Barbarian and Avenger defenses (Forked Thread: Thaneborn Barbarians)

[Ceraus]

Forked from: Thaneborn Barbarians

The Barbarian Agility feature, a first among scaling bonuses, actually works. The barbarian gets no stat to AC, losing on the gradual +4 bonus other classes get. Instead, he gets a fixed +1 bonus, compensating for average starting Dex, and a gradual +2 bonus, half what optimized classes get.

If that bonus did not half-scale as it does, the Con barbarian would only have a single scaling defense out of four, which is totally horrible (heavy armor becoming a necessity). But by getting two half-scaling bonuses, his defenses scale as much as other single-defense-boosting builds (Con fighter, Dex wizard). The Cha barbarian gets two full-scaling defenses and two half-scaling ones, on par with double-defense-boosting builds.

Note that the barbarian is still at a disadvantage since AC is more important than other defenses.

Theorically, a barbarian could abuse his Agility feature by starting with a high Dex and boosting it every chance, granting him exceptional Striker AC and rogue-like Ref at high levels, but things would stay in control for a couple of reasons:
- Boosting Dex for AC and Ref would leech from either Con for HP or Cha for Will.
- Leaving a secondary stat behind worsens class features and some power bonuses.
- At worst, the barbarian gets +2 AC and Ref as levels rise.
- The flavor would be off. I think players will simply choose to forfeit Dex or boost it only half of the time (a nice compromise).

What's really broken, though, as mentioned, is the avenger's Armor of Faith.

Both avenger builds get scaling AC through a secondary stat. They only start with cloth proficiency, but even then are competitive with rogue and ranger AC, being only one point behind at most (assuming a 4-point stat gap with rogues and a 2-point stat and 1-point armor gap with rangers). Leather Armor Proficiency, a no-brainer feat, makes them surpass both other melee strikers with little effort; rogues and rangers can't buy higher AC as easily.

Let's say the rogue gets Hide Proficency and Hide Specialization, both feats he can qualify for much easier than the avenger.

The avenger just takes the no-brainer Improved Armor of Faith and outclasses the rogue forever more. He might even take the same feats the rogue did, but his stats don't lend themselves to that as much.

I didn't even mention the high avenger HP. The warden, druid and barbarian get atypically high HP but low AC to compensate; the avenger just gets high HP and AC out of the box, with an option for 3-5 more AC for the low price of two feats with no prereqisites or penalty.

Actually, the avenger's max attainable AC is tied with shielded heavy armor users'... but the latter require the nigh-unanimously broken Agile Armor for its potential +3 bonus.

Proposed solution:
- Armor of Faith, as the name implies, is an armor bonus, thus doesn't stack with Leather or Hide armor.
- Improved Armor of Faith stays at +1 (and stays a no-brainer feat!).

That makes the avenger par with the other melee strikers as far as AC is concerned. The avenger gets slightly ahead because his +1 feat bonus to AC has no prerequisites (a very minor advantage). For some reason, his HP is higher... but I think the nerf-hammer has hit hard enough for now.

To my surprise, arguments against the unbalancedness of Armor of Faith are numerous and as follow:
- The avenger is hard to properly leader-assist, so he must have crazy survivability.
- His AC is irrelevant, he'll get hit in the NADs regardless.
- He's not broken until he's spent two feats and gained a few levels.
- At worst, he's untouchable, and his party dies instead.

I'll let you judge their validity yourself.

 

[Runestar]

So the avenger manages an AC of 54 at lv30. What's your point?

 

[Victim]

Avengers don't seem to have the same sort of damage as other strikers, however. If they give up offense for more defense, I think that actually weakens them.

 

[ppaladin123]

What's odd is that the Censure of Retribution build wants to get hit otherwise it will not gain the bonus damage it needs to be a competitive striker. Unfortunately as Int goes up so does AC. It's probably better for that type of avenger to stay in cloth armor for this reason.

 

[DracoSuave]

Defense is sort of a Divine shtick, and Avengers have a habit of getting in the thick of it. Other strikers tend to punish, disuade, or counter people from hitting them, or have tricks to get them out of dodge. Avengers don't so much. Higher AC tends to get involved.


That said, Avengers are not a massive damage striker. They're about the 'death by a thousand cuts'. They don't hit hard. They hit -often-.

 

[Starfox]

The Avenger seemed like a very Defenderish striker to me - almost like a single-target tank. I think its supposed to be able to hold a major target - maybe not a solo, but at least an elite - occupied while the rest of the team clears lesser mobs. It pays for this with less damage.

 

[DracoSuave]

Avengers are the strikers with -two- bonus damage abilities. Both are situational, but while some are concentrating on trying for the Censure, the real benefit is in the Oath. The trigger is easier to maintain, and the powers of the Avenger are designed in keeping Oath going.

It changes your chance of a successful attack signifigantly.

So, if you have a 50% chance to hit, it's now 75% chance to hit. If you had 5% chance to crit, now it's 9.75%.

So, assuming the given 50/50 chance to hit average, you've basicly increased your non-crit-adjusted DPR by 50%. You're critting almost twice as much.

So, if you spend your time going after Oath rather then Censure, you'll increase your DPR by 50%.

The Censures are simply 'incentives' to make this happen more often.

 

[KidSnide]

The Avenger seemed like a very Defenderish striker to me - almost like a single-target tank. I think its supposed to be able to hold a major target - maybe not a solo, but at least an elite - occupied while the rest of the team clears lesser mobs. It pays for this with less damage.

Right. Without having seen them in play, Avengers strike me as the type of strikers who are supposed to be able to leave the rest of the party and make a honest one-on-one attempt to take out the controllers and artillery in the back line.

Rogues are notoriously bad at this sort of strategy (unless they really pile it on with abilities that let them set up their own combat advantage), and melee rangers can be quite vulnerable to the counter-gank when part of the enemy front line collapses backwards to hit the PC flanker. Avengers don't have the damage output of a melee ranger, but they have better defenses and lockdown abilities which makes them better suited for this tactic.

Avengers are probably real good characters for players who want to do their own thing. It seems like they are less dependent on group coordination than most D&D classes.

-KS

 

[Obryn]

Avengers are probably real good characters for players who want to do their own thing. It seems like they are less dependent on group coordination than most D&D classes.

After reading the Oath very closely, I have to disagree... Avengers need the rest of the party to keep (1) away, and (2) all the other enemies away with them.

Their Oath of Enmity requires two things to operate - that they use a melee attack, and that there are no other enemies adjacent to them. I think the latter requirement will require some pretty unusual strategy and group coordination. "OK, keep everyone else occupied while I kill this one."

-O

 

[Mengu]

I think Dexterity is essentially an unspoken tertiary stat for Barbarians. If you can get a racial bonus in this area, such as from a half-orc you are in good shape. But if you are going for a build that starts with high strength and con, you're simply better off spending the feat on chainmail. It's a conscious choice that makes either direction viable. I have no problem with the way they've laid out the barbarian. For instance if I were playing a half-orc Barbarian, I might go for something like 18/14/16/8/10/13. If I was playing a more wreckless Goliath, I might go for 20/16/11/8/10/10, sacrificing a significant bit of reflex defense for greater punch and higher resilience through temporary hit points.

I haven't quite figured out Avengers yet. I think they are rather feat dependent for striker-like damage. Superior weapon (say fullblade), focus, and the feat that gives them extra damage for charging their oath target. Maybe even power attack (-2/+3 doesn't sound terrible when you're rolling twice with a flank). Early on, if they want to be good at their striker role, they may not have the feats to spare for leather or better armor. But I think they will eventually get leather and improved armor of faith to bolster their AC.