Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder RPG teases with new barbarian class

[Ghostwind]

For a magic-hating barbarian, how about a powerful blow that actually dispels magic? A "debuffing blow" or something less meta-gamey?

I really like this idea. *Makes note to design something to fit this in next project*

 

[RangerWickett]

For a magic-hating barbarian, how about a powerful blow that actually dispels magic? A "debuffing blow" or something less meta-gamey?

I, too, like it.

Would it be too much of stepping on a druid's toes to let a high-level barbarian summon beasts, or spontaneously conjure a horde of warriors to fight with him?

 

[Felon]

Unsurprisingly (because we talk about this crap all day) I agree with GlassJaw.

The barbarian is commonly held up as one of the better designed classes in the game.

Of course there are all sorts of fun things that Pathfinder-- or any designer-- can do with it. You can do all sorts of fun things with all the classes if you want to roll up your sleeves and go nuts.

But-- especially considering that Pathfinder wants to be backwards-compatible-- this is a classic case of Ain't Broke Don't Fix It.

Too front-loaded for my taste, and lacking in any kind of customizability.

 

[SSquirrel]

As much buffing as seems to happen in most of ENWorld's games (we always had to save our spell slots for damage as our DM was a bit vicious and of the "me vs them" DM mentality heh) that would definitely be something useful. In 4E it seems that buffing is far less a focus than in 3.5, but it could definitely be good for this one.

 

[Achan hiArusa]

The way it looks to me, it looks like that if you spent your rage points one way you would have standard Barbarian rage, but it will probably allow you to do other types of rage like the Ki Frenzy of the Sohei or the Whirling Frenzy variant in Unearthed Arcana. So as a DM if you don't want to do the work you just keep the class the way it is and allow the players to customize their rage.

 

[dystmesis]

I thought the point of simplifying (and possibly nerfing) power attack was to make to make it, something for brute, unthinking warrior-types, less math-intensive so they could focus on being brute warrior-types...

Then they go ahead and take the barbarian, the epitome of that archetype, and increase its math intensity? Where's the logic?

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Too front-loaded for my taste, and lacking in any kind of customizability.

I like front loaded classes, actually. I don't think that multiclassing (even "dipping") should be discouraged, nor do I think that "purity" of 20 levels in a single class needs to be particularly encouraged.

On the other hand I could happily abolish prestige classes entirely-- if that helps you kind of see where I am coming from.

 

[dragonlordofpoondari]

For a magic-hating barbarian, how about a powerful blow that actually dispels magic? A "debuffing blow" or something less meta-gamey?

OOO, I like that! Mostly because it sounds like such a terribly naughty ability. In all seriousness, it does make sense and it appeals to old-school design intent, so I say yes!

I also agree that a Barbarian shouldn't have to take extra feats to make his core ability worthwhile. Without having seen the RAW, I am inclined to say that it sounds good so far.

 

[ImperialParadox]

I thought the point of simplifying (and possibly nerfing) power attack was to make to make it, something for brute, unthinking warrior-types, less math-intensive so they could focus on being brute warrior-types...

Then they go ahead and take the barbarian, the epitome of that archetype, and increase its math intensity? Where's the logic?

Yeah I'm wary of that too. Most players I know play barbarians to smash! things, not to micromanage 'spells.'

(By spells I mean a new subsytem of powers with all the fiddly bits it entails)

 

[BradfordFerguson]

I don't think options are a bad thing for players who are probably experienced and likely looking for something else to say in combat than, "I rage." "I power attack."

Why can't the barbarian player have 4 options? Just because the character is dumb and the player may want to smash stuff, why not make it more interesting?

I'm interested to see what Jason Buhlman comes up with. I liked the Iron Heroes version of the barbarian. I tested out a stripped-down (but more complex for fighter types) version of 3.5 and found that the player mainly used the STR/CON rage. I also left them the option of a rage that helped saves, and a rage that helped movement (handy for either closing or chasing fleeing enemies)