Is the barbarian too powerful in your campaign?

[Emirikol]

Just a simple poll here. In your campaign, do you feel that the barbarian is significantly more powerful than other classes?

For example, does your barbarian typically do a bazillion points of damage and have massively more hp's than other characters pretty much 4-5x overshadowing all other characters in the game (with the possible exception of an overspecialized fighter)?

I don't mean this as a troll, I've just noticed that the barbarian seems a LOT overpowered in my campaign.

Thoughts? Solutions? Blasphemy?

jh

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Two games ago I played a barbarian character. He did rule in combat, dishing out significantly more damage than the other characters ... at least until his rage ended, at which point he was slightly better than useless (and was eventually killed when fatigued).

Having had barbarians as a DM, I don't have a problem with them. Maxed out, they can deal a lot of damage -- it's what they are designed to do -- but their low AC means they survive based upon ablative hit points, which balanced fairly well.

In a balanced campaign that has a variety of combat enemies, puzzles and traps, and talking encounters, the barbarian should shine in those encounters where "Krusk SMASH!" is the appropriate response, but the other members of the party should be contributing more in finessed combat encounters and the other situations.

If you think your barbarian is massively overpowered, I'd ask first -- what are the other characters, how is the barbarian built, and what type of encounters has he come up against? If the only min-maxer in the party is playing a 20 Str two-handed weapon wielding barbarian along side a rogue specialized in diplomacy, a bard, and a ranger specialized in archery, and all you've thrown at him is hordes of humanoid mooks, of course he will appear significantly overpowered.

Edit: Personally, the only 3.5 base classes that I think have a visible power advantage are clerics and druids, and that not by enough that it needs to be compensated for. Of course, this depends on what supplements you allow -- I'm speaking core rules here.

 

[Agent Oracle]

Nope.

Good attack,
Good damage
good Hp
One good save
Two bad saves
Bad penalty for special power
Bad armor class
Bad Skill points

 

[Thanee]

4+Int is bad skill points?

And to the original question... No, the barbarian class is fine. Maybe a little too front-loaded and thus a little too attractive for multiclassing.

Bye
Thanee

 

[ThirdWizard]

Nah, I see them die too often to consider them overpowered.

 

[Emirikol]

Have any of you found AC to be irrelevant though because of available magical items for the barbarian?

jh

 

[Dragonblade]

Barbarians are considered a joke in my game. Most people take a level for the 40ft of movement, the hit die and attack bonus but then play something else for their other levels.

Personally, I think the class is way underpowered. For starters I would probably make rage something the class can do at will.

 

[Crothian]

Barbarians are fine everytime they have been used.

 

[Thanee]

Have any of you found AC to be irrelevant though because of available magical items for the barbarian?

Not really. Those -2 AC will always give opponents a +10% chance to hit you, unless your AC is really high. This is compensated for by the better hit points, though, usually.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Agent Oracle]

4+Int is bad skill points?

And to the original question... No, the barbarian class is fine. Maybe a little too front-loaded and thus a little too attractive for multiclassing.

Bye
Thanee

Okay, okay... Middling skill points. Not especially good. I mean, it's half what a rogue gets, Wizards get fewer skill points, but since their class stat focus is intelligence, they wind up with more than the barbarian almost guarenteed.