Was one of the big fears people had when they announced the Barbarian was getting working-over in Unchained. After all, Paizo couldn't have a powerful non-spellcasting character.It's not true, though. At least not in this regard. The only 'powerful combination' that existed before this book you give up is Reckless Abandon + Come And Get Me which was always way too much emphasis on offense and thus a bad call.
More worrying is the absence of Spell Sunder, but given Sunder Enchantment's continued presence, that appears to be a typo.
Yeah, the panic over Paizo planning to nerf the barbarian was clearly overblown. Though I do still think that out of all the reworks in Unchained, the barbarian was by far the least necessary.
Spell Sunder better not be gone. It was basically the coolest rage power, on both a thematic and mechanical level.Oh, agreed. And, once again, I very much doubt it's intentional given Sunder Enchantment's continued presence (for reasons both thematic and mechanical).
Bad news.
Spell sunder is gone.
|
Spell Sunder better not be gone. It was basically the coolest rage power, on both a thematic and mechanical level.Oh, agreed. And, once again, I very much doubt it's intentional given Sunder Enchantment's continued presence (for reasons both thematic and mechanical).Bad news.
Spell sunder is gone.
Upon what do you base this conclusion?
Upon what do you base this conclusion?Spell Sunder better not be gone. It was basically the coolest rage power, on both a thematic and mechanical level.Oh, agreed. And, once again, I very much doubt it's intentional given Sunder Enchantment's continued presence (for reasons both thematic and mechanical).Bad news.
Spell sunder is gone.
Because I can has pdf.
Spell sunder isn't printed in the new set of rage powers, and it isn't in the list of Ultimate Combat rage powers that are stated to be usable unaltered.
Sunder enchantment is listed as usable unaltered, however.
|
|
Because I can has pdf.
So can I. :)
Spell sunder isn't printed in the new set of rage powers, and it isn't in the list of Ultimate Combat rage powers that are stated to be usable unaltered.
Sunder enchantment is listed as usable unaltered, however.
Uh...given that Sunder Enchantment has Spell Sunder as a prerequisite, these statements are mutually incompatible. You can't use Sunder Enchantment unaltered if Spell Sunder doesn't exist. It's like having Weapon Specialization on a similar list of Feats while Weapon Focus isn't...it just doesn't work.
Which is why I'm saying it's likely an error of some sort.
Because I can has pdf.So can I. :)
Spell sunder isn't printed in the new set of rage powers, and it isn't in the list of Ultimate Combat rage powers that are stated to be usable unaltered.
Sunder enchantment is listed as usable unaltered, however.
Uh...given that Sunder Enchantment has Spell Sunder as a prerequisite, these statements are mutually incompatible. You can't use Sunder Enchantment unaltered if Spell Sunder doesn't exist. It's like having Weapon Specialization on a similar list of Feats while Weapon Focus isn't...it just doesn't work.
Which is why I'm saying it's likely an error of some sort.
I didn't notice the prereq to Sunder Enchantment.
Realizing that, I think you are correct, especially given that that section is sloppily edited (it calls Ultimate Combat Ultimate Campaign instead).
I personally suspect that the person writing that list thought that spell sunder was too good and sunder enchantment was more balanced (but didn't notice sunder enchantment's prereqs). It is entirely possible I am not giving the Paizo staff enough credit, however.
I've looked over the Unchained Barbarian, and while I think it's still strong, I think the normal barbarian was strictly better. The one thing I think the UBarbarian has is that it is more simple to run.
The loss of a few key rage power such as Spell Sunder and others makes it a deal breaker. As does the fact that you can have only once stance active and that it takes a move action to enter. I have so many better things to do with a move action most of the time, that I'm not interested in it. If they had made it a swift, I would have been fine with it.
As it is, I'm unlikely to ever want to play a UBarbarian. About the only thing I really like is the hp bonus being true temporary hit points. Such that if you only take an amount of damage equal to your temporary hit points and combat ends...
you end your rage
have a minute before the next combat
it's like you never took damage
I've looked over the Unchained Barbarian, and while I think it's still strong, I think the normal barbarian was strictly better. The one thing I think the UBarbarian has is that it is more simple to run.
The loss of a few key rage power such as Spell Sunder and others makes it a deal breaker. As does the fact that you can have only once stance active and that it takes a move action to enter. I have so many better things to do with a move action most of the time, that I'm not interested in it. If they had made it a swift, I would have been fine with it.
As it is, I'm unlikely to ever want to play a UBarbarian. About the only thing I really like is the hp bonus being true temporary hit points. Such that if you only take an amount of damage equal to your temporary hit points and combat ends...
you end your rage
have a minute before the next combat
it's like you never took damage
Yeah, about where I stand on it. The Unchained Barbarian isn't a the massive nerfing I feared it would be, but about the only positive I see if the barbarian getting temporary HP to fix the old "Instant death when you stop raging" problem. And a lot of the other changes just baffle me: replacing the strength bonus with a straight + to hit and damage because the math was "too hard." Whaaat?
Stances are a nice idea, but they didn't require "unchaining" the barbarian. And honestly, stances seem more like something that should be a general martial feat line than exclusive to the barbarian.
I've looked over the Unchained Barbarian, and while I think it's still strong, I think the normal barbarian was strictly better. The one thing I think the UBarbarian has is that it is more simple to run.
The loss of a few key rage power such as Spell Sunder and others makes it a deal breaker. As does the fact that you can have only once stance active and that it takes a move action to enter. I have so many better things to do with a move action most of the time, that I'm not interested in it. If they had made it a swift, I would have been fine with it.
As it is, I'm unlikely to ever want to play a UBarbarian. About the only thing I really like is the hp bonus being true temporary hit points. Such that if you only take an amount of damage equal to your temporary hit points and combat ends...
you end your rage
have a minute before the next combat
it's like you never took damageYeah, about where I stand on it. The Unchained Barbarian isn't a the massive nerfing I feared it would be, but about the only positive I see if the barbarian getting temporary HP to fix the old "Instant death when you stop raging" problem. And a lot of the other changes just baffle me: replacing the strength bonus with a straight + to hit and damage because the math was "too hard." Whaaat?
Stances are a nice idea, but they didn't require "unchaining" the barbarian. And honestly, stances seem more like something that should be a general martial feat line than exclusive to the barbarian.
I agree, the stances really didn't need a new Barbarian class to use. And they should probably be generally available to martial characters. Still, the move action activation kills stances for me more than anything else.
|
Because I can has pdf.So can I. :)
Spell sunder isn't printed in the new set of rage powers, and it isn't in the list of Ultimate Combat rage powers that are stated to be usable unaltered.
Sunder enchantment is listed as usable unaltered, however.
Uh...given that Sunder Enchantment has Spell Sunder as a prerequisite, these statements are mutually incompatible. You can't use Sunder Enchantment unaltered if Spell Sunder doesn't exist. It's like having Weapon Specialization on a similar list of Feats while Weapon Focus isn't...it just doesn't work.
Which is why I'm saying it's likely an error of some sort.
I didn't notice the prereq to Sunder Enchantment.
Realizing that, I think you are correct, especially given that that section is sloppily edited (it calls Ultimate Combat Ultimate Campaign instead).
I personally suspect that the person writing that list thought that spell sunder was too good and sunder enchantment was more balanced (but didn't notice sunder enchantment's prereqs). It is entirely possible I am not giving the Paizo staff enough credit, however.
The ability to suppress an ongoing spell effect has been wrapped into Witch Hunter. If you confirm a crit you suppress the effect for one round. Much easier math than the original Spell Sunder. I think the intent is likely that Witch Hunter should be the prereq for Sunder Enchantment. Probably gonna need an errata or FAQ.
I REALLY don't get where all the "But Core Barbarian mast is so haaard!" is coming from. What makes CMB vs CMD so mind-boggling compared to Attack vs AC?
|
Couple of items I missed earlier:
- Nerf to Combat Maneuvers (although there is a '+ to maneuvers' stance you can take)
- Nerf to Strength Based Skills (Unless you take the appropriate Rage Power). Shockingly, I don't remember seeing a '+ to skill checks' stance...
I'm starting to wonder why they didn't just say '+2/+3/+4 to any roll you add your Strength or Constitution to (except Hit Dice)' but I guess that's part of the problem they were trying to fix (everyone forgetting to add their rage bonus to Fort Saves and opposed checks).
Other 'Odds and Ends':
Looking over the 'two weapon' rules again, I see that the revised class isn't really a buff: If you qualify for Two-Weapon Fighting then you qualify for Double Slice anyway...
The only reasons I can see to use 'reckless stance' are:
- The 'to hit' bonus applies to all attacks (like Bows), unlike 'Accurate Stance' (which is melee and thrown attacks only). Beware the reckless raging archer!
- There is a follow-up power that lets you share your stance with allies within 30 feet. It's a bit expensive on rage powers but it might be good in certain parties
A version of Spell Sunder has been rolled into the revised 'Witch Hunter' power, so it's technically easier to get now
Personally, I'm thinking you should be able to activate one of your stances for free when you enter rage unless you exited your previous rage less than a minute ago (in which case you keep whichever stance you had when that rage ended).
Being rolled into witch hunter as a bonus on critical hits means spell sunder loses a lot of it's utility. Now all it's good for is removing buffs on enemies you're attacking, when before you could use it to knock spells off your allies, break battlefield control spells, etc.
Plus now instead of tactical option you can apply when you need it, spell sunder is totally at the whims of the dice gods.
I REALLY don't get where all the "But Core Barbarian mast is so haaard!" is coming from. What makes CMB vs CMD so mind-boggling compared to Attack vs AC?Actually, the unchained barbarian's bonus to attack rolls from raging will improve your combat maneuver bonus as well. Remember, you add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects, so long as they are applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver.
This is true, but I have no idea why you felt the need to explain it to me when it had nothing to do with anything I said.
|
My biggest peeve, is the Unchained Barbarian is worse with a Bow.
When I first read through, my thoughts went right towards my Primal Hunter Barbarian.
I do note that now, you can go for a Dex focused melee Barbarian, with little trouble.
You can very easily go with a Fencing Grace/Slashing Grace Unchained Barbarian.
My Primal Hunter, will still have to stay unchained, as is, and keep her Adaptive Composite Longbow.
Contributor
|
Oh! Even better. Other than the sorry state of the swashbuckler the incompatibility of the Skald and the Barbarian was the most frustrating things from the ACG for me, so I'm happy that got fixed.
I am of similar opinion. Unfortunately, this happened. :(
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh! Even better. Other than the sorry state of the swashbuckler the incompatibility of the Skald and the Barbarian was the most frustrating things from the ACG for me, so I'm happy that got fixed.I am of similar opinion. Unfortunately, this happened. :(
sigh
While the Unchained barb won't be able to pull off bowbarian, I still like it better. I never liked the majority of the regular barbarian's powers, or rage cycling. Between fixing those and simplifying rage, I'm much more likely to play barbarians than before. Plus, now a proper sword & axe barbarian is practical.
Loving what I hear so far. The spell smashing ability would be easy enough to add in, and raging vitality is a simple edit. When you take something and "unchain" it, I expect there to be some quirks.
Thank you for a tasteful fix to rage cycling, and rebalancing the powers.
I'm going to be watching threads to see what issues crop up (or don't), as I suspect there may be some pieces that quirk a bit when put together.
I agree, the stances really didn't need a new Barbarian class to use. And they should probably be generally available to martial characters. Still, the move action activation kills stances for me more than anything else.I've looked over the Unchained Barbarian, and while I think it's still strong, I think the normal barbarian was strictly better. The one thing I think the UBarbarian has is that it is more simple to run.
The loss of a few key rage power such as Spell Sunder and others makes it a deal breaker. As does the fact that you can have only once stance active and that it takes a move action to enter. I have so many better things to do with a move action most of the time, that I'm not interested in it. If they had made it a swift, I would have been fine with it.
As it is, I'm unlikely to ever want to play a UBarbarian. About the only thing I really like is the hp bonus being true temporary hit points. Such that if you only take an amount of damage equal to your temporary hit points and combat ends...
you end your rage
have a minute before the next combat
it's like you never took damageYeah, about where I stand on it. The Unchained Barbarian isn't a the massive nerfing I feared it would be, but about the only positive I see if the barbarian getting temporary HP to fix the old "Instant death when you stop raging" problem. And a lot of the other changes just baffle me: replacing the strength bonus with a straight + to hit and damage because the math was "too hard." Whaaat?
Stances are a nice idea, but they didn't require "unchaining" the barbarian. And honestly, stances seem more like something that should be a general martial feat line than exclusive to the barbarian.
Like most people I am not privileged in knowing the designer's creative process.
So maybe, the stances were introduced to allow players to make decisions in game, there has been a lot of criticism about how martial characters are simple to play, for the inexperienced gamer 'just hit things,' and stances and stamina-feats is shifting martial characters role to the 'thinking persons' character.
I could see Ragnar Lothbrok (Vikings t.v series), shifting between the guarded stance and the accuracy stance.
The Unchained Barbarian was ostensibly made to be simpler to understand, though. Juggling the action economy problems stances bring to the table is a negative on that front.
Like most people I am not privileged in knowing the designer's creative process.
So maybe, the stances were introduced to allow players to make decisions in game, there has been a lot of criticism about how martial characters are simple to play, for the inexperienced gamer 'just hit things,' and stances and stamina-feats is shifting martial characters role to the 'thinking persons' character.
I could see Ragnar Lothbrok (Vikings t.v series), shifting between the guarded stance and the accuracy stance.
Stances in and of themselves are a fine idea (I love ToB/Path of War's version of them). The issue is that they're not an especially barbarian thing (as opposed to a general martial thing), and that they don't even come close to offsetting all the stealth-nerfs slapped onto the Barbarian.
Stances in and of themselves are a fine idea (I love ToB/Path of War's version of them). The issue is that they're not an especially barbarian thing (as opposed to a general martial thing), and that they don't even come close to offsetting all the stealth-nerfs slapped onto the Barbarian.Like most people I am not privileged in knowing the designer's creative process.
So maybe, the stances were introduced to allow players to make decisions in game, there has been a lot of criticism about how martial characters are simple to play, for the inexperienced gamer 'just hit things,' and stances and stamina-feats is shifting martial characters role to the 'thinking persons' character.
I could see Ragnar Lothbrok (Vikings t.v series), shifting between the guarded stance and the accuracy stance.
Stealth nerfs?
Stealth nerfs?Stances in and of themselves are a fine idea (I love ToB/Path of War's version of them). The issue is that they're not an especially barbarian thing (as opposed to a general martial thing), and that they don't even come close to offsetting all the stealth-nerfs slapped onto the Barbarian.Like most people I am not privileged in knowing the designer's creative process.
So maybe, the stances were introduced to allow players to make decisions in game, there has been a lot of criticism about how martial characters are simple to play, for the inexperienced gamer 'just hit things,' and stances and stamina-feats is shifting martial characters role to the 'thinking persons' character.
I could see Ragnar Lothbrok (Vikings t.v series), shifting between the guarded stance and the accuracy stance.
Losing stuff like spell sunder and Come and Get Me hurts, even if they've been replaced by "simpler" (read less powerful) versions. Not to mention improved strength was better than +to hit and damage, but that needed to be changed because strength is "too complicated."
Losing stuff like spell sunder and Come and Get Me hurts, even if they've been replaced by "simpler" (read less powerful) versions. Not to mention improved strength was better than +to hit and damage, but that needed to be changed because strength is "too complicated."Stealth nerfs?Stances in and of themselves are a fine idea (I love ToB/Path of War's version of them). The issue is that they're not an especially barbarian thing (as opposed to a general martial thing), and that they don't even come close to offsetting all the stealth-nerfs slapped onto the Barbarian.Like most people I am not privileged in knowing the designer's creative process.
So maybe, the stances were introduced to allow players to make decisions in game, there has been a lot of criticism about how martial characters are simple to play, for the inexperienced gamer 'just hit things,' and stances and stamina-feats is shifting martial characters role to the 'thinking persons' character.
I could see Ragnar Lothbrok (Vikings t.v series), shifting between the guarded stance and the accuracy stance.
I kind of agree, (especially when performing maneuvers) temporary hit points is a significant boon though.
There are no stealth nerfs though, unless I'm missing something,
Like most people I am not privileged in knowing the designer's creative process.
So maybe, the stances were introduced to allow players to make decisions in game, there has been a lot of criticism about how martial characters are simple to play, for the inexperienced gamer 'just hit things,' and stances and stamina-feats is shifting martial characters role to the 'thinking persons' character.
I could see Ragnar Lothbrok (Vikings t.v series), shifting between the guarded stance and the accuracy stance.
Realistically, not many Barbarians would switch. It's not conducive to doing so in the middle of a fight, and it'll eat into your rage powers very, very quickly if you want to get the upgraded stances. And since Accurate has two very good ones... you probably do. Guarded's upgrades are okay at best, unfortunately.
So it's a decision, but more likely it's a decision on level-up, not during a battle.
Yeah, I agree, especially at high levels. And converting the move action (for stances) to a swift action at 7th-9th seems like an obvious choice that makes sense.
The Vital Strike feat tree takes out some of the sting of the move tax of stances, however the Barbarian doesn't have many feats to pay that high of a tax.
There is at least the nerf that two-handed weapon no longer really benefit from rage they way they used to. Before the bonus to strength would then get multiplied by 1.5. Now, rage adds a flat bonus to damage. Furious courageous weapons no longer work like they used to.
There are several small decreases in the barbarians potency.
There are no stealth nerfs though, unless I'm missing something.
I believe you are. First off, rage not granting a Strength bonus anymore is a big deal. It used to either balance out or overtake the penalty to AC as far as CMD was concerned. Plus, it was relevant for Strength ability/skill checks or lifting heavy loads, which was useful both in AND out of combat. Two-handed weapons and mighty composite longbows also benefited more from the old version. Not getting these morale bonuses also means that the courageous enchant is suddenly not all that good for barbarians. Lastly, we're now losing out on a +2 to +4 Fortitude saving throw bonus when in rage. None of this is cool at all. Temp hit points is nice, but that's about the only good thing from this new version of rage. Considering new rage doesn't stack with skald's Inspired Rage and there's virtually nothing else that it COULD stack with to make this worth it, I have to wonder why they did a full heart-transplant when all the patient required was a flu shot.
I'm looking through the rage powers now to see precisely what changed, but so far I'm not optimistic. I've already spotted a couple instances where there's a questionable 'trade-off' or it's outright worse than it was before-hand.
In that case there is no reason to use the unchained barbarian. It's a straight downgrade to a balanced class. Just houserule it and give the upgraded talents and most of of the stance talents to the regular barbarian.No reason to not take Come and Get Me instead of Taunting Stance, since they come at the same level and you probably have some other stance already.The unchained barbarian can't take Come and Get Me. The unchained rage powers replace all of the rage powers from the CRB, APG, and UC except for those listed in the "Unmodified Rage Powers" sidebar. (The sidebar states this explicitly.)
Actually that sidebar says nothing about the non-replaced Core and UC Rage Powers.
The interpretation that makes the most sense until that box is FAQd is that the listed APG and Ultimate Campaign rage powers are the legal powers from said book. That the Rage Powers detailed in Unchained replace Rage powers of the same name in Core+Ultimate Combat. Also that Rage Powers from ACG and other books are still legal.
|
|
unexpected strike is pretty much going to be your level 8 rage power as they removed the once per rage clause.
Eh, they added the limitation that it only works if the target is the only opponent you threaten. That prevents it from being too useful for characters with a large threatened area (from a reach weapon, being enlarged, etc). I expect it will still come up more often, but not enough to be a no-brainer choice.
You could make a tiny dex-based barbarian who has 0 reach and has to enter his opponent's square to fight. =D
Actually Come and get me got turned into a stance called Taunting Stance. Other than being a stance it does the exact same thing.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually Come and get me got turned into a stance called Taunting Stance. Other than being a stance it does the exact same thing.
Yup. And given that the only power that's now a Stance you could combine with it previously was Reckless Abandon and that combination was verging on suicidal...it's really not a meaningful nerf.
So, the only real ways Barbarians got weaker are as follows:
1. No more Courageous weapons. Ah, well.
2. Possibly no more Spell Sunder.
3. Two-handed weapons do slightly less damage (eventually a whole 2 points less).
4. No Fort Save bonus.
5. No more Rage Cycling.
6. Technically, the minute-long Fatigue, though it'll almost never actually matter.
Here are the ways that they got stronger:
1. All powers that used to Rage Cycle are weaker, but either always-on or Stances. That's a net win most times, since Cycling took significant effort.
2. Superstition is now a competence bonus and Rage's bonuses are untyped. This is much better synergy in several important ways (the most obvious being that Superstition and the Rage bonus to Will Saves now stack, and both now stack with Good Hope or Heroism).
3. Several of the stances are amazing. A flat bonus to accuracy? Why yes, I would like that. Or the one for damage.
4. Temporary Hit Points. That's so much nicer than everyone having to grab Raging Vitality or Diehard or just die when they go down.
5. Non two-handed builds (TWF for example) just got alot better and more viable, which is shiny.
While no real net change, it's also worth noting that Superstition no longer applies to supernatural abilities, but also no longer forces you to save vs. spell-like abilities, only actual spells.
That's...really not looking like a huge change for the worse with the exception of the loss of Spell Sunder. Which is the easiest thing in the world to add back in (unless you're in PFS...in which case you can just use the standard Barbarian).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually Come and get me got turned into a stance called Taunting Stance. Other than being a stance it does the exact same thing.Yup. And given that the only power that's now a Stance you could combine with it previously was Reckless Abandon and that combination was verging on suicidal...it's really not a meaningful nerf.
So, the only real ways Barbarians got weaker are as follows:
1. No more Courageous weapons. Ah, well.
2. Possibly no more Spell Sunder.
3. Two-handed weapons do slightly less damage (eventually a whole 2 points less).
4. No Fort Save bonus.
5. No more Rage Cycling.
6. Technically, the minute-long Fatigue, though it'll almost never actually matter.Here are the ways that they got stronger:
1. All powers that used to Rage Cycle are weaker, but either always-on or Stances. That's a net win most times, since Cycling took significant effort.
2. Superstition is now a competence bonus and Rage's bonuses are untyped. This is much better synergy in several important ways (the most obvious being that Superstition and the Rage bonus to Will Saves now stack, and both now stack with Good Hope or Heroism).
3. Several of the stances are amazing. A flat bonus to accuracy? Why yes, I would like that. Or the one for damage.
4. Temporary Hit Points. That's so much nicer than everyone having to grab Raging Vitality or Diehard or just die when they go down.
5. Non two-handed builds (TWF for example) just got alot better and more viable, which is shiny.While no real net change, it's also worth noting that Superstition no longer applies to supernatural abilities, but also no longer forces you to save vs. spell-like abilities, only actual spells.
That's...really not looking like a huge change for the worse with the exception of the loss of Spell Sunder. Which is the easiest thing in the world to add back in (unless you're in PFS...in which case you can just use the standard Barbarian).
Agreed,
The Unchained Barbarian is pretty good, there are much bigger problems in the Pathfinder game that is worth criticising.
They lose a few things, but temporary hit points more than makes up for it. Very powerful, 5 battles with Rage and that is like an extra 100 hp for a 10th level Barbarian.
Really, I'd say the Barbarian's gains are at best equal to his losses. But moreso than that, the big issue for me is that it all feels so incredibly ... unneeded. The Barbarian did not need unchaining. Being unchained has not made the Barbarian a better class in any way. It's gained a couple new good things, lost more good things it used to have, and the only real goal seems to have been to suck out any of the class's uniqueness and make it conform to the standardized Paizo Class Template.
Hmm tiefling Dex based Barb with Beast totem and Maw alternate Racial could be fun, pick up an Agile AoMF along the way.
The Urban Barbarian was already a very strong archetype for those who wanted to be a dex-based barb, the concept is nothing new.
But at least now you still get a temp HP and Will save bonus.
And miss out on all the benefits of boosted up dexterity (initiative, AC, reflex saves, etc)
There is a rage power to begin raging before Initiative/surprise rounds....
Also I don't get the people who think Unchained was supposed to buff Barbarians. Previously it was a$$ backwards rulings and weird oddball cases that made them the best martial. Now they actually seem to fit into the game more.