Musings on smart barbarians (INT and Carnage)

[DreamWayfarer]

I have nothing against high-INT barbarians. It's great they're viable and benefit from the high INT.

 

It just doesn't sit right with me that all Pillars barbarians have to be smart. I'd like it to be possible to play a dumb brutish barbarian effectively as well.

While I doubt I would play a dumb Barbarian, and like the class as it is, I am all for character building freedom. I was just arguing that Barbarians needing INT is not something stupid.

[Blades of Vanatar]

 

What? Its neither. Its overwhelming rage.... plus their accuracy isnt top notch so how would it help?

Now I am unsure what you are talking about. In order to hurt foes effectively, or even hit them at all, you need technique and precision. Brute strenght does not cut it if you have neither.

And when you want to do so against many foes, you need a lot of finesse to be able to pull it off. You can just jump into the fray swinging your greatsword blindly, but in that case you would most likely either kill yourself or break your own blade against the hard parts of an enemy's armor.

And I don't see how blind, stupid rage would let you pull it off with no discipline or technique. Focused anger, however, can help sometimes.

Barbs are fantasy warriors. They are based on rage not discipline or technique. Hence their name.

[DreamWayfarer]

Barbs are fantasy warriors. They are based on rage not discipline or technique. Hence their name.

The name has little meaning in reality, since people have been calling those of different cultures "barbarians" since the times of Rome.

 

Plus, with the fact they are "fantasy warriors" you can justify praticaly anything, including they using their powerful brains to project telekinetic waves of force from their weapons. I, however, prefer the simpler explanation of careful positioning and disciplined rage.

 

I do not oppose making Carnage independent on INT, I am just trying to point out why making it rely on Int is not stupid. If the class had any name other than Barbarian or Berseker, then I doubt people would care so much about that.

Edited January 26, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Kaylon]

I have nothing against high-INT barbarians. It's great they're viable and benefit from the high INT.

 

It just doesn't sit right with me that all Pillars barbarians have to be smart. I'd like it to be possible to play a dumb brutish barbarian effectively as well.

Have you tried to play a 3INT barbarian with high MIG/DEX/PER and only passives? It's very effective and low management if you build him well.

[Blades of Vanatar]

 

Barbs are fantasy warriors. They are based on rage not discipline or technique. Hence their name.

The name has little meaning in reality, since people have been calling those of different cultures "barbarians" since the times of Rome.

 

Plus, with the fact they are "fantasy warriors" you can justify praticaly anything, including they using their powerful brains to project telekinetic waves of force from their weapons. I, however, prefer the simpler explanation of careful positioning and disciplined rage.

 

I do not oppose making Carnage independent on INT, I am just trying to point out why making it rely on Int is not stupid. If the class had any name other than Barbarian or Berseker, then I doubt people would care so much about that.

OMG.... you're part Barbarian aren't you?! I'm so sorry, I didn't mean to offend you.

[DreamWayfarer]

OMG.... you're part Barbarian aren't you?! I'm so sorry, I didn't mean to offend you.

Edited January 26, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[PrimeJunta]

Have you tried to play a 3INT barbarian with high MIG/DEX/PER and only passives? It's very effective and low management if you build him well.

 

I have, for a bit. I found it materially worse than a 3 INT fighter or rogue.

[DreamWayfarer]

 

 

Have you tried to play a 3INT barbarian with high MIG/DEX/PER and only passives? It's very effective and low management if you build him well.

I have, for a bit. I found it materially worse than a 3 INT fighter or rogue.

I think we should talk first about Barbs with only 10 INT and if they need tweeks to be viable and later talk about ones with 3 INT, what about you? Edited January 26, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Kaylon]

 

Have you tried to play a 3INT barbarian with high MIG/DEX/PER and only passives? It's very effective and low management if you build him well.

 

I have, for a bit. I found it materially worse than a 3 INT fighter or rogue.

 

That's rather vague... What a barb with 18INT can do so much better compared to a barb with 3INT?

[Boeroer]

College?

[DreamWayfarer]

That's rather vague... What a barb with 18INT can do so much better compared to a barb with 3INT?

Hit more foes with carnage, keep Frenzy and Bloodlust for longer, heal more with Savage Defiance, keep more foes sickened with Threatening Presence, make better use of on-hit/crit effects, use Heart of Fury for massive damage, and in general be more useful.

Edited January 26, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Elerond]

 

 

Barbs are fantasy warriors. They are based on rage not discipline or technique. Hence their name.

The name has little meaning in reality, since people have been calling those of different cultures "barbarians" since the times of Rome.

 

Plus, with the fact they are "fantasy warriors" you can justify praticaly anything, including they using their powerful brains to project telekinetic waves of force from their weapons. I, however, prefer the simpler explanation of careful positioning and disciplined rage.

 

I do not oppose making Carnage independent on INT, I am just trying to point out why making it rely on Int is not stupid. If the class had any name other than Barbarian or Berseker, then I doubt people would care so much about that.

OMG.... you're part Barbarian aren't you?! I'm so sorry, I didn't mean to offend you.

 

On a serious note, lets just leave as it is. Our opinions on what a barb is are obviously different.

 

 

All non ancient Greek speaking people are barbarians, as it comes from ancient Greek term βάρβαρος term that said Greeks used for people that didn't speak Greek or other Greeks when they wanted to insult them. 

[Blades of Vanatar]

Most people in modern times do not look at barbarians in that light. Even more so when it comes to how people view them in terms in classes in CRPGs.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Blades of Vanatar

[HawkSoft]

In game terms most of our characters fight more like historical *barbarians* (as individuals) rather than as *regulars* (fighting in ranks) as the combats we are dealing with are too small for the formations that characterise regular troops to be effective. I see very little real difference between the skills required of a fantasy fighter regardless of their background and think the *barbarian* trope to be as synthetic as the dwarf with a Scottish (or possibly Scotch) accent.

 

I could see more (role playing) value in a true berserker class that fought without any thought of self preservation, not sure many would make it to the level cap though

Possibly a variation on monk or druid?

[DreamWayfarer]

Possibly a variation on monk or druid?

No neef for a variation. Monks are already perfect for that, and can dump INT more reliably than Barbs .

[PrimeJunta]

That's rather vague... What a barb with 18INT can do so much better compared to a barb with 3INT?

@DreamWayfarer listed the essentials.

 

My point is, the one thing that barbarians can do that other martial classes can't is Carnage. Without it, the barb is just a fighter with below-average accuracy and defences who can get up to fight again one more time than the fighter. Fighters get better offensive and defensive abilities, and comparable self-healing. Rogues kinda suck at defensive abilities, but they'll wipe the floor with barbs on offence. Without Carnage, even buffed with Frenzy -- which will last a much shorter time -- a barb can't compare to a comparable-level hurty fighter.

 

I.e., Carnage is the barb's reason for being, and its effectiveness is bound to INT. With subpar Carnage, the barb is just a subpar fighter. This makes INT more essential for barbs than it is for casters, even. This strikes me as "off."

[Boeroer]

To be honest, the barb can also hit adjacent foes with 3 INT - but I seldomly managed to hit more than 3 foes. But if you build him as a sticky tank maybe that's enough.

[Kaylon]

 

That's rather vague... What a barb with 18INT can do so much better compared to a barb with 3INT?

Hit more foes with carnage, keep Frenzy and Bloodlust for longer, heal more with Savage Defiance, keep more foes sickened with Threatening Presence, make better use of on-hit/crit effects, use Heart of Fury for massive damage, and in general be more useful.

 

Yes, that's on paper... However you rarely find situations with more than 3-4 enemies clustered together. The real question is if it's worth being able to hit 1-2 more enemies once in a while or is it better to strike 3-4 enemies faster and harder all the time.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Kaylon

[PrimeJunta]

Yes, that's on paper... However you rarely find situations with more than 3-4 enemies clustered together. The real question is if it's worth being able to hit 1-2 more enemies once in a while or is it better to strike 3-4 enemies faster and harder all the time.

This is not true. On PotD at least you're facing massive mobs all the bleepin' time. If your barb is front and center, with a high INT he will be making a lot of Carnage attacks.

[DreamWayfarer]

Yes, that's on paper... However you rarely find situations with more than 3-4 enemies clustered together. The real question is if it's worth being able to hit 1-2 more enemies once in a while or is it better to strike 3-4 enemies faster and harder all the time.

Even against smaller enemy groups, highter INT means you can hit them when they are further apart, while with 3 INT they must be literaly touching one another. And longer frenzy means hitting faster and harder .

Edited January 27, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[Raven Darkholme]

 

 

That's rather vague... What a barb with 18INT can do so much better compared to a barb with 3INT?

Hit more foes with carnage, keep Frenzy and Bloodlust for longer, heal more with Savage Defiance, keep more foes sickened with Threatening Presence, make better use of on-hit/crit effects, use Heart of Fury for massive damage, and in general be more useful.

 

Yes, that's on paper... However you rarely find situations with more than 3-4 enemies clustered together. The real question is if it's worth being able to hit 1-2 more enemies once in a while or is it better to strike 3-4 enemies faster and harder all the time.

 

I don't really get your point. Yes, you can play a 3 INT barbarian as much as a 3 MIG rogue, but high INT is clearly better?

In a party it might not matter as much, but from the barbarian itself every point of INT is a lot more damage, high AoEs are king in this game.

[Boeroer]

There's a sweet spot. Maybe it's around 18 INT. You attack every enemy that even touches your AoE with his toe - it doesn't matter if your AoE circle just scratches his hitbox or if it swallows it completely. So there's a good chance that 6 INT and 12 INT don't make a lot of difference in terms of carnage AoE in most fights. But if you really pump INT and also use an overseeing item your AoE even touches Ogres in the third row. With kith it's even better. That is a huge difference to 3 INT of course. Especially if you go for debuffing/disabling and not for damage. If you want to use HoF it's even more crucial.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Boeroer

[Mocker22]

 

 

That's rather vague... What a barb with 18INT can do so much better compared to a barb with 3INT?

Hit more foes with carnage, keep Frenzy and Bloodlust for longer, heal more with Savage Defiance, keep more foes sickened with Threatening Presence, make better use of on-hit/crit effects, use Heart of Fury for massive damage, and in general be more useful.

 

Yes, that's on paper... However you rarely find situations with more than 3-4 enemies clustered together. The real question is if it's worth being able to hit 1-2 more enemies once in a while or is it better to strike 3-4 enemies faster and harder all the time.

 

I think this hits the nail on the head. How often can you truly hit a bunch of mobs. I would prefer to have high single target dps and just drop enemies quicker, especially since this lowers the incoming dmg to your party as well.

 

I've always found Carnage to be fairly underwhelming. The radius is quite small even with maxed int. With resting bonuses, gear, etc, it is decent but I feel that I've gimped my other stats so hard to make it happen that it's pretty meh. I think the base radius of carnage should be increased by maybe 50%ish so that you can take less int(thinking like 13-14 instead of 18 here).

 

Another huge problem with Carnage imho is there are not enough talents that make it better. Accurate Carnage is IT. Other classes have talents and abilities that really focus on what makes them unique, such as a ranger taking a bunch of talents for their pet.

 

The only way that Carnage really works good imo is if you focus on proning or interrupts and use your barb in more of a support role. It doesn't *feel* good as an AoE dps class, which is how I would personally want to play a barb.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

There's a sweet spot. Maybe it's around 18 INT. You attack every enemy that even touches your AoE with his toe - it doesn't matter if your AoE circle just scratches his hitbox or if it swallows it completely. So there's a good chance that 6 INT and 12 INT don't make a lot of difference in terms of carnage AoE in most fights. But if you really pump INT and also use an overseeing item your AoE even touches Ogres in the third row. With kith it's even better. That is a huge difference to 3 INT of course. Especially if you go for debuffing/disabling and not for damage. If you want to use HoF it's even more crucial.

 

Yeah, I think that if you really looked at things objectively the "ideal" barbarian would probably have somewhere around 15 base Int.  Put those three points in Dex, Per, or Might instead and overall you'd likely do more damage, because even on PotD there is a functional limiation on how many enemies are around you at any one time and how big an AoE you actually need to grab them all. Overall you're probably better off with a slightly smaller carnage radius and more damage, interrupts, accuracy, attack speed, etc. against the targets within that radius.

 

The problem is that when you're playing a character you're going to really notice each time an enemy is JUST outside your range and because people are bad at estimating frequency of events it'll seem like you need more Int than you do. Net result is I end up always picking Godlike barbarians just so I can take Dex and Int to 19. 

[PrimeJunta]

 

Yes, that's on paper... However you rarely find situations with more than 3-4 enemies clustered together. The real question is if it's worth being able to hit 1-2 more enemies once in a while or is it better to strike 3-4 enemies faster and harder all the time.

I think this hits the nail on the head. How often can you truly hit a bunch of mobs. I would prefer to have high single target dps and just drop enemies quicker, especially since this lowers the incoming dmg to your party as well.

Then play a fighter, ranger, or rogue. Barbarians can't touch them for single-target damage, no matter how you build them.

 

I've always found Carnage to be fairly underwhelming. The radius is quite small even with maxed int. With resting bonuses, gear, etc, it is decent but I feel that I've gimped my other stats so hard to make it happen that it's pretty meh. I think the base radius of carnage should be increased by maybe 50%ish so that you can take less int(thinking like 13-14 instead of 18 here).

No, carnage is awesome if you build it up properly (talents, abilities, and especially items).