What is the point of unchained barbarian?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

101 to 150 of 180 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Texas Snyper wrote:
Athaleon wrote:
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.

Not at all. A lot of us really, really hate the burn mechanic. And before someone mentions the overwhelming soul just stop: It should be called the underwhelming soul instead... :P


You hate the burn mechanic about as much I hate the X pool mechanic. Now we both have a class with a resource mechanic we like! Hooray!


Arachnofiend wrote:
You hate the burn mechanic about as much I hate the X pool mechanic. Now we both have a class with a resource mechanic we like! Hooray!

Burn is still a resource pool, though.


I know you don't appreciate it Lemmy but burn has a very different feel and playstyle compared to an arcane pool or similar abilities. I'd argue it but I and others have already had this discussion with you so I know there's not going to be convincing done.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
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.

Not to continue a derail, but I definitely agree that OA is probably Paizo's best book since the APG, and probably actually superior. The only classes I have any complaints about are the Psychic and the Medium, and those complaints largely consist of being disappointed that the amazing Medium we saw in the playtest was butchered to make room for the Psychic, which is largely "just another full caster", though still more interesting, IMHO, than the previously existing ones. Occultist, Mesmerist, Spiritualist, and Kineticist are all pretty solid and interesting options, there are more cool and well-balanced archetypes than I think I've ever seen in a single Paizo book, and the other crunchy and fluffy bits are solid as well.

On topic- Was UBarb necessary when so many other classes could have used the page space more fruitfully? Probably not. But it is what it is at this point, and I think it's a decent sidegrade for low op players.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
You hate the burn mechanic about as much I hate the X pool mechanic. Now we both have a class with a resource mechanic we like! Hooray!

While I don't hate pools, I think they've been overused so I'm all for trying something new. Punching myself repeatedly in the face until I power up is about the last method I'd use though. And the worst part of the whole thing is that they had to go back and steal Con casting from the scarred witch to make it all seem better... Now it's the best witch archetype for 1/2 orcs instead of one with a cool and different mechanic...

Sigh... I might be able to feel better about Burn if the non-burn option wasn't so darn terrible. :P

Ssalarn: What I dislike about the U Barb isn't what they did but that they made a whole rewrite for it. They could have made unchained rage and some unchained rage powers instead of wasting space on things that didn't change. Archetypes don't reprint the entire class with the changes added so why do that here?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Athaleon wrote:
I still haven't taken a good look at Occult classes, but the Kineticist draws a lot of hate for some reason.

Kineticist gets a lot of hate because a ton of its options were designed as conservatively as possible, it doesn't do a ton of damage and a lot of its archetypes are headscratchingly bad.

Oh and a lot of people don't like Burn.

It's still a really really cool class that's reasonably powerful and does things in a way that no other Paizo class can though.

Texas Snyper wrote:
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.

Back when everyone was doing DPR calculations mostly what I saw were people comparing the Kineticist to the worst archer builds, not the best.

And since then most of the complaints I've seen have been more about weirdly lacking talents, bad elemental focuses, painful or arbitrary feeling restrictions and bad archetypes more than anything else.

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:


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.

I'm not sure I really get this.

Even at absolute worse, the UBarb is not a particularly gigantic nerf, especially in the DPR department. So I don't see how the class goes from campaign ruining to completely manageable with a collection of fairly trivial changes. They're doing the same or almost the same damage as before and are arguably better in a few specific ways.


Yeah, the UBarb should see at most a minimal difference in damage compared to the old Barb, the primary change is lack of access to the best utility rage powers. Spell Sunder doesn't increase your DPR, it's way better than that.


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


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?

Good question! Ultimately, the question comes down to whether "Unchained Barbarian" is considered a distinct and separate class from "Barbarian."

If they are distinct, separate classes, it will be 21 PP and (10 x character level x 21) gold. If they are not, it will be at least 36 PP and (10 x character level x 36) gold since you would retrain out of UC Barbarian to a class like Cavalier, which has synergy. This cost, of course, depends on the synergy chart not being updated (which I don't believe it has). So far as I know, UC Barb is not considered an archetype, else you could use the significantly cheaper archetype retraining rules. That would be a mere 5 PP and (10 x character level x 5) gold as only one class feature has been "replaced."

You'll want to check with your VOs. What you will find is that it is likely not worth doing to a 3rd level PC and it's easier to restart the character.


Arachnofiend wrote:
Yeah, the UBarb should see at most a minimal difference in damage compared to the old Barb, the primary change is lack of access to the best utility rage powers. Spell Sunder doesn't increase your DPR, it's way better than that.

Spell Sunder alone almost pushed the Barbarian to tier 3 (a very balanced tier)!

Spell Sunder is great because not only because it's very useful and unique, it's also really freaking cool and theme-fitting!


Serisan wrote:
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


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?

Good question! Ultimately, the question comes down to whether "Unchained Barbarian" is considered a distinct and separate class from "Barbarian."

If they are distinct, separate classes, it will be 21 PP and (10 x character level x 21) gold. If they are not, it will be at least 36 PP and (10 x character level x 36) gold since you would retrain out of UC Barbarian to a class like Cavalier, which has synergy. This cost, of course, depends on the synergy chart not being updated (which I don't believe it has). So far as I know, UC Barb is not considered an archetype, else you could use the significantly cheaper archetype retraining rules. That would be a mere 5 PP and (10 x character level x 5) gold as only one class feature has been "replaced."

You'll want to check with your VOs. What you will find is that it is likely not worth doing to a 3rd level PC and it's easier to restart the character.

Wait, isn't UBarb an alternate class like Ninja thus a archetype written with a full wrote up.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
What is the point of unchained barbarian?

Padding the page count.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
Covent wrote:


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.

While I do appreciate the heads up, I said I did not purchase Paizo products anymore. I never said I did not read/use them. OA is useable at my table, however after reading it, neither myself nor any of my players have any real interest in nor plan on using any of its content with the possible exception of the Kinetist. That interest was by myself and simply due to my love for Avatar: The last airbender, but the class while borderline capable can easily have its thematic niche filled by other much more capable classes.

The closest I have come to buying anything from Paizo recently is the WMH. I decided after looking through a copy to simply use the few things I wanted from online rather than paying for a book which I would only use a very few things from.

Books I have bought since include Ultimate Psionics, Mythic Hero's Handbook, Mythic Monstrous Manual, and the Mythic Spell Compendium. I have also purchased Spheres of Power and quite a few other 3rd party products as I have found for my game that the balance is better in Non-Paizo products.

Basically I disagree with the balance level being maintained as the status quo at Paizo, however it appears to be going well monetarily for them so good on them. I bear them no rancor, I simply have decided to vote with my wallet for the content I like.


TOZ wrote:
Quote:
What is the point of unchained barbarian?
Padding the page count.

Allowing dex builds and improving TWF builds


Ryan Freire wrote:


Allowing dex builds and improving TWF builds

"allowing" is a bit disingenuous. There were already two barbarian archetypes that did that.

Improved, maybe though.


People seem to forget about the Savage Technologist a lot of the time.


Sundakan wrote:
People seem to forget about the Savage Technologist a lot of the time.

Technology guide isn't common fare for most games.


swoosh: It allows to use whatever archetype you want for "dex builds and improving TWF" instead of forcing you to pick from those two. It opens up all the options for you and that's not a small thing.

Sundakan: Ryan Freire has it right. It from a less used book and it focuses on firearms. Even for those that remember it, it's easy enough to set aside. A gun barbarian is a pretty niche character.


Maybe, but it's a pretty cool archetype nonetheless.

Nobody ever wants to play John Carter though.


Sundakan wrote:

Maybe, but it's a pretty cool archetype nonetheless.

Nobody ever wants to play John Carter though.

I actually really like the look of it for a Zeitgeist campaign.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Sundakan wrote:

Maybe, but it's a pretty cool archetype nonetheless.

Nobody ever wants to play John Carter though.

I actually really like the look of it for a Zeitgeist campaign.

Oh, for the right setting it's a cool archetype. For the average game though it's a bit of an oddity.


graystone wrote:
swoosh: It allows to use whatever archetype you want for "dex builds and improving TWF" instead of forcing you to pick from those two. It opens up all the options for you and that's not a small thing.

There's also a big difference between Ubarb opening up some archetype options for dex builds compared to the lie constantly being peddled in this thread that there was no way to make a dex-based barbarian before the Unchained Barbarian.


Chengar Qordath wrote:
graystone wrote:
swoosh: It allows to use whatever archetype you want for "dex builds and improving TWF" instead of forcing you to pick from those two. It opens up all the options for you and that's not a small thing.
There's also a big difference between Ubarb opening up some archetype options for dex builds compared to the lie constantly being peddled in this thread that there was no way to make a dex-based barbarian before the Unchained Barbarian.

If you want a weaker rage with urban barb or to be a gun and sword build from a niche supplement sure. But if you're looking for parity, unchained barb is a better option.


I'm not sure the consensus is actually "there was never a way to make a TWF/Finesse barbarian before hand!", but instead "the unchained barbarian made it much simpler and powerful to go with a TWF build.

Of the two options that have been supplied here (Urban and Savage Tech), one gives rage cut in half, and the other replaces your Con bonus with the Dex bonus...and leaves the bonus to Strength (because that's what you need as a Finessee barbarian, a bonus to Strength).

The simple +2/+2 and the temporary hit points gives you the option of using a finesse build and not feeling bad for having a half-rage or a bonus to a useless stat for you.


Chengar Qordath wrote:
graystone wrote:
swoosh: It allows to use whatever archetype you want for "dex builds and improving TWF" instead of forcing you to pick from those two. It opens up all the options for you and that's not a small thing.
There's also a big difference between Ubarb opening up some archetype options for dex builds compared to the lie constantly being peddled in this thread that there was no way to make a dex-based barbarian before the Unchained Barbarian.

"some archetype options" is roughly 28 out of 30 archetypes...

Secondly, I don't recall anyone saying it was 100% impossible to make a dex barbarian so I don't know what "lie constantly being peddled" you noticed. It's now possible to play a ubarb using dex or wis to hit without gimping yourself or limiting yourself to certain archetypes.

So when I say 'now I can make a dex barbarian' it means just that: I could actually make one without an archetype or pick any archetype I want! Not something you can say with the old version.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Ryan Freire wrote:
Sundakan wrote:
People seem to forget about the Savage Technologist a lot of the time.
Technology guide isn't common fare for most games.

It's actually a pretty nifty archetype though because it doesn't force any tech guide stuff. Works well with it, but it plays well with standard pathfinder too.

At least as long as you can reload your gun. And don't care about progressing along the TWF feat chain or have a DM on your side.

graystone wrote:

Secondly, I don't recall anyone saying it was 100% impossible to make a dex barbarian so I don't know what "lie constantly being peddled" you noticed. It's now possible to play a ubarb using dex or wis to hit without gimping yourself or limiting yourself to certain archetypes.

While it's a stretch to call it peddling lies, when people say UBarb "allowed dex barbs" it implies that you couldn't do dex barb before. Which I wager is where the sentiment is coming from.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
Yeah, the UBarb should see at most a minimal difference in damage compared to the old Barb, the primary change is lack of access to the best utility rage powers. Spell Sunder doesn't increase your DPR, it's way better than that.

Spell Sunder alone almost pushed the Barbarian to tier 3 (a very balanced tier)!

Spell Sunder is great because not only because it's very useful and unique, it's also really freaking cool and theme-fitting!

Agreed. My level 13 Barb is as powerful and has as much utility as other Tier 3 classes. He can kill stuff like know ones business, he can survive almost anything (200+ HP, DR 6/-, super high saves plus ring of evasion), he can crowd control with dazing assault, he can bypass spell effects with spell sunder. The few other things that he can't do can be solved with some potions (invis, fly, etc).

It is extremely hard to keep him down and out. His only issue is if you catch him off guard and hit him with something nasty before he can rage.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Have you gotten a defense against fatigue? I've had some fun hitting raging barbarians with Waves of Fatigue and Boneshatter, both of which automatically fatigue the target.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Have you gotten a defense against fatigue? I've had some fun hitting raging barbarians with Waves of Fatigue and Boneshatter, both of which automatically fatigue the target.

I assume you know this, but for anyone else, being fatigued while in rage doesn't end the rage, you just can't start a new rage while fatigued.

So fatiguing spells only prevent raging if you get them off before the barbarian's turn, really. In between combats it's easy to cure fatigue with lesser restoration.


Unchained Barbarian is the greatest waste of space I've ever seen in a PF book.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
ryric wrote:
I assume you know this, but for anyone else, being fatigued while in rage doesn't end the rage, you just can't start a new rage while fatigued.

Actually no, everyone I have played with has made the mistake of thinking you can't keep raging while fatigued.


The Cord of Stubborn Resolve is a good fix for Fatigue. 1d6 Nonlethal (which, open to interpretation, can be mitigated by DR anyway) instead of Fatigue is excellent.

Ryan Freire wrote:


If you want a weaker rage with urban barb or to be a gun and sword build from a niche supplement sure. But if you're looking for parity, unchained barb is a better option.

Urban Barbarian Rage is weaker, but it does allow you some more options. Int/Dex/Cha based skills, which UBarb can't, and no AC penalty which can be nice.

That said, yeah UBarb is probably the better pick for a Dex based fighter.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
it implies that you couldn't do dex barb before. Which I wager is where the sentiment is coming from.

What it implies that the Ubarb 'allows dex barbs' out of the box. Not outside products needed. No searching for ways to make it viable.

So the lie, if there is one, is that the old barbarian "allowed dex barbs". 2 archetypes could make it work for them but that's barbarian + something else that modifies it... Urban Barbarians and Savage Technologist had dex options, not the base class or 14/15th of the archetypes. So anytime you, Sundakan or Chengar Qordath see "allowed dex barbs" you should add 'of ANY archytype or even without one' to it if it'll make you feel better about it.

Sundakan: As far as weaker, I know that's really not my point. Ubarb allows a base class dex character with no archetype. It allows for a Feral Gnasher dex build. It allows for a TWF Sea Reaver. It allows a Armored Hulk to get Wis to hit with some multiclassing.


To be fair, the Urban Barb stacks with Invulnerable Rager, which is really the only archetype you care about.


Arachnofiend wrote:
To be fair, the Urban Barb stacks with Invulnerable Rager, which is really the only archetype you care about.

The more dex you have the more the loss uncanny dodge hurts. You'll need that DR as you'll expect to be hit more. This gets worse when attacks start to deal more than straight damage.

Not to say DR and Invulnerable Rager aren't good, I don't know if it's the only option to care about for a dex character.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Yeah, my rager needs to get him a miss chance to help mitigate those attacks. 45 points of damage after DR at level 4 was rough. (Also, ranged weapon needed too.)


Athaleon wrote:
Gambit wrote:
ITT I learned that immersion and verisimilitude aren't major priorities for many around here.
I learned years ago that some people just can't separate RP and mechanics.

I mean you can

but probably shouldn't.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Envall wrote:
but probably shouldn't.

Most people I know find separating RP and mechanics to be the most immersion-breaking way to ruin verisimilitude they know.


TOZ wrote:
Envall wrote:
but probably shouldn't.
Most people I know find separating RP and mechanics to be the most immersion-breaking way to ruin verisimilitude they know.

Yeah,

The lv10 bastard son of some random minor noble with no ranks of diplomacy was allowed to chat it up with Princesses, Kings, and Captains of the guards and convince them of anything he wanted with no check needed because he lived in a noble house for a little bit.
Our lv10 Oracle, with diplomacy in the 30s couldn't talk to anyone nor convince anyone of anything because it wasn't in his backstory.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Have you gotten a defense against fatigue? I've had some fun hitting raging barbarians with Waves of Fatigue and Boneshatter, both of which automatically fatigue the target.

That is my next thing. I am going to take Internal Fortitude (rage power) and grab a flawed Scarlet and Green Cabochon ioun stone.

That combo gives me endurance and immunity to fatigue, exhaustion, sickened, and nauseated. I love taking the negative of the flawed stone and making it the better positive effect.


The biggest weakness of the barbarian is not being able to rage before your turn. A normal barbarian can fix that with a magic item (rage as immediate action). However, an invulnerable rager barb (a very popular choice) gives up uncanny dodge and because of that is flat footed before turn and can't use immediate actions. Still trying to find a way to fix that whole (prevent him from being flat footed / regain uncanny dodge).

Paizo Employee Design Manager

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Envall wrote:
but probably shouldn't.
Most people I know find separating RP and mechanics to be the most immersion-breaking way to ruin verisimilitude they know.

Yeah,

The lv10 bastard son of some random minor noble with no ranks of diplomacy was allowed to chat it up with Princesses, Kings, and Captains of the guards and convince them of anything he wanted with no check needed because he lived in a noble house for a little bit.
Our lv10 Oracle, with diplomacy in the 30s couldn't talk to anyone nor convince anyone of anything because it wasn't in his backstory.

At that point you're not even playing Pathfinder anymore, you're playing "magical storytime", and why even use a character sheet? The kind of game described is, to me, about the worst kind of game imaginable. It's unfair to the oracle's player who took the time to build a character that was mechanically capable of the things they wanted to do, it's unfair to the bastard because he's not being given the opportunity to actually learn how to play, and it's unfair to every single player at the table since the time and effort invested into building their characters is essentially meaningless.


Ssalarn wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Envall wrote:
but probably shouldn't.
Most people I know find separating RP and mechanics to be the most immersion-breaking way to ruin verisimilitude they know.

Yeah,

The lv10 bastard son of some random minor noble with no ranks of diplomacy was allowed to chat it up with Princesses, Kings, and Captains of the guards and convince them of anything he wanted with no check needed because he lived in a noble house for a little bit.
Our lv10 Oracle, with diplomacy in the 30s couldn't talk to anyone nor convince anyone of anything because it wasn't in his backstory.
At that point you're not even playing Pathfinder anymore, you're playing "magical storytime", and why even use a character sheet? The kind of game described is, to me, about the worst kind of game imaginable. It's unfair to the oracle's player who took the time to build a character that was mechanically capable of the things they wanted to do, it's unfair to the bastard because he's not being given the opportunity to actually learn how to play, and it's unfair to every single player at the table since the time and effort invested into building their characters is essentially meaningless.

yeah, it really was pretty much magical storytime, I was playing a halfling fighter and I had to be curtailed so much. I was going to sneak into a party and I was going to succeed until the Divination auto succeeded, no save, to find me. Then I had a personal watcher to keep track of me and keep me away from the castle, so that I couldn't sneak around to find information while the Cavalier was talking to everyone to try and find information about the potential assassination attempt going on in the castle. Needless to say the Oracle and I didn't play with that GM for very long.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Yeah, my rager needs to get him a miss chance to help mitigate those attacks. 45 points of damage after DR at level 4 was rough. (Also, ranged weapon needed too.)

Yeah. Hit mitigation is still a needed thing that is hard to get at low levels.

Once you are at lvl 11 you can use the come and get me / dazing assault combo to mitigate enemy attacks.

Also, if you have superstition you could decide to grab eater of magic and ditch the ubiquitous cloak of resistance for a cloak of minor displacement. The lower saves suck but the re-roll from eater makes up for it and the 20% miss chance is nice.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not talking about dissociating CHA from NPC interactions, in fact I've argued the opposite on this site before.

I'm talking about the complaint about how a mechanic (Rage cycling) ruins immersion and verisimilitude. Saying "it ruins immersion to have players make their Barbarians turn Rage off and on every turn" means you can't separate the mechanic from the RP. From a purely in-character perspective the Barbarian isn't behaving any differently than normal, or expected.


Sundakan wrote:

The Cord of Stubborn Resolve is a good fix for Fatigue. 1d6 Nonlethal (which, open to interpretation, can be mitigated by DR anyway) instead of Fatigue is excellent.

Ryan Freire wrote:


If you want a weaker rage with urban barb or to be a gun and sword build from a niche supplement sure. But if you're looking for parity, unchained barb is a better option.
Urban Barbarian Rage is weaker, but it does allow you some more options. Int/Dex/Cha based skills, which UBarb can't, and no AC penalty which can be nice.

Plus all the other perks that come along with directly boosting dexterity. Not only does the Urban Barb not get an AC penalty, they'll gain more AC from their boosted dexterity. Better initiative too, for what that's worth.


Chengar Qordath wrote:
Sundakan wrote:

The Cord of Stubborn Resolve is a good fix for Fatigue. 1d6 Nonlethal (which, open to interpretation, can be mitigated by DR anyway) instead of Fatigue is excellent.

Ryan Freire wrote:


If you want a weaker rage with urban barb or to be a gun and sword build from a niche supplement sure. But if you're looking for parity, unchained barb is a better option.
Urban Barbarian Rage is weaker, but it does allow you some more options. Int/Dex/Cha based skills, which UBarb can't, and no AC penalty which can be nice.
Plus all the other perks that come along with directly boosting dexterity. Not only does the Urban Barb not get an AC penalty, they'll gain more AC from their boosted dexterity. Better initiative too, for what that's worth.

Initiative boosts don't apply retroactively, so unless you're Raging at combat start, that won't work.


Athaleon wrote:

I'm not talking about dissociating CHA from NPC interactions, in fact I've argued the opposite on this site before.

I'm talking about the complaint about how a mechanic (Rage cycling) ruins immersion and verisimilitude. Saying "it ruins immersion to have players make their Barbarians turn Rage off and on every turn" means you can't separate the mechanic from the RP. From a purely in-character perspective the Barbarian isn't behaving any differently than normal, or expected.

It depends of course, how you flavour rage in game. If you treat rage as a battle trance, then at higher levels the ability to rage cycle could be flavoured as gaining a greater mastery over the battle concentration and allowing the barbarian to more easily slip in and out of their battle trance. Rand in the Wheel of Time books goes through a development like this as he gains greater mastery of the "void" concentration technique through the stories.


Urban Barbarian is a nice archetype. It and Savage Technologist's flavor though make them for from a universal panacea for every dex need. One is tied to civilized life and the other requires access to firearms.

So on a far off island, feral goblins barbarians with either archetype seems odd at best. Now with Ubarb a Savage Barbarian, True Primitive, Raging Cannibal and Jungle Rager are viable option as well as thematically appropriate ones.

So in the end, it really doesn't matter that Urban Barbarian and Savage Technologist exists or how good they are. Ubarb opened alternate hit stats for ALL [archetypes or not].

101 to 150 of 180 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What is the point of unchained barbarian? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.