Discussion on Fixing the recently 100% Broken Berserkers Fury feat (BBN Under-Review)

[dkyle]

Well according to the SRD passage, it specifically doesn't mention anything about anti-magic fields and SLAs but amazingly enough it does about specifically say that anti-magic fields does not affect Extraordinary abilities and does affect Supernatural abilities. While 3.5 is notorious about having completely bad wordings and sometimes being contradictory, completely leaving out how SLAs are affected by anti-magic fields while specifically describing how they affect other abilities allows a lot of leeway IMHO. (PS that is of course if you ignore the chart).

The text is not unclear. It says they don't work where magic is suppressed or negated. That obviously includes antimagic fields, which negate magic.

And why ignore the chart? Rules text takes precedence over charts where they contradict, but they do not contradict here. A chart is an entirely legitimate clarification of the rules.

The Devs are free to not follow those rules, but the current operation smells a lot more like a bug to me than an intentional design decision.

[rest]

Disagree. I don't want it to be overpowered.

Tho barbarians will remain an awesome class either way. 1 feat being broken doesn't change a classes balance, it makes us do a feat respec and makes the game less interesting and varied.

So if it the class is so awesome either way, why bellyache about it and claim you had "no advanced warning" that it was going to be fixed? If it doesn't break your character, why all the nerd-rage? It's a broken feat. Hey guess what there are PLENTY of those in game. Do I like that? No I wish they would fix the ones that are broken. But what makes this one so special? You said yourself that this ONE FEAT saved you TEN ACTION POINTS because it extended your rage so much. Tell me one other feat that gives THAT much of an advantage?

But then again according to you, 95% of ALL feats have incorrect descriptions. Your words, not mine. Here, in fact.

95% of the feats in this game don't work per the description.

Man. That's a lot of broken feats. And THIS one is the one that gets your barbarian blood boiling. I sure didn't see THAT one coming.

And then you're getting "crits of 1000+" on the wizard past life feat.

It can deal several hundred damage, and crit in the 1000+ range.

Holy smokes that is AMAZING. I have the PL feat on my cleric, and I have NEVER seen that type of damage. What's your secret? Is it another thing that you will hint at but never come right out and say? I'm seeing 25ish damage from each missile. Maybe a crit near 100. So I guess if EVERY single one of those missiles crit, it might come close to 1000. The day that happens is the day I go out and buy a lottery ticket, because I'd be the luckiest guy in DDO!

[fyrst.grok]

yep It's **** now.. But most PL feats need an overhaul to be worth it.. A bonus to any class who have ANYthing in common and a bonus to the same class would seem logical if logic can be applied to a fantasy world.

On the bright side.. Our TR'd barbs will no longer need 2 levels of fighter

[stainer]

Each missile has it's own crit chance... The odds of all 10 missiles critting in the same cast are pretty close to zero. 300-500 points per cast at cap is fairly accurate (with like 2-3 of them critting). But to say the spell can crit for 1000+, while technically true with all the right enhancements, gear, and crit rolls, is very devious.

You say potato, I say supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

[Shade]

So if it the class is so awesome either way, why bellyache about it

I don't play a single class, nor do I only care about a single class.

I care about the game as a whole, and this feat is available to many classes, and many builds, and many players will get effected by it.

Myself less then some others, but perhaps more then players who never took the feat sure. But being it just happened today, it's best to discuss these things when there fresh.

This is a discussion thread about ways to make the feat useful. Not me bellyaching. I like everyone will just swap it out and think "What a waste of developer time creating another useless feat and move on" if it doesn't pan out. If we can get a dialog goign and make this a useful and balanced feat however, that would be a lot better.

f anyone is bellyaching, its you demanding the feat to be worthless. I just care to have a friendly discussion on ways to improve it so its balanced and worthwhile, you are not offering any suggestion to help towards that goal, just complaining. Thus this is my last reply to you, as you dont seem to care to provide any meaninful discussion.

[rest]

nor do I only care about a single class.

Thanks for the chuckle

f anyone is bellyaching, its you demanding the feat to be worthless. I just care to have a friendly discussion on ways to improve it so its balanced and worthwhile, you are not offering any suggestion to help towards that goal, just complaining. Thus this is my last reply to you, as you dont seem to care to provide any meaninful discussion.

Show me where I "demanded" this feat be worthless? Please. Link to my exact words asking for this feat to be worthless. Maybe you're confusing me with "some qa guy from years ago". Oh wait that was shown to be a direct quote from a developer 6 months ago. Well I guess they're pretty much the same thing right?

[Chai]

That would be called a, "design flaw," or, "bug."

Naaa, hes quoting d20 and using it to stipulate 3.5 rule zero, which is incorrect. d20 has alot of alterations from the norm 3.5. This is another example where attempting to simplify 3.5 omitted alot of important details. The real 3.5 text is as follows.

A spell-like ability is subject to the effects of antimagic. An antimagic field or a beholder's antimagic ray suppresses a spell-like ability so that it has no effect. This suppression does not dispel the ability, however, so if the spell-like ability's duration outlasts the antimagic effect, the spell-like ability resumes functioning when the antimagic effect goes away. An antimagic effect also blocks line of effect (see Chapter 10 in the Player's Handbook) for any magical ability, though a creature always has line of effect to itself. So a creature with a spell-like ability could use the ability on itself, even in an antimagic field. The magic still would be suppressed while the creature remains inside the antimagic effect, and the creature would gain no benefit from the ability until it left the area of antimagic. Time spent inside the antimagic effect still counts against the magic's duration, however.

Since beholders antimagic zones already do not function in DDO like they do in P&P, there is already a variance there. In DDO the antimagic field removes buffs more like a mass dispell with no check on time intervals, where in P&P the field suppresses them and is always on, and when the target moves out of the field, the buffs are still there. Since the anti magic field is more powerful in DDO than it is in P&P, Turbine had to make a decision on whether to allow SLA use inside the more powerful field. They basically created their own entity which goes against rule zero in that regard rather than implementing the anti magic field like it works in P&P. What they DID implement was more of a mass dispell that turns on and off at intervals. They had to decide how this would be handeled, because in P&P the minute the field shuts off like it does in DDO, the SLAs used take effect. What they went with in DDO is that SLAs can be used inside the antimagic (mass dispell) field.

[Combat_Wombat]

This feat should be giving hit points as written. We may end up changing it to a flat +20 hp granting access to toughness enhancements if it keeps misbehaving. (With the existing rage clicky and intimidate bonus.)

I would fully support this as this is what it should have been from start to be in line with other active past life feats

[Monkey_Archer]

No where did the devs ever say that.

No, but it was either that or the extended rage length (or both)... and to be honest the extra rage length isn't nearly as powerful as most people make it out to be. As someone who has a 6 barbarian splash thats currently using the barb PL, I'd honestly rather keep the +4str/con then the extra 2-3 minute duration. Sure it's nice having 5+ minute rages that last over 20 minutes of combat, but ~12 minutes of rage is still going to be enough for most quests, and if not I can always just use the FB set.

The hugest and most overpowered portion of it was without a doubt the massive increase to rage length. It gave me around +3 minutes on my rages. Saved barbarians a massive 10 action points and allowed me to get even more hp/dmg stuff as i didnt need any extend rage.

My suggestion has no rage length increase. Nor does it increase con like your saying.

Old:
+4 str +4 con, +5 hp. (+45 hp total)

Mine (only for pure lvl20 barbarian, who would have to drop TOUGHNESS to fit it in:
+6 str +2 con (20 HP)
Counting toughness, its a net loss of around 100 HP! A huge sacrifice in the name of a small bit of DPS icnrease. Very balacned if you bothered examaining the overall builds.

Examining specific builds as reason to buff a feat is usually not a good idea IMO...
The pure barbarian is feat starved argument can just as easily be used to say every other feat in the game is weak, and we shouldn't be buffing every feat in the game just so it's a relevant choice for a pure barbarian.

The paladin past life seem to be the closest comparison for the barb past life, and its definitely worth taking. You draw comparisons (even call the pali PL "incredibly powerful") then suggest that the barb PL be buffed to be 10 times more useful then the pali PL...

Pali PL:
+2 heal
+3 luck to hit/damage for just over 6 minutes (which doesnt stack with prayer/recitation so in many cases this is only +1 to hit, +2 to damage)

Your suggestion 1:
+2 intim
Free toughness
Extra rage
+3 to hit, +3-5 damage, +20 hp for over 30 minutes

See the problem? I'm not saying that the suggestion itself is overpowered in your particular context... but comparatively, it just makes the argument to buff every other Past life feat to be on-par with this new barbarian one...

And the reason its less for non pure bbns.

And theres 3 suggesiton there, if you disagree with just 1 fine but why just be 100% negative in your reply. What do you think of the other 2?

I did skim over your third suggestion... It seems the most reasonable, but I'd rather just see the first half of your first suggestion: +2 intim, toughness and +1 use of rage..

Guess your very upset by the damage boost chagnes then..

Because every single favored soul, rogue, bbn, human and half elf can get the exact same benefit..

For all of 1 action point.

I'd be fine with those being non stacking too.. EG: Action Point bonus type.

No i'm not upset with the damage boost changes... they do certainly create some class/race combination balance problems, but its better that damage boost become useful first and have further changes to other classes/races at a later date as needed.

...and there is a big differnce between in 2-4 minutes of damage boosting as a class/racial specific bonus and a stacking +6str/con + damage boost for 6+ minutes available for every race/class.

[Carpone]

This feat should be giving hit points as written. We may end up changing it to a flat +20 hp granting access to toughness enhancements if it keeps misbehaving. (With the existing rage clicky and intimidate bonus.)

That would be a welcomed change.

I for one am happy you're tackling these bugs. Everyone who has been using the broken version (myself included) has known it's had a limited shelf life. I don't know why it's such a surprise to folks that it's being fixed.

[Shade]

Your suggestion 1:
+2 intim
Free toughness
Extra rage
+3 to hit, +3-5 damage, +20 hp for over 30 minutes

See the problem? I'm not saying that the suggestion itself is overpowered in your particular context... but comparatively, it just makes the argument to buff every other Past life feat to be on-par with this new barbarian one...

Please re-read the OP more carefully. It's nothing like that. I did do some minor edits tho, i originally had +5 hp as a typo, but i took that out.
It has no toughness nor any bonnus hp.

Your also not giving a fair comparison.
+3 to hit and +3-5 dmg just flat out would be borign as it just copies pal PL (Cant see how its overpowered since its almosts the same). Tact on to a pure barbs rage it's much less so because your already at 70 strength anyways, and rages completely prevents so many thingsl ike key potions, clickies, etc.. That is not fair to directly say its better then Pal PL, whicih can be used without penalties.

I did skim over your third suggestion... It seems the most reasonable, but I'd rather just see the first half of your first suggestion: +2 intim, toughness and +1 use of rage..

U "skimed" my very short suggestion thats 3 lines long?
mmmm..

Well I read yours fully and I agree thats a good comprimise too.

...and there is a big differnce between in 2-4 minutes of damage boosting as a class/racial specific bonus and a stacking +6str/con + damage boost for 6+ minutes available for every race/class.

huge differences in my idea yea.. Can't really fairly compare them, but can say that +10% dmg from a limited use boost that has huge penalties isn't overpowered.

Free bonus dmg all the time is one ting.
Damage at a big HP/defense cost is entirely different imo.

[LordPiglet]

lol thats horrible. Nerf one class os another feels better?

I play both favored souls and bbns, I don't feel better.

Infact I feel like my favored soul got MUCH stronger this update, and my bbn got nerfed yet again like he has on dozens of other updates.

The fact they greatly upgraded the duration on favored soul comdemnation is much bigger upgrade then the minor changes to wings imo.

How did your fvs soul get stronger?

Few user of wings for double the spell points per use.

Shield of condemantion lowered by 10% per tier.

The only buff is they they expanded the tier length to 20seconds. But now it has to trigger 4 times to get that same buff as it had from 2 hits before. The only thing a longer duration helps on is boss fights, and you're the same one complaining about a FVS performance in said fights.

Oh, wait, this will help you, since you should be named champion while you tank LoB.

[Shade]

The only thing a longer duration helps on is boss fights, and you're the same one complaining about a FVS performance in said fights.

1. I've absolutely never specificly complained about fvs performance in a raid fight. Only recent thing i've said even close to that is that it's too easy to kite in LoB.. And favored souls are the best at kiting. Not a complaint so much as an obvious fact of the game.

2. For my fvs, the only time I've ever seen favored souls comdemnation stacking debuff ever get more then 1 stack or have any purpose or use IS boss fights. And it will be better then ever now for those.

Also while I apprecirate the support and attention.. talking about me personally in a thread thats otherwise meant to be a general discussion about a feat is not the right place to do it.

Please post fan comments on my youtube channel, It's a more on topic place for them.

[Monkey_Archer]

Please re-read the OP more carefully. It's nothing like that. I did do some minor edits tho, i originally had +5 hp as a typo, but i took that out.
It has no toughness nor any bonnus hp.

Your also not giving a fair comparison.
+3 to hit and +3-5 dmg just flat out would be borign as it just copies pal PL (Cant see how its overpowered since its almosts the same). Tact on to a pure barbs rage it's much less so because your already at 70 strength anyways, and rages completely prevents so many thingsl ike key potions, clickies, etc.. That is not fair to directly say its better then Pal PL, whicih can be used without penalties.

Ok without the hp/toughness its slightly more reasonable, but I'd still call it strictly superior to the Pali PL (and every other melee past life).
The bigger problem is that this would make it the only PL thats specifically designed for the same class (yes the bugged version was too, but that was also unintended). I think past lives should be beneficial to all classes, with only minor, barely relevant bonuses for the same class. The sorc past life being a prereq option for savant is a good example.

U "skimed" my very short suggestion thats 3 lines long?
mmmm..

"skimmed" ... "didn't read at all" ... same difference

huge differences in my idea yea.. Can't really fairly compare them, but can say that +10% dmg from a limited use boost that has huge penalties isn't overpowered.

Free bonus dmg all the time is one ting.
Damage at a big HP/defense cost is entirely different imo.

The issue with that one has less to do with cost vs benefit balance, and more to do with overall power creep.

[Eladrin]

This feat should be giving hit points as written. We may end up changing it to a flat +20 hp granting access to toughness enhancements if it keeps misbehaving. (With the existing rage clicky and intimidate bonus.)

It's still misbehaving, I'm planning on making this change for u11.

[Carpone]

I don't play a single class, nor do I only care about a single class.

[...]

Definitive Guide to Barbarians, Update 9 Half-Orc Barbs, Youtube Channel, DPS Challenge
Characters (Khyber): Axer, Greataxer, Metalaxer, Dualaxer, Obliterator, Sworder

Your sig is 4 barbarians, two guides on barbarians, a YouTube channel dedicated to barbarian awesomeness and a DPS challenge rigged for barbarians. Say what you want, but everything you post is read through the "he's that barbarian evangelist guy" filter.

[Shade]

Your sig is 4 barbarians, two guides on barbarians, a YouTube channel dedicated to barbarian awesomeness and a DPS challenge rigged for barbarians. Say what you want, but everything you post is read through the "he's that barbarian evangelist guy" filter.

Perhaps by you and some of my fans.

A lot of other players take my words more objectively for what they are.

[Shade]

It's still misbehaving, I'm planning on making this change for u11.

Awesome news. That is a good step towards making the feat have some purpose..

Would be great if you get a chance to consider modifying the clicky into something useful tho. I think everyone agree's it's currently mostly pointless.

Just a simple duration/charge amount increase. Or a change into an actaul rage would go a long way to making this a compettive feat overall.

[Monkey_Archer]

It's still misbehaving, I'm planning on making this change for u11.

Any chance on making the clicky somewhat useful? Even something small like extending the duration to 1 minute would at least make it worth putting on a hotbar.

[zebidos]

I honestly had no idea that the barb past life was broken but that makes sense now why my TR'd barbs rage lasted a bit longer then usual.

All I ask is one thing, don't nerf the halfling barbarian battle squeek.

Thank you.