What's the problem about fighter/barbarians?

[Kilaya76]

I've heard this combo is disliked by some / all dms for both mechanical and rp reasons, and I would like to have a discussion about it.
 
So, first of all, what is the reason for this?

[I can has fun?]

It's sort of like the same reason there aren't any paladin bards, except without the built-in alignment restrictions.

[Howlando]

"Disliked" does not mean forbidden, nor does it mean you will be punished.

It just means "disliked."

It is not a combination I care for. And I am honest about it.

There are some multiclass combinations that make excellent sense in terms of reflecting a character's development - for example, a ranger that wanders the wild but then during the course of RP is taught how to become a druid and takes the oaths, and thus becomes a ranger/druid.

There are some multiclass combinations that make sense in terms of the combination most accurately reflecting what the character is - for example, a Northern Skald type might be best reflected as a barbarian/bard.

The barbarian/fighter combination does not reflect this symmetry well to me. I understand it can be rationalized in various ways - the savage wild-man who joins the army, or whatever - but it doesn't work. There's a certain symmetry to the two classes, a balance between the two that I appreciate. Fighters get concentration, barbarians get taunt. Fighters get weapon-spec, barbarians get different perks.

Each class has its own feel, its own style - and each respective style can further be enhanced by multiclassing of their own, but I do not think the barb-fighter should be mixed. It is like cooking, and mixing two ingredients that while great on their own or when combined when other flavors turn bland and flavorless when combined.

A fighter/rogue is a popular and powerful combination, but there is a trade-off between it and pure fighter. Sure fighter/rogues get evasion and sneaks and UMD, but they will have less HPs and less BAB than pure fighter.

What is the trade-off with barbarian/fighter? The way multiclassing works you can keep concentration AND taunt AND discipline maxed, with perfect BAB, better fortitude saves, all armor proficiencies if you want, barbarian speed, rage, weapon spec... everything.

It is a bland, tasteless mess. The fun little style of the barbarian and fighter are both equally lost, and what is left remaining is something that is simply... boring. A forgettable character.

Obviously, in EFU:A the roleplay involved with a particular character eclipses its build. But there's no denying that a character is best when its build artfully matches what the character IS. Sometimes that is through a pure class, sometimes (rarely) it is through some zany combination that maybe no one has even done before.

For me, the barbarian/fighter multi-class combination has no style, no flavor, no nothing - I look at one, and I don't even see the respective classes, I just see "tank."

[ScottyB]

I think the philosophy is that if you're going to be a fighter for fighting, then you're dedicated to combat and martial skill, hence the frequent bonus feats for things like Disarm, Knockdown, Called Shot, etc. A barbarian is more of a savage warrior; they aren't about technique or focus, but simply tearing the shit out of anything they don't like. While non-lawful fighters probably get along with barbarians of similar good/evil alignment, they should possess different motivations and approach combat differently, as well.

Mechanically, it's because it's all about the mechanics. Woo, extra feats AND extra STR/CON! I don't think I've ever seen someone become a barbarian (they always take barb after fighter, always) as a result of "going native" or anything like that. It's usually, "so like, my guy is really angry all the time now. Barbarian rage (+STR lolol)!"

As much as I like crazy multiclasses, I like them when they make sense for the character, and they often have a rather gimped build because of it. Most of my fighters, though, end up being pure fighters, with one fighter/rogue exception, and that was so I could have Weapon Spec: Whip on my rogue. (lol, dominatrix)

[Kilaya76]

A fighter/rogue is a popular and powerful combination, but there is a trade-off between it and pure fighter. Sure fighter/rogues get evasion and sneaks and UMD, but they will have less HPs and less BAB than pure fighter.
 
What is the trade-off with barbarian/fighter? The way multiclassing works you can keep concentration AND taunt AND discipline maxed, with perfect BAB, better fortitude saves, all armor proficiencies if you want, barbarian speed, rage, weapon spec... everything.
 

The way multi-classing works also means a fighter / rogue can keep discipline, concentration, and UMD maxed, even with one lvl of rogue, the resulting character simply being an overpowered fighter that can use wands with the ridiculous trade-off of 1 point of ab and 4 hp. Far, far stronger than any barb/fighter build, especially in pvp. Why did all, or almost all the characters who succeeded at pvp in the server have levels in classes that allow the use of wands? The truth is, that no matter how much bab, hp, or whatever you are , UMD characters always win pvp, especially when they have a lot of gold. Yet they are not frowned upon.
 
As for the rp aspect, I don't see why a fighter/barb is any less interesting than full fighter or full bard, or than a fighter/bard, or fighter/rogue.

[Caddies]

While I do agree that from a mechanical perspective a well-built fighter/rogue is stronger than a fighter/barb on EFU:A, I think Howland and Scotty amply demonstrated why the fighter/barbarian multiclass rarely if ever makes sense from an IC/RP perspective.

I'd also disagree that simply having use of wands means you will win PvP more than classes without it. Whether or not someone wins PvP depends on a whole range of other factors, each one of them more important than access to wands. Regardless, the dislike of fighter/barbarians doesn't stem from perceived mechanical overpower, but rather thematic/style concerns.

[9lives]

Now that I have weapon specialisation, I just get so mad!

[PanamaLane]

I'm of the firm opinion that if you can justify it with back story and RP your character well, then that's all that matters. DM's shouldn't take preference in multiclassing, unless you are failing horribly in your RP of said multiclasses (like a fighter/druid that never spends any time in the woods, but always casts a key barkskin before battle).

Let people play whatever the heck they want to play without any sort of judgment. If its allowed in the mechanics then that's all that should matter. Just back it up with RP. If the WotC didn't want fighter/barbs, they would have built in a method of preventing them.

BTW, Tarzan is a fighter/barb as far as I can tell (in some versions of the tale, where he's tamed by visits to civilization).

[Thomas_Not_very_wise]

remember the april fools day joke on them banning the ftr/barbarian class

haha

[9lives]

That wasn't an April Fool's joke.

[Howlando]

The issue of wands is separate, it is indeed not an issue of what is and what isn't more powerful but rather than in my opinion that particular combination has no style. It is admittedly a subjective opinion, but you did ask.

[BoomdaddyBP]

Kilaya, the thing is, it can be interesting but most times it just is not. Fighter/Barbarian is putting two completely different styles and miraculously making them work. Trained, calculated warrior and raging, freedom loving barbarian being this powerful crusher makes little sense when they should probably deduct from the power of each other, but alas the game doesn't have a way of representing that.

Additionally, to your UMD = win, that is way off. Caddies said it when he stated that there are multiple things that come into play. Truth being told, that fighter/barbarian with a huge stack of potions is probably more dangerous then a fighter/rogue with wands.

[Snoteye]

There is no point in discussing this, proponents can always rationalize the build and opponents can always offer counter-arguments. Either you like it or you don't, and there's probably not a single reasoning out there that will make you think otherwise. As it happens, the vast majority, if not the entirety, of the EfU DM staff dislike this combination, and Howland and Scotty have explained well why that is.

[ExileStrife]

One of the other reasons I don't fancy the particular combination is because for every one, single ftr/barb that is well played and characterized, there are 20 that are taken by clueless players who purely want the mechanical benefits.  That tarnishes the combination and I am human.  It makes me prone to quickly looking past any ftr/barb character rather than spending the time to see if the combination really "works" for the particular concept.

[Sedarine]

Bored and powergaming after playing squishy elves on CoA I tried this build. It's lethal and able to deal 100 + HP scythe crits at mid levels...yeah, that was RP baby. I agree, this build can be explained, but too often it is just abused.

Remember the warehouse? Me and Hookswords would two man it, either he'd hand over the 1K or die...sometimes in one hit. I can see the DM's grief here ;)