Barbarians, Fighters and Rangers - playtest + analysis + suggestions


Classes: Barbarian, Fighter, and Ranger


Basically, this is an updated version of my older post. It's nowhere to be found, I'm afraid, so I'm taking the liberty to add it here again.
Some of the problems have been pointed to me during play (Scarred Lands, Fighter and Ranger stuff mostly).

1. Too many subsystems.

The classes, as presented in Pathfinder Beta, use more subsystems to handle progression of class abilities than those in 3.5.

The direct consequences are: steeper learning curve, increased bookkeeping, decreased backwards compatibility.

The indirect consequences are: decreased appeal for beginner players, slower combat resolution due to increased resource management overhead, increased complexity for mutliclassing and use of prestige classes.

Also, all melee classes are still unable to defend themselves from control spells (Weak saves, incapable of working around walls, SoD effects).

Examples follow.

1.1 Barbarian.

1.1.1 New subsystems: Rage point pool, Rage powers.
- Incompatible horizontally (no other class uses Rage point pool or Rage powers) and vertically (no classes to develop on new Rage mechanic).
- Increased bookkeeping... (sorry, going to vent a bit) Ye Gods, I need to say this: try to use a horde of 40 Barbarians in Pathfinder Beta. Whoever came up with this concept, should be made to run such battle 3 times a day until they apologize for not thinking the concept though.

1.1.2 Suggested optimizations.
- Replace Rage powers with [Rage Combat] feats.
- Replace new Rage versions with [Rage Combat] feats.
- Add prerequisite to each [Rage Combat] feat: usable only when Raging.
- Replace "Rage power" with "Bonus Rage Combat feat" in class feature progression.
- Make all feats usable at-will but only one at any given time.
- Make all rage feats to be distinct so that switching between various Rage powers during combat would be an interesting option for character.
- Make use of each feat a Swift action.
- Lengthen Rage duration to 15 minutes.
- Limit number of Rage uses to 1+Con modifier/day.
- Ability to self-heal between encounters. Right now Barbarians with their low armor class provide biggest hitpoint sink for all healing abilities.

1.2 Fighter.

1.2.1 New subsystems: Weapon Training, Armor Training.
- The systems are easier to manage. Unfortunately they lack room for customization.
- New systems are entirely lackluster. Adding more attack bonuses, more damage or improving armor class will not solve two major problems of Fighter class:
- nothing to do besides hitting round after round,
- defenseless against spellcaster characters.

1.2.2 The following Fighter archetypes are still not viable under Pathfinder Beta:
- highlevel Fighter commanders (not enough skill points, no feats for officers)
- melee battlefield controller (fighters able to hinder or penalize opponent actions via use of skirmisher weapons)
- lightly armored duellers
- big game hunter (Improved Grab == bye bye, Mr Fighter)

1.2.3 Broken (unusable) feats:
- Power attack - impossible to find sweet spot (i.e. relation of taken penalty to opponent's armor class)
- Combat Expertise - use of non fighter ability (Intelligence) and general weakening of the feat

1.2.4 Suggested optimizations against tier 1 characters:
- Combat feats pool should incorporate feats allowing to negate magic effects which eliminate fighter from play: effects targetting Will save, effects displacing fighter character, effects building barriers between fighter and his prey, effects which permanently block line of sight between fighter and opponent.
- Combat feats for negating magic effects should be available at higher total character levels, not just total Fighter levels

Examples of test cases which fighter should be able to handle at resource cost:
- Empowered Ray of Enfeeblement
- Invisible Flying Wizard
- Wall of Stone
- Solid Fog
- Dominate Person
- Hitpoint attrition from multiple encounters

Examples of possible abilities to help fighter in a game non-breaking way:
- Ability to temporarily ignore temporary ability damage
- Ability to use Perception based roll to improve chance of guessing location of invisible objects or to fight while blinded
- Ability to break magically conjured or created objects
- Ability to temporarily ignore magical effects impeding movement
- Ability to delay or weaken effects which take away chracter's control from player
- Ability to self-heal damage between encounters

1.3 Ranger

1.3.1 New subsystems: 0. There are however new class features.

Favored Enemy - this is still the biggest pain to handle. Very campaign specific and requires cooperation from GM's side to be effective. Basically, the best way to use it is still to declare Humanoid (human) to be your first and foremost enemy, with appropriate type of outsider or undead second.

Combat styles and Spellcasting still feel very awkward.

Favored Terrain - this is much better than Favored enemy, however some distinctions appear artifical:
Urban <> Underground (dungeons)
Forest <> Jungle

Also, benefits are rather hard to remember.

1.3.2 Suggested optimizations.

Favored Enemy - replace this with ability to study opponent and then gain significant advantages against. It should be personal, at will and require certain time to use.

Favored Terrain - decrease number of terrains, limit number of bonuses to 2 (skills) and 1 (combat). Increase bonuses (+2 for skills is fine, but +1 to initiative is too low to produce an effect).

Combat styles - just allow Rangers to pick combat feats from more limited pool than that of a Fighter. No more virtual feats, please. Just make them regular bonus feats.

Spellcasting - just drop it or make optional. It's not gamebreaking not to cast spells, but such limited spell access only adds to bookkeeping instead of enhancing the class.

Regards,
Ruemere

Scarab Sages

That is probably the clearest presentation for solving the Rage/Fighter dilemna. I especially like your suggestion of scraping the subsystems in favour of expanding feat options.


I agree with a lot of what you said. The 40 barbarian horde thing, is going to come up no matter what character or monster you're using if they have spells or spell like abilities a limited number of times/day.

Wait till you get to paladin.


Allow me:

Barbarian: While I LOVE the rage points and powers, and while I REALLY enjoyed putting my players against a raging hord of orcs under this new system, I must say I'm an old Werewolf the Apocalypse player that even has one tatoo of that game in my right arm. So, no wonder I like it.

However, I can see that while this system is cool, and I pretend to use it, it really isn't compatible, and it has the Player-Monster problem: You read it, and one of your players make one character with it. This eems okay until you try to use some npcs with that ability, at the point you hate it. This is why you see so many Sorcerers evil-masterminds out there: They are simpler to the dm.

The Exchange

Loved your take on the barbaian, particularly the rage feats rather than points. The barabrian player in my AoW campaign chose barbarian because it was simpler to play and he didn't have time to reserach spells etc. He plays sporadically and loves the simple approach offered by this class. Rage points nearly made him cry :). I understand this is not a normal case but I know a few players who chose fighter barbarian etc because they are simpler to use.

We ditched it completely after the first three games (across levels 13 - 14). We're currently working on a way to tie the rage powers in as bonus class progressions similar to rogue. Haven't played with it enough to comment on this as a possible alternative though.


Hmm, to help fighters resist spells, next feats could be implemented:
Will of the Hero
Prerequisite: Iron Will, BAB +6
Effect: Once per day, a character can reroll the failed will save against effects of any spell, spell-like ability or supernatural ability.

Agile Evasion
Prerequisite: Lightning Reflexes, BAB +6
Effect: Once per day when a character is hit by a melee or ranged touch attack from any spell, spell-like ability or supernatural ability, he can force the attacker to immediately reroll that attack with a -2 penalty.

Stone Body
Prerequisite: Great Fortitude, BAB +6
Effect: Once per day, a character can reroll the failed fortitude save against effects of any spell, spell-like ability or supernatural ability.

Adamantine Attack
Prerequisite: Power Attack, BAB +9
Effect: Once per day, a character can use the weapon he is holding to make a special attack against any unmoveable object or magical Force effect. He makes a Strength check (with a bonus equal to half his BAB) against that materials Break DC, or in the case of non-permanent Force magical effects against the spells's DC. If he succeeds, that object or effect if immediately destroyed.


I wouldnt go and make fighters too resistant to spells. Especially from feats. What is the spell caster to do? Dagger pokes? once the fighter shrugs off a spell the wizard has no other viable options to use against them.


CharlieRock wrote:
I wouldnt go and make fighters too resistant to spells. Especially from feats. What is the spell caster to do? Dagger pokes? once the fighter shrugs off a spell the wizard has no other viable options to use against them.

If your read it, this feats only work once per day. Wizards have more then one spell per day.


-Archangel- wrote:
CharlieRock wrote:
I wouldnt go and make fighters too resistant to spells. Especially from feats. What is the spell caster to do? Dagger pokes? once the fighter shrugs off a spell the wizard has no other viable options to use against them.
If your read it, this feats only work once per day. Wizards have more then one spell per day.

But how many fighters only need one round to incapacitate a wizard? I know quite a few. And if you were playing a wizard and ran into even two npc fighters with these feats your going to want to have your DM ban them. I've seen a lowlevel fighter in our game regular scoring 15 damage with non-crit hits. At BAB 6 this fighter can do that twice which can kill most wizards up to 6th level (whena fighter would get BAB6) in one round.


CharlieRock wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
CharlieRock wrote:
I wouldnt go and make fighters too resistant to spells. Especially from feats. What is the spell caster to do? Dagger pokes? once the fighter shrugs off a spell the wizard has no other viable options to use against them.
If your read it, this feats only work once per day. Wizards have more then one spell per day.
But how many fighters only need one round to incapacitate a wizard? I know quite a few. And if you were playing a wizard and ran into even two npc fighters with these feats your going to want to have your DM ban them. I've seen a lowlevel fighter in our game regular scoring 15 damage with non-crit hits. At BAB 6 this fighter can do that twice which can kill most wizards up to 6th level (whena fighter would get BAB6) in one round.

Look, fighter has to burn two feats to protect himself against one kind of effect once per day.

This is not something all fighters get. This is very useful for player's Fighters. And NPCs do not have to have it. Your DM is the judge of it, and his job is not to punish the players. Your DM can do worse things to the party wizard (send high SR and magic immune opponents).

Fighters can only have one of these at lvl 6, and if they focus on all of these feats they will not have other combat feats that they need.

Not to mention these feats do not give automatic success. If a fighter with Will of the Hero has +5 Will save against DC 20 spell he still needs to get 15+ on d20 on his second roll.
Also, touch attacks usually hit fighters pretty easily. Even on a repeat roll a chance is still big that fighter is going to get hit.

Only the repeat of Fort save is a really good feat, but it should be since fighters should not die from death effects often (they have too many weaknesses already).

Also these are not fighter exclusive feats.

I probably should have added that these feats do not stack with similar effects that also allow rerolls (like Slippery Mind). You cannot use both abilities/feats against the same effect.


You would save yourself a lot of work if you used action points. They do basically what these feats do. And I would rather see fighter's rely on teamwork to take out wizardly foes then have them become some kind of all-in-one impervious class. At some point somebody is going to ask why play any other class. And fighters, I have never seen a lack of anyway.

Edit:well, once a day isnt really game breaking. but it might lead people into that "hit three rooms and rest" mindset so they can recoup their uses. /shrug
I would also switch the prereq of iron will to a min wis score. I just have a hard time picturing the guy who always falls for "your shoes untied" getting some unknown burst of willpower. ... daily. LoL
And adamanine attack , I know what you mean by it, but it isnt exactly clear. Especially if you were a new player and werent familiar with Force effects and assumed it was more like a star wars term.


Thank you for your kind words. And thank you for adding your input.
I hope that designer or designers of Pathfinder will take note of this.

Regarding specific contributions to this thread:

-Archangel- wrote:
Hmm, to help fighters resist spells, next feats could be implemented[...]

My opinion is that when facing each other in a duel with no clear combat advantage, a wizard and fighter should use up about 80% resources.

Wizard resources:
- hitpoints,
- spell slots dedicated to combat spells (controller spells, direc damage spells),
- spell slots dedicated to protective spells (abjurations, conjurations),
- spell slots dedicated to mobility advantage spells (teleports, invisibility, fly).

Fighter resources:
- hitpoints,
- ability scores (exhausted by ability drain),
- mobility/reach,
- weapon attacks.

The combat, again in my opinion, should revolve around each side using abilities against each other and stripping or negating various layers of protection.
The wizard should be able to keep distance from the fighter, however the fighter should be able to try to close the distance each round.
The wizard should be able to survive at least one round against fighters onslaught, however at the cost of using up protections.
The wizard should be able to put up barriers (walls, living creatures) yet the fighter should be able to overcome them (at the resource cost).
The wizard should be able to use instant-win effects, yet the fighter should be able to delay onset of such effects or negate them (at the resource cost).

In the end, the winner should be decided by die rolls and winning tactic. Neither the fighter nor the wizard should be epected to devote their spells or slots entirely to the purpose of winning this fight. Also, there should be no assumptions as to the items used.

Assuming we want to change as little as possible, it should be possible to use your suggestions to that end, however, I would allow room for some power increase. The 1/day abilities are too limited toward 20th level.

Suggested increases:
- each reroll would come with a bonus equal to half total character level.
- each reroll could be used number of times per day, however each would come at resource cost (for example: since each of those feats represents major effort to save one's beacon, the cost would be equal to 2 points of temporary ability damage to relevant ability subsequently lowering chances for future rolls),
- adamantine attack would cost 2 points of temporary ability damage to Strength ability.

Someone may argue that Cleric with wand of Restoration would easily negate the cost. The answer here would be that each use of these feats would both decrease fighter's effectiveness, neither feat guarantees success and finally taking each feat decreases fighter allotment of feats.

Regards,
Ruemere


CharlieRock wrote:
You would save yourself a lot of work if you used action points. They do basically what these feats do. And I would rather see fighter's rely on teamwork to take out wizardly foes then have them become some kind of all-in-one impervious class. At some point somebody is going to ask why play any other class. And fighters, I have never seen a lack of anyway.

The thing is that in higher level campaigns people ask themselves what they need fighters for. And withdraw if their party wizard gets immobilized/exhausts spells... hence the term of 15 minute workday.

This is not about making fighter superior to other classes but rather bringing it a little up.

CharlieRock wrote:
Edit:well, once a day isnt really game breaking. but it might lead people into that "hit three rooms and rest" mindset so they can recoup their uses. /shrug

Check my suggestions then to Archangel's proposals.

CharlieRock wrote:
I would also switch the prereq of iron will to a min wis score. I just have a hard time picturing the guy who always falls for "your shoes untied" getting some unknown burst of willpower. ... daily.

Nah, there can be other interpretations of this particular power:

- too dumb to notice,
- too thick to be affected,
- too sturdy to care,
- "tis only a flesh wound",
- second wind,
- last ditch effort.

CharlieRock wrote:

LoL

And adamanine attack , I know what you mean by it, but it isnt exactly clear. Especially if you were a new player and werent familiar with Force effects and assumed it was more like a star wars term.

I take it you like it too? :)

Regards,
Ruemere

Scarab Sages

I think the solution is to allow the fighter to end a negative condition on their next turn, using an action to make a special save even if the effect does not allow one. This falls in line with things like hold person, but gives the fighter a bit of an edge when actually trying to end the effect. The wizard takes the fighter out for one round, the fighter gives up his round ending the effect. This would apply to any spell that has a limited duration effect, such as slow, ray of enfeeblement, but not things like blindness/deafness or bestow curse.

The fighter can sacrifice their only expendable resource - hit points - to gain a bonus on the escape save. 2 for 1 would probably work. So, to gain a +10 bonus on a save to end an effect, the fighter gives up 20 hit points. It means the spell still had an effect, the fighter has expended both time and resources, and combat continues as normal. I think this could work as either a feat or a class ability to replace bravery.

What do you think?


I think you might be on to something jal


CharlieRock wrote:

You would save yourself a lot of work if you used action points. They do basically what these feats do. And I would rather see fighter's rely on teamwork to take out wizardly foes then have them become some kind of all-in-one impervious class. At some point somebody is going to ask why play any other class. And fighters, I have never seen a lack of anyway.

Edit:well, once a day isnt really game breaking. but it might lead people into that "hit three rooms and rest" mindset so they can recoup their uses. /shrug
I would also switch the prereq of iron will to a min wis score. I just have a hard time picturing the guy who always falls for "your shoes untied" getting some unknown burst of willpower. ... daily. LoL
And adamanine attack , I know what you mean by it, but it isnt exactly clear. Especially if you were a new player and werent familiar with Force effects and assumed it was more like a star wars term.

Action Points goes against backwards compatibility. Also Jason stated that he will be only adding feats to fighters, so I decided to go along and create useful defensive feats to help fighters against charms, rays, death effects and force barriers.

Blind Fighting helps him against invisibility and some flying magical items (which are not a problem at higher levels) will help him with flying opponents.

And if you feel my description of Adamantine Attack is not good enough, please rewrite is so it is better. English is not my first language and I done it without much tinkering. Also names of the feats are results of only half a minute of thinking and can be changed if anyone comes up with anything better (should not be too hard).


Also Rumere, I do not want to give this ability to fighter to use too often. Maybe put in a sentence that allows him to do it again once more per day when his BAB is +12 or more.

Oh, yea, new feat:

Remarkable Perception
Prerequisites: Blind Fighting, BAB +6.
Effects: Experience in fighting invisible foes (or fighting while not being able to see) has left you with a knowledge to anticipate their movements. You gain an insight bonus to your Perception skill equal to your BAB when actively or passively looking (and trying to pinpoint) for anyone that is invisible to you (either because of some spell or special ability or because you are blinded). Also when actively looking for such opponents you only need spend a swift action (normally it is a move action).


Jal Dorak wrote:

I think the solution is to allow the fighter to end a negative condition on their next turn, using an action to make a special save even if the effect does not allow one. This falls in line with things like hold person, but gives the fighter a bit of an edge when actually trying to end the effect. The wizard takes the fighter out for one round, the fighter gives up his round ending the effect. This would apply to any spell that has a limited duration effect, such as slow, ray of enfeeblement, but not things like blindness/deafness or bestow curse.

The fighter can sacrifice their only expendable resource - hit points - to gain a bonus on the escape save. 2 for 1 would probably work. So, to gain a +10 bonus on a save to end an effect, the fighter gives up 20 hit points. It means the spell still had an effect, the fighter has expended both time and resources, and combat continues as normal. I think this could work as either a feat or a class ability to replace bravery.

What do you think?

Ah, I love the beauty of simplicity of this solution. The most valuable fighter resource expended, yet in exchange the fighter gets to act.

That said, I would add the following in order to allow scaling:
- the feat should be available from 11 BAB (to keep it only for high level gaming only)
- use of feat would net total class level/2. The important reason for this bonus formula is that Spell DCs and monster abilities follow pattern of, respectively, from 1 to 9 or HD/2. Also, in order to make this feat usable for multiclass or prestige class characters, the bonus should refer to character level total.
- the usage cost of the feat should be level dependent, too, since with higher levels its much easier to replenish hitpoints. My original cost of 2 points of temporary ability damage (Constitution) could be increased to 4, or, to for ease of calculation, (10 + character level total).

Ah, and to those who think this feat to be too powerful - this is intended for 11+ levels, i.e. for high level play, where DC soar to the skies, and where spellcasters wield "I win" spells with abandon.

Also, the purpose is not to overpower casters at leisure, but to protect your friendly brute from being eliminated from game with a single spell - a spellcaster can still win, it's just that it is likely to take several rounds more (and use several spells) instead of one.

Regards,
Ruemere


I have a good day, a new feat :)

Defensive Mastery
Prerequisite: Any two or more of the three feats (Will of the Hero, Agile Evasion, Stone Body), BAB +15
Effect: Each 24 hours choose one of the effects based on what feats you already have. Once chosen it cannot be changed until 24 hours has passed. This effects lasts or can be used for the whole duration.
A) if you have Will of the Hero: Any spell, spell-like or supernatural ability that affects you after you failed your Will save against it allows you a new save the next round. Even if you fail that save the effects of the spell, spell-like or supernatural ability has a halved duration.
B) if you have Agile Evasion: Any ranged or melee touch attacks that miss you have a chance to reflect to the original caster/attacker. Make a Combat Maneuver check with a +1 bonus per four character levels you have (round down) against a DC of 15+target's CMB. If you win the effect is reflected with the touch attack roll equal to your Combat Maneuver check roll. You can only reflect one such attack per round, and in the case of spells that shoot more rays at you, others just miss (if they missed originally).
C) if you have Stone Body: Any damage from weapons, spells, spell-like or supernatural abilities that would leave you dead or incapacitated (less then 0 HP) is delayed for one round. The effects (or damage) activate (is applied) at the beginning of the originators (attackers) next turn if applicable at that moment (for example: if you get the effects of Death Ward on you during the delayed round, the Finger of Death that activated this ability would no longer be able to affect you). You can only delay once per encounter.


-Archangel- wrote:
Also Rumere, I do not want to give this ability to fighter to use too often. Maybe put in a sentence that allows him to do it again once more per day when his BAB is +12 or more.[...]

+11 is a very telling point of fighter career. At 11th level specialist casters gain access to:

Cleric (6th level):
- Antilife Shell
- Harm
- Symbol of Fear
- Symbol of Persuasion

Wizard (6th level):
- Suggestion, Mass
- Symbol of Persuasion
- Forceful Hand
- Symbol of Fear
- Disintegrate
- Flesh to Stone

Precisely the spells this feat our meatshield... er, protector needs protection from.

Regards,
Ruemere


Your main problem is going to be the fighter's resources , aside from hp, are limitless. Ruemere's list has weapon attacks and reach as fighter resources. But those dont run out. All the wizard's resources are finite and will.
Why wouldnt it be backward compatible with action points? D&D3.5 had action points.
Maybe our play experience's have been drastically different. But I've never been in a high level party that was bereft a fighter. They are always around and always proving useful.
Mostly because a) the players burn through their spells quickly and have to rely on the other characters in the team (fighters) to finish out the objective, or b) they hold back for the big fight they think is coming, relying , once again, on the fighters until that big enemy shows.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

ruemere wrote:

1.1.2 Suggested optimizations.

- Replace Rage powers with [Rage Combat] feats.
- Replace new Rage versions with [Rage Combat] feats.
- Add prerequisite to each [Rage Combat] feat: usable only when Raging.
- Replace "Rage power" with "Bonus Rage Combat feat" in class feature progression.
- Make all feats usable at-will but only one at any given time.
- Make all rage feats to be distinct so that switching between various Rage powers during combat would be an interesting option for character.

Yes to this. I've been saying for some time that 'rage powers' should work like the old combat feats, and should have no points cost.

ruemere wrote:
Favored Enemy - this is still the biggest pain to handle. Very campaign specific and requires cooperation from GM's side to be effective. Basically, the best way to use it is still to declare Humanoid (human) to be your first and foremost enemy, with appropriate type of outsider or undead second.... Favored Enemy - replace this with ability to study opponent and then gain significant advantages against. It should be personal, at will and require certain time to use.

Yes to this as well. Your favored enemy should be a specific enemy you pick once per encounter, not a creature type.


I agree with the favored enemy thing. I don't really have any idea of what would be good in PF, and I don't have an idea that I use at my games.

But then, there are a lot a folks that are paid at paizo to do this, and I would simply love to see something a little less capaign dependent. Maybe you could choose your enemy at the beggining of the day or something like this. Until one good option appears, I allow the ranger player to remake his favored enemy option each time he gains a level...


CharlieRock wrote:

Your main problem is going to be the fighter's resources , aside from hp, are limitless. Ruemere's list has weapon attacks and reach as fighter resources. But those dont run out. All the wizard's resources are finite and will.

Why wouldnt it be backward compatible with action points? D&D3.5 had action points.
Maybe our play experience's have been drastically different. But I've never been in a high level party that was bereft a fighter. They are always around and always proving useful.
Mostly because a) the players burn through their spells quickly and have to rely on the other characters in the team (fighters) to finish out the objective, or b) they hold back for the big fight they think is coming, relying , once again, on the fighters until that big enemy shows.

Weapons and armor have hp, although destroying gear is and should be frowned upon at most tables.

What is the wizard doing that he's burning through 20+ spell slots like gravy at high levels? And that's not counting bonus slots from high intelligence and SLAs from the 3.P beta wizard class.

I mean, yes, if you have an encounter every 15 minutes for 16 hours each adventuring day the wizard will run out of spells. Those are hardly assumed conditions. The Fighter will also run out of hp and the party out of healing resources to replace them. That 'fighters can go all day' is a myth - they're dependent on caster healing resources to keep going, which are primarily from spell slots...

Scarab Sages

ruemere wrote:


- Increased bookkeeping... (sorry, going to vent a bit) Ye Gods, I need to say this: try to use a horde of 40 Barbarians in Pathfinder Beta. Whoever came up with this concept, should be made to run such battle 3 times a day until they apologize for not thinking the concept though.

I don't understand this complaint. The fact that they have lots of options doesn't mean they have to use them. If I were to run a horde of 40 barbarians, I'd figure out how many continuous max-power rage they could do, and just assume they did it unless interfered with. If I run a horde of 40 fighters, I'm not going to tweak each of their power attacks individually either. ;)

Named NPCs/leaders/whatnot might get the option of using their rage points for other things, but in any group that size most of the members are mooks and so can use a standardized if suboptimal battle plan.


Owen Anderson wrote:
ruemere wrote:


- Increased bookkeeping... (sorry, going to vent a bit) Ye Gods, I need to say this: try to use a horde of 40 Barbarians in Pathfinder Beta. Whoever came up with this concept, should be made to run such battle 3 times a day until they apologize for not thinking the concept though.

I don't understand this complaint. The fact that they have lots of options doesn't mean they have to use them. If I were to run a horde of 40 barbarians, I'd figure out how many continuous max-power rage they could do, and just assume they did it unless interfered with. If I run a horde of 40 fighters, I'm not going to tweak each of their power attacks individually either. ;)

Named NPCs/leaders/whatnot might get the option of using their rage points for other things, but in any group that size most of the members are mooks and so can use a standardized if suboptimal battle plan.

(warning: sense of humor and ability to take some flaming required)

Dude, oh dude... there is so much wrongness in your post that my eyes water, my head spins and my vision goes dark.
On a more serious note, you're entirely entitled to your opinion, however, if you feel like acknowledging concepts outlined in several next paragraphs, please do read on. Otherwise, I heartily recommend skipping this post and this thread, as per your suggestion, whether my proposals are incorporated or not, they will make no difference to you.

Onto the stuff:

1. The point of the new system is to introduce new class features and new resource management system aka Rage Points. Since the powers require expenditure of resources separately for each activation (and sometimes for deactivation)) of each power, every little raging barbarian needs to keep track of their point pool. It's like keeping score of additional set of hipoints per character in addition to tracking currently assigned power.

2. Yes, it's possible to overrule the thing so that every barbarian in the horde activates the power at the same time but... in a narrow corridor only some of the horde members will activate the powers.
Depending on situation, each member of the horde may decide to activate different powers due to situational positioning.

3. Different powers can be ON at the same time. Again, circumstances dictate their usage and because of this uniform approach is likely to be severely suboptimal.

4. Finally, the cardinal response to "but you can houserule this": this can be simplified now, at the open test stage. It would be neater to do that before we reach final version instead of houseruling simplifications later. Other benefits - fewer compatibility problems, some players may be actually happy (class becomes easier to learn while preserving its uniqueness).

Regards,
Ruemere


Squirrelloid wrote:
What is the wizard doing that he's burning through 20+ spell slots like gravy at high levels?

Casting at a rate of one per round. Laugh. I've seen it happen. Invariably they ran out of spells pretty quickly. Who do you think they made Reserve feats for? (the ones where you can cast a psuedo-spell that uses up no slot as long as you have one slot in 'storage')


CharlieRock wrote:
Squirrelloid wrote:
What is the wizard doing that he's burning through 20+ spell slots like gravy at high levels?
Casting at a rate of one per round. Laugh. I've seen it happen. Invariably they ran out of spells pretty quickly. Who do you think they made Reserve feats for? (the ones where you can cast a psuedo-spell that uses up no slot as long as you have one slot in 'storage')

Even so, the average high level encounter lasts all of 3 rounds, tops. (That is, 3 rounds of meaningful combat - there may be stunned monsters to coup de grace). If you have more than 6 encounters in a day that's fairly unusual. So 3 rounds x 6 encounters = 18 rounds of casting time. Even assuming you have 18 quickened spells on hand to cast 2/round, you still haven't exhausted all of a high level wizard's bag of tricks.

A 15th level wizard, counting bonus spells from high int, has ~33 spells per day, plus 14 SLAs in pathfinder (alternately, +8 spells for being a specialist in not pathfinder). So even if we assume that 14 spells/SLAs get used out of combat, that still leaves almost 2 spells/SLAs per round of combat you expect to fight. And as no one prepares that many quickened spells...

I suppose your wizard might be wasting time on direct damage spells. That could make it take longer than 3 rounds. Of course, that's when you start expecting party members to die, because the party can't really expect to last much more than 3 rounds either.


Squirrelloid wrote:
CharlieRock wrote:
Squirrelloid wrote:
What is the wizard doing that he's burning through 20+ spell slots like gravy at high levels?
Casting at a rate of one per round. Laugh. I've seen it happen. Invariably they ran out of spells pretty quickly. Who do you think they made Reserve feats for? (the ones where you can cast a psuedo-spell that uses up no slot as long as you have one slot in 'storage')
Even so, the average high level encounter lasts all of 3 rounds, tops.

False. Just patently false.

Your game may take three meaningful rounds per encounter. Mine don't. At low levels they do, but the higher the levels the longer the combats last. Real-time as well as game-time.
When we ran the Spawn of Shurpanaka (levels 10-12 and we did it at 12), there were at least three encounters that went 5 rounds or more plus about two or three little mini-encounters that took about 2-3 rounds.
And that was one of those Legends & Lairs mini-adventures! Not one of them Dungeon Crawl Classics that have encounters which can last five or longer all over the place (DCC#19 Volcano Caves springs to mind).
And besides that, regardless of encounter length, there is only going to be so many "useful" spells before your just throwing lowl level stuff that doesnt do much good. Flare ceased being a helpful spell early on. Many others joined it as the levels increased.

Dark Archive

ruemere wrote:

- Increased bookkeeping... (sorry, going to vent a bit) Ye Gods, I need to say this: try to use a horde of 40 Barbarians in Pathfinder Beta. Whoever came up with this concept, should be made to run such battle 3 times a day until they apologize for not thinking the concept though.

Uh, try to use an army of 40 spellcasters in 3E, and the same bookkeeping problem arises -- who has cast which spell, and which spellcasters have how many spells left, and what is the duration/DC for level, and which casters have which metamagic feats... throw in spellcasters of varying levels, and it's a nightmare.

You do keep track of every enemy's HPs, right? How about including their Rage Points under the HP tally -- it would make a horde of 40 barbarians way easier to run. At least it's vastly easier to run than an encounter with several spellcasters...

Scarab Sages

ruemere wrote:
... stuff ...

I was going to respond point-by-point, but then I realized it was going to be simpler to write an overall response.

First, I want to point out that what I'm suggesting is emphatically not a houserule. It's completely within the realm of options the barbarians have under the RAW. They're just not choosing to use all their options.

To present an analogy, when I have high-level NPCs, I don't account for all of their 1st level spell slots. I don't track every single skill point. In my campaign, if you encounter a group of 4 cultists, all four have the same spell list prepared. Every thug in the band (except perhaps the leader or a named NPC) gets essentially the same stats. This isn't changing the rules, it's just simplification for the DM's benefit.

Returning to the barbarians, the underlying point (pun semi-intended) is that a Pathfinder barbarian who chooses to spend all his points on raging for as long as possible is functionally equivalent (modulo possible minor differences in duration) from a standard 3.5e barbarian. If you can run a horde of 40 3.5e barbarians, you can run an horde of 40 Pathfinder barbarians, albeit ones that are not necessarily making optimal tactical choices.

By taking the "easy" strategy, you have a horde that is just as easy to run as the 3.5e version, but doesn't gain you the tactical advantages the options would have granted. This seems like a fair trade-off to me: more options (and thus more powerful via micro-control of them) requires more work. It's your choice which you care about more. In my experience, for anything that I have 40 of, the optimality of each individual's tactics is immaterial. I don't want my BBEG doing stupid things, but there's only one of him. :-p


Jal Dorak wrote:

I think the solution is to allow the fighter to end a negative condition on their next turn, using an action to make a special save even if the effect does not allow one. This falls in line with things like hold person, but gives the fighter a bit of an edge when actually trying to end the effect. The wizard takes the fighter out for one round, the fighter gives up his round ending the effect. This would apply to any spell that has a limited duration effect, such as slow, ray of enfeeblement, but not things like blindness/deafness or bestow curse.

The fighter can sacrifice their only expendable resource - hit points - to gain a bonus on the escape save. 2 for 1 would probably work. So, to gain a +10 bonus on a save to end an effect, the fighter gives up 20 hit points. It means the spell still had an effect, the fighter has expended both time and resources, and combat continues as normal. I think this could work as either a feat or a class ability to replace bravery.

What do you think?

Jal, this is just the sort of thing I was thinking. I would limit it to effects that involve will saves, however.

-Steve


This topic has been rendered redundant by "[Design Focus] Barbarian Rage". Replying for the sake of completeness.

Asgetrion, Yesterday, 10:44 PM wrote:
Uh, try to use an army of 40 spellcasters in 3E, and the same bookkeeping problem arises[...]At least it's vastly easier to run than an encounter with several spellcasters...

Binary abilities (ON/OFF with no cost) are easier to track than Power-Pool with Variable Resource Cost ones. I like Barbarians having more options, just not at the cost of additional resource management.

That's why my opinion is that we should avoid making Barbarians bookkeeping equivalent of spellcasters. Points-Be-Gone is one of the ways to keep it this way.

As a side note, I have played in AD&D using rules variant of mana pools instead of spell slots. It did not help to speed up the game and so we abandoned it (long time ago).

Owen Anderson (Pathfinder Subscriber), Yesterday, 11:17 PM wrote:
[...]By taking the "easy" strategy, you have a horde that is just as easy to run as the 3.5e version, but doesn't gain you the tactical advantages the options would have granted. This seems like a fair trade-off to me: more options (and thus more powerful via micro-control of them) requires more work. It's your choice which you care about more. In my experience, for anything that I have 40 of, the optimality of each individual's tactics is immaterial. I don't want my BBEG doing stupid things, but there's only one of him. :-p

Ah, but the more options need not come at the cost of increased complexity. Please, do have a look at Arcana Evolved way of doing things - templated spells, abilities and weapons, spells castable at various power levels, spell slots spendable in three ways, numerous class abilities.

All neatly wrapped in a simple unified system, yet each of the classes is unique.

If you build Barbarians so that they can freely choose, at the immediate cost of action (swift action) and make abilities simple and binary, you will keep your options with no overhead. Power pools are good for computer games, where math stuff and point totals are remembered by helpful application while my solution, similar in spirit to Arcana Evloved one, does it for tabletop.

Regards,
Ruemere

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Design Forums / Classes: Barbarian, Fighter, and Ranger / Barbarians, Fighters and Rangers - playtest + analysis + suggestions All Messageboards
Recent threads in Classes: Barbarian, Fighter, and Ranger