| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sweet. Hopefully this will kill the 'invulnerable rager is default barbarian' thing that comes up all the time.
It may be the default everyone looks at first but it's not the only viable and fun path for a barbarian. Secondly, I never thought that taking increased DR was worth it for the Invulnerable rager build. When we were helping Trinam with his guide, I argued with him that there were much better powers to take and fit in.
Sweet. Hopefully this will kill the 'invulnerable rager is default barbarian' thing that comes up all the time.It may be the default everyone looks at first but it's not the only viable and fun path for a barbarian. Secondly, I never thought that taking increased DR was worth it for the Invulnerable rager build. When we were helping Trinam with his guide, I argued with him that there were much better powers to take and fit in.
I agree. There were better powers to take.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, it's not so much that the Invulnerable Rager Barbarian was the only build, so much as it was the most thematic. Tanking ungodly amounts of damage before kicking the bucket, the Invulnerable Rager was the first thing that came to mind when we thought of the Barbarian. What need have a Barbarian of dodging? His most important class feature DECREASES his AC! So the idea of getting rid of Uncanny Dodge and silly things like Trap Sense for a character who tanked damage just made sense, and synergized really well.
This FAQ most certainly did not change that, especially when Increased DR was such a poor option when compared to all of the other myriad of options the Barbarian has now.
Superstition, Witch Hunter, Spell Sunder, the "Beast Totem" line (for Pounce), the "Elemental Blood" line (for Flight), Come and Get Me, Flesh Wound, Deathless Frenzy.
Off the top of my head, those were 12 Barbarian Rage Powers that were better than a +1 to DR. Then there are still a host of others that are much better than a measly +1 to a stat (Unexpected Strike, Savage Dirty Trick, Smasher, Strength Surge, etc.). That's what makes the Barbarian a well designed class. He doesn't need to go dumpster diving for scraps of plusses here and there just to be competitive.
It's just really annoying when Paizo wants to take away even those scraps when it concerns a martial character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Elemental blood is another power that I think is a waste. 3 rage powers spent just to get the ability to fly. Meh. Any number of magic items will give you the same thing. It might have been worth it if you sproited actual wing that were Ex rather than Su. That way you could still fly in an anti-magic field.
I love things like unexpected strike, knockdown. knockback, inspire ferocity (if you have some Cha), smasher (you can not be detained ever), savage intuition (if allowed).
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
So...is this FAQ just negated, or what?It's consistent with that FAQ. Ish.
Had the IR said 'the barbarian's damage reduction is increased to' it'd stack, but since it's a new ability it doesn't, even if that new ability is more or less the same conceptually. .
Also, if we're discussing semantics as disqualifying factors, should we disallow Druids from taking Boon Companion (since Nature Bond =/= Animal Companion) and Wizards from taking Improved Familiar (since...Horselord Ranger can't qualify for Monstrous Mount anymore because Mounted Bond isn't Divine Bond anymore. And so on.
IR DR works off a formula, where regular B DR is a non formulaic progression.
Totally different abilities.I guess someone could consider the reduced effective level (ranger -3) as a formula, but I'm certain that sort of thing isn't a barrier to the effect being identical or different. It isn't like IR says "consider the Barbarian effective level as 5 higher or anything". If it did it would be the same ability.
Unless on the horse lord, you think "The Ranger gains a +2 bonus on Handle Animal and Ride checks with his animal companion mount. " changes it enough to not be the same?
Savage intuition is only good on npcs, since it has pretty bad anti synergy with superstition, which ofc you are taking.
Actually, the biggest risk of a standard invulnerable rager/superstition build is not going first. Invulnerable ragers give up uncanny dodge and thus can not use the standard magic item path to activating rage before their turn starts. Thus they are extremely vulnerable to spell casters in the surprise / first round.
Get hit with a dominate before you can rage and all that superstition bonus means nothing to you. However, it means everything to your friends as you are very resistant to everything while you kill them for your new master.
Thus, the ability to rage before your turn is a very high priority and savage intuition is one of two paths I know of to getting it for an invulnerable rager. If you want to be able to buff then the better option is one lvl of Ulfen Guard.
Some questions are better left unanswered :/Corollary: Some answers are better ignored.
Agreed. Stupid beyond stupid. Really starting to wonder what the (re)designers are thinking...
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are probably thinking what I've said a dozen times. They see when the boards say "here's the only real option" and say "well that wasn't the point" and change it.
+1
Or
- We have no idea how anyone got that idea.
- we wrote that thinking it wasn't too bad - but man, that was a bad idea.
I can't even blame them for that. There's literally thousands of feats and traits and archtypes and racial options. The concept had often falls to the way side of optimization.
At this point we will see things like half orcs not gaining a +2 luck bonus for scars. Minor things which have a huge outcome.
FTFY.
I just don't know if it's intentional or not, but there's no doubt that the nerds are too many, too hard, and too fast.
Freaking geeks are like a g+*~@@n horde! XD
As long as they make Halfling's Luck, you know, a luck bonus if they change the scars then I won't mind one bit.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
FTFY.I can't even blame them for that. There's literally thousands of feats and traits and archtypes and racial options. The concept had often falls to the way side of optimization.
At this point we will see things like half orcs not gaining a +2 luck bonus for scars. Minor things which have a huge outcome.
No. You didnt. I meant what I typed. They don't erase options just change them. So they wont take away Fates favored just alter what the scars give as a bonus so it won't stack.
Which no one will be surprised about when it happens.
With all due respect, making an option suck is the same as erasing it.
If tomorrow, the half-orc bonus was changed from luck to resistance, then for all intents and purposes that option has been erased.
FTFY.I can't even blame them for that. There's literally thousands of feats and traits and archtypes and racial options. The concept had often falls to the way side of optimization.
At this point we will see things like half orcs not gaining a +2 luck bonus for scars. Minor things which have a huge outcome.
No. You didnt. I meant what I typed. They don't erase options just change them. So they wont take away Fates favored just alter what the scars give as a bonus so it won't stack.
Which no one will be surprised about when it happens.
Yes I did. Sacred Tattoo by itself isn't a problem, what's a problem is people taking a cookie cutter trait to double something that Paizo doesn't feel should be increased. Fate's Favored is one of the most cookie cutter traits there is, right up there with Indomitable Faith and Reactionary, and is almost exclusively taken with Half-Orc War Priests.
They already nerfed one thing in relation to the fact that it grants a Luck Bonus, I don't think they'll be stupid enough to nerf another thing, and doesn't fit their nerf MO as demonstrated by Crane Wing.
Well if you're happy with changing Fates favoured instead that's fine. What would it provide then?
That's simple, make it a 1/day ability, and probably only make it apply to a single Luck Bonus, instead of all of them.
@ CWheezy: It's cookie cutter when everyone and their grandma takes it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed. Stupid beyond stupid. Really starting to wonder what the (re)designers are thinking...Some questions are better left unanswered :/Corollary: Some answers are better ignored.
Second-level corollary: Don't ask a FAQ you don't want to hear the answer to.
I think you took a turn to then left there, guys.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lol cookie cutter. How can a trait be cookie cutter.
That means an entire build. Any individual option cannot be cookie cutter.
Also most traits are useless so its not surprising to see the rare good one in play often.
Cookie cutter?
You show me a half-orc Warpriest/Archaeologist Bard that doesn't have Fate's Favored, and I'll show you a pan of brownies.
Fates Favored, luck bonus, and other unrelated subjects are best moved into other threads.
Actually it's quite germane in my opinion, when you are discussing the impact of these types of faq requests.
|
Lol cookie cutter. How can a trait be cookie cutter.
That means an entire build. Any individual option cannot be cookie cutter.
Also most traits are useless so its not surprising to see the rare good one in play often.
Cookie cutter?
You show me a half-orc Warpriest/Archaeologist Bard that doesn't have Fate's Favored, and I'll show you a pan of brownies.
mmmmm, brownies, Raglum looooovvvvvveeeeee brownies......
mmmmm, brownies, Raglum looooovvvvvveeeeee brownies......Lol cookie cutter. How can a trait be cookie cutter.
That means an entire build. Any individual option cannot be cookie cutter.
Also most traits are useless so its not surprising to see the rare good one in play often.
Cookie cutter?
You show me a half-orc Warpriest/Archaeologist Bard that doesn't have Fate's Favored, and I'll show you a pan of brownies.
What was that?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Fates Favored, luck bonus, and other unrelated subjects are best moved into other threads.Actually it's quite germane in my opinion, when you are discussing the impact of these types of faq requests.
Ranting about changes doesn't help promote the product.
So it doesn't bring more people into the game.
Fates Favored, luck bonus, and other unrelated subjects are best moved into other threads.Actually it's quite germane in my opinion, when you are discussing the impact of these types of faq requests.Ranting about changes doesn't help promote the product.
So it doesn't bring more people into the game.
I don't believe ranting is an accurate description. When the jingasa was nerfed, i sold it and bought something else useful to the build (lucky horseshoe)
When the staff of the master was nerfed, I agreed that it should have been, and switched to a different staff as bonded object, and changed some feats.
But I have yet to rant about the inappropriate nerfing of some items to fix a problem that doesn't lie with the item, but with the synergy it has with a trait.
With Invulnerable Rager, it is splitting hairs on the definitions of damage reduction as to be farcical.
Ah, yes.
I, too, believe that we should make all traits* equally crappy instead of creating more interesting, more powerful ones.
(*Substitute any of the following here: feats, classes, items, abilities, or any option available to any player ever.)
It's simpler to bring one subject down to an appropriate amount of power than it is to raise every other subject to be on the same level as the original issue in question; you're basically comparing a simple fix versus basically rewriting the definition, implication, and power level of all other traits in the game.
Of those, which do you think is more likely for Paizo to do?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, my days of not taking errata and FAQ seriously are certainly coming to a middle.
Ah, yes.
I, too, believe that we should make all traits* equally crappy instead of creating more interesting, more powerful ones.
(*Substitute any of the following here: feats, classes, items, abilities, or any option available to any player ever.)
It's simpler to bring one subject down to an appropriate amount of power than it is to raise every other subject to be on the same level as the original issue in question; you're basically comparing a simple fix versus basically rewriting the definition, implication, and power level of all other traits in the game.
Of those, which do you think is more likely for Paizo to do?
It's even simpler to remove the option entirely or ignore its existence. Does this mean I have another member of the "remove full casters and mundane classes" party?
Get hit with a dominate before you can rage and all that superstition bonus means nothing to you. However, it means everything to your friends as you are very resistant to everything while you kill them for your new master.
Maybe. Dominate is a 1 round cast time. ALSO if you rage while dominated you get your superstition bonus to the 2nd save, perfect.
Going first is bad if you have superstition any way. I see it come up significantly more often than the downsides
Fine. Remove dominate and add in any other save or suck/die. The main point is that you are making a big nasty melee character who is supposed to have high saves and be relatively protected from casters. Going late means that you WILL be making saves vs a casters highest lvl nasty spell in the first round before you can rage. Even if your not used against your own party, taking you out will be the GMs first goal.
PS: One round of dominate is all this build needs to kill off 1-2 of your party. Alternatively, I can go tell you to get me a large keg of ale from the dwarves that live under that mountain of the other side of the world. Now you don't get a reroll and are effectively dead.
|
The rage power refers to the class feature damage reduction, meaning that it doesn’t help invulnerable ragers’ invulnerability class feature. The suggestion for the archetype to take that rage power in the suggested rage powers is in error and will be removed in the next errata.This new RAI interpretation is still not RAW.
There is (now) an error in the rage power description due to this FAQ.
It says, "barbarian's damage reduction". You'll need to change that verbiage too when (IF) you next errata the Core book to reflect explicitly the class ability and not the generic game defintions that currently controls "damage reduction".
Pedant much?
"Barbarian's Damage Reduction" always meant DR gained from the class, not just a Barbarian who has DR from any source. All the FaQ does is, sadly, state that "Barbarian's Damage Reduction" and "Invulnerability" are two different abilities.