Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Barbarian - likes and dislikes?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 2839868" data-attributes="member: 8158"><p>You state you disagree, but in fact your statements are very much in sync with what I was saying. To summarize: the fighter was intended to be easy to learn and hard to master, and people who weren't able or inclined to make the attempt to master it wound up with mediocre fighters. The "easy to learn" part correlates with what you say above about its genericness and simplicity, and the "hard to master" part meshes with your claim that some considered it a bad class to take too many levels in.</p><p></p><p>The place where we're not connecting is that you're not truly talking about shortcomings with the fighter class or the feats available, but with folks who picked up on the "easy to learn" bit, but didn't get a handle on the "tough to master" aspect. Instead, some people want the fighter to be "easy to learn, nothing to master". Rather than finding combinations of feats that synergized with each other, they favor prerequisite-guided feat chains that provided a clear-cut path for turning a fighter into a powerhouse. </p><p></p><p>Which was what they ultimately got in the PHBII; a fighter made barb-simple. I'm cool with that, and I like the new feats, but the class didn't need that stuff to be effective. The folks who derided single-classed fighters were just deriding the class for not providing straightforward paths. </p><p></p><p></p><p>In relation to the game of D&D, rage is not complex. Adding +2 to hit and damage is not particularly challenging, nor is gaining two hit points per level, or a Will save bonus. D&D is all about racking up bonuses, nothing special there. </p><p></p><p>As for picking feats, a player who's keeping it simple has a two-handed weapon. Now, where are you going from there? Power attack, almost de facto. There's a nice little prereq-guided feat chain to go down. </p><p></p><p></p><p>No, not at all. What I'm saying is that the barbarian is equipped to be simple--plug and play, as Doghead aptly puts it. You can go in other directions if you wish (wanna be a 2WF barb? more power to thee) it's very friendly to the players who just want to smash things with a really big sword.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, let's see how disparate the fighter and barbarian skillsets are: </p><p></p><p>Fighters get Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Ride, and Swim.</p><p></p><p>Barbarians get Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Listen, Ride, Survival, and Swim.</p><p></p><p>OK, who amongst us really sees a gaping chasm between the two skillsets? I find the arguement that a barbarian spends more time taking classes in jumping, intimidating, and riding than a fighter because barbarians just don't spend all that much time beating things up to be rather specious. And not just from a logical or intuitive standpoint (though that's certainly there), but from the more objective perspective that skill-point allotment is largely a function of class balance. It relates to how many class skills the class has (in this case, 9 to the fighter's 7), and the sum of its total package of modifiers--skill points, hit dice, BAB, and saves. The barb is compensated more handsomely than the fighter, and the reason for doing so certainly isn't because the class needs to be a skilmonger in order to pull its weight.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Felon, post: 2839868, member: 8158"] You state you disagree, but in fact your statements are very much in sync with what I was saying. To summarize: the fighter was intended to be easy to learn and hard to master, and people who weren't able or inclined to make the attempt to master it wound up with mediocre fighters. The "easy to learn" part correlates with what you say above about its genericness and simplicity, and the "hard to master" part meshes with your claim that some considered it a bad class to take too many levels in. The place where we're not connecting is that you're not truly talking about shortcomings with the fighter class or the feats available, but with folks who picked up on the "easy to learn" bit, but didn't get a handle on the "tough to master" aspect. Instead, some people want the fighter to be "easy to learn, nothing to master". Rather than finding combinations of feats that synergized with each other, they favor prerequisite-guided feat chains that provided a clear-cut path for turning a fighter into a powerhouse. Which was what they ultimately got in the PHBII; a fighter made barb-simple. I'm cool with that, and I like the new feats, but the class didn't need that stuff to be effective. The folks who derided single-classed fighters were just deriding the class for not providing straightforward paths. In relation to the game of D&D, rage is not complex. Adding +2 to hit and damage is not particularly challenging, nor is gaining two hit points per level, or a Will save bonus. D&D is all about racking up bonuses, nothing special there. As for picking feats, a player who's keeping it simple has a two-handed weapon. Now, where are you going from there? Power attack, almost de facto. There's a nice little prereq-guided feat chain to go down. No, not at all. What I'm saying is that the barbarian is equipped to be simple--plug and play, as Doghead aptly puts it. You can go in other directions if you wish (wanna be a 2WF barb? more power to thee) it's very friendly to the players who just want to smash things with a really big sword. Well, let's see how disparate the fighter and barbarian skillsets are: Fighters get Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Ride, and Swim. Barbarians get Climb, Craft, Handle Animal, Intimidate, Jump, Listen, Ride, Survival, and Swim. OK, who amongst us really sees a gaping chasm between the two skillsets? I find the arguement that a barbarian spends more time taking classes in jumping, intimidating, and riding than a fighter because barbarians just don't spend all that much time beating things up to be rather specious. And not just from a logical or intuitive standpoint (though that's certainly there), but from the more objective perspective that skill-point allotment is largely a function of class balance. It relates to how many class skills the class has (in this case, 9 to the fighter's 7), and the sum of its total package of modifiers--skill points, hit dice, BAB, and saves. The barb is compensated more handsomely than the fighter, and the reason for doing so certainly isn't because the class needs to be a skilmonger in order to pull its weight. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Barbarian - likes and dislikes?
Top