Devs: Barb PL WAI? Scheduled for nerf? Y/N?

[Hayday]

So the Wizard PL is then worth EIGHT feats by that analysis?

Sure it's a flawed analysis, as I already admitted...but I wouldn't say the Wizard PL feat is worth 8 by that method, as currently there are only (depending on your playstyle) 2-3, maybe 4 schools whose DCs actually matter.

[sephiroth1084]

Shrug its overpowered as is currently. We all know it is. The paladin and wizard ones are also overpowered compared to the others we all know this is true too. If you want to make a legitimate claim argue to improve the others and make suggestions to do so because 3 past life feats should not be far better then the others.

I don't think that's right, actually.

The PL feats you mentioned aren't overpowered, they're simply actually worth a feat slot. The wizard one is better than other, similar feats by quite a bit, but isn't overpowering the character. A wizard with this is better than one without, but not in a big way.

The paladin one is valuable, but would you drop another key feat for it? If you had Extend, maybe, but without it? It's good, but the limited use and duration kind of hampers it a bit, though that largely comes down to what content you're running.

The barbarian feat is a tiny bit (operative word being 'tiny') too powerful, but not dramatically so. Do you drop Toughness or Stunning Blow for this on a pure barb? Do you feel compelled to go human just to fit this in? Would you splash fighter if the only benefit were being able to acquire this?

These, I think, are pretty close to being spot-on for what a past life feat should bring to a character. They are, after all, eating up one of your few precious feats, many of which are already tied up in prerequisites and necessities. They'd better be worth it!



Compare these with, say, the Ranger PL, which does almost nothing for you if there is an actual ranger in the party. It isn't simply not worthwhile to someone going back to the ranger class, but entirely pointless if you party with a ranger.

[Cetus]

Well look at the barbarian past life from the angle of what it enables us to create as a result of it.

You receive a stacking 2 intimidate, 5 hp (as of right now), an additional 2 combat feat DC's, 3 dmg, 2 to hit, and 40 hp for a significant extension of a pre-existing rage.

The next most powerful feat is probably the pally past life which grants +3attack/dmg in 3 seperate clickies, each over 2 minutes (without extend). Madstone procs and classes that rage use this in more discrete intervals in all practical applications.

Wizard PL: +1 to all spell DC's and 10 free MM. This is useful to any build that considers offensive casting and/or crowd control.


And the rest decrease in power....

The barbarian past life is dramatically more powerful than the next most powerful feat simply because it enhances EVERYTHING about a character as a melee; that is: Combat Feat DC's, To-hit, DPS, HITPOINTS. Every area is enhanced, rage duration is amped.

Putting 2 levels of barbarian on any build with that past life auto-grants +8str/+8con and a longer duration rage. But that, in of itself, is the restriction that I don't agree with. The barbarian past life is only beneficial to those with barbarian in them.

So, we should ask ourselves whether or not past life feats should be consistent in being openly beneficial to a certain group of classes- or should they benefit most the class that the feat itself came from?

If you think that the feats should buff their own class- then the monk and barb lives are golden. Even the Wizard life is great. But the fighter past life for instance, that grants 20 bab, is obviously designed for non-fighters. The ranger PL is obviously designed for non-rangers. The bard past life would be ok, but the wizard one trumps it because the song doesn't stack with nomal bard songs. The rogue past life is truly a great PL because it benefits every melee AND rogues alike- not to mention the +1 to all skills aspect of it as well. The cleric and FvS lives shouldn't even be mentioned in here, since they stink so bad.

I don't want the barb PL effect removed, I simply would want more application to non-barb level containing builds.

[QuantumFX]

But the fighter past life for instance, that grants 20 bab, is obviously designed for non-fighters.

The passive portion of that feat is attractive to anyone with the word “Defender” in their PrE.

So, we should ask ourselves whether or not past life feats should be consistent in being openly beneficial to a certain group of classes- or should they benefit most the class that the feat itself came from?

I’d settle for wide benefits (Meaning can benefit multiple builds but not necessarily all builds.) with a special perk for a straight <class> to <class> reincarnation.

[Noelemahc]

This is still correct. The past life is essentially intended to provide extra rages (generally to a non barbarian class), not improve existing ones.

Meh. I just want the feat to give +20 hp like it's supposed to and not +5. Could care less what the rest of it does because the rage is too short to matter (and my stance eats it anyway).

[sephiroth1084]

I’d settle for wide benefits (Meaning can benefit multiple builds but not necessarily all builds.) with a special perk for a straight <class> to <class> reincarnation.

That's really what the PL feats should be doing.

The paladin PL feat should be giving extra smites, or LoH, or more smite damage.
The ranger PL feat should be giving extra FE bonuses, or...something.
The cleric PL feat should be giving a bonus to healing or...something.
The bard PL feat should be giving a bonus to existing songs, or improving song duration.
The barbarian PL feat should be increasing rages, or DR, or rage duration.

And all of these should be in addition to some other benefit that is more generally useful. And any of them that mimic another feat should be counting as that other feat in order to meet prerequisites.

[Delt]

The barb one is overpowered and not WAI. No surprise.

On the plus side, Turbine still takes a year+ to fix things, so you have plenty of time to enjoy the stacking barb PL and any other, less talked about PL "bugs".

[Kza]

Its op imho, but.. What i really dont like is having these things in game and noone know if its gone in 1 month or 2 years or never. That is really bad imho. If Turbine says it will be in game atleast 1 year because low priority it would be good to know. having these kind of extra benefits thats not WAI during long times and noone knows when they dissapear aint good. Better change fast before ppl adapt to em.

[fredericko]

"Overpowered" is a term that can't be used by itself, since it implies comparison. The real issue is with the other active PL feats: many are "underpowered", totally unworthy of the feat slot they take. It's those feats that need working on, not one of the few chosen ones that can actually be put to good use.
If a player rolls the highest strength race, mix two of the most DPS focused classes, toss in a full barbarian past life and its active feat, either he gets one of the highest DPS toons possible or the game isn't balanced. Should Turbine roll the servers back to when you could have a 18rgr/1rog/1mnk, and get the full package: top notch raid DPS, full rogue utility, and AC tanking? Should a 6 ranger / 2 monk splash yield comparable DPS than a 6 barb / 2 rogue splash? Where's the cost/benefit ratio, where's the balance in that? Or is this actually the issue with some posters here? That they are mad at how no longer their swiss knife builds can compare DPS-wise to a class that is build solely with DPS in mind?
Reading Eladrin's post makes me wonder whether he is actually aware of what the community is doing with feats and builds. Take any high performance barbarian builds for that matter, Shade's for instance. Are those builds spending APs into maxing their number of rages? If not, what's the use of extra rages as Eladrin says? It's not like barbarians are swimming in feats, like fighters or monks.
I honestly can't understand Eladrin, or Turbine for that matter. Of all past life feats they go and plan to "fix" nearly the only one that is actually worth its slot...

[Vengenance]

Rule 1: We don't talk about fight club.

If people keep brining this up it will get nerfed because the devs love to nerf the things we love the most. Keep it quiet and maybe it won't.

So says the person who couldn't keep his mouth shut about twitching until the devs finally hit it with the nerf bat.

[Forzah]

+4 str/con and +50% longer rages surely is overpowered... but the PL feat as intended is seriously underpowered.

Proposed fix:
I'd say add +2str/con permantly to the rage ability for taking the feat, but no longer duration. And make the PL rage last at least 3 minutes so that it's at least useful.

[sephiroth1084]

+4 str/con and +50% longer rages surely is overpowered... but the PL feat as intended is seriously underpowered.

Proposed fix:
I'd say add +2str/con permantly to the rage ability for taking the feat, but no longer duration. And make the PL rage last at least 3 minutes so that it's at least useful.

I think the duration increase is a useful tool for facilitating barbarian splash builds, which is an important consideration. Meanwhile, it doesn't do that much for pure or mostly pure barbarians who typically have more rage than they need anyway. It has the side benefit of freeing up some AP on many barbs, which may be too good. Perhaps a 25% increase to rage length instead, along with the +2 Str/Con bonus?

If the PL rage clicky lasted a flat 3 minutes, iit still probably wouldn't be worth the feat. Maybe if it granted 3 rages that last 2 minutes each. Or 3 rages that last 30 seconds +6/Con mod and benefit from rage enhancements (so barbarian splashes could get more mileage with AP).

Another option could be, as I stated earlier, tying greater penalties to the past life benefit, like Exhaustion when the rage ends, then fatigue once you get Tireless Rage. Maybe make it a toggleable stance so you don't necessarily have to have all your rages affected so (if it is toggled ON when you activate a rage, that rage functions according to these rules--you can't turn it off to avoid Exhaustion just before the rage ends).

[Dark-Gulrak]

This thread makes me mad very mad

Wish they would tweak it and leave it alone. The feat as per description is pretty fraking useless

And thank you so much OP. I've been wanting that question answered awhile now, since I am also about to TR my barb into a HO but not sure of going pure or 18/2 depending on the feat being "fixed" or not.

[sephiroth1084]

This thread makes me mad very mad

Wish they would tweak it and leave it alone. The feat as per description is pretty fraking useless

And thank you so much OP. I've been wanting that question answered awhile now, since I am also about to TR my barb into a HO but not sure of going pure or 18/2 depending on the feat being "fixed" or not.

I think I'll still go 18/2 and fit in Toughness, Stunning Blow and...something else. The PL until it gets 'fixed' then maybe Quicken or I don't know what. Haste Boost is worth losing 4 Str.

[~SyZoRe]

as a WF the fatigue from the fast life rage doesnt affect me, but if ill ever go back to flashy its gonna be a pain.
i hope they will not nerf but maybe take the fatigue off or just make it shorter..

but overpowered its NOT.

[Emili]

as a WF the fatigue from the fast life rage doesnt affect me, but if ill ever go back to flashy its gonna be a pain.
i hope they will not nerf but maybe take the fatigue off or just make it shorter..

but overpowered its NOT.

All barbs get tireless rage at 17... before than it's easy enough to drink a pot.

Shrug its overpowered as is currently. We all know it is. The paladin and wizard ones are also overpowered compared to the others we all know this is true too. If you want to make a legitimate claim argue to improve the others and make suggestions to do so because 3 past life feats should not be far better then the others.

Which is very true. A point should be made that a Barb, Wizard and Pally currently have more incentive to TR due to the PL's than any other class and the former two the scope is nearly aimed to TR toward thier "own" previous class...

[sephiroth1084]

Which is very true. A point should be made that a Barb, Wizard and Pally currently have more incentive to TR due to the PL's than any other class and the former two the scope is nearly aimed to TR toward thier "own" previous class...

Well, I'd add monk to that list (increase fist size and +1 damage is about +3 avg damage I think), and rogue (+11 damage, +5 to-hit, +1 skills). Monk clearly back to itself, but rogue to any melee not planning on having aggro all the time.

Paladin is one of the best intermediate TRs, with fighter probably being second for melees (healing amp and the excellent clicky; +1 attack and tactics, decent purchasable feat).

Wizard is clearly the best PL for all casters, but I wouldn't say it is OP, but rather than the others need something better.

[domecek1]

The way of nerfing is a bad way in every game. I have played a game, which was destroyed by nerfs... Nobody was listening to players, which was calling for boost things and not nerfing, so they left. I hope, devs here will be more clever.

Archamage pres is also OP, but I would like to see some improve for sorc than nerfing this pres. (sometimes I can see lfm with only wiz icon - thats bad)

[stoolcannon]

I agree they shouldn't change it... The feat is nearly worthless without the "bug"

If by nearly you mean 100% worthless then yes, you are correct. What a horrid waste of a feat slot if that's all it does.

[Caeldos]

That's really what the PL feats should be doing.

The paladin PL feat should be giving extra smites, or LoH, or more smite damage.
The ranger PL feat should be giving extra FE bonuses, or...something.
The cleric PL feat should be giving a bonus to healing or...something.
The bard PL feat should be giving a bonus to existing songs, or improving song duration.
The barbarian PL feat should be increasing rages, or DR, or rage duration.

And all of these should be in addition to some other benefit that is more generally useful. And any of them that mimic another feat should be counting as that other feat in order to meet prerequisites.

Definately.
I feel that some past lives should be beneficial even to those without mountains of free feats. Hence they need to provide the same benefits as the feat they are intended to replace. Furthermore they should have some other small bonus.

For example the barbarian past life should grant a rage use (extra use if you already have rages) at level 1 and an extra per 8 character levels, and gave a +50% listed rage duration. This benefits any melee character, and makes small barb splashes fairly viable (enhancements improve these rages since they're just normal rage uses).

Passively the feat should give the 1 hp/level bonus it currently does. Also, it should give +1 intimidate.

Furthermore, a barbarian being the source of the feat, doesn't normally have enough feats to take it. Because of this it mimics the toughness feat as a prerequisite.



Following a similar line of thought. For another example the bard past life should grant a bard song use (extra use if you already have bard songs) at level 1 and an extra per 8 character levels. Furthermore it should increase the effects of inspire courage by 1 tier, that is by increasing the benefits by +1.

Additionally the feat gives +1 to all charisma based skills as well as giving +1 dc to your enchantment spells. Since bards are tight on feats, it will also mimic the feat SF:Enchantment as a prerequisite.



Essentially all the feats should give some sort of clickable ability tied to the past life class, or if they already have the ability increase its potency, number of uses and/or duration (if reasonable and applicable).
Rangers typically have no active (useful) class abilities, as before going with spells may be a good idea. To increase the draw to that particular feat, it should not only give the barkskin clicky but also a ram's might clicky (on the same uses per day) and also increase the damage dealt to favored enemies (if the character has any) by 2.


Apart from the class specific active ability, a small skill bonus (1-2 ranks depending on which skills are affected) should be tied to the feat. The affected skills should reflect what skills the past life class would be expected to be good at. (General charisma for bard, intimidate for barbarian, all for rogue, sneak for ranger, heal for cleric etc.)

Lastly the feat should if the class is very feat starved, mimic another feat with similar effects, if it would help fulfilling prerequisites.



The goal of the changes would naturally be to make all past life feats useful and available as a good choice especially to the class that gave the past life feat, while still being somewhat useful to other similar classes.