| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
ITT I learned that immersion and verisimilitude aren't major priorities for many around here.
I love the Barbarian because the Barbarian does awesome things.
"Armor? What the f%#% is armor? Who needs steel when you have the skin of a dragon?"
"I literally eat magic for breakfast."
"The Fly spell pisses me off. It makes me so angry that I grow my own damn wings."
The UBarbarian is significantly less geared towards being awesome. It was changed to be more in line with the Fighter in terms of being as simplistic as is it is boring; I know this may surprise you as the kind of person who can be elitist about being casual but often times the things that make a class very strong are directly tied to the things that make the class cool.
|
Not strictly true. You don't get the THP back if you drop your rage and rage again within a minute. That would be the best effect of it, giving you huge increases to durability if you cycled every round, but it only gives you a very slight increase to longevity. If you're doing 5 encounters a day averaging CR = APL in a 4 person party for that assumption, you're saving 175 gp of 5450 earned per day. So... 3.2% of your individual income. Yay?
The 175gp figure was 4 fights a day, five would be 235 gp. And yeah, it's a small amount on any individual day, but over, say, 5 days, you've saved over 1k. Assume you level then, at 11th, the savings jump to 28 charges per fight (due to Greater Rage, assumes 33 HP of damage per fight), or 420 gp. 5 days of that and we're talking another 2100. So 3k over two levels. At 10th-11th level 3k isn't nothing.
It's not a super flashy bonus or anything, but it's there and it's a nice side benefit there from day one. I mean, assuming five days to level at 5 encounters a day and this bonus every time, that's 300 gp for the whole of 2nd level, 410 gp saved for 3rd, a 545 gp for 4th, and so on...well, eyeballing it, by the end of 11th you've saved somewhere between 9-10k in gold. That's getting on a full tenth of your gold for that level.
Now, in practice, you'l save less than that, as some battles won't damage you...but it'll be well over half that if you use Wands as your primary healing method (and who doesn't?). Also in practice, that gold will probably be divided at least somewhat between party members (since few people each have their own Wand of CLW, and/or keep track of the price of each charge)...but it's not actually a small number, especially at low levels.
Okay, that's a fair point. It still doesn't excuse the breadth of nerfs the barbarian got everywhere else.
Which ones? Their damage goes down very slightly (1-2 points) if they're using a two-handed weapon, and up if they're TWF. Most of the changed Rage Powers are straight upgrades (the Strength Surge equivalent and Taunting Stance being perhaps the only exceptions...and Taunting Stance is only a nerf in that it's a Stance). Superstition come out even, since it no longer protects against supernatural abilities, but does allow spell-like's through if you want 'em.
The only real nerf is the missing Rage Powers, and as mentioned, that's the easiest thing in the world to change.
Unless you're restricted to PFS I think UnBarb is better than Barby if you use a comination of pre and post unchained rage powers.
The only real nerf is the missing Rage Powers, and as mentioned, that's the easiest thing in the world to change.
Just because it's relatively easy to houserule out a nerf doesn't mean it's not a nerf.
I believe the rage powers are only missing for PFS and that RAW the unchained have access to all rage powers from other books than the ones listed. The listed Rage powers were one from books they had changed other rage powers that were going in unaltered. Nothing in the Ubarb says that they wouldn't have access to other rage powers.
Now unfortunately for PFS they ruled that Ubarb only has those listed powers, so either they'd need to revise their ruling or we have to hope that future books spell out that they are applicable for Ubarbs specifically, even though that was the default anyway. Same thing goes for Rogues and rogue talents.
|
|
The only real nerf is the missing Rage Powers, and as mentioned, that's the easiest thing in the world to change.Just because it's relatively easy to houserule out a nerf doesn't mean it's not a nerf.
Sure. But Ashiel was referring to everything about the class except temporary HP being a nerf, and that post was in response to Ashiel's disputing that point.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sure. But Ashiel was referring to everything about the class except temporary HP being a nerf, and that post was in response to Ashiel's disputing that point.The only real nerf is the missing Rage Powers, and as mentioned, that's the easiest thing in the world to change.Just because it's relatively easy to houserule out a nerf doesn't mean it's not a nerf.
Unchained rage type does hurt your damage if you're using a two-handed weapon, which has always been popular for barbarians since it's less MAD and leaves more open feat slots to take Extra Rage Power. Not to mention if you're making a dual-wielding old-barbarian you'd want the Double Slice feat anyway, which leaves a dual wielder getting the same boost from rage as the UnBarb.
Plus you don't get the fortitude save boost that normal barb gets from boosted CON, along with any other secondary boosts that come from getting ability score increases. If my barbarian has Intimidating Prowess, I'll miss that extra +2-4 to my intimidate check. Or if I need to pick up something heavier than my normal strength score would allow. Or if he needs to make a Constitution-based check. Or... You get the idea. Little stuff and corner cases, but sometimes those things matter.
Granted, for me the biggest issue with the UnBarb was not so much the quality of the changes as it was how needless the changes were. Even the parts that are a bit better don't feel better enough to justify making a whole unchained class, especially when other classes needed unchaining a whole lot more.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Granted, for me the biggest issue with the UnBarb was not so much the quality of the changes as it was how needless the changes were. Even the parts that are a bit better don't feel better enough to justify making a whole unchained class, especially when other classes needed unchaining a whole lot more.
Amen to that. :P
Sure. But Ashiel was referring to everything about the class except temporary HP being a nerf, and that post was in response to Ashiel's disputing that point.The only real nerf is the missing Rage Powers, and as mentioned, that's the easiest thing in the world to change.Just because it's relatively easy to houserule out a nerf doesn't mean it's not a nerf.
There were a couple of more subtle nerfs to existing rage power as well. For example, Unchained Superstition only applies to spells and spell-like abilities, not to supernatural (Su) abilities). Unchained Eater of Magic no longer grants you a second saving throw 'once per rage' when you fail a save (much more of a nerf if you commonly rage cycled). Spell Sunder is no longer a rage power.
Taken together, these nerfs make the Unchained Barbarian much less resistant to magic (and especially to supernatural abilities) than previously.
As an example, an otherwise unbuffed Raging level 12 Human (Superstition FCB) Barbarian with Eater of Magic might have a 93.75% chance save on an adult Red Dragon's breath (DC24 Reflex). With the Unchained versions of these rage powers, the same Barbarian would have a 30% chance to save.
So expected outcomes become:
- Core: 75% save, 18.75% save and gain 14 temp HP (93.75% total save %), 6.25% fail.
- Unchained: 30% save and gain 14 temp HP, 70% fail.
Now personally, I think this is a sign that the combo of Supersitition/Human FCB/Eater of Magic/rage cycling is probably something the devs didn't consider as they were developing the individual abilities (CRB/UC/ARG).
But if this is commonly how you built your Barbarians, and if you play in high powered games (or at least games with above-average save DCs needed), you're likely to perceive these as drastic nerfs. Every other ability aside, resistance to magic was one of the number one draws to Barbarian. Paizo softened this a bit in the Unchained version. For the rest of the 'nerfs,' I agree with you that they're mostly inconsequential.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really care much about the whole math of everything so much as why it was made an Unchained Class at all?
It seems like if the concern was making the class simpler for newbies, it would have worked better as an archetype. Replace Rage with Unchained Rage (or whatever the new name is) and that makes it good for new players (or those who can't grok the math) and people who want say a Dex based Barbarian.
Rewriting all the the Rage Powers (and keeping the same names to boot) just seems a much more cumbersome way to go about it, and is likely to get confusing for new players in itself.
"Okay, so I want to take this and do this."
"No, that's for the Core Barbarian, the Unchained Barbarian Rage Power of the same name does this and this, not that and that."
Just seems they made it more complicated and extensive a change than they needed to.
|
|
There were a couple of more subtle nerfs to existing rage power as well. For example, Unchained Superstition only applies to spells and spell-like abilities, not to supernatural (Su) abilities). Unchained Eater of Magic no longer grants you a second saving throw 'once per rage' when you fail a save (much more of a nerf if you commonly rage cycled). Spell Sunder is no longer a rage power.
My point was, and I quote "The only real nerf is the missing Rage Powers".
Spell Sunder very much falls under that (and I strongly favor allowing it). Eater of Magic doesn't, but I'd honestly missed it, and it does have advantages (you can gain temporary HP from every single spell you save against, not just one per round, and that only if you failed it and re-rolled). Still, it's legitimately weaker...but I've never seen it listed as a must-have the way some Rage Powers are. Superstition + Human FCB make it kinda superfluous a lot of the time.
Superstition is an interesting case, because it got worse, as you note, but so did its downside. Standard Superstition you can't consent to spells or spell-like abilities. Unchained Superstition you can consent to spell-likes, though still not spells. So I generally feel like that one's a wash (especially considering how few Supernatural abilities actually require Saves).
Additionally, the Unchained Rage bonus to Will Saves actually stacks with Superstition making the Unchained Barbarian better at Will Saves vs. spells and spell-like abilities (well, not counting Eater of Magic anyway).
Several other Rage Powers also got better. It's very possible for a 12th level Unchained Invulnerable Rager to have DR 10/-, for example.
I don't really care much about the whole math of everything so much as why it was made an Unchained Class at all?
It seems like if the concern was making the class simpler for newbies,
That was just one of them.
Two others were; Reducing the amount of barbarians who died as soon as they hit the unconcious threashold from loss of rage con and granted hit points. and eliminating the exploit of rage cycling from Barbarians lower than 17th level.
I find the unchained barbarian encourages rage cycling. It's now more important to get than ever. The main reason is temp hit points. I rage and get 3 hit points per level at say 12th level, usually takes me till around levels 9-12 get rage cycling, and that is +36 temp hit points. So in the fight I get if for 30 damage. Doesn't bypass my temp hit points. Rage cycle and get 36 more next round. This is why I think the Unchained Barbarian is better. Sure I need to take move action to enter a stance but I don't have to. Not going into a stance I'm the same as the old Barbarian. All I trade for this +1 damage with two handed weapon. Then on top of that add the 2 points of DR at level 8 and 10 from Increase Damage reduction and I have DR 6/-.
The loss of Spell Sunder is unfortunate but it's something I house rule back into the game as my Witch Hunting Orc tribes use in my game. So if they have the players can have it too.
Oops, missed that 1 minute for temp hit points. That's not so bad then.
I don't really care much about the whole math of everything so much as why it was made an Unchained Class at all?
It seems like if the concern was making the class simpler for newbies,
That was just one of them.
Two others were; Reducing the amount of barbarians who died as soon as they hit the unconcious threashold from loss of rage con and granted hit points. and eliminating the exploit of rage cycling from Barbarians lower than 17th level.
The archetype still fixes the former (all that comes from the new Rage)though.
Is the latter even fixed at all with Unchained?
|
|
I find the unchained barbarian encourages rage cycling. It's now more important to get than ever. The main reason is temp hit points. I rage and get 3 hit points per level at say 12th level, usually takes me till around levels 9-12 get rage cycling, and that is +36 temp hit points. So in the fight I get if for 30 damage. Doesn't bypass my temp hit points. Rage cycle and get 36 more next round. This is why I think the Unchained Barbarian is better. Sure I need to take move action to enter a stance but I don't have to. Not going into a stance I'm the same as the old Barbarian. All I trade for this +1 damage with two handed weapon. Then on top of that add the 2 points of DR at level 8 and 10 from Increase Damage reduction and I have DR 6/-.
The better DR definitely works. The Temp HP thing doesn't at all. To quote the Unchained Barbarian Class Description (under Rage):
These temporary hit points are lost first when a character takes damage, disappear when the rage ends, and are not replenished if the barbarian enters a rage again within 1 minute of her previous rage.
You get your temp HP once per minute. That's the most you can have them.
The loss of Spell Sunder is unfortunate but it's something I house rule back into the game as my Witch Hunting Orc tribes use in my game. So if they have the players can have it too.
Yeah, this is really easy to House Rule. And since using Unchained Stuff at all is a House Rule...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ubarbarian raised the floor and lowered the ceiling. Pretty much the same as Umonk, except the ceiling for Umonk was shifted rather than lowered (more of a beatstick focus).
On the other hand - Urogue blatantly raised both floor & ceiling, and Usummoner lowered both a bit while simplifying the mechanics.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
The point of Unchained Barbarian is to take up wordcount that could have been utilized for an Unchained Fighter, which is something that people were actually asking to have in Unchained.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The point of Unchained Barbarian is to take up wordcount that could have been utilized for an Unchained Fighter, which is something that people were actually asking to have in Unchained.
Or an Unchained Druid, split into two classes (one a nature based full caster, the other a full BAB wildshaper).
Or an Unchained Wizard, who is both forced and rewarded for specialization like other classes are rather than just being good at everything possible right off the bat.
Or an Unchained Cleric, refitted to be a true full caster in cloth now that the Warpriest exists and removes the need for battle cleric builds.
Basically there is a LOT they could have done with that word space other than nerfing the barbarian.
The point of Unchained Barbarian is to take up wordcount that could have been utilized for an Unchained Fighter, which is something that people were actually asking to have in Unchained.Or an Unchained Druid, split into two classes (one a nature based full caster, the other a full BAB wildshaper).
Or an Unchained Wizard, who is both forced and rewarded for specialization like other classes are rather than just being good at everything possible right off the bat.
Or an Unchained Cleric, refitted to be a true full caster in cloth now that the Warpriest exists and removes the need for battle cleric builds.
Basically there is a LOT they could have done with that word space other than nerfing the barbarian.
These are all noble and reasonable goals.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I learned years ago that some people just can't separate RP and mechanics.
They are at their finest when working in tandem as a cohesive unit. ;)
Design Manager
|
Or an Unchained Druid, split into two classes (one a nature based full caster, the other a full BAB wildshaper).Or an Unchained Wizard, who is both forced and rewarded for specialization like other classes are rather than just being good at everything possible right off the bat.
Or an Unchained Cleric, refitted to be a true full caster in cloth now that the Warpriest exists and removes the need for battle cleric builds.
Basically there is a LOT they could have done with that word space other than nerfing the barbarian.
Word. The problem there is that the design team, taken as a whole, operates from the perspective that all of those classes are fine as is. Clerics are fine as is, wizards are squishy, complicated, and die a lot, and the 8 Strength gnome druid iconic with her small cat animal companion has never out-performed Valeros in combat, so what's the big deal? Recall that during the transition from 3.5, much more time was spent making wizards more powerful, durable, and giving them more options to extend their adventuring day and be "more magical" than was spent decreasing their power. Cleric and druid did receive nerfs, but by and large these nerfs really only served to gate the classes' power behind an additional layer of system mastery.
Pathfinder is a game filled with "fiddly bits", and Paizo spends more time and effort on making the game accessible to people who don't have the time and patience, or knowledge and skill, to reconcile those fiddly bits than they do on reining in those fiddly bits for people who know how to leverage them. It's not entirely an unsound strategy either; their own successful sales record and the flourishing of success of PFS the last few years means that there are new players being drawn into the market, and presumably thus has led to the conclusion that opening up the entry point for play is more valuable than restricting classes with high abuse potential.
I, personally, would have loved to see an unchained cleric where domain choice had a much larger impact on the character, or an unchained wizard where school specialization actually had pros and cons and, again, meaningfully impacted the character, but those aren't classes that are seen as needing additional attention.
Aside: from Paizo's perspective, they did provide an Unchained Fighter, via the Stamina and Combat Tricks system. While it's true that this didn't actually address the majority of problems people had with the Fighter, like poor skills and saves, it did make them "cooler" in combat and provide an arguable spike in their performance on that front if you give them the Combat Tricks for free as suggested, so as far as they're concerned, they did listen to complaints about the Fighter, their solution just wasn't what people were actually looking for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aside: from Paizo's perspective, they did provide an Unchained Fighter, via the Stamina and Combat Tricks system. While it's true that this didn't actually address the majority of problems people had with the Fighter, like poor skills and saves, it did make them "cooler" in combat and provide an arguable spike in their performance on that front if you give them the Combat Tricks for free as suggested, so as far as they're concerned, they did listen to complaints about the Fighter, their solution just wasn't what people were actually looking for.
Yeah, adding yet another optional subsystem that isn't legal in PFS, which is essentially their marketing campaign? Not a fix. The only thing they've done right for Stamina is actually supporting it after their initial release. That said, there's reason to complain that support for Stamina's continued support if you think it's a waste of word count. I'm on the fence for the game as a whole, but as a primarily PFS player, it's worthless to me.
You're absolutely right about "fiddly bits." There are an incredibly large number of them in the system and it is truly a struggle to reconcile "easily approachable" and "crunchy, satisfying numbers."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The worst thing I can say about UBarb is that I only heard people start complaining about the Barbarian being too complicated or about problematic rage powers or rage cycling after the UBarb was announced to fix those things.
In fact what I mostly heard were people describing it as the most well put together non-spellcaster in the game. So it seemed like a really weird target for 'unchaining'.
Aside: from Paizo's perspective, they did provide an Unchained Fighter, via the Stamina and Combat Tricks system. While it's true that this didn't actually address the majority of problems people had with the Fighter, like poor skills and saves, it did make them "cooler" in combat and provide an arguable spike in their performance on that front if you give them the Combat Tricks for free as suggested, so as far as they're concerned, they did listen to complaints about the Fighter, their solution just wasn't what people were actually looking for.
Agreed, though I don't think they've stopped there. Skills and saves have been significantly improved through the Weapon Master's Handbook. It's very reasonable now for a Fighter and a Paladin to have similar saves in mid-levels (level 13 was where I benchmarked this for myself).
So from Paizo's perspective:
- They released the Stamina and Combat Trick systems.
- They released an entire PC that mostly targets Fighter (WMH), and helps immensely with saves, and somewhat with skills (mostly through Advanced Weapon Trainings).
- The same book has some nice utility feats (Smash from the Air, Ace Trip, Ricochet Toss) that increase in-combat utility.
- It included feats like Flight Mastery, Dispel Mastery, or Vision Mastery that have both in-combat and out-of-combat applications.
Part of this is because Fighters are the poster child for the C/M disparity, and people can't decide whether they're unhappy because Fighters are less effective than Paladins, or because they're less effective than Wizards. Well-built Fighters are approaching the usefulness of a Barbarian or Paladin, but they haven't been rewritten to consume the enemy with fireballs from their eyes, and bolts of lightning from their arses, and there's a lot of angst that crops up about this lack of arse-lightning. ("I want my Fighter to be able to do <insert a bunch of things that no other martial can remotely do> because Cuchulain," falls into this category -- it's not really aimed at Fighter per se, but because Fighter's performance has been lackluster for so long, it's easier to say this about them than it is about, e.g. Barbarian.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As much as I criticize Paizo's (lack of) ability and willingness to actually make martial classes more viable, I gotta admit the WMH does help quite a bit.
In fact, it's the first Paizo book I've seen that actually helps in a significance way without turning Fighters into a completely different class.
The response from a vocal minority on this board has been (1) renewed overt hostility towards Fighter, (2) complaining that Fighter doesn't have spells, and therefore sucks, and (3) complaining that the Weapon Master's Handbook has too many nice things for Fighters, and everyone should get to use them because Fighters suck.
Huh? Most of what I've seen on this forum has been very positive toward the WMH/MTT/DTT/etc. books.
Don't take one thread asking a question about one feat as some sort of general forum consensus. That's just silly.
The response from a vocal minority on this board has been (1) renewed overt hostility towards Fighter, (2) complaining that Fighter doesn't have spells, and therefore sucks, and (3) complaining that the Weapon Master's Handbook has too many nice things for Fighters, and everyone should get to use them because Fighters suck. [Emphasis added]
Huh? Most of what I've seen on this forum has been very positive toward the WMH/MTT/DTT/etc. books.
Don't take one thread asking a question about one feat as some sort of general forum consensus. That's just silly.
Vocal minority != concensus
:-)
My point relating to this thread is that there's historically been a lot of comments like, "Why did they publish and Unchained Barbarian? We need an Unchained Fighter! Unchained Fighter!!!" Paizo decided not to do an Unchained Fighter, but it's not like they've been ignoring the class. Instead they've incrementally improved the class over time.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aside: from Paizo's perspective, they did provide an Unchained Fighter, via the Stamina and Combat Tricks system. While it's true that this didn't actually address the majority of problems people had with the Fighter, like poor skills and saves, it did make them "cooler" in combat and provide an arguable spike in their performance on that front if you give them the Combat Tricks for free as suggested, so as far as they're concerned, they did listen to complaints about the Fighter, their solution just wasn't what people were actually looking for.Agreed, though I don't think they've stopped there. Skills and saves have been significantly improved through the Weapon Master's Handbook. It's very reasonable now for a Fighter and a Paladin to have similar saves in mid-levels (level 13 was where I benchmarked this for myself).
So from Paizo's perspective:
The net result is that Fighter as a player character is significantly more versatile and powerful than it was 12 months ago. The response from a vocal minority on this board has been (1) renewed overt hostility towards Fighter, (2) complaining that Fighter doesn't have spells, and therefore sucks, and (3) complaining that the Weapon Master's Handbook has too many nice things for Fighters, and everyone should get to use them because Fighters suck.
- They released the Stamina and Combat Trick systems.
- They released an entire PC that mostly targets Fighter (WMH), and helps immensely with saves, and somewhat with skills (mostly through Advanced Weapon Trainings).
- The same book has some nice utility feats (Smash from the Air, Ace Trip, Ricochet Toss) that increase in-combat utility.
- It included feats like Flight Mastery, Dispel Mastery, or Vision Mastery that have both in-combat and out-of-combat applications.
Part of this is because Fighters are the poster child for the C/M disparity, and people can't decide whether they're unhappy because Fighters are less effective than Paladins, or because they're less effective than...
So, a couple points of note here.
- Just because Stamina and Combat Tricks exist doesn't mean it's a reliable fix. After all, the organized play campaign does not allow it.
- I am unconvinced that the requirement of additional system mastery and additional books, particularly ones that don't get official errata, is the right answer here.
- Ultimately, the problem I have with the fighter is that it masquerades as a new-player-friendly class, but it currently requires the greatest system mastery of any martial to be equivalently effective to other "easy" classes, such as Barbarian, Paladin, or even Unchained Rogue.
In looking at my HeroLab screen, which I know is not complete (I'm missing many of the packs), I have nearly 2000 feats to choose from. Even sorting down to just valid feats with no class levels and straight 10s for stats leaves me with 173. Meaningfully sifting through these feats is not easy for new players, nor is it particularly easy for experienced players. Imagine, if you will, a new player that just picked up the Core Rulebook asking advice about building a fighter from an experienced player and being told that, to be effective, they also need to get Unchained for a subsystem (which may or may not be legal at the table) and WMH for specific feats (which, again, may or may not be legal at the table). How does that new player feel? Overwhelmed? Cheated out of their money? There are lots of feelings you could have there and virtually none of them are good. The alternative is then to tell them "X would be better" is not really a superior solution.
I agree that a fighter is significantly more versatile than it was 12 months ago given the available feats. These feats also are available to non-Fighters in many cases. How is that a fighter-specific fix? The answer is likely "well, fighters get more feats." If Flight Mastery is the most efficient fix for the fighter's lack of engagement options, it's probably similarly efficient for other classes, as well. If that's the case, then it's worth asking whether it actually addresses the gap between the fighter and other martial classes.
TL;DR: if a proposed solution (a) isn't part of the base class or (b) requires additional books that (c) may or may not be table legal, it's probably not a sufficient fix.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
...
Unchained answered some problems with Construct, Undead and other being lacking a CON score and/or immune to fatigue taking level in Barbarian.
Also, where does that "Damages Modifier is not multiplied for Two Handed weapons/attacks" thing come from?
While in a rage, a barbarian gains a +2 bonus on melee attack rolls, melee damage rolls, thrown weapon damage rolls, and Will saving throws.
Core Barbarian gains +4 STR, so for a 1H weapon this is +2 dmg and for a 2H weapon, it's +3 dmg (1.5*2). Unchained Barbarian doesn't gain a STR. Since she gains a flat +2 damage increase, it's the same whether on a 1H or 2H weapon.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Was it confirmed by Paizo? or is this another debate/FAQ candidate?
Is there anything to actually confirm? The text is incredibly straightforward, and it's a really minimal change.
I agree that a fighter is significantly more versatile than it was 12 months ago given the available feats. These feats also are available to non-Fighters in many cases. How is that a fighter-specific fix? The answer is likely "well, fighters get more feats." If Flight Mastery is the most efficient fix for the fighter's lack of engagement options, it's probably similarly efficient for other classes, as well. If that's the case, then it's worth asking whether it actually addresses the gap between the fighter and other martial classes.
TL;DR: if a proposed solution (a) isn't part of the base class or (b) requires additional books that (c) may or may not be table legal, it's probably not a sufficient fix.
- No change to Fighter will be part of the base class.
- Therefore, any change to Fighter (including 'Unchaining' it) will require additional books.
- There will always be table variation on what's considered 'legal'.
Fighters have clearly gotten the most out of WMH, from Advanced Weapon Trainings if nothing else. Also, many of the other feats (e.g. Ricochet Toss or other Weapon Mastery Feat) require a larger feat investment for a non-Fighter than for a Fighter. The net effect is that all of the martial classes got somewhat buffed, and Fighters got buffed the most. This is the right direction for Paizo to move.
Anyway, all of this is very OT for this thread at this point, so uh ... how 'bout them Barbarians?
|
|
Was it confirmed by Paizo? or is this another debate/FAQ candidate?Is there anything to actually confirm? The text is incredibly straightforward, and it's a really minimal change.
To be fair, a few of the FAQs coming out lately have basically been "Yes, this ability works exactly how we said it works".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Full Disclosure: I was vastly disappointed in Unchained and stopped purchasing Paizo products afterwards.
You missed out, then. Occult adventures is definitely their best RPG-line book since the APG, and arguably their best book ever.
The best thing about the uBarb is the boost to TWFing, IMO, as well as the upgrades of Raging Climber and Raging Swimmer to give actual climb/swim speeds and therefore be worth taking.
I would definitely argue about that if it weren't off topic. I haven't used or wanted to use a single thing from OA. :p
What I like about the U-barb is that it supports the various abilities that allow you to use a different stat for melee attacks. You can now make viable barbarians with races that get a minus in strength. Now even they can get angry in combat! ;)
I do wish that rage would work with thrown weapons hit though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do a lot of people just have a massive collective blindspot to the fact that the Urban Barbarian existed? Because I keep hearing about finesse barbarians being better in unchained, despite the fact that they lose out on all the benefits an urban barbarian gets from actually boosting their dexterity instead of just getting a + to hit and damage.
You can argue that but you'd be wrong. The Kineticist and Occultist are excellent additions to the class selection and I'm sure there are others who would be happy to say the same about the other classes.
Does a lot of people just have a massive collective blindspot to the fact that the Urban Barbarian existed? Because I keep hearing about finesse barbarians being better in unchained, despite the fact that they lose out on all the benefits an urban barbarian gets from actually boosting their dexterity instead of just getting a + to hit and damage.
Yeah, Urban Barbarian is a thing, but that forces you to choose between +4 Dex or +2 Dex/+2 Con.
Unchained Barbarian gives you a flat +2/+2 attack/damage, plus the "fake" benefits of a +4 Con.
You get both, as well as Fast Movement (which Urban gives up).
So, yeah. Urban Barb can make a Finesse Barbarian, if you want to give up some the normal benefits of rage.
I still haven't taken a good look at Occult classes, but the Kineticist draws a lot of hate for some reason.
FWIW temporary con increases/decreases have been one of the most consistently confusing topics for other players I've played with, so I wouldn't underestimate how important that temporary hit point change is to why they did this.
Does a lot of people just have a massive collective blindspot to the fact that the Urban Barbarian existed? Because I keep hearing about finesse barbarians being better in unchained, despite the fact that they lose out on all the benefits an urban barbarian gets from actually boosting their dexterity instead of just getting a + to hit and damage.Yeah, Urban Barbarian is a thing, but that forces you to choose between +4 Dex or +2 Dex/+2 Con.
Unchained Barbarian gives you a flat +2/+2 attack/damage, plus the "fake" benefits of a +4 Con.
You get both, as well as Fast Movement (which Urban gives up).So, yeah. Urban Barb can make a Finesse Barbarian, if you want to give up some the normal benefits of rage.
Yep, it's a barbarian option that actually allows you to pick an archetype instead of being forced into a single one.
Yep, it's a barbarian option that actually allows you to pick an archetype instead of being forced into a single one.Does a lot of people just have a massive collective blindspot to the fact that the Urban Barbarian existed? Because I keep hearing about finesse barbarians being better in unchained, despite the fact that they lose out on all the benefits an urban barbarian gets from actually boosting their dexterity instead of just getting a + to hit and damage.Yeah, Urban Barbarian is a thing, but that forces you to choose between +4 Dex or +2 Dex/+2 Con.
Unchained Barbarian gives you a flat +2/+2 attack/damage, plus the "fake" benefits of a +4 Con.
You get both, as well as Fast Movement (which Urban gives up).So, yeah. Urban Barb can make a Finesse Barbarian, if you want to give up some the normal benefits of rage.
That's not quite the statement he was arguing there.
He was talking about the Urban Barb as a better finesse Barb, I argued for why Unchained should still be considered.
Yep, it's a barbarian option that actually allows you to pick an archetype instead of being forced into a single one.Does a lot of people just have a massive collective blindspot to the fact that the Urban Barbarian existed? Because I keep hearing about finesse barbarians being better in unchained, despite the fact that they lose out on all the benefits an urban barbarian gets from actually boosting their dexterity instead of just getting a + to hit and damage.Yeah, Urban Barbarian is a thing, but that forces you to choose between +4 Dex or +2 Dex/+2 Con.
Unchained Barbarian gives you a flat +2/+2 attack/damage, plus the "fake" benefits of a +4 Con.
You get both, as well as Fast Movement (which Urban gives up).So, yeah. Urban Barb can make a Finesse Barbarian, if you want to give up some the normal benefits of rage.
That's not quite the statement he was arguing there.
He was talking about the Urban Barb as a better finesse Barb, I argued for why Unchained should still be considered.
But I was debating that U barb opens up ALL the barbarian options to alternate stats like dex or wisdom and he was replying to me. Urban Barbarian is cool if you want to play one but that is a tiny sliver of the options that would otherwise be hugely suboptimal.
Urban Barb is a horrible pick for those that are using wisdom to hit for instance but works fine with the u barb.
So what does it take to retrain in PFS from Unchained to 'Chained'? Because my UBarb hasn't been doing the damage I expected him to do at L1, 2, or 3?
|
|
So what does it take to retrain in PFS from Unchained to 'Chained'? Because my UBarb hasn't been doing the damage I expected him to do at L1, 2, or 3?
Why? They lose a couple of the most potent rage powers, but their DPR (at those levels especially) should be the same as a chained barbarian except at -1 damage if using a two-handed weapon. Not all that significant.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still haven't taken a good look at Occult classes, but the Kineticist draws a lot of hate for some reason.
That's because they compare it to the best DPS/DPR archer build possible and say the class sucks because it can't match that.
|
|
Everyone knows Unchained Barbarian is a nerf.
But that's good, at least from my GM's perspective: before Unchained, my experience was that every Barbarian at my table either made the game a cakewalk or it completely screwed the party out of its resources. Barbarian full STR is either a zero or a one depending on the encounter, so I like that Unchained Barb is a more balanced input to your party.
Now it's a little bit less a cakewalk and multiple temp HPs per day (i.e. each time you rage I think) is a little easier on resources.
IMO, however, the greatest advantage of Unchained Barbarian is to allow for Dex-based Barbarians, with low STR. An Unchained Barbarian / Unchained Rogue (all spindly skinny mean hairband style! like young Robert Plant with f&@+ing kukris and a maniacal gleam in his eye!) would be quite the thing to behold if built properly!! (and in taverns he can start playing the Immigrant Song!)