Barbarian Playtest Experiences

[Rechan]

On the topic of defenses, are we also disregarding neck-slot items? You know, you're assumed to have all three primary items (weapon, armor, neck slot).

We had someone play one last week. A repeated refrain was: "You do HOW MUCH damage?!?!?"

Seemed pretty overpowered to me.

Funny. I have a similar experience with the ranger.

 

[themilkman]

Funny. I have a similar experience with the ranger.

And I have a similar experience with the rogue. Throwing a fistful of d6s feels good.

I've played a 1st level Barbarian in one playtest so far, and he played really well. He dealt more damage than anyone else, but he was the party's only striker. He wasn't knocking people over in one hit, but with some good rolls, he could bloody people. His damage seemed on par with a brutal scoundrel rogue. Maybe a little less, but he wasn't so reliant on positioning for sneak attack bonus damage to hit the high numbers. In fact, he played a lot like a melee rogue, with pressing strike serving as a MUCH better deft strike. (This is to say that I played him like a melee rogue, and he seemed to play well that way.) If flanking is possible, pressing strike will give it to you every single round, which also helps whichever melee fellow you're working with.

Like a melee rogue, you also need to look after your health. The DM started throwing things at him pretty quickly, because he makes a tempting target in the thick of it. He got bloodied in two out of three encounters I played him in. Between the party's pally and the cleric, though, he was never in any real danger of going down. Also, I probably could have played him a little more conservatively, or started him with some heavier armor in my build. One time, in particular, he went from more than full to bloodied in one round due to a somewhat reckless use of Avalanche Strike. He stayed on his feet, though.

Balance seems good at first level, but I'm curious to see how some of the higher level rages play out (e.g., Thunder Hawk, Stone Bear).

 

[Ander00]

On the topic of defenses, are we also disregarding neck-slot items? You know, you're assumed to have all three primary items (weapon, armor, neck slot).

That is of course right, so monsters from level 25 onward will not necessarily hit you on a 2. You're still looking at two bad defenses though (which could be behind by something like 8-10 points). I think we can agree on that being worse than having only one bad defense, without further theorizing about high-level play (I'd be glad to hear about actual high-level play experiences though).


cheers

 

[Mengu]

We had someone play one last week. A repeated refrain was: "You do HOW MUCH damage?!?!?"

Seemed pretty overpowered to me.

This is why I've been testing it side by side with a Rogue. I don't think the Barbarian is quite outshining the rogue in the damage department, the rogue is usually better, until the Barbarian uses a daily, at which point the barbarian can become better if he used something like Frost Wolf Rage or Flameheart Rage. And when the two of them flank an opponent, they definitely make quick work of it. But getting the rogue in position to strike is still the party's primary priority.

My test group includes Paladin, Warlord, Wizard, Rogue, and Barbarian. The party dynamics are rather interesting. The Paladin and Warlord strive to keep the Barbarian alive through marking and healing, while at the same time providing the Rogue with combat advantage through a flank, daze, knock down, etc. The Wizard does his own thing, softening targets, sometimes giving the Rogue combat advantage through effects, and sometimes helping defend the Barbarian by Illusory Ambushing whatever is attacking the Barbarian. It feels like the non-striker's job is to assist the strikers.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

And I have a similar experience with the rogue. Throwing a fistful of d6s feels good.

Yah. Rolling 2d10 + 2d8 + 13 on my bugbear rogue's Torturous Strike means a lot of damage flows out if the dice are friendly.

Brad

 

[pskought]

We had someone play one last week. A repeated refrain was: "You do HOW MUCH damage?!?!?"

Funny. I have a similar experience with the ranger.

And I have a similar experience with the rogue.

We've had a similar experience with the Warlock. Gosh, it's almost as if these classes were designed to do more damage than the others. Hunh.

I'm glad to hear the barbarian is more or less working. I have to say, I thought the rage mechanic was a little confusing upon first read. does it play smoothly?

 

[themilkman]

I have to say, I thought the rage mechanic was a little confusing upon first read. does it play smoothly?

It played pretty smoothly for me. A lot like any Stance power from another class. The only tricky parts are remembering that it modifies your at-wills. (Howling Strike + Swift Charge is particularly awesome, when raging, to get to the squishy backline baddies, and the extra damage to Pressing Strike is nice too.) I'm not high enough level to use any Rage Strikes, yet, but I'm not particularly excited about that anyway. Our DM likes to throw many encounters at us each adventuring day, so I don't see myself blowing multiple dailies in any single encounter.

 

[Obryn]

We had someone play one last week. A repeated refrain was: "You do HOW MUCH damage?!?!?"

Seemed pretty overpowered to me.

My party's rogue just got her Charisma up to 16 and a +2 dagger. She's now doing, on a Sly Flourish sneak attack, 1d4+9+2d8. We're hearing stuff like that a lot.

Is the Barbarian more excessive?

-O

 

[Staffan]

My party's rogue just got her Charisma up to 16 and a +2 dagger. She's now doing, on a Sly Flourish sneak attack, 1d4+9+2d8. We're hearing stuff like that a lot.

Is the Barbarian more excessive?

The Barbarian has an at-will attack that does W+Str+1d6 at low levels (W+Str+2d6 at paragon, 2W+Str+3d6 at epic). That still seems like a little lower than what you're getting, but on the other hand the barbarian can use it without having to go through hoops to get flanking or stuff like that (admittedly, it's not that hard for the rogue to get combat advantage, but I'd estimate it at about 75%)

The barbarian would seem to get more oomph out of encounter and daily powers than the rogue though. Both the rogue's and the barbarian's encounter powers tend to do 2W damage, but the barbarian gets more out of those on account of having a bigger W. Then again, the rogue gets to add his sneak attack to his encounter powers, which the barbarian doesn't.

A third issue is that the rogue benefits from feats like Backstabber and Nimble Blade, but we don't know if what similar feats exist to support the barbarian. It's a pretty good bet there are some, but the playtest article only has about 2 powers per level and one paragon path.

 

[Cadfan]

Also remember that the rogue gets less damage out of encounter and daily powers than you might expect, since his [w] value is 1d4 or so. The barbarian, by contrast, gains a fair bit more as the amount of [w]s in a power increases.

That's the balance I've noticed in our games. The rogue's at wills are amazing, but the ranger's encounter and daily powers are much better in terms of damage dealt. The barbarian should be the same, because large, two handed weapons have better [w] values.