Barbarians seem very effective, too effective?

[Otterscrubber]

So in my group we have a barbarian and I get that they are strikers but they seem to massively out damage even other strikers, while at the same time having tremendous ability to move themselves and their targets. I was very surprised to find they can actually shift through an enemies square, something that rogues can do 1/encounter if they take the ability. The barbarian in our group routinely does 2x damage over the ranger and striker it seems. What is wrong with this picture?

 

[keterys]

Sounds like your ranger isn't doing enough damage.

Anyhow, a few levels for illustrative purposes:

L1:
Barbarian does 3d6+5 damage = 15.5
Ranger does 2 attacks for 2d10+2+1d6 = 16.5

L6:
Barbarian does 3d6+10 damage = 20.5
Ranger does 2 attacks for 2d10+6+1d8 = 21.5

L11:
Barbarian does 4d6+12 damage = 26
Ranger does 2 attacks for 2d10+8+2d8 = 28

Etc. Multiple attacks always win. If you give them Reckless or Bloodclaw, the Ranger surges ahead by the corresponding amount.

 

[Otterscrubber]

Ya, except he always seems to bust out encounters (3w damage - 6d6 damage) drop a guy, get a second attack and hit in the 30s regularly while only being lvl 3.

 

[keterys]

Avalanche Strike is actually less effective than Vault the Fallen in most situations, but in those cases the Ranger still has lots of extra attacks himself.

For example, the Ranger might Disruptive Strike to get an immediate attack not on his turn that he gets every combat (whereas Swift Charge actually does have a chance of not triggering in a helpful manner) and Two-Fanged Strike plus Hunter's Quarry does more damage than Avalanche Strike in a couple levels and is almost even now.

Ie,
6d6+8 (29) vs. 2d10+10+d8 (+3 if both hit) (25.5-28.5) now _but_ the barbarian has to take a huge defense penalty to get his and the ranger can target two enemies if he wants to for some reason.

And the Barbarian likely has worse defenses to get there, even without Avalanche Strike.

 

[Iron Sky]

The barbarian in my game I'm running is pretty impressive. Aside from being the sole survivor in a fight that killed the other 4 PCs(he also killed a higher level elite 1v1), he does ridiculous amount of damage on a charge:

2d6(brutal 1)+2d6+1d8+15(average about 30. +7 more if he's on his Obsidian Steed). That's at level 8.

He also has boots of Adept Charging that gets him away so he can charge pretty regularly. When he can't, well, that's when he drops his encounter powers and does about the same damage.

Add in 7 THP when dropping something or going bloodied and, yeah, I'm really impressed with the barbarian.

My ranger in our old campaign was doing about 2x1d10+4+1d8(average about 24) at the same level.

 

[keterys]

That is a bucket on a charge. That with the horned helm for +1d6 on charge and the weapon that gives +1d8 on charges, I'm assuming?

All that and the Obsidian Steed sounds like too much on a charge, but haven't seen that combo in play.

Now, Barbarians with Storm of Blades? Oh yah, way too much damage. I actually find level 3 and 7 barbarian encounter powers fairly weak for a striker who doesn't get its striker damage through class features, but level 1 and 13 are more than enough.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

I play both a ranger and a barbarian, and one thing I feel is that the barbarian is much more swingy. The two attacks means that my ranger is likely to hit with one attack and not the other, and do a moderate amount of damage. The barbarian either hits or misses. When he misses he does nothing, but when he hits he hits big.

As humans we tend to remember the outliers, the big hits where you crit with Avalanche strike drops the foe with the free basic, then charges another enemy. Meanwhile the ranger is plugging along, not getting the really huge hits, but also with fewer rounds of doing nothing.

 

[Storminator]

How does the barbarian compare to the dragon sorcerer?

We have a DS in our game and he's regularly doing 20+ in blast 3. Our rogue still spikes higher on the single target damage, but the sorcerer is dealing out LOTS of aggregate damage. We're at level 5.

PS

 

[keterys]

Depends on how much the sorcerer can line up multiple targets. 1d8+14 to two targets compared to 3d6+10 to one target is a pretty solid choice.

 

[brassbaboon]

I play a 9th level spiked-chain wielding ranger. Spiked chain is a flavor choice, not a character optimization choice. I am one of those rare birds who actually wants to play an interesting character instead of following the pure optimization paths.

Our barbarian in the party is a pretty typical optimized executioner's axe wielding barbarian.

So far, after three sessions together, my ranger is pretty well acknowledged by the party as the more effective damage-doer. That is in large part because twin strike means my ranger almost never misses entirely, while the barbarian's player spends about half his rounds throwing his dice down when he misses entirely.

When it comes to encounter or daily powers doing the most damage, I'd say the barbarian comes out ahead on encounter powers but my ranger comes out ahead on daily powers. With the right trigger and using an action point, my ranger has easily topped 100 damage in a single round. But that's using my ninth-level daily power and an action point plus some item bonuses.

Bottom line is that I feel my ranger is much more fun to play, much more flexible, much more interesting, and keeps up just fine in whittling down the opposition.