Making Lion Totem Barbarian (C.Champion) balanced

[StreamOfTheSky]

For those who may not know, a Barbarian with this totem at level 1 does not gain fast movement, but instead gains the Pounce ability.

I should start with some caveats:
I do not mind barbarians getting pounce. I think it's completely appropriate. Unlike some friends who suggest "flipping" the totem benefits, I also don't mind them getting it at level 1, instead of level 7. Druids can pounce (by spell or wildshape) at level 5, why should the fully martial barbarian have to wait longer than that? Most low level barbs won't get any use from pounce, aside from those with Whirling Frenzy while doing so or those brave souls who choose to TWF.

My main problem is people one level dipping barbarian for this bit of goodness, by far sweeter than just about any other one level dip in the game. So, I originally had 2 possible solutions, but my friends and I all agreed the second wasn't very good, and one of my friends suggested another possibility, the #2 option.

Please let me know which of these you think is better to institute as a houserule, or give your own suggestions.

1) The extra attacks you can make beyond the first on a charge is limited to your barbarian level.

-or-

2) The distance you can pounce is limited to 5 ft + 5 ft /barbarian level (10 ft at level 1, 15 at level 2, etc...). At level 11, you gain the ability to pounce out to any distance you can charge. Note: This ability does nothing to extend the distance you can charge, if you are able to pounce to a farther range than you could charge in the round.


If you must know the idea that even I decided to kill, here it is:

Spoiler:

Any time you take a class level in a class other than barbarian, you lose this class feature until you take a new level in barbarian. That is, you only benefit from this class feature when it was your training in barbarian that you last enhanced.

(The idea was to work like a weak form of the paladin/monk multiclass restriction, to make the class feature unpalatable to those not planning to regularly advance in Barbarian)

[Aus_Snow]

Ah, the good ol' front-loading issue, a la many a Fighter fix or custom Ranger (not to mention the 3.0 Ranger. . .)

How about delaying the Pounce, to. . . 3rd? I know, they'd be missing out on any compensation for two whole levels. Still, it's not without precedent, the general idea. There are a number of ability substitutes and class variants in WotC books, where this happens.

It's about the best I can come up with right now. :\ Probably something you've already considered, but hey, just in case.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Yeah, as I've noted in other threads, I don't really like delayed (or even worse, "pay later") alternate class features.

[Starbuck_II]

You could give them a feat at level 1 and pounce at 3rd.

Like Run (without Preqs). Run isn't that useful, but would provide some benefit.

[StreamOfTheSky]

So I'm to take it that it's never in any form acceptable to let a PC move and make two or more attacks at level 1? The only replies so far have both suggested delaying access to any semblence of pounce to level 3 or so.

[Stringburka]

Alternative 1 seems fine to me :3

Or, you might want to consider this:
Until 3rd character level, this only works when raging.

Since first levels only get rage 1/day, a character could level dip for rage and pounce once per day, but by level 3 you can pounce at any time.

[Asha'man]

I agree entirely with the reasoning in your starting post. 1st-level barbarians having pounce is fine, 4th-level warblade/2nd level fighter/1st level barbarians having it might not be. Clr 18/Barbarian 1 is right out.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a good mechanical fix that preserves the ability for low-level barbarians, but denies it to dippers. I'd be more inclined to avoid the problem by having some input on what classes and class features PCs multiclass into. Assuming you've got reasonable players, it shouldn't be a problem to say "Do you really see Thord as a barbarian/cleric, or is this just for the Pounce?" "Merrick has practically all Diamond Mind maneuvers and is always going on about focus and presence of mind in combat, is Barbarian really appropriate?" Or even outright "Sure you can multiclass to barbarian, but I won't let you take Lion Totem, because it would make you too powerful compared to the other PCs."

On the other hand, depending on the power level of your game, it might not be too powerful at all. It's been shown pretty conclusively that the main problem of Fighter-types at high levels is mobility, and easy access to Pounce would certainly alleviate that.

[Eldritch_Lord]

Honestly, martial types being able to make all of their attacks after moving is something they should just be able to do; it worked in 1e and 2e, why was it removed? I usually rule that all characters who have full BAB for all of their classes can make all of their attacks on a standard action, and all of their iterative attacks on a charge. It solves the dipping problem, it makes mobility-based classes worthwhile (you don't have to jump through hoops for a melee scout, a full-BAB monk can make use of its speed, etc.), and it lets non-chaotic martial classes have some love.

[StreamOfTheSky]

If what I'm understanding of your houserule is correct, full BAB classes are still free to multiclass and dip like crazy; they still have full BAB in the end. But for the medium BAB classes, they basically get a double whammy: not only do they lose more BAB with each multiclass which already greatly hurt, they're also now sacrificing ever getting to full attack on a move. And I'm curious about the case of say...a Rogue x / Swashbuckler 4. At at least some levels, he'll have a higher BAB than a straight rogue. But if you have to have exactly the appropriate amount of BAB for your level and class...he still loses out on those levels. Maybe it doesn't work like that, but that's how I interpreted what you said.

[Asha'man]

The problem with "everyone can move and full attack" is that under the 3e design philosophy, you'd have to extend the same courtesy to monsters. Which makes everything from trolls to true dragons a hell of a lot more dangerous. I've played a few high-level fights where monsters had various "move and full attack" tricks (Disciple of Demogorgon, quickened teleport etc) and the carnage was incredible. It becomes even more impossible than it already is to fight defensively or protect wounded characters.

You might say that it's no problem if fighter-type characters and monsters thrash everything in their path, because all casters have Save-or-die effects, and from level 1 at that. But firstly, I don't think making everything as powerful as the most powerful option is a satisfying form of balance (too swingy) and secondly, despite the hype, magic has its weaknesses. It runs out. Wizards are fragile. (The 17th level wizard in our campaign died every other session for a while(!)) There are ways to protect against magic. But swords don't run out, and there are precious few ways to protect against greatsword to the face. When a fighter-type gets off a full attack, that's a lot of damage at pretty much any level.

[Eldritch_Lord]

Originally Posted by StreamOfTheSky

If what I'm understanding of your houserule is correct, full BAB classes are still free to multiclass and dip like crazy; they still have full BAB in the end. But for the medium BAB classes, they basically get a double whammy: not only do they lose more BAB with each multiclass which already greatly hurt, they're also now sacrificing ever getting to full attack on a move. And I'm curious about the case of say...a Rogue x / Swashbuckler 4. At at least some levels, he'll have a higher BAB than a straight rogue. But if you have to have exactly the appropriate amount of BAB for your level and class...he still loses out on those levels. Maybe it doesn't work like that, but that's how I interpreted what you said.

Note I said those characters who have all their levels in a full BAB class; fighter/barbarian or hexblade/ranger yes, fighter/rogue or paladin/monk no. There are still ways for characters for less than full BAB to gain the ability (and relatively easily) it's just that they don't get it by default. Think of it like Swift Hunter or those other let-two-classes-work-well-together feats: If you go straight X you're fine, but if you want to add Y you might need to sink a feat or two in exchange.

Originally Posted by Asha'man

The problem with "everyone can move and full attack" is that under the 3e design philosophy, you'd have to extend the same courtesy to monsters. Which makes everything from trolls to true dragons a hell of a lot more dangerous. I've played a few high-level fights where monsters had various "move and full attack" tricks (Disciple of Demogorgon, quickened teleport etc) and the carnage was incredible. It becomes even more impossible than it already is to fight defensively or protect wounded characters.

...and once again the "full BAB for HD" rule saves the day. Dragons, magical beasts, monstrous humanoids, and outsiders are the only monster types with full BAB for their HD, so they're the only ones that get as boost--and since dragons and outsiders are supposed to be crazy good, monstrous humanoids are natural martial types, and magical beasts need some love every now and again, I don't really think it's much of a problem, if it is one at all. Yes, dragons and monstrous humanoids already make great beatsticks, but if you remember to bump up CR to compensate (which I do), everything works out.

You might say that it's no problem if fighter-type characters and monsters thrash everything in their path, because all casters have Save-or-die effects, and from level 1 at that. But firstly, I don't think making everything as powerful as the most powerful option is a satisfying form of balance (too swingy) and secondly, despite the hype, magic has its weaknesses. It runs out. Wizards are fragile. (The 17th level wizard in our campaign died every other session for a while(!)) There are ways to protect against magic. But swords don't run out, and there are precious few ways to protect against greatsword to the face. When a fighter-type gets off a full attack, that's a lot of damage at pretty much any level.

I'm not one of those who believes magic is utterly superior (though I will say that if your caster is dying more often than once every 4 or 5 sessions that it may be a playstyle issue, like trying to frontline instead of buff from the back). I started playing with 1e and 2e, where fighters were quite competitive and were superior in many circumstances because casters were much easier to interrupt and SoD-ing fighters was much harder. I use this rule to try to shift my games back to a 2e feel, not because of any perceived imbalanced; the fact that it does help even the odds at higher levels is just a bonus.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Well, I don't really want everything with full BAB to full attack and move, anyway. I also have never seen save -or - dies dominate the game, due to frequently high saves and monster immunities. But maybe it's also because my group as a whoel finds them largely distasteful. (Once in a while, it can be fun. My gestalt Ninja/Cleric wanted to be the quintessential "Ask a Ninja" ninja, so it was freaking awesome one time when he knocked a wyvern out of the sky on round 1 with Phantasmal Killer. That said, there were a bunch of other enemies in that encounter, wyvern was just the most dangerous, so it also didn't ruin the fight)

Back on topic...I'd still like to see some opinions based on my initial conditions: I don't mind level 1 barbs having pounce in some form, but I also don't want it to remain the cheap dip that it's become in my group, and am looking for a houserule to retain the former and limit or remove the latter. Thus far, the solutions have been to not let barbs have it at level 1, or give everyone with full BAB the ability. I'm happy for the input...but I wasn't really looking for that.

[Stringburka]

Or simply make Pounce always work in rage only. I mean, it stops dippers from getting it more than 1/day, but at higher levels, barbs can rage every encounter. At lower levels, they become slightly more restricted - but before level 6, the benefit of full attack isn't extremely big anyway (unless dual wielding).

[Asha'man]

I concur with Stringburka. There's no perfect fix for this, but his suggestion is the best on the thread in my opinion.

[StreamOfTheSky]

It could work. There are feats to extend rage or gain extra rages per day if a PC valued class levels over feats, but I guess paying feats to use the benefit all the time isn't necessarily a bad thing. It does make the barbarian yet more dependent on his rage to be good in a fight, which slightly worries me. There are spells liek calm emotions out there to take a barb right out of rage, and then he can't re-enter it again that encounter. Other than that, I like Stringburka's idea. Consider that option #3.