Battlerager: Experiences?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Has anyone actually played a Battlerager above level 5 or so around here?

Yes, the oneshot I mentioned was 15th level. The Battlerager was a Dwarf with all the feats to improve the number of temporary hit points, and trust me, that meant it scaled very well with level. Too good, in fact.

 

[Bagpuss]

I think that the Temp HP gained will not scale as quickly as monster damage. For example, in upper heroic, a character that started with 16 CON will be up to 18 due to the level 4 and 8 bumps. That means that they'll get 4 temp HP when they get smacked in melee.

You mean +7 temp HP.

You are forgetting. Dwarven Stoneblood (for another half Con, +2) and Improved Vigor for another +1 at Heroic (+2 at Paragon and +3 at Epic)?

I'm curious as to what the playertester reports for this class were (or if there was any playtesting at all).

 

[Nail]

Here's my challenge: name any other class that, when faced with certain monster compositions (minions, melee skirmishers/soldiers, even some brutes/lurkers) can enter a combat with absolutely no fear, unless severely outnumbered or outpowered.

You might be missing the point here.

4e is built arround the assumption that typical monster groups will fill many (but not necessarily all) of the roles. If most encounters are with only one or two monster types, you are not only short-changing yourself, but you are probably making the combat less exciting than it could be.

4e is also built around the assumption that many combats will start with the PCs being outnumbered, and the terrain being a significant component of combat. These factors too can mean danger to any PC, regardless of class or build, and that no one PC can control the entire combat.

Finally, 4e is built around the assumption that the PCs have roles too, and that the monsters know those roles as well as the players do. The fighter is the defender. Defenders ...<wait fer it!>...defend. They don't do tons of damage. The monsters can see this (plain as day), and will do what they can. Perhaps they'll back off and pelt the defender with ranged attacks. Perhaps they'll try to ignore him and go after the squisher targets. Perhaps they'll just charge and hope for the best.

Bottom Line: If it ain't fun, don't use it...YMMV, and all o' that... but keep in mind how 4e builds its challenges. It's not cut-and-dry.

 

[Nail]

You mean +7 temp HP.

With 2 feats spent. ...And only if yer a dwarf. ...And only if you put a 16 in Con (+racial to 18).

Which means yer Ref and Will defences are a bit low. Strangely, ranged attackers (controllers) often attack Ref and Will defences. Huh.

Another thing I don't see mentioned: Aura or on-going damage effects don't give the BRV Ftr THPs.

 

[Nail]

One last bit:

I'm looking at KotS, the first WotC-published module. I notice that the minions have ranged weapons. I notice that several encounters explicitly lay out how at least some of the minions are meant to hang back and pelt the PCs with missile weapons.

Surely some missile fire is to be expected?

 

[keterys]

I find the battlerager concept neat, but I'm not a fan of the implementation. Really poor interaction with melee minions and I dislike how it encourages/constrains using Crushing Surge to build ever more temp hp.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

Don't like the Battlerager; there's the barbarian.

Don't like the Tempest fighter; there's the Ranger.

These fighter build step on toes and do it with suspicious mechanics (though I have much more sympathy for the Tempest fighter as long as you remove the absurd off-hand property on the double-weapons).

The battlerager is particularly weird in term of fluff/mechanics. What's battleragey about the fighter/battlerager? Aside from his class features, he still gains the same powers as other fighters. He mostly stands his ground and act like any other defender but for some mysterious reasons gains tons of THP at the expense of +1 to hit because he has a temper that doesn't translate to his tactics.

Now this is a dwarven battlerager, both in fluff and in mechanics.

We already have the CON based barbarian who regains THP in a much better balanced way and has powers that actually scream 'Battlerager'.

The fighter/battlerager is to be tossed aside in favor of the barbarian IMO. I don't even feel bad about killing character concepts because I don't. I just kill a broken feature.

 

[chaotix42]

A PC of mine switched his dwarf fighter over to a Battlerager with the racial feat that improves the class feature. After 3 sessions (2 at 6th level, one at 7th) I've asked him to consider nerfing the class feature in some way or just switching back to the old class feature. I really enjoyed the flavor we worked up while Battlerager was in play, but it just increased the fighter's survivability too much.

 

[abyssaldeath]

(snip) picture of awesome badassery

That has to be my favorite picture.

 

[Bagpuss]

With 2 feats spent. ...And only if yer a dwarf. ...And only if you put a 16 in Con (+racial to 18).

Actually only 14 in Con, because we were talking about a Battleranger with the level 4 and level 8 attribute bumps.

Which means yer Ref and Will defences are a bit low. Strangely, ranged attackers (controllers) often attack Ref and Will defences. Huh.

Ref is low for all fighters but I think Will will be pretty good considering the Dwarven racial bonus and only putting a 14 into Con. His Wisdom and Strength should be pretty high.

Another thing I don't see mentioned: Aura or on-going damage effects don't give the BRV Ftr THPs.

So? They still take off temp hit points, the point is all those things effect normal fighters just as much if not more (because they won't ever have the vigor temp hit point buffer).