Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 5417409" data-attributes="member: 5834">reDeath is part of the game. You want a safe game, then house rule it. I don't want a safe game. If a barbarian enters a psychotic rage, he should risk dying just like the barbarians of old.So designing archetypes appropriately is flavor to you? It isn't to me. It's simulationist. It's trying to capture the realism of the ability. If that's what you call flavor, then we have completely different ideas of what flavor is. So we'll never agree on that.It's saying "If a barbarian is unconscious, should he be able to maintain a psychotic rage?" The answer is no. Thus the mechanic should fit the ability. In this case it does. It is inappropriate that a barbarian can maintain rage while unconscious. Unrealistic and inappropriate is the word I would use.Neither feat looks bad to me.Diehard lets you fight to massive negatives.Raging Vitality gives you an extra hit point a lvl and higher fort save.It does work right. It isn't too much of a cost. Both methods provide a decent benefit to a barbarian.Even the prereq of Endurance allows the barbarian to sleep in his medium armor. Which is huge in a campaign unless you never bother to catch your players unaware out of their armor. That happens quite often in our campaigns. They get ambushed while sleeping all the time.Sounds to me like you don't like the change form 3E because you want to lower your risk of death. Well, if you play a berserker, you should be at risk of death.The berserker's of old usually did what they did and expected to die. Berserking was usually the last stand of a warrior. He was going to amp up, usually with drink, and then go all out until he bit the farm.The barbarian rage ability simulates that well. I encourage my barbarian player to remain in character all the time which means he is at risk of death. This is a ROLE-PLAYING game. The role of the character comes first. Not mechanical safety.If you're interested in staying alive and having a safe character, then don't play a psychotic barbarian berserker. It wouldn't fit your personality. Play a safe arcane caster or rogue or something. Fighters, barbarians, and paladins are the type of classes that throw themselves into the fray to the death.A berserking barbarian the most insane of all of them as he throws himself into battle with complete, psychotic abandon with no thought of his own life. The currently designed rage ability simulates that quite well. Which is the intent of the game and quite right...very, very right. It's how a role-playing game should be designed with the role-playing before the game aspect.If you want a safer game and don't care about closer simulation of psychotic rage including the chance of death, then house rule it differently. I like the fact that the barbarian might die when coming out of a rage. That fits the archetype.And that is not flavor as you like to call it. It's simulation.What you want to do is purely game mechanics without regard for simulation. You want to make something safe mechanically, even if it doesn't properly simulate the ability. Not what I want to see Pathfinder do myself.</blockquote>

Verification