Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mmu1" data-source="post: 1033811" data-attributes="member: 319">I never really bought into the "Barbarians are so much better than Fighters" school of thought, mainly because I really have very mixed feelings about Rage... This is because I've played Barbarians, and I've seen several played when  I DMed, and a lot of them end a fight going "Oh crap, oh crap, oh crap, in two rounds I lose 20 hit points, putting me at -14, someone please heal me NOW!"To make things worse, as soon as they're 5th level and get at least 10 extra HP from Rage, they can no longer be safely stabilized while at negative HP, because as soon as Rage ends, they'll drop dead - which can be a huge problem at the end of a long fight that uses up most of a party's spells, or if the party Cleric happens to get knocked out.  I'm sorry, but ending a fight 50 or 100 HP "in the hole" doesn't appeal to me in the slightest, and you never have enough HP in high level play - you just need massive amounts of healing more or less often.Whereas the Fighter's biggest problem is that class is just so damn bland, not that it's weak... And the fact that Fighters multi-class so well is actually an asset, not some huge disadvantage.</blockquote>