Battlerager....Overpowered?

[James McMurray]

16 str/18 con vs 18 str/16 con (or whatever) starting stats, warhammer vs. longsword (same enchantment level), weapon focus (or equivalent).

Average damage calculations will almost invariably come out in favor of the hammer guy (weapon talent OR battle-rager), and so the hammer guy will kill his foes faster. On the same sequence of attack rolls, the sword guy benefits if they fall in the narrow (3 number) range where he hits and the battle-rager hammer guy misses. Otherwise, the hammerer does better. The sword-guy's extra hits do hit harder, but they still have a hard (read: impossible) time making up for the 17 numbers on the d20 where the battle-rager hammer guy does better (+2 damage when both hit, +con modifier when they both miss).

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'd rather not have a character whose goal it is to shout "yay! I missed again!"

 

[nerdytenor]

Maybe you are misreading the power? It triggers when you are hit, not when you hit.

No, I just had a brain fart is all.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

I missed the very first line of the Battlerager class feature.

Getting temp HP after getting hit is pretty powerful. Personnally I wouldn't mind it if it came with the obligation to wear chainmail or lighter and to forego shields.

Otherwise, I suspect we'll see a lot of tank fighter who have very little battlerager in them but still take that class feature.

 

[Sir Brennen]

I personally don't see the imbalance. Tho one solution might be to cap the Temp HP at Level + Con Mod/score or something similar.

My question is this: if our +11 Con Mod Battlerager Dwarf is currently at 10 HP and gets smacked down for 20 points of damage, what happens? Do TmpHP affect someone who's below zero? Is he at -10 or +1 Hp?

 

[James McMurray]

I personally don't see the imbalance. Tho one solution might be to cap the Temp HP at Level + Con Mod/score or something similar.

My question is this: if our +11 Con Mod Battlerager Dwarf is currently at 10 HP and gets smacked down for 20 points of damage, what happens? Do TmpHP affect someone who's below zero? Is he at -10 or +1 Hp?

He's at -10 with 11 temporary hit points and unconscious. phb 293

 

[Larrin]

Otherwise, I suspect we'll see a lot of tank fighter who have very little battlerager in them but still take that class feature.

This is one reason i feel a little worried about the battlerager.

Trading a +1 to hit for even just 3 temp hit points is a pretty solid upgrade. You'll miss every once in a while because of it (but honestly how often do you miss by only one point, it could easily not come up in a combat), but you'll be benefitting every single battle from you vigor, multiple times. Its not world ending, but it does push it into the ' a little too good' category in my mind.

Honestly, how do you compare +1 to hit with battle vigor temp hp....its apples to oranges...and at times it can be like comparing 3 medium sized apples to 7 smallish oranges.

In the end the build feels like its leaning over the edge of game balance as far as it can while standing on one foot. It could go over with just a little carelessness. Its relying really hard on "hits less often/lower ac" to make up for a really souped up survivability....and the extent to which it hits less often and has lower AC are VERY variable.

I'm betting this build will be very variable...fluctuating from 'its a darn good build, but didn't overshadow the rest' to 'I took 2 real damage and ended with double my hitpoint max in temp hp AND killed everything'.

I hope i'm wrong, but it makes me nervous.

 

[Vendark]

16 str/18 con vs 18 str/16 con (or whatever) starting stats, warhammer vs. longsword (same enchantment level), weapon focus (or equivalent).

Average damage calculations will almost invariably come out in favor of the hammer guy (weapon talent OR battle-rager), and so the hammer guy will kill his foes faster. On the same sequence of attack rolls, the sword guy benefits if they fall in the narrow (3 number) range where he hits and the battle-rager hammer guy misses. Otherwise, the hammerer does better. The sword-guy's extra hits do hit harder, but they still have a hard (read: impossible) time making up for the 17 numbers on the d20 where the battle-rager hammer guy does better (+2 damage when both hit, +con modifier when they both miss).

The problem with this comparison is that it assumes the longsword guy wants to go Str/Con. Chances are good that he's going to go Str/Wis instead, and take the Marked Scourge feat at paragon. That lets him add his Wis modifier to damage every time he hits a marked opponent (in other words, almost every time he hits), and that puts him well ahead of the hammer guy when both hit.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The problem with this comparison is that it assumes the longsword guy wants to go Str/Con. Chances are good that he's going to go Str/Wis instead, and take the Marked Scourge feat at paragon. That lets him add his Wis modifier to damage every time he hits a marked opponent (in other words, almost every time he hits), and that puts him well ahead of the hammer guy when both hit.

And if the build is that much better, then unless it's got a con mod of +0, then it could probably be better still by taking vigor.

 

[Kraydak]

The problem with this comparison is that it assumes the longsword guy wants to go Str/Con. Chances are good that he's going to go Str/Wis instead, and take the Marked Scourge feat at paragon. That lets him add his Wis modifier to damage every time he hits a marked opponent (in other words, almost every time he hits), and that puts him well ahead of the hammer guy when both hit.

Assuming you always get Marked Scourge, take a 18/18 str/wis build (shifter) vs an 18/18/12 str/con/wis build (warforged).
Then at 30, with a 2W power, and the sword guy hitting 50% of the time (which is good at 30) we have:
Sword:
+7(sword wis-hammer wis)*9(times both hit)+(9 (2d8)+9(str)+9(wis)+3(weapon focus)+6(magic))*1(extra hit)=101 damage that the hammer doesn't get over 20 attacks
Hammer:
+9(con)*11(hammer's misses)+2 (2d10-2d8)*7(both hit, non-crit)+4 (20-16, crit damage)*2 (both crit)=121 damage the sword guy doesn't see that the hammerer does over 20 attacks.

Marked scourge, if almost always up, does allow a Str/Wis sword build to compete on a basically even footing with a hammer rhythm build. Without it, there is no comparison.

In short, the battle-rager getting channeled towards hammers (and other things, I guess) isn't a weakness. In the above case, making the hammerer a battle-rager, we get
Sword:+137, Hammer:+144.
Indeed, at high levels +to hit become more valuable in general. Hammerer still wins. I'm too lazy to do battle-rager-hammer-rhythm-marked-scourge dwarf (16/18/14 str/con/wis) vs other PHB race marked-scourge-swordguys (20/14 str/wis human or dragonborn optimal).

(Note: beware math errors, I'm in Europe, it's late for me)

 

[Plane Sailing]

A Fighter who can't hit his opponents is a lousy Defender.

You may think he is a lousy defender, but actually in practice he is a fine defender - plus the player is having fun with him, and the other players are grateful for his defenderiness (and miss him terribly on the occasions he can't be there).

Talking about 'optimum builds' might be fun for character optimisation boards, but in the context of having a fun game (which is what D&D is about, right?) it is largely irrelevant. Although you've not said it here, the implication is that unless the PC has an 18 or 20 in his prime stat he is in some way unplayable in his defined role. (I've seen this mentioned in several other threads in the past by others).

Maybe in your games everyone likes to play super-optimised characters. In my games people don't. They often end up with odd combinations of things.

We still have fun, which is the main thing, eh?

Cheers