level.
We never face monsters outside of an encounter. So Challenge Rating, although a useful term to compare monsters "on the shelf," fades into the background when you place them in any encounter, including the infinite featureless plains of playtesting. I always assumed monsters were encountered in their home terrain, and used tactics described for them or that logically suited their abilities. (Monsters with hide or otherwise good ambush abilities attempt to ambush, monsters that fly do so, spotting distance is effected by terrain, and so forth). The Sea Hag specifically takes advantage of its Swim Speed and Aquatic habitat to stay out of melee range, for example, and that's exactly what I'd do with it as the DM.
So no, I don't ignore terrain, I specifically account for terrain. In especially close fights (like the 2 orcs combat), I specifically account for the possibility of the presence of difficult terrain because it could very well matter.
Squirrelloid wrote: I could also have gone through and spent an hour on mundane equipment, but that's not the Barbarian's role - yes, the optimizer in me could have nailed a few of those if i'd been psychic or just generally prepared, but the average player should be able to contribute in a level-appropriate manner to a party of characters. I don't mind *some* system mastery, too much is mind-numbingly stupid. And carrying things like alchemists fire says nothing about the *Barbarians* ability to handle a swarm, just that any character can pack expendable explosives and deal with swarms - its a poor playtest of the Barbarian. I totally agree with what you're saying. That's exactly the point I'm trying to get across -- it's not the barbarian's role to handle swarms by himself, so it's a dumb test to see how an unprepared barbarian handles a swarm by himself. (Replace "swarms" with any "melee-resistant" monster in the above sentence, like hydras, flying monsters, etc.) If, for some reason, your barbarian's party didn't have a wizard (or the equivalent), then he would have to pack a bunch of expendable items to compensate. But even if you ran a well-equipped barbarian through your test and had better success, it would say very little about the barbarian and a lot about the equipment.
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: I could also have gone through and spent an hour on mundane equipment, but that's not the Barbarian's role - yes, the optimizer in me could have nailed a few of those if i'd been psychic or just generally prepared, but the average player should be able to contribute in a level-appropriate manner to a party of characters. I don't mind *some* system mastery, too much is mind-numbingly stupid. And carrying things like alchemists fire says nothing about the *Barbarians* ability to handle a swarm, just that any character can pack expendable explosives and deal with swarms - its a poor playtest of the Barbarian. I totally agree with your statements that I've bolded above. That's exactly the point I'm trying to get across -- it's not the barbarian's role to handle swarms by himself, so it's a dumb test to see how an unprepared barbarian handles a swarm by himself. (Replace "swarms" with any "melee-resistant" monster in the above sentence, like hydras, flying monsters, etc.) If, for some reason, your party didn't have a wizard (or the equivalent), then the barbarian would have to pack a bunch of expendable items to compensate. But even if you ran a well-equipped solo barbarian and had better success, it would say very little about the barbarian and a lot about the equipment. Except the Barbarian is supposed to be the equivalent of a monster of his level. Not the Barbarian plus 10k gp of expendable mundane and magical gear to cover every conceivable situation, the Barbarian with typical gear for his class is a CR N monster. And that makes his performance against other CR N monsters matter even while operating within the constraints of his role.
You'll note I give him some oil flasks to deal with regenerators (not that any show up) and I give him a portable ram - these are things that are within his role. Those are tools he will use to contribute meaningfully to a party. Alchemist's fire? That's what the rogue is for. Having auto-losses is an *acceptable* and *expected* part of this playtest methodology.
Squirrelloid wrote: Except the Barbarian is supposed to be the equivalent of a monster of his level. Not the Barbarian plus 10k gp of expendable mundane and magical gear to cover every conceivable situation, the Barbarian with typical gear for his class is a CR N monster. And that makes his performance against other CR N monsters matter even while operating within the constraints of his role. I don't get it. You and I are in complete agreement that it's not the barbarian's role to be able to fight well against monster "X". So why is it reasonable to judge him on his results against "X" (which we agree in advance is supposed to be poor)?
It's like judging a wizard's power after he's run out of spells, or if he's completely surrounded by enemies. He's not supposed to perform well in certain circumstances, so it's unreasonable to say the wizard is weak because of it.
@Virgil -
I ultimately agree with you that its not an exceptionally optimized Barbarian. It does highlight the weaknesses of some options (Overhand Chop, some Rage powers), which is useful information. I don't think a Barbarian should have to be perfectly optimized to perform in a level-appropriate way. I'll admit I'm better at caster optimization, but even a mildly optimized caster can do level appropriate things. Super-optimized casters go to crazy town.
Its also not a deliberately poor Barbarian. Those look (at least to me) like choices people could find reasonable. I built him in 20 minutes, tops, for all three level versions put together. I excluded the obviously bad abilities, but I didn't rigorously analyze the output efficiency or any other utility of the remaining abilities. I happened to run into some subtlely bad abilities (or abilities that would eventually be good, but weren't yet). Heck, i got more use out of Overhand Chop than Power Attack, and yet I'd swear up and down that Overhand Chop is the worse feat of the two. (Admittedly, the lack of choice in Paizo's Power Attack really decreases its utility. PA for 1-2 at low levels is reasonable, being forced to PA for 4 not so much).
Interestingly, I also ran into the situation where his problem wasn't so much dealing damage as avoiding damage, something better choice of rage powers wouldn't help with. His damage output was acceptable, his ability to absorb damage wasn't.
The existence of so many bad rage power choices is a design flaw, just like the presence of so many bad feats has been (and continues to be) a design flaw. There shouldn't be so much system mastery that I need to rigorously analyze every block while building a character to make sure I'm not screwing myself over completely.
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: Except the Barbarian is supposed to be the equivalent of a monster of his level. Not the Barbarian plus 10k gp of expendable mundane and magical gear to cover every conceivable situation, the Barbarian with typical gear for his class is a CR N monster. And that makes his performance against other CR N monsters matter even while operating within the constraints of his role. I don't get it. You and I are in complete agreement that it's not the barbarian's role to be able to fight well against monster "X". So why is it reasonable to judge him on his results against "X" (which we agree in advance is supposed to be poor)?
It's like judging a wizard's power after he's run out of spells, or if he's completely surrounded by enemies. He's not supposed to perform well in certain circumstances, so it's unreasonable to say the wizard is weak because of it. Its the same reason we care that a wizard seriously dies to a pit trap at 1st level. That's not his schtick, and its why he's batting 0.500 instead of 0.900. Because against a diverse field of EL = Level encounters he should bat ~0.500. That's including all possible EL = Level encounter types, not just the ones that he can beat. Because he'll be in parties facing those encounters and should be able to contribute in a level-appropriate way to a reasonable fraction of them. Carrying the loot is not a valid archetype, although D+D has been burdened by it for quite some time.
Regardless, lets look at what else he loses to:
A 5-headed hydra. Basically the top tier damage dealer for its CR. Clearly Bbns aren't the king of smack down.
A wizard at any level. Is the only answer to magic more magic? This is seriously a problem if only some classes can do magic.
Save or Lose spam. Basically, its a johnny one-note caster with good innate defenses.
Flying critters with ranged attacks. Baughdvnleob isn't an archer, though he carries some ranged weapons in a pinch, and will get hosed by those who out-archer him. (flight for everyone shouldn't be an assumption until 9-10th level, which is why I don't go looking for ways to give Baughdvnleob flight. Regardless, by the time a potion of flight is reasonable, the monsters either nail him with save or lose while he drinks it or can outrun him trivially. Better flight options are too expensive before ~9th level).
Many puzzle monsters. Notably, the spectre just utterly hoses him. Its not that he can't damage an incorporeal monster - that just requires a magic weapon, but a monster who will seriously surprise him by coming out of a wall or the floor and drain 4 levels before he does anything? That's a real problem and he has no answer (and no possible answer at that level).
Hordes of foes. He just can't kill them fast enough.
What does he win against:
Goes toe-to-toe with some second-tier bruisers. They're still pretty badass in melee, but they aren't the top of the curve.
Can trash reasonably sized groups of foes.
Can survive things which deal non-lethal levels of damage. (though if that damage is avoidable, this is generally losing).
hogarth wrote: I don't get it. You and I are in complete agreement that it's not the barbarian's role to be able to fight well against monster "X". So why is it reasonable to judge him on his results against "X" (which we agree in advance is supposed to be poor)? Because any particular class should also have encounters where the tables are turned, where the monster is screwed without a hope. When that is included, we result in fights a class does really poorly against and really well against, on top of fights the class does average against. One of the many problems is that the barbarian doesn't get to have monsters where "smack it with my greatsword" was an awesome life choice, at least not in the same capacity as a barbarian fighting a swarm.
Squirrelloid wrote: Its the same reason we care that a wizard seriously dies to a pit trap at 1st level. That's not his schtick, and its why he's batting 0.500 instead of 0.900. Because against a diverse field of EL = Level encounters he should bat ~0.500. That's including all possible EL = Level encounter types, not just the ones that he can beat. Because he'll be in parties facing those encounters and should be able to contribute in a level-appropriate way to a reasonable fraction of them. Carrying the loot is not a valid archetype, although D+D has been burdened by it for quite some time. Does your example solo wizard have a bunch of party buffs prepared (like Haste, Enlarge Person, etc.)? If not, then why does the wizard get to be optimized for solo adventuring and the barbarian doesn't?
All you've proved so far is that an unprepared barbarian is not very good as a solo adventurer. I agree 100% with that conclusion.
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: Its the same reason we care that a wizard seriously dies to a pit trap at 1st level. That's not his schtick, and its why he's batting 0.500 instead of 0.900. Because against a diverse field of EL = Level encounters he should bat ~0.500. That's including all possible EL = Level encounter types, not just the ones that he can beat. Because he'll be in parties facing those encounters and should be able to contribute in a level-appropriate way to a reasonable fraction of them. Carrying the loot is not a valid archetype, although D+D has been burdened by it for quite some time. Does your example solo wizard have a bunch of party buffs prepared (like Haste, Enlarge Person, etc.)? If not, then why does the wizard get to be optimized for solo adventuring and the barbarian doesn't?
All you've proved so far is that an unprepared barbarian is not very good as a solo adventurer. I agree 100% with that conclusion. Previous post edited.
Enlarge person? Ew. Haste? Ew.
My wizards take the same types of spells in their top-tier slots whether solo or in a group. At low levels that means Sleep, Colorspray, Web, Glitterdust, and the like. Ie, the good spells that seriously win encounters by themselves. (And my last arcane caster was consistently the party MVP despite never casting a party buff spell).
Squirrelloid wrote: Previous post edited.
Enlarge person? Ew. Haste? Ew.
Similarly...
Throwing axes? Ew. Vials of oil? Ew. No tanglefoot bags? Ew. No potions of Enlarge Person? Ew. No reach weapon? Ew.
:)
Swordslinger wrote: Honestly, the tests seemed a bit slanted to me.
The level 4 test seems very suspect.
There were several fighter hosers on the list and the wizard was always equipped with lots of anti-fighter spells. Worst of all the fight against the wizard took place outdoors. Non-flying opponent against a wizard outdoors just a plain rigged match.
I'm sorry I chose good spells. Are you sad I didn't purposefully gimp the wizard to increase the Barbarian's ego? Seriously, combat magic at all levels is save or lose, and all wizards in any playtest i run will use such magic, and supplement it with magic that improves their mobility and survival. Its how the game works.
And an elf's native habitat is Temperate Forest, which last I checked is outdoors. Thanks for playing.
Quote:
Also I mean, a hydra is basically another fighter hoser. That's the kind of thing that you specifically don't want to melee, because it's a slow melee master, so you really should lose against the hydra.
So he can't beat magic users and he can't beat melee bruisers... what do you expect him to beat, kindergartners? The MM seriously has 4 types of monsters: Caster, Melee, Ranged, and Puzzle, with some blending of those concepts. Most mid-high level caster and ranged monsters have options that make getting to them hard. Most puzzle monsters require knowing the trick (and surviving long enough to use it) to kill them. (Incorporeality is a puzzle monster trait). Barbarians apparently don't dominate casters, don't dominate meleers, shouldn't be expected to dominate ranged attackers who are generally faster or hard to reach, and aren't who you'd expect to beat puzzle monsters (and they certainly don't beat the nasty ones). So this sounds like a design flaw, not a methodology problem.
Quote:
For the level 7 tests...
honestly the guy is only losing to flying stuff pretty much, which is highly terrain situational. At this point the barbarian may decide to take cover and use a bow or something, or just plain take cover in a doorway. This is a part where I think tactics can really prove to even the score, as well as better equipment. Even something as simple as a potion of invisibility or fly can even that score.
But on a terrain-less matchup, fliers are obviously going to win, because that terrain favors them so much. Try throwing in some dungeon corridors and a smart barbarian and things may turn out a bit differently there.
The Succubus *could* fly, but she seriously doesn't need to. She wants to be close and personal, if you know what I mean. (Nor do I ever portray her as flying).
The Lillend doesn't need flight - move 70' would be sufficient to stop baughdvnleob from ever getting an attack.
The Chimera seriously doesn't care it can fly, it lands and melees with him. (His bow is about as effective as its breath weapon, and it has no other ranged options, so flying is a liability for it).
The Air Elemental doesn't need to fly to avoid Baughdvnleob, it clobbers him in a straight up fight. That it can also suck him into a whirlwind, fly up 200' and drop him, rinse/wash/repeat is just icing on the cake.
Achaierai don't fly. That doesn't stop Baughdvnleob from getting his ass handed to him.
Green Hags similarly do not fly and have no magic. Just a really nasty str-damaging touch attack.
The spectre encounters him indoors. The fact that incorporeality => flight is irrelevant, it can walk through the wall as easily as the ceiling.
Only the elf wizard possibly uses flight specifically to beat baughdvnleob, and frankly, she can just as easily use greater invisibility instead.
Try actually reading the details before making grandiose (and false) claims about the results of something.
As to terrain, I specifically put each monster in its native terrain, defaulting to dungeon for 'Any' monsters. That very few low-mid level monsters in the MM are actually native to dungeons/underground might surprise you, but its true. (Especially as there are few low level constructs and I forgot to include any oozes - although those are probably auto-loses for Baughdvnleob, they fill approximately the same niche as swarms). Most dungeon monsters are puzzle monsters, which is a real problem for fighter types because they better hope they brought exactly the right item options.
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: Previous post edited.
Enlarge person? Ew. Haste? Ew.
Similarly...
Throwing axes? Ew. Vials of oil? Ew. No tanglefoot bags? Ew. No potions of Enlarge Person? Ew. No reach weapon? Ew.
:) He can't afford a longbow at level 1. Sorry. Characters don't start with that much money. He's a front-line fighter, not a ranger, he wants better armor more than a longbow.
Vials of oil are useful for killing regenerators or otherwise burning places down.
Tanglefoot bags should not be considered default equipment, nor should a reach weapon. (Did you notice any point where reach was a problem here?) Come now, this is a fairly typical Barbarian Archetype - he carries a big axe. This archetype should be playable in D+D at low levels. That it fails by 4th level says something.
Squirrelloid wrote: hogarth wrote:
Similarly...
Throwing axes? Ew. Vials of oil? Ew. No tanglefoot bags? Ew. No potions of Enlarge Person? Ew. No reach weapon? Ew.
:)
He can't afford a longbow at level 1. Sorry. Characters don't start with that much money. He's a front-line fighter, not a ranger, he wants better armor more than a longbow. I agree -- I'd go with javelins (3x the range, 1/8 the price).
Squirreloid wrote: Vials of oil are useful for killing regenerators or otherwise burning places down. Acid is better than oil vs regenerators (which takes a full round to prepare). Alchemist's fire is better, too. You can keep the oil for burning stuff down, I guess; it's pretty cheap.
Squirreloid wrote: Tanglefoot bags should not be considered default equipment, nor should a reach weapon. (Did you notice any point where reach was a problem here?) A reach weapon (+ Enlarge Person) (+ armor spikes, if you're not using a spiked chain) is an extremely popular way to get AoOs and/or avoid full attacks in the games I play in. Ditto for tanglefoot bags (which remove the ability to 5' step for the bad guys). Ditto for potions of Protection from Evil, potions of Protection from Melee Attacks (levitate, spider climb, fly, whatever), potions of Protection from Targeted Attacks (invisibility), etc. Especially if the party wizard is stingy with the buffs...
:)
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: hogarth wrote:
Squirreloid wrote: Tanglefoot bags should not be considered default equipment, nor should a reach weapon. (Did you notice any point where reach was a problem here?) A reach weapon (+ Enlarge Person) (+ armor spikes, if you're not using a spiked chain) is an extremely popular way to get AoOs and/or avoid full attacks in the games I play in. Ditto for tanglefoot bags (which remove the ability to 5' step for the bad guys). Ditto for potions of Protection from Evil, potions of Protection from Melee Attacks (levitate, spider climb, fly, whatever), potions of Protection from Targeted Attacks (invisibility), etc. Especially if the party wizard is stingy with the buffs...
:)
I'm familiar with two-handed weapon + armor spikes. I think its an inappropriate idea that deserves to be removed from the game - TWF and THF should not be combinable. Could I have done it? Sure. I'd feel really dirty though. Its not that its broken in a global sense - melee characters doing that still don't compare to casters - but that destroys the viability of a lot of concepts at the expense of making a particular concept (with no fictional source material) much better. The way to make melee classes do level-appropriate stuff is to give them level-appropriate abilities that let them participate in a level-appropriate way. Not tell everyone 'the spiked chain/armor spikes chain-tripping meleer is the only way to play'. I read Snow's chain-tripper build on the WotC forums forever ago. It was elegant, it was leaps and bounds beyond other Fighter builds of the time, and it was bad for a game where we really want people to play Sir Lancelot, King Arthur, Hercules, and Perseus (at least at low levels) and Thor, Hulk, and Superman at high levels.
The trouble with a lot of the single class playtests is that they are ignoring the need for the rest of the party.
In several of Virgo's wizard play test scenarios I see that the wizard casts fly to get out of reach of the opponent and then bombs them from the air. The trouble with this is that a mixed group of foes is not so easily dispatched.
Imagine a group of stone giants with boulders and some dire bears (straight out of Fortress of the Stone Giants). A wizard can cast fly to get away from them in melee, but now the giants hurl huge boulders at him +12 to hit, 2d8+12 damage each. The wizard might take one or two, but eventually will die.
The point of the rest of the party is to enable the wizard to not have to cast fly to survive an encounter. With a party along for the ride the wizard can instead first cast Charm Monster or something while the rest of his party runs interference against the charging bears and giants.
Sure, the wizard is going to do a lot of the damage here, he always does, but the rest of the party is key to getting that to happen with only 20% resource losses.
I would love to a see a full party test with 4 archtype classes and then swap out problem classes for the archtypes to really see how they shine or fail in a party atmosphere.
JHegner wrote: The trouble with a lot of the single class playtests is that they are ignoring the need for the rest of the party.
In several of Virgo's wizard play test scenarios I see that the wizard casts fly to get out of reach of the opponent and then bombs them from the air. The trouble with this is that a mixed group of foes is not so easily dispatched.
Imagine a group of stone giants with boulders and some dire bears (straight out of Fortress of the Stone Giants). A wizard can cast fly to get away from them in melee, but now the giants hurl huge boulders at him +12 to hit, 2d8+12 damage each. The wizard might take one or two, but eventually will die.
The point of the rest of the party is to enable the wizard to not have to cast fly to survive an encounter. With a party along for the ride the wizard can instead first cast Charm Monster or something while the rest of his party runs interference against the charging bears and giants.
Sure, the wizard is going to do a lot of the damage here, he always does, but the rest of the party is key to getting that to happen with only 20% resource losses.
I would love to a see a full party test with 4 archtype classes and then swap out problem classes for the archtypes to really see how they shine or fail in a party atmosphere.
You're going to multiply your variables, and thus both increase your sources of error and decrease your ability to tell who is pulling their weight and who isn't. Testing a party is a poor metric for determining if classes are balanced against each other. Seriously the Cleric or Druid breathes radioactive fire (metaphorically) and makes the locals run in panic screaming 'CodZilla' while the wizard haxx0rs reality to win. Can you really tell the difference in party performance between the party fighter sipping a martini or stepping up to take a swing in that environment? I can't.
A Wizard of appropriate level to single-handedly handle a group of stone giants + dire bears utterly destroys them. I'll need to look up the EL of that encounter, but my guess is that its 13+. +12 attack against a level 13 wizard? *snicker* Good luck hitting the displaced wizard with an AC in the 30s who drops 2 save or lose spells each turn. Giants have weak will saves, not many boulders are going to fly after a few glitterdust spells...
Actually, in my wizard playtest, I specifically had him fight a party of cloud giants and specifically dealt with the boulder throwing. Mirror Image combined with a decent AC made it so they weren't hitting him in the time it took him to kill them. I could've just as easily used greater invisibility in the event there was a ceiling problem.
Oh, wait, is there someone named Virgo around here? This could get confusing :P
I am aware that the wizard blows a larger load of resources when fighting solo, but as you said, a party allows him to scale back a little bit and not use as much. This isn't indicative of how the wizard operates, but how a party operates, because their combined power is supposed to be sufficient that nobody is truly threatened when they fight a something four EL below theirs.
Now, while using a reach weapon and a tanglefoot bag works, it stops working after the low levels (sufficient size or strength or reach to deal with it without being truly hindered). And low levels is the only time martial characters pull their weight.
Squirrelloid wrote: Seriously the Cleric or Druid breathes radioactive fire (metaphorically) and makes the locals run in panic screaming 'CodZilla' while the wizard haxx0rs reality to win.
A Wizard of appropriate level to single-handedly handle a group of stone giants + dire bears utterly destroys them.
So what you're really saying is that we need to nerf magic users. Sounds good to me.
*sigh* No, that's not what we're saying. Why is the fighter/barbarian being used at the baseline here? Proper playtests, and common anecdotes, are showing that they are simply not level appropriate when facing against virtually anything in the Monster Manual past level 5.
When faced with imbalanced classes, this most emphatically does NOT mean the weakest is the most balanced. And we're not even trying to balance them in a dueling scenario, but how well they fare against what a party actually faces, monsters. And all signs point to the martial classes failing to compete with the opposition, while everyone else actually pulls their weight.
EDIT: Wait a minute, did you just say we need to nerf magic users on the comment of (in paraphrase) "a wizard that's powerful enough to solo a challenge is able to solo the challenge"? That just doesn't make any kind of sense. Doesn't the fact "a fighter that's too low level to solo a challenge dies horribly", mean we should buff fighters?
Squirrelloid wrote: I read Snow's chain-tripper build on the WotC forums forever ago. It was elegant, it was leaps and bounds beyond other Fighter builds of the time, and it was bad for a game where we really want people to play Sir Lancelot, King Arthur, Hercules, and Perseus (at least at low levels) and Thor, Hulk, and Superman at high levels. To point out the obvious:
* Sir Lancelot didn't use a guisarme and armor spikes.
* Merlin didn't cast Mirror Image and Evard's Black Tentacles.
* 3.5 D&D isn't Le Morte d'Arthur (for better or for worse).
At any rate, I agree that the barbarian already has two strikes against him. It's just a bit disappointing that you're giving him a third strike by forcing him to fight with one hand tied behind his back.
:)
Squirrelloid wrote:
I'm sorry I chose good spells. Are you sad I didn't purposefully gimp the wizard to increase the Barbarian's ego? Seriously, combat magic at all levels is save or lose, and all wizards in any playtest i run will use such magic, and supplement it with magic that improves their mobility and survival. Its how the game works.
Well, the thing is that you've chose your load out of spells specifically to fight fighters. Like the wizard knows he's oging against a fighter. What happens if he's against another wizard or a wraith? Then stuff like web and flight doesn't help him much. Specifically the load out was designed to slay a fighter, and yeah obviously if your entire spell load out for the day is dedicated to doing that, you'll win. But what happens when you've got fly, protection from arrows, web and stinking cloud and you run into a wraith or another caster? You're basically screwed.
Squirreloid wrote:
And an elf's native habitat is Temperate Forest, which last I checked is outdoors. Thanks for playing.
A solo fight set up outdoors against a flying foe with a nonflying barbarian is just plain stupid. It's a set up to try to prove that you think the barbarian is too weak. To make matters worse, your wizard has spells that totally are designed to fight a nonflying opponent in the woods.
I mean at that point might as well give the barbarian a bulwark of antimagic that he spent all his gold on and see how the wizard does then.
Or lets set the encounter in a small 10x10 room that the barbarian just opened the door to. Seriously, I can set up rigged terrain too to favor one side. And that doesn't really prove much.
"Squirreloid wrote:
So he can't beat magic users and he can't beat melee bruisers... what do you expect him to beat, kindergartners?
He actually does pretty well against the melee monsters you put him against. It's just that hydras are over the top close range killing machines with 20 speed and super fast healing. They basically are specifically designed to tear apart fighters in melee.
As far as monster categories, I would put monsters at the following categories:
-Melee nuker (this is like the slwo moving melee that kills other melee, like the hydra)
-Generic melee (ghouls, zombies, orcs) These are your basic grunts.
-Melee Skirmishers (the fast moving stuff that emphasizes mobility, like blink dogs and wolves and such)
-Ranged skirmisher (generally either ranged flight or just runs fast and fires ranged attacks)
-Ranged meleer (wyverns and griffons )
-Full caster (rarer than you'd think, generally this is only going to be NPC mages or a very rare creature)
-Puzzle monsters (incorporeals, gaze monsters and so on).
-Swiss army knife monsters (they've got a few spell likes, some basic melee, and are generally good at everything but not exceptional at one thing)
Now, pretty much the barb should be beating generic melee, melee skirmishers and ranged meleers.
Barbs should be able to hold thier own against swiss army knife monsters and full casters. Full casters largely depend on terrain and circumstance, as well as if the caster happens to be using an anti-melee load out.
Barbs should generally lose against melee nukers, ranged skirmishers and some puzzle monsters. A barb with the right magic items and tactics should do reasonably well against puzzle monsters.
Now I really don't think that's that bad.
I do pay attention to these test despite the validity. One thing that I have noticed is what people set up as the encounters. Each person does something different for the challenges. I think that these test need a common set of challenges that uses several different builds, not just the more powerful or optimized ones. Maybe take the character through a written adventure solo and see if the character could survive each encounter 50% and record those results. I think the results would have a little more validity and show off what is actually weak in the class and how it truly compares to the other classes.
*bitterly cries at the loss of a very long response*
I'll try to reproduce it at some point...
*sighs*
Essentially, these tests are very useful, but not valid tests in any way as a measure of "pulling one's weight", particularly with an arbitrary (completely arbitrary) pass/fail rate of 50%.
curses more
hogarth wrote: Squirrelloid wrote: I read Snow's chain-tripper build on the WotC forums forever ago. It was elegant, it was leaps and bounds beyond other Fighter builds of the time, and it was bad for a game where we really want people to play Sir Lancelot, King Arthur, Hercules, and Perseus (at least at low levels) and Thor, Hulk, and Superman at high levels. To point out the obvious:
* Sir Lancelot didn't use a guisarme and armor spikes.
* Merlin didn't cast Mirror Image and Evard's Black Tentacles.
* 3.5 D&D isn't Le Morte d'Arthur (for better or for worse).
At any rate, I agree that the barbarian already has two strikes against him. It's just a bit disappointing that you're giving him a third strike by forcing him to fight with one hand tied behind his back.
:) I'm sorry that playing the classic barbarian archetype is considered inappropriate. Because honestly he should be able to get by doing that.
I'm not saying alternate paradigms aren't acceptable, but "historical" heroes should be replicable and playable. Wizards are in one of the toughest boats, but Merlin seriously casts Polymorph (Other) in some stories, and that's level appropriate, so we're good. But just because Lancelot doesn't use a Guisarme and armor spikes doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to play Lancelot and do level appropriate things. That you can't is a game flaw.
Majuba wrote: *bitterly cries at the loss of a very long response*
I'll try to reproduce it at some point...
*sighs*
Essentially, these tests are very useful, but not valid tests in any way as a measure of "pulling one's weight", particularly with an arbitrary (completely arbitrary) pass/fail rate of 50%.
curses more
Seriously, its not arbitrary, its exactly what the game rules tell us is supposed to be happening. An EL = APL +4 encounter should result in a TPK 50% of the time. I'm not making this up, the DMG *says that* in 3e. (That they made the text more vague in 3.5 doesn't even matter - the CR guidelines are exactly the same in principle - they've just removed the exact percentages and added more useless text which suggests it without giving the number).
The game rules also specifically tell us that a Character of level N is a CR N monster, and that a party of size 1 has an APL = level -4. Crack the DMG, its there for those willing to read rather than just deny it.
fliprushman wrote: I do pay attention to these test despite the validity. One thing that I have noticed is what people set up as the encounters. Each person does something different for the challenges. I think that these test need a common set of challenges that uses several different builds, not just the more powerful or optimized ones. Maybe take the character through a written adventure solo and see if the character could survive each encounter 50% and record those results. I think the results would have a little more validity and show off what is actually weak in the class and how it truly compares to the other classes. I plan on running a fighter and a wizard at some point. I will use the same challenges.
Sigh, for some reason Paizo logged me out while posting a reply, so this is take 2 for me...
Swordslinger wrote: Squirrelloid wrote:
I'm sorry I chose good spells. Are you sad I didn't purposefully gimp the wizard to increase the Barbarian's ego? Seriously, combat magic at all levels is save or lose, and all wizards in any playtest i run will use such magic, and supplement it with magic that improves their mobility and survival. Its how the game works.
Well, the thing is that you've chose your load out of spells specifically to fight fighters. Like the wizard knows he's oging against a fighter. What happens if he's against another wizard or a wraith? Then stuff like web and flight doesn't help him much. Specifically the load out was designed to slay a fighter, and yeah obviously if your entire spell load out for the day is dedicated to doing that, you'll win. But what happens when you've got fly, protection from arrows, web and stinking cloud and you run into a wraith or another caster? You're basically screwed. Save or lose spells (1) tend to target will, (2) are good against the vast majority of potential opponents at low levels, and (3) work against even will favored enemies by spamming them. They are also wins when they work. This means they are an efficient use of resources.
What spells would you take? Seriously?
And web + stinking cloud vs. another wizard is made of win. That's a great spellset.
Finally, elves are native to temperate woodlands. Its part of the elf monster statblock. Its in the rules in your MM. I didn't choose it because it reamed the fighter - I made no choices about environment at all. I did what the MM said should happen. So get off this, elves aren't supposed to be encountered in closets, they're supposed to be encountered in woods. End of debate.
Swordslinger wrote:
Squirreloid wrote:
And an elf's native habitat is Temperate Forest, which last I checked is outdoors. Thanks for playing.
A solo fight set up outdoors against a flying foe with a nonflying barbarian is just plain stupid. It's a set up to try to prove that you think the barbarian is too weak. To make matters worse, your wizard has spells that totally are designed to fight a nonflying opponent in the woods.
You know, you really like hammering on this despite the fact I *proved* in my last post that flight had *nothing* to do with the utter fail of the Barbarian at level 7. It was a non-issue. Get off it. Actually read what I wrote for a change. No monster flight b*@!~ed him at 7th level. One monster speed b$!~!ed him, the rest that beat him found other ways of totally hosing him.
Swordslinger wrote:
I mean at that point might as well give the barbarian a bulwark of antimagic that he spent all his gold on and see how the wizard does then.
By the time Antimagic shows up (CR11), the wizard is packing spells which create stuff instantaneously, and therefore continue to exist when they enter an AMF. Trust me, AMF hurts non-casters far more than casters because non-casters need all those magical number pumps to compete with level-appropriate monsters.
Swordslinger wrote:
Or lets set the encounter in a small 10x10 room that the barbarian just opened the door to. Seriously, I can set up rigged terrain too to favor one side. And that doesn't really prove much.
What monsters are native to cubicles? Tech support? Yeah, like toddlers, the Barbarian eats those. Unfortunately, they aren't an EL 7 threat.
Few monsters at low levels are native to subterranean habitats. Even across high levels, the consistently subterranean monster types are:
(Giant) Vermin
Construts
Oozes
Undead
We already saw how a Spectre just tears a Barbarian apart, so mid-high level undead are a problem. Constructs are not an easy fight for melee characters, they tend to have lots of HD => high attack bonuses and high damage from massive strength. Not to mention 2x his hp or more. (Elementals are kind of like constructs in that they similarly are overloaded on str and HD, and they also eat meleers). Oozes tend to defeat meleers. Which leaves vermin and low-level undead, and I seriously don't care how many zombies the barbarian can carve a path through. And the Barbarian seriously can't take on a Colossal Monstrous Centipede at level 9. (I won't even belabor the point with the Colossal Monstrous Scorpion, as its not found underground). Ie, most things that are native to subterranean habitats eat the Barbarian in close combat. Oops?
Swordslinger wrote:
"Squirreloid wrote:
So he can't beat magic users and he can't beat melee bruisers... what do you expect him to beat, kindergartners?
He actually does pretty well against the melee monsters you put him against. It's just that hydras are over the top close range killing machines with 20 speed and super fast healing. They...
Getting eaten by the top tier melee monster of its level and going even against significant melee threats is not doing 'pretty well'. Its awful. A bigass axe needs to utterly dominate some subset of monsters for it to be a good life choice for an adventurer. Because Casters and Rogues seriously have level-appropriate match-ups they just own no questions asked.
Part of the problem here is no one seems to know what melee characters should be good at. I mean, clearly opinion is they shouldn't just trounce melee monsters. Its both not true, and wizards already do it anyway (so its redundant). But they also don't trounce casters (because caster is defined as better than non-caster in the rules). And they aren't going to have a great record against puzzle monsters because its not supposed to be their thing. Ie, melee characters are defined as not being level appropriate. That has to stop.
Im not going to say your testing is entirely wrong. Its not. You have effectively exposed many of the barbarians weaknesses.
However, understand that these challenges are not meant to be faced by any one class, nor as one fight at full strength.
The CR rating only really begins to work if you have a full party, and you challenge them with several fights in succession.
The question you should really be asking here isn't "how does the barbarian do as a stand alone warrior" but rather "Is this class performing an important and useful role as part of a group."
The best thing about fighters, barbarians, and paladins past 4th level is not their insane combat ability, its their toughness. A barbarian can take several more hits than a cleric or mage. That usually means that the mage is going to get two or three more spells off. The healer will have someone who take take several rounds worth of damage and not simply die from it, so their healing abilities are more effective. The rogue now has someone to flank with, who might actually benefit from +2 to hit.
I always try to test new classes as part of a larger whole. As far as the barbarian is concerned, yes, he has some serious weaknesses. He has to chose between a good AC and his accelerated movement (although with a dwarf thats not a problem at all) and his damage (2-hander vs. Axe and Board). His low will save, even when raging, makes him vulnerable to a wide array of spells and special abilities. But he serves the role as the party roadblock very effectively, especially when you use his feats and special abilities to improve that role.
I do not believe the barbarian is underpowered. Its job is simply not to do huge amounts of damage all at once. His job is to fight, and keep fighting, buying time for the rest of the party to set up the win, either by increasing his fighting strength or by locating the monster's weakness. I would also point out that the barbarian can keep on beating things into the dirt long after the spell-casters have run their magic dry and the rogue has exhausted his bag of tricks. Consider this before you declare him too underpowered.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
