Post/Author/DateTime	Post
SchizophrenicGuineaPig 03-04-04, 12:43 AM	This is my first post on these forums so if i screw up somehow please bear with me. I just started my first campaign and the group is going to choose their characters. I am trying to decide between either the barbarian or the fighter. I want to compare the two classes to determine how they will perform in different circumstances to see what i would like the best. So far i have compiled this list of characteristics: The barbarian substitutes armor class for hitpoints.The barbarian does not begin with heavy armor proficiency. However, he does have a d12 hit die and gains an additional 2 hit points per level while raged. This means that he will be more effective against monsters with a single accurate attack and less effective against monsters with multiple attacks or a low bonus and high damage (power attack for example). Hit points absorb all types of damage from attacks while armor class absorbs only physical damage. The barbarian will be more resilient against magical and other none physical damage and will be able to combat spellcasters easier than the fighter. Barbarians wearing light armor will move at 40ft while a fighter in heavy armor will be moving at 20. The barbarian will be able to close with his enemies faster and may take less damage approaching his target. The barbarian will be able to start dealing damage faster than a fighter. Barbarians can rage and gain +2 to their fort saves and +2 to their will saves to further increase resistance to spells. The lack of armor for the barbarian means that monsters with poison and disease attacks will hit more often and force more saving throws. the Barbarian is weaker against poison and disease attacks While the fighters weapon focus adds +1 to attack and weapon specialization adds +2 to damage, The +4 to str from rage adds +2 to attack and +3 to damage if using a two hander. The strength bonus applies to all melee and thrown weapons while the fighter feats apply to only one. Also the Rage will provide a bonus to strength based skills. Later on, the addition of greater weapon focus and greater weapon specialization increase the fighters attack bonus to +2 and his damage to +4. The Greater Rage ability provides +3 attack and +4 1/2 damage if using a two hander. Mighty rage will provide +4 attack and +6 damage. The fighter feats are passive abilities and are always present while a barbarian has a limited number of rages. The fighter will be less effective than the barbarian while he is raged but more effective when he is not raged. Fighters recieve 11 more feats than barbarians but if the fighter wishes to compete in terms of attack and damage, he must spend 4 of those feats on WF, GWF, WS, and GWS. in effect, the fighter has just 7 more feats. The fighter will have more options for combat due to his quantity of feats. The fighter can use his bonus feats to improve combat options, while leaving his base feats available for non combat bonuses. the barbarian recieves double the fighters base skill points and recieves more class skills. The barbarian can not read or write. Barbarians are virtually immune to sneak attacks and and can not be flanked. barbarians recieve bonuses to evade traps. Thats all i can think of for now. Please tell me if i have left anything out, and i welcome all constructive criticism.
Solidcobra 03-04-04, 12:52 AM	the barbarian can deal more wicked damage, but the fighter can enter PrCs easier.... or, do the best thing: Combine them! a barbarian X/fighterX/PrCX will do great (unrelated note: barbarian5/fighter1/frenzied berserker10 is a great build, start with barbarian 1, taking intimidating and destructive rage, then go fighter 1 and take power attack, then go barbarian until you are barb5/fight1, and take cleave, then go frenzied!)
Tam 03-04-04, 09:21 AM	Do not underestimate the importance of attributes: With a 25 point buy generation, those two builts offers about the same features : Human barbarian: Str 15, Dex 16, Con 12, Wis 10, Ig 8, Cha 9 Human Fighter: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 14, Wis 10, Ig 13, Cha 8 Same Hp, Skill points, max melee attack bonus. Fighter has +1 For, potentially a +1 max AC (when she gets the gold to buy full plate), better bonus with knowledge skill. Barbarian has +2 Ref, +2 attack with range weapon, better bonus with move skill, and less armor penalty for those skills. She also has +2 AC with touch attack. These are not optimum builts, just built that offers comparison start; decide in which direction you want to go and chose from there. - IMO WS,GWS are better left for range attack. For melee attack, (WF+WS) is worth +2 to +3 to Str with narrower usefullness (that is, half orc character could already be considered as having those 2 feats with all melee weapons). - Barbarian offers DR, fighter not. DR is very good to shrug off magic missile or swarm like attack. Did you know it took an average 600 rounds for a 20th level wizard (Str 10) to coupdegrace, with her dagger, a 20th level 150 hp naked barbarian ?
capt. narcissist 03-04-04, 09:23 AM	Originally posted by Solidcobra the barbarian can deal more wicked damage, but the fighter can enter PrCs easier.... or, do the best thing: Combine them! I 100% agree.
Thyrwyn 03-04-04, 10:36 AM	but which one do you want to play? Do you want to play a barbarian or character that is more deliberate? That said - do not underestimate the power of Uncanny Dodge - it makes those extra HP go an awfully long way.
Frodo Lives 03-04-04, 11:17 PM	If I play a melee character I personally like having a higher AC than a few extra HPs. I'd rather not get hit than be able to take more damage. During combat I don't think it makes a huge difference in terms of survivability, one gets hit less the other can take more damage. However, after combat it really saves on the party resources (especially if healing power is low). No actual data to back this up, just my personal preferance. The higher AC the better. It depends on if you are playing with a lot of the splat books or not. If you are then fighter is my choice, there are tons of really good feats and feat combos out there. If not, then the barbarian probably has more advantages.
Slivvy Gaidin 03-05-04, 12:02 AM	I'm a big Bbn fan, and have come to the conclusion that in most cases, a high AC will not save you. High attack bonuses will often hit (although a hig AC will help for those reiterative attacks), incorporeal will ignore your armor, and special abilities often have you rolling saving throws. Thats not to say that hig AC isn't useful- I just prefer Bbns
Ascian 03-05-04, 12:19 AM	I agree on the note about combining them. My SO and I were rolling up new characters for a higher-level one-shot, and didn't show our sheets until we were done. Guess what? We'd both taken Barbarian 1st level, then four levels of Fighter. For me the Barb was an incidental grab for more skill points, HP, and base speed at first level before I started Fightering for PrC prereqs. For him, Fighter was an incidental stop-off on his way to more Barbarian levels so as to get an extra feat or two under his Belt of Giant Strength. Either way, it's a very profitable choice, build-wise. That we built a 'barbarian sisters get recruited into an army and then lead a rebellion' background out of the level chronology was just entertaining gravy.
Iron Chef Vastrox 03-05-04, 12:34 AM	I would go Barb, not only for mechanical reasons, but I'm also a Scandinavian Studies major and know all of the RP ins and outs of Norse/Icelandic culture. By 20th level, your Rage will give you a +8 to Str and Con, as well as +4 Will Saves. You get DR 5/- and far better skills, as well as a beefier hit die and the +4 bonus vs. Enchantment effects. This makes your raging will save against a 'hold person' a base +14. Not too shabby. Battle Rage also enhances Power Attack bonuses, since you get a +2 through +4 to hit/damage at various levels, you can PA almost for free. Not only that, but the Barb doesn't suffer nearly as much in the AC department as one might think...mithral fullplate is a 'medium' armor, meaning wearable by a Barbarian. Plus, you'll be in a better situation to take advantage of the +3 Max Dex bonus. Assuming identical equipment, you'll have the same AC as a fighter. Even in rage, you'll only be at a -2, but still have several other bonuses (like resistance to trip, +4 to will saves, that sort of thing).
Slivvy Gaidin 03-05-04, 01:43 AM	Aside from the statistical bonuses, both fighter and barbarian make good role-playing additions to your character when used in multiclass. A barbarian multiclassing to fighter can show his attempt at embracing 'civilisation', showing a focus on fighting (less on woodsman stuf) or simply a discipline that was beaten into him (like spending a period of time in an army). A multiclass into barbarian, OTOH, can represent the results of a traumatic experience causing the character to slightly lose control, or it could represent a newfound and embraced connection with the primal side of oneself.
Zardnaar 03-05-04, 01:59 AM	I prefer fighters over barbarians now. As you go up in levels the barbarians tend to fall behind for several reasons. 1. Sure they can dish out huge damage in mellee. Unfortionatly they suck at ranged combat. 2. They suck up to much of the parties resources (healing). Your already low AC is made alot worse when you rage. The Fighters/Clerics AC will often be 10 points higher than yours. 3. Dominate. Although better than fighters (most of the time) a dominated fighter is annoying. A dominated barbarian is often fatal for at least one member of the party. Any DM not using dominate isn't playing wizards/sorceror to their full potential. Basically at high levels a Fighter type is marginal. A fighter type mellee is even worse. An archer can fit a role at level 20. A level 20 barbarian is basically a tough Dire Animal. They can beat a fighter mano a mano in a slugfest. A Monk should be able to take out any equal level Barbarian believe it or not.
ManTimeForgot 03-05-04, 02:40 AM	So you dislike barbarians because they are more powerful and if they are dominated it means trouble? Barbarians have that bonus to will save for good reason, no? I also have no idea how there is a 10 AC difference. And the hps are generally made up for in damage reduction, which is what allows the barbarian to take on multiple little foes without too much penalty. I find not too many differences in caliber between the barbarian and fighter when it comes to ranged combat. The fighter who specializes in heavy armor typically sacrifices dexterity, and thus the barbarian will come out even for the most part because the barbarian will have higher dex. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Zardnaar 03-05-04, 04:19 AM	Level 3 or so PC. Full plate, large shield, 12 dex=21AC Barbarian Chain shirt,12 dex, raging AC13 OK an 8 point difference. Magic shields are cheap though and commen. At the lower levels the barbarian is requiring more cure light wounds spells than anyone else. Sure they may kill stuff quicker but are a 1 trick pony (rage and beat away) If the DM is reasonably intelligent with NPCs with 10+ intelligence its not to hard to use archery or a retreat while the barbarian is raging. Once fatigued he is alot worse than a fighter. Our current party had a barbarian and when that player left the fighter/cleric replaced him doing just about as much damage but taking alot less due to his AC. I would prefer a tank vs a meatshield virtually any day of the week. The barbarian is just as much of a liability as a benefit IMHO and in my games I DM (not counting PrC's like Battlerager or Frenzied Berzerker)
Archangel 03-05-04, 07:17 AM	So give that Barb a breasplate and a large shield and its AC rises to 16 in rage and 18 normal! Not to mention that Barbs usually have higher Dex, lets say 14 dex, so now 19 AC and rage 17!
Dunbar 03-05-04, 03:02 PM	Just to clarify a few things so the original poster can make an honest choice... Originally posted by Zardnaar I prefer fighters over barbarians now. As you go up in levels the barbarians tend to fall behind for several reasons. 1. Sure they can dish out huge damage in mellee. Unfortionatly they suck at ranged combat. Um, why? Generally barbs will have a higher dex than fighters (because of no heavy armor), so they have an edge there. I'm assuming a melee-focused fighter vs. a melee focused barb, here. Both are proficient in bows, have high BAB, etc. Why do barbs suck at ranged combat? Obviously an archery-focused fighter is better at ranged attacks than a melee-focused barb, but that's not the question here. 2. They suck up to much of the parties resources (healing). Your already low AC is made alot worse when you rage. The Fighters/Clerics AC will often be 10 points higher than yours. First, the AC issue. 10 points higher? Please. 16 dex barb in breastplate vs. 12 dex fighter in full plate means the fighter has +1 better AC, +3 when the barb is raging. Both can choose to use a shield if they want to. In the end, the difference is around 3 points of AC between a fighter and a barb, assuming we are comparing characters who are either both using or both not using a shield. And at high levels, a barb can get an animated shield and switch to using a two handed weapon with full bonuses from rage. The fighter, if he chose to go sword and board, has already dumped feats into his one handed weapon for specialization and isn't that flexible on upgrading. Advantage barb on damage here. And that is one other issue...if the barb is hitting more often and doing more damage, enemies are dying faster, so they get fewer attacks. Thus, he gets hit a bit more often due to lower AC, but his opponents get fewer attacks since they die faster. Which saves more hps in the long run? Depends on a lot of variables. Finally, what about sneak attack? With improved uncanny dodge, barbs should just about never be sneak attacked. Pit a barb and a fighter against a bunch of rogues and see who takes more damage. 3. Dominate. Although better than fighters (most of the time) a dominated fighter is annoying. A dominated barbarian is often fatal for at least one member of the party. Any DM not using dominate isn't playing wizards/sorceror to their full potential. Well, barbs are more resistant to dominate than fighters vie bonuses to will saves from raging and a class ability. And while barbs do tend to do more damage than fighters, either one being dominated is very very hard on the party. In terms of the domination department, I'd rather have a barb on my team who is less likely to be dominated than a fighter. Basically at high levels a Fighter type is marginal. A fighter type mellee is even worse. An archer can fit a role at level 20. A level 20 barbarian is basically a tough Dire Animal. They can beat a fighter mano a mano in a slugfest. A Monk should be able to take out any equal level Barbarian believe it or not. True. So are we comparing a melee fighter to a melee barb? Or an archer fighter to a melee barb? An archer fighter is certainly not going to have a shield, whereas a melee barb has that options, giving the AC edge to the barb in that case. Besides, a high level fighter should have access to items or teammates that allow him to fly and otherwise get to his opponents to dish out a smackdown. While fighter-types in general don't do as well as spellcasters do at higher levels, melee is hardly irrelevant. And as for your second post: Level 3 or so PC. Full plate, large shield, 12 dex=21AC Barbarian Chain shirt,12 dex, raging AC13 OK an 8 point difference. Magic shields are cheap though and commen. This is a totally unfair comparison. Why does the barb have only 12 dex? Why a chian shirt and not a breastplate? Why does the fighter get a shield while the barb does not? But lets look at damage then...give the fighter a longsword and the barb a greatsword, both have 18 str, barb has 22 since he is raging. fighter = 1d8 + 4 = 8.5 dmg on average barb = 2d6 + 9 = 16 dmg on average. The barb is doing about double the damage! Add in power attack and cleave, and he's probably attacking 2 times every other round considering hps of opponents around this level. He's killed all his opponents long before the fighter has...so who takes more damage is up in the air. Especially if the barb kills say the enemy caster sooner and doesn't get hit with sleep or hold person. At the lower levels the barbarian is requiring more cure light wounds spells than anyone else. Sure they may kill stuff quicker but are a 1 trick pony (rage and beat away) I see. And the fighter isn't a one trick pony because he can..well..step up to his opponents and swing away. Yeah. Oh, and we haven't mention things like uncanny dodge and DR (added combat bonuses for the barb) and better skillpoints and skill list (yay, barbs can do something outside of combat). Fighters are more of a one-trick pony. If the DM is reasonably intelligent with NPCs with 10+ intelligence its not to hard to use archery or a retreat while the barbarian is raging. Once fatigued he is alot worse than a fighter. If attacked by archers, the barb takes cover and uses his own bow, just like a fighter would. If the enemy tries to retreat, the barb can charge and attack (if the enemy is in heavy armor he's in trouble). If they flee, fine, the encounter is over and the barb is no longer fatigued. And while they run the party takes pot shots at them with ranged weapons. Our current party had a barbarian and when that player left the fighter/cleric replaced him doing just about as much damage but taking alot less due to his AC. I would prefer a tank vs a meatshield virtually any day of the week. The barbarian is just as much of a liability as a benefit IMHO and in my games I DM (not counting PrC's like Battlerager or Frenzied Berzerker) Such an example is not really worth much. So a certain barbarian played a certain way (let me guess, 12 dex with a chain shirt, no wonder he got hurt bad) pales in comparison to some other fighter/cleric (why why multiclass cleric? Striaght cleric is much better IMHO). This tells us nothing. In a fair comparison, both fighters and barbs have strong points and weak points. Personally, I'd go with barb or barb/fighter for the following reasons: Rage > Specialization Rage gives you options and flexibility; specialization ties you to one particular class of wepaon. Granted specialization isn't limited to a certain number of times per day, but at higher levels you have enough rages to go around. Hps > AC At higher levels, the hp bonus from rage is huge. Thus the barb keeps on fighting when the fighter is down. Sure the fighter gets hit less thanks to 3 points more AC or so, but AC doesn't help against damage spells, and hps does. Will save The biggest problem fighter have is will save spells, which are essentially save or die many times. Barbs get a bonus from a class ability and from rage. This is a very good thing. Higher movement Ever tried to flee as a fighter in full plate? Running 60ft per round, while your opponent can charge that far? And you've lost your dex bonus while running...hope your opponent doesn't have sneak attack. If your DM never has your party forced to flee this may not be a big deal, but if you do have to run, a fighter is often in big trouble. More skills Fighters have the crummiest skill list in the game. Barbs have more skillpoints and a much better list (yay listen as a class skill!). It's nice to not always be surprised, and to be able to contribute to the party outside of combat. I'd rather have a barb on watch at night than a fighter any day. Uncanny dodge Priceless if you ever face rogues or anything with sneak attack. For me, the question becomes do you want to play a canny fighter, able to respond to multiple opponents (uncanny dodge), respond to danger (listen), deal gobs of damage (rage), highly moble (fast movement), who can shield his mind against domination and hold type spells (will save bonuses)? Or do you want to play the specilized fighter, married to one weapon and encased in armor so he can barely move (20ft move and 60ft run in full plate...ouch), who deals almost as much damage, has more tricks up his sleeve for combat (bonus feats) but lacks the other intangibles?
Votan 03-05-04, 05:18 PM	This is an analysis that I have done many times. The high points are: 1) Out of combat -- the Barbarian has more skill points and more class skills than the fighter (including listen which is always nice in a watchperson). In 3E a lot of non-combat activity is at least partially skill driven. 2) Feats aren't enough -- the Barbarians combat abilities rapidly outclass the feat chains at high level. Want 5/- DR? Not with a feat. Want rage? All of the fighter specializations and focuses come close (at 12TH!!! level). Mighty rage is just obscene. Barbarians are provably better at 1st level. Only very specialized circumstances (like a humanoid vs humanoid duel) does a 20th level fighter start to look as a good as a barbarian. Fighter return to their own in epic levels. However, the strange rule that bonus feats can be used to buy epic feats o0nce you are in epic levels means the barbarian can start over as fighter 1 at 21st level and get epic feats even faster than the epic fighter does. :eek: I'm not saying there is never a reason to be fighter. I am just saying that it requires a specific character concept to make it work well that isn't really Barbarian. Example, an archer seems to work better as a ranger or a fighter.
Zardnaar 03-05-04, 05:51 PM	Only Epic fighters (21+) can take epic bonus feats. A Barbarian 20/Fighter1 has to take a non epic bonus feat. My point was most barbarian builds I have seen use a 2 handed weapon and power attack to do the most damage. Lower AC usually. Our current party is level 13 or so and since the departure of the Barbarian they don't miss him at all since the fighter types replaced him. With the same dex and same armor fighters often use shields so the AC is usually at least 4 points higher due to rage and shield. Also do other DMs ever strike PCs when they're weak? Barbarians fatigued, PCs resting in a camp etc. All those bonus feats can make a big difference- Combat Reflexs for example and it won't weaken a fighter build to much to "waste" 2 feats to take rapid shot and point blank shot to make a somewhat competant archer. I have used Monks to beat PC barbarians in a fight. Barbarian rages, monk uses faster movement to stay clear until rage wears off or uses spring attack and trip attempts to whittle the Barbarian down. A fighter is somewhat vulnerable here but may have a feat somewhere to help out or can use a bow instead. Also at higher level no NPC who is reasonably intelligent is going to mellee with a Barbarian to see who will run out of hit points 1st. Also due to a low AC the Barbarian is very vulnerable to grapple checks- his higher strength is often moot since alot of monsters have 20+ grapple checks at those levels. Sometimes Barbarians will shine but if the DMs tactics just involve throwing waves of Orcs/Giants etc at the PCs and wondering why his encounters get ripped to pieces is basically giving the Barbarian a perfect situation constantly. I try to divide my encounters up between magic,missile, mellee etc so in these situations a Barbarian is at best OK.
SchizophrenicGuineaPig 03-06-04, 01:36 AM	Originally posted by Zardnaar I have used Monks to beat PC barbarians in a fight. Barbarian rages, monk uses faster movement to stay clear until rage wears off or uses spring attack and trip attempts to whittle the Barbarian down. A fighter is somewhat vulnerable here but may have a feat somewhere to help out or can use a bow instead. Also at higher level no NPC who is reasonably intelligent is going to mellee with a Barbarian to see who will run out of hit points 1st. Also due to a low AC the Barbarian is very vulnerable to grapple checks- his higher strength is often moot since alot of monsters have 20+ grapple checks at those levels. It was my understanding that you had to start a grapple with a touch attack. I do not believe armor is a factor in touch attacks.
Iron Chef Vastrox 03-06-04, 03:13 AM	Originally posted by Zardnaar Only Epic fighters (21+) can take epic bonus feats. A Barbarian 20/Fighter1 has to take a non epic bonus feat. Nope, not true. Read the first line of your ELH: Classes section: "Regardless of the method by which you achieve 21st level, once you reach that point you are considered an epic character." Epic Fighter, Epic Barbarian, etc. are their very own classes, not continuations off of PHB classes. There is nothing wrong with going Barbarian 20/Epic Fighter X for epic bonus feats. Unless you can find me a quote in errata or ELH re-prints, this is the rule. My point was most barbarian builds I have seen use a 2 handed weapon and power attack to do the most damage. Lower AC usually. Our current party is level 13 or so and since the departure of the Barbarian they don't miss him at all since the fighter types replaced him. With the same dex and same armor fighters often use shields so the AC is usually at least 4 points higher due to rage and shield. On average, Barbarians only lag in AC by 2-3 points, on average. At epic levels, their armor class is typically identical to fighters of comparable level. I'll give a more detailed breakdown later. The reason your group is not missing the barbarian is because 1.) it sounds as though it was being poorly played and 2.) you have another front-line melee character to fill in the gap. Also, by 13th level an animated Large Steel Shield is easy to come by. Not only that, but with the 2-handed weapon and Power Attack, you'll be dealing far more damage than a one-handing Fighter. Also do other DMs ever strike PCs when they're weak? Barbarians fatigued, PCs resting in a camp etc. All those bonus feats can make a big difference- Combat Reflexs for example Attacking the Barbarian while fatigued is almost always a DM cheap shot to hose the Barbarian. Barbarians can rage 1/encounter. Typically this rage will last from 5-7 rounds, possibly 10-12 with Extended Rage. If all of the monsters aren't dead after a minute, then they're of sufficiently low power that Raging is unnecessary. If they are not of low power, then Rage or no, the party is in over its head. If the DM is simply sending in dozens of waves of monsters 30 seconds apart and considering them '1 encounter', then the Barbarian is getting unfairly hosed. Resting in a camp, the Barbarian is actually the best-equipped to take on an encounter, because his defenses are least dependent on armor, which the fighter typically has to spend 5 minutes getting into. Combat Reflexes? Barb's got Cleave. The combat effect is very similar. and it won't weaken a fighter build to much to "waste" 2 feats to take rapid shot and point blank shot to make a somewhat competant archer. Point Blank Shot and Rapid Shot do not an archer make. This choice will actually make the fighter far weaker than the Barb. as he has either 1.) invested poorly in an inferior secondary combat style or 2.) ineffectively split his resources between combat styles. You've only got so many ability points. Typically the 16/12 split is far better than the 15/14 between Str or Dex. I have used Monks to beat PC barbarians in a fight. Barbarian rages, monk uses faster movement to stay clear until rage wears off or uses spring attack and trip attempts to whittle the Barbarian down. A fighter is somewhat vulnerable here but may have a feat somewhere to help out or can use a bow instead. Also at higher level no NPC who is reasonably intelligent is going to mellee with a Barbarian to see who will run out of hit points 1st. Also due to a low AC the Barbarian is very vulnerable to grapple checks- his higher strength is often moot since alot of monsters have 20+ grapple checks at those levels. 1. Nothing says that a Barbarian must rage at the beginning of combat. 2. Allowing for the same equipment, a monk's speed bonus never outpaces the Barbarian's to the point that the monk can attack and be outside of Charge range. If you're talking about ranged combat, the Barbarian has a clear advantage with Martial Weap. Prof: Longbow. 3. A Monk is actually one of the worst grapplers in the game. Grapple checks are reliant on Str modifier, BAB, and Size modifier. The Barbarian has both perfect BAB and superior Strength. There is no core class that can make and break grapple checks with the reliability of a Barbarian, raged or not. 4. The NPC that does nothing but run from the barbarian also can't close with the casters and support characters the barbarian is protecting. You can try plunking away with your longbow all day, but the Barbarian will do the same...while the party Wizard and Cleric rain fire down on your head. 5. Because every monster can grapple well, the Barbarian is useless? This actually makes the barbarian better, because they can break grapples with more reliability than fighters, and especially monks. Sometimes Barbarians will shine but if the DMs tactics just involve throwing waves of Orcs/Giants etc at the PCs and wondering why his encounters get ripped to pieces is basically giving the Barbarian a perfect situation constantly. I try to divide my encounters up between magic,missile, mellee etc so in these situations a Barbarian is at best OK. A nice theory, but the Barbarian actually has better defenses against magic than the Fighter will. With a faster move speed and less reliance on 'Heavy Armor' (Mithral Fullplate, the best AC-booster in the game, is 'medium') the Barbarian can quickly turn missile combat into melee combat. And, once melee combat begins, he turns on the hatred and starts power attacking for sickening damage.
kedi 03-06-04, 03:45 AM	Fighter is a lot better. Period. Why? 13 more feats. 13 MORE FEATS. People choose human only for +1 feat and extra skills. +13 feat is holy. Think, a human fighter has 3 feats at 1st level. With apropirate feats, a well build fighter is better than almost any class. for example: an archer fighter (human): 12 str, 15 dex, 13 con, 14 int, 10 wis, 8 cha 3 feats at first level. 20 skill points at 1st level. feats: Rapid shot, point blank shot, weapon focus (longbow) a melee fighter (human): 15 str, 12 dex, 13 con, 14 int, 10 wis, 8 cha 3 feats at first level. 20 skill points at 1st level. feats: weapon focus (bastard sword) ex. weapon profiency (bastard sword) dodge. or weapon focus (longsword), dodge, mobility. attack melee +4 or elven archer: 10 str, 17 dex, 11 con, 14 int, 10 wis, 8 cha 2 feats at first level +5 skill points at first level feats: point blank shot, weapon focus (longbow) attack ranged +5 within 30 ft of enemy. fighter is one of the best classes (best classes: cleric, ranger, rogue, fighter, sorcerer) for custom builds. You can make a stalker from fighter, or an assassin, or a swashbuckler, anythi,ng you desire. d12 hit dice and rage, well, fighter is worth enough to take anyways.
Iron Chef Vastrox 03-06-04, 04:50 AM	Originally posted by kedi 13 more feats. 13 MORE FEATS. There comes a point where fighter bonus feats start to lose their punch. You can only do so much with the Power Attack and Expertise trees at 15th level, and if the plan is to go archer, then why not take Ranger since the majority of the good archery feats are free anyways? Fighter is generally better at making PrC prereqs, but then the comparison isn't between Barbarian and Fighter. Spiked Chain/Improved Trip builds are the only ones where Fighter is the penultimate class to take. +13 feat is holy. Think, a human fighter has 3 feats at 1st level. With apropirate feats, a well build fighter is better than almost any class. It is a well-accepted sentiment on the boards that this opinion is incorrect. Fighters, especially Human Fighters, do extremely well out of the gate, but begin to underdog at moderately high levels. Take this question to the Character Optimization Board if you don't believe me. an archer fighter (human): 12 str, 15 dex, 13 con, 14 int, 10 wis, 8 cha 3 feats at first level. 20 skill points at 1st level. feats: Rapid shot, point blank shot, weapon focus (longbow)[QUOTE] A fighter will make a better archer than a Barbarian. Ranged combat is simply not the barbarian's specialty. However, this does not mean that barbarians are bad at ranged combat. Also, straight Rangers generally tend to make far better archer characters than straight fighters do. Barbarians also have a great deal in terms of combat survivability. [Improved] Uncanny Dodge makes the Barbarian virtually immune to anything a rogue can throw at him. Damage Reduction easily makes up for the 2-3 points of armor class that the Barbarian lags behind the fighter. The ability to Rage is indispensible when trying to make/break grapples, break objects, or dish it out in melee combat. [QUOTE]You can make a stalker from fighter, or an assassin, or a anythi,ng you desire. Actually, no. A fighter is not the best first choice for either of these builds because of the skills needed to make an effective stealth-based character, which the stalker and assassin are. I will admit that fighter is a very good multiclass for any stalker/assassin/swashbuckler needing a hitpoint boost or a couple of 'cheap' feats. The real advantage of the fighter in build customization is in making Prestige Class prerequisites. Four levels of fighter will typically give you all the bonus feats you need, with the option for specialization later on. d12 hit dice and rage, well, fighter is worth enough to take anyways. I agree. However, you're neglecting the improved skills list, fast movement, Greater Rage, Mighty Rage, Damage Reduction, Indomitable Will, Uncanny Dodge, Improved Uncanny Dodge, and Trapsense. For core straightclass playability, the Barbarian is far ahead of the Fighter.
Zardnaar 03-06-04, 06:05 AM	No hitting a Barbarian when fatigued isn't a cheap shot. Its a good idea from a strategic point of view from the NPCs point of view. If your dungeon crawls consist of clear out room a, rest move on to room b, rest etc then of course the Barbarian is alot better. However if the NPC has had previous experience with the PCs or has scouts, divination etc the NPC should have a rough idea of the PCs tactics. This is where the Barbarian starts to become a liability more than a fighter. Not only they take more damage and require more healing but if they rage they weaken themselves once that rage wears off- which is a good time for a NPC counterstrike. I have run numerous games where in the 10+ level range and a couple around the 18-30 range. Dominate and Hold monster type spells are an issue at these levels. Even raging a Barbarian can easily fail a will save. Not only do the PCs lose their best fighter type but that fighter is now beating on them- probably with a 2 handed weapon. A barbarian can easily out damage a fighter but since their missile options are more or less thrown weapons or crappy archery. Rapid shot won't make the best archer in the world but its better than no archery feats for a Barbarian (not many barbarian PCs I have seen have any archery feats). A Barbarian is to much of a one trick pony and often a liability except in the low levels. From levels 4-10 I would prefer a fighter. Also the PHB mentions a fighter may select a bonus fighter feat. Not a bonus epic fighter feat. Although perhaps not clear personally I don't allow any 20 whatever/fighter1 to take a bonus epic feat. Its the only class ability fighters get in the epic levels.
Iron Chef Vastrox 03-06-04, 02:31 PM	You keep neglecting, however, that the Barbarian doesn't have to rage at every encounter. If your NPC throws some fodder minions at the party as a pre-emptive strike, there's no reason for the Barb to rage. I certainly wouldn't waste my times/day until I saw a bad guy that could actually give my party a problem. The barbarian can still rage once per encounter, and is only fatigued for the number of rounds that he raged for. If he decimates four goblins, then a bad guy ports in on the next round, that's one encounter and the barbarian's rage can continue over. If the barbarian kills the goblins in one round, is fatigued for one round, then the bad guy ports in, that's two encounters, and on the next round the fatigue wears off and the Barb is at full capacity again. No, it isn't the most efficient use of rages, but this can be overcome by Extra Rage or the more times/day of a higher level barbarian. Not only they take more damage and require more healing Shortly, I will post a detailed AC analysis to show how the Barbarian matches up to the Fighter. I have run numerous games where in the 10+ level range and a couple around the 18-30 range. Dominate and Hold monster type spells are an issue at these levels. Even raging a Barbarian can easily fail a will save. These are the levels where the Barbarian is least susceptible to Will Saves. Dominate and Hold monster are enchantment spells. The Barbarian's base saves against enchantment spells at 14th level is: 4 (base) + 4 (Indomitable Will) + 3 (Greater Rage) So, in rage, the Barb's got a +11 before Wisdom or Magic bonuses get added in. Compare to the Fighter: 4 (base) + 2 (Iron Will) This is assuming that the Fighter took Iron Will, not at all an absolute. So the 14th level fighter has got a whopping +6 versus the Barbarian's +11. At higher levels, the disparity increases to +14 for the Barbarian, +8 for the Fighter. A Barbarian fails a will save much more infrequently than a fighter of similar level. On to the Archery bits, a Barbarian can charge 80 feet in one round. This is enough to close to within melee with the vast majority of missile-users, unless your ranged encounters occur with the PCs in the middle of a grassy plain, on top of a hill, standing over a big Bull's Eye. Add in the magic inherent at these levels, like Boots of Striding and Springing, the Barbarian can charge 140 feet in a single round. With Wings of Flying or a Ring of Flight, and there's really very little that the Barbarian can't melee with. A Barbarian is to much of a one trick pony and often a liability except in the low levels. From levels 4-10 I would prefer a fighter. That's your opinion, and I respect that, but I would still opt for the Barbarian. For one thing, the Barbarian's one-trick ponyedness encompasses closing to melee range, dealing, and absorbing damage. I like that pony. Also, this is where the Barbarian can't be flanked and has Dex bonnus to AC when flatfooted. If you're facing off against rogues or incorporeal undead, the Barbarian has a tremendous advantage over the fighter. Also the PHB mentions a fighter may select a bonus fighter feat. Not a bonus epic fighter feat. Although perhaps not clear personally I don't allow any 20 whatever/fighter1 to take a bonus epic feat. Its the only class ability fighters get in the epic levels. I don't really know why you're looking at the PHB for epic abilities. The only two books with epic content are the ELH and DMG 3.5. If you don't allow non-20th level fighters to take Epic Fighter, then that's your house rule, but it doesn't change the official rules and can't be used in a debate on core effectiveness
Edymnion 03-06-04, 02:50 PM	The armor thing is nothing. Give him a Mithril Breastplate, and a Barbarian is good to go. Long as you've got a half-way decent Dex (I'd suggest a Dex 14), you're going to have an AC of 17 vs. AC 19 fighter with full plate and 12 dex. Thats only 3 points. And the higher your level, the less important the actual base AC bonus of armor becomes. Mithril Breastplate gives good defense, counts as Light armor so you can get your fast movement, and best of all, you'll be getting Damage Reduction. DR 5/- by lvl 20. Thats better than a fighter in obscenely expensive adamantine full plate. More hp, that d12 goes a long way, as you already mentioned. Uncanny Dodge. Whee, who cares about Rogues now? Bring on the pain! Twice as many base skillpoints. You can never have too many skillpoints. Not only can you out-bash the Fighter, you can out-skill him as well! Tactics. Charge + Power Attack are a nice way to get a free +4 damage when using a two handed weapon. Rage + Charge + Power Attack = +8 to damage. Yeah, Rage is usable only a limited number of times per day, but its nowhere near as bad as it sounds. Even at lvl 1, your Rage should last more than long enough for any encounter you come across, the rest of the time you just fight like a Fighter. By higher levels, you can rage every time you enter combat, because you are unlikely to have more encounters per day than you have Rages. Even if you do, just take the Extra Rage feat, gets you 2 more rages per day. And the most important thing, don't pidgeonhole the Barbarian. He doesn't have to be the uncivilized brute. You've got tons of skillpoints compared to the Fighter, dumping some in Literacy won't cost you anything. Take a couple ranks in Speak Language. Spend a couple in Perform and play a musical instrument, or be a storyteller. Be civilized, be perfectly at home in cities. Aka, play a Berserker instead of an uncultured Barbarian. Uses the exact same mechanics, but has a totally differant feel. Let your character define their class, don't let your class define your character. Just because the book calls them frothing war machines doesn't mean you have to play them that way. And I would suggest sticking in pure Barbarian all 20 levels, no multiclassing, no PrC. DR 5/- and Tireless Rage are nothing to snub your nose at, while the increased rage ability that knocks your stat boosts through the roof is simply incredible. Not worth giving up for a proficienty or two via Fighter or some PrC abilities, IMO.
Votan 03-06-04, 03:07 PM	Originally posted by Zardnaar No hitting a Barbarian when fatigued isn't a cheap shot. Its a good idea from a strategic point of view from the NPCs point of view. If your dungeon crawls consist of clear out room a, rest move on to room b, rest etc then of course the Barbarian is alot better. However if the NPC has had previous experience with the PCs or has scouts, divination etc the NPC should have a rough idea of the PCs tactics. This is where the Barbarian starts to become a liability more than a fighter. Not only they take more damage and require more healing but if they rage they weaken themselves once that rage wears off- which is a good time for a NPC counterstrike. I have run numerous games where in the 10+ level range and a couple around the 18-30 range. Dominate and Hold monster type spells are an issue at these levels. Even raging a Barbarian can easily fail a will save. Not only do the PCs lose their best fighter type but that fighter is now beating on them- probably with a 2 handed weapon. A barbarian can easily out damage a fighter but since their missile options are more or less thrown weapons or crappy archery. Rapid shot won't make the best archer in the world but its better than no archery feats for a Barbarian (not many barbarian PCs I have seen have any archery feats). Well, I have 3 comments here. 1) The Barbarian getting attacked just as his rage subsides is a very tactics related move. Tactics nerf a lot of comparisons. If the enemies think out specific ways to exploit the weaknesses of party members then nearly everybody can be made to look weak (even a cleric!). In this case, an extremely carefully timed counter-attack (remember a round is 6 seconds so being off by 1 minute in the counter attack is likely going to let the Barbarian rest) is an effective anti-Barbarian tactic if it is used right. Waves of enemies is also an issue but again the timing between waves has to be perfect or else an encoutner will end. But it really requires a bit of metagaming on the part of the DM to really work well. As for strikers and runners -- the Barbarian is actually less susceptible to them then the fighter (faster move means you need faster skirmishers). If the opponents simply withdraw then the Barbarian can let the encounter end. Besides, I'd stop raging agaisnt monks if this was used too often. Once in a long while to make a point is good DMing -- every second encounter is strange. Nobody doubts that a series of encounters can be designed to exploit the weakness of a class. At the levels you specify 4-10, a wizard is much more vulnerable to this than a Barbarian. If the bad guys counter attack as soon as the party is out of spells the wizard is a commoner with a staff. There is a delicate balance between exploiting the weaknesses of a party and designing encounters to specificly exploit them. 2) Dominate is less effective on Barbarians then fighters. In my opinion (and this controversial), I actually like a level of Barbarian as a fighter just so I can rage when a spellcaster is around. I won;t do it normally -- it isn't worth it. But when a Dreadmaster of Bane appears you wanna bet I want every will save enhancement I can get. 3) Higher skill points means either more non-combat options or better physical stats (by using intelligence as a dump stat). This is actually why I like the Barbarian more than the fighter. The skills seem to be better than featsin many role-playing intesive games. Besides, the non-rage abilities are things that I'd like to buy if I were a Fighter (Uncanny Dodge? No sneak attacks? Improved will saves? trap sense?).
Votan 03-06-04, 03:29 PM	Originally posted by Zardnaar Also the PHB mentions a fighter may select a bonus fighter feat. Not a bonus epic fighter feat. Although perhaps not clear personally I don't allow any 20 whatever/fighter1 to take a bonus epic feat. Its the only class ability fighters get in the epic levels. From the 3.5 Epic SRD: "When a single-class epic character gains a level, he or she may choose to increase the level of his or her current class or pick up a new class at 1st level. Now these are the rule for picking a new feat from this new class that was started at first level: "Whenever an epic character is allowed to pick up a feat as part of character level advancement, he or she can choose either a nonepic feat or an epic feat. All class descriptions provide a list of bonus feats that characters must choose from. When a character has to choose from a list of bonus feats in the second class, he or she can also choose from the bonus epic feats described for each specific class." :mymy: These are the rules for starting a new class at first level for an epic character. So a Barbarian 20/Fighter 1 picks an epic feat at first level. Yes, it does seem to make being a fighter from level 1-20 look silly. Yes, it is probably a bad rule because of just this exact case (it removes the only advantage a Fighter had over a Barbarian which was their phenomenal epic feats). :looloo: So you can create a house rule to ban this (which is perfectly reasonable, by the way) but in core it adds to the argument to be a Barbarian 20/Fighter X. In fact, that is the fastest way that I know if to get a second epic feat and you end up with MORE epic feats than a fighter. :eek: Until this was pointed out to me I used to be in perfet agreement with you that in a level 18+ campaign a fighter would eventually really pay off.
Zardnaar 03-06-04, 05:34 PM	Votan my bad. I was thinking of 3.0 in regard to epic feats and the Barbarian 20/Fighter1. I'm not saying the Barbarian is a bad class but is somewhat limited. Everyone uses examples of mithril beatsplate or whatever. Mithril breatplate costs 5000gp or so. Using the same armor, and stats. 16 dex Barbarian vs fighter. Barb. Mithril breastplate, AC 18, 16 raging. Fighter. Breastplate+2, Shield+1, AC 23 all the time. Throw in weapon specialisation/focus and a bastard sword and damage is going to be close. Also alot of the time Barbarian damage is overkill. Hitting a goblin for 5 points of damage is just as good a 10 points of damage. If you're fighting say dire animals or something theres a very good chance the Barbarian will take alot more damage or be grappled/tripped. Thats why I prefer Fighters although if I was building a mellee character I would multiclass as a fighter/barbarian or if I was in the epic levels Barb 20/FighterX or in a min/max mood Dwarf Fighter2/Barb3/Battlerager5/Frenzied Berzerker10 . Up until recently I would have agreed the Barbarians better but after by current campaign I'm leaning towards a Fighter(not by much though).
Votan 03-06-04, 11:43 PM	Originally posted by Zardnaar Votan my bad. I was thinking of 3.0 in regard to epic feats and the Barbarian 20/Fighter1. No problem. I simply did not beleive this rule when it first came up until I went and verfied it. I understand whjy they might want to do something for a fighter 10/wizard 10 who wants to keep advancing in both classes. But it completely smashed the best advantage of the epic fighter. Up until recently I would have agreed the Barbarians better but after by current campaign I'm leaning towards a Fighter(not by much though). Playing a fighter is a very rational choice for certain types of builds. Building a very fun fighter is perfectly possible and with the right feats they can can be very formidable. I consider (among +1 BAB classes) the Paladin, Barbarian and Ranger as balanced. I see the fighter a balanced/weak. They make the best battle experts but that concept would be better with a longer skill list and more skill points. Basically, if you have a character concept that using feat chains for synergy then the fighter is pretty decent. I also think that prestige classes can easily change this balance. The Barbarian best stuff comes up as the character levels up. The fighter can leave the class at level 5-6 and not be giving up good things (and having nice things like weapon specialization).
Zardnaar 03-07-04, 01:01 AM	The main reason I like Fighters better though is versatility. Archer, TWF, mounted etc or Fighter/Rogue type characters. The Barbarian is good at his role but thats all he can really do well. And I hate being railroaded.