Eagle is actually good to, bonus action dash can be really useful to stay in the fight, also that they get disadvantage to AoO against you is also useful to clear a path for your friends.
Hey, I took several Eagle totem features when I was building a dragon-themed Barbarian once. Grabbing somebody and then flying straight up and dropping them may not be as good as just cleaving them with a greatsword, but it's a lot more interesting.
I will be that girl for comedic effect and engagement only: "Um ackshually, agile weapons aren't the ones that add Dexterity to your hit rolls?" *pushes up glasses*
Nop, but you and he have messed up. If you're talking about pathfinder, that is. Agile weapons gave you a -4 on the second attack and a -8 on the third and subsequent attacks, whereas with a normal weapon it would be -5 and -10. That's why you get half the damage, the chance of you being able to hit more than one attack in the same turn is higher.
I would like to say brutal critical in 5e is deceptive based on how crits work in that system. Namely it’s only like an increase of 1 or so damage overall and is a damage source you have no control over which is a bit disappointing for several high level class features
All half orcs get the same feature at 1st level as well as several other features, barbarians don't get it until 9th level with that being the only feature they get, it's incredibly disappointing. In my games I make it that they can double the total damage of their crits, with it eventually increasing to triple the damage at 13th level, and finally quadruple the damage at level 17
I think a huge part of this is because damage seems a lot higher in pf2e than dnd 5e. Just looking at the weapon scaling of magical items it really favors pf2e in making big numbers. Not saying that good or bad, as someone new pathfinder I find it interesting and it seems a good way to make the bigger weapons feel stronger
I would've gone with Beast barbarian vs Pathfinder's Animal Instinct. Beast lets you morph to get natural attacks, which is more analogous to the animal instinct.
Predator's Pounce is even better than it appears as it has the Rage trait. Meaning at the level you get it (12th) the 11th level class ability Mighty Rage let's you combine that Predator's Pounce with your Rage action. So you Rage and as part of that Stride and Strike.
I think he also forgot to mention in 5e, rage ends if you don't attempt an attack or get attacked. Not always too hard to do, but there are times where between helping a downed member with a potion or attacking and keeping the rage you are locked out of some actions at a huge cost.
@@CommissarMitch well, no. the rule state as follow : "You tap into your inner fury and begin raging. You gain a number of temporary Hit Points equal to your level plus your Constitution modifier. This frenzy lasts for 1 minute, until there are no enemies you can perceive, or until you fall unconscious, whichever comes first." Meaning if you can still hear, smell or feel it presence, you stay in Rage (so I assume, RAI it's if all ennemies are either dead or fled out of pursuit range)
Technically, a closer analogue to PF2's Animal Barbarian in D&D 5e would be Path of the Beast from Tasha's Couldron of Everything. Going PHB only, though, Totem is a solid choice. Also, For the D&D Barb, they also get unlimited uses of Rage at level 20.
This was a really fun video, loved the well thought out comparisons. As for the 5E rage limits, very much agree with that as a weird flavour choice. I *suspect* that the limitation is there because, like you pointed out, Rage in 5E is basically exclusively a positive/bonus effect rather than a conscious trade-off, and so balance-wise somebody decided that there would be a cap per-day.
@@centurosproductions8827 Oh that's a really interesting point regarding iterations. I will definitely say that Barbarian was never one of the classes that was really on my radar so I am very much not familiar with most of the nuts and bolts from previous editions. Really going to that granular level of rounds per day sounds like just too much book-keeping minutia for my personal tastes. :)
Note on 5e Barbarians and AC, half-plate is generally what you want for AC as it'll beat out your unarmoured defence unless you have really high stats (to a degree that is unrealistic if using 5e's point buy/standard array). So generally medium armour is preferable here, so long as they're not using *heavy* armour, all their features work. Edit: And they lack proficiency in heavy armour anyway. Edit2: Also find it funny you mentioned Brutal Critical as a cool feature, when, to me, it's a symptom of how weak higher level class features for martials in 5e is.
I think the word "friends" might actually be there for things like Charm/Dominate Person-being charmed makes you consider the charmer "a friendly acquaintance" even if they aren't technically your ally. 🤔
I like the concept behind this video. It's interesting to consider how the rules reward or restrict players choices and how that impacts gameplay. I think it would be interesting to take a character from outside the TTRPG community and try to make a character sheet for them in each system. (Like any character from a show, video game, or movie who would fit into the DND/PF2 genre.)
Great video! Thematically, I feel like Path of the Zealot and Path of the Giant would compare well with Spirit Instinct and Giant Instinct, but they're pretty different mechanically.
True, and while he did say he was sticking to the core rulebooks of each system for the sake of simplicity, I feel that a slightly better option for the Animal Instinct would have been Path of the Beast, which also has a shapeshifting sort of feel to it, granting the user natural weapons to attack with, although it is more heavily implied that the shapeshifting is rooted in lycanthropy.
I would say that 5e crits can be fine with the brutal critical, but it wouldn't work quite as well as it does with Pathfinder. Because of how much damage and how frequent crits happen in Pathfinder, not to mention any weapons that have the deadly/fatal traits. It's very easy to spike damage in that regard, but in 5e, they only ever get it on a nat 20.
Really nice video! I like this type of direct comparison between the two systems. I think an interesting follow up could be to try to make a character in both systems that uses classes or other elements that don't have a direct obvious equivalent class/subclass/ancestry, like making a 5e warlock and trying to match it as closely as possible in theme and/or play style in PF2e. I've done a lot of theory crafting for converting specific Warlock builds, so it'd be interesting to see your take on something like that!
A few things. 1: DnD having Brutal Critical from the start makes sense for that system as it is a 5% chance to critically hit. If a Barbarian had it so all their weapons had the Deadly/Fatal traits I feel we players would riot. 2: DnD Barbarian Rage stops if you fail to attempt to hit an enemy. So if you are out of range or magically held in place for your turn, your limited Rage ends. Pathfinder rage only ends early if you stop seeing an enemy. 3: Pathfinder Rage is only halfing damsge from Agile weapon. You can still use DEX. It just pushes you away from using stuff like Daggers and Light Hammers.
D&D and PF2e have different design philisophies. D&D 5e gives all major class abilities at the beginning and let's them scale decently or adds more uses to them, which makes all classes front loaded, until level 3 they get all their major abilities and usually some more at levels 5, 9, 13 and 17, or one level lower or higher. Classes are also more like packages, which makes the system good for beginner and casual players. There is a scaling with bounded accuracy and ASI's, but for the most part you want new things to improve stuff. PF2e also gives you some interesting stuff at the beginning, but it usually doesn't scale or just becomes a nice bonus later on, with the focus spells and all that. It starts to give you cool and mechanically stronger things the longer you play, like Quickened Spell or the cool archetypes like eldritch archer or beast gunner. If D&D 5e is Playmobil, PF2e is like Lego, letting you build extremely variable characters and giving you the mechanical complexity to sink into it, so the system is overwhelming (not even a question) for completely new players. It's also much more balanced, giving incremental increases to your stats at every level up, scaling the enemies the same way, especially with the crit ranges.
I've thought recently about how comparing dnd 5e to pf2e feels to me a lot like comparing games like elden ring and monster hunter; yeah you can look how certain weapon classes compare to each other or how their combat feels or even stuff as precise as how rolling feels between each game, but at the end of the day you have to step back and realize that they're not the same game and what draws in new players and what compels veterans to stay between each is going to be completely different and usually contradictory. what someone may like about one or the other may be the thing that someone else hates (ie I saw a post where someone hated pf2e adding level to proficiency because to them it felt functionally the same as adding nothing, whereas I see it as mechanical proof that your character is getting better at what they do and are becoming stronger).
D&D 5e is like a blogpost of someone's homemade chocolate chip cookie recipe. Sure there are some typos, and the instructions can get vague at times. But the person writing this is entertaining, is telling funny stories, and the sheer amount of likes and comments on this website means they have to be doing something right. Pathfinder 2e is a Lab Report breaking down the composition of a chocolate chip cookie. Sure there's a ton of terminology that you don't pick up on right away, and even when you do there are still some sentences you have to read twice to fully understand. But the paper is written flawlessly, perfectly legible, clean graphs of data, goes into detail. You can't help but be impressed from the sheer display of execution Some people are willing to learn the fine details of a cookie, some people just wanna eat a cookie. Nothing wrong with either of those, just don't act one's better than the other
Honestly, I'd love a series comparing the two, I really would like to see the Paladin and Champion juxtaposed (mostly for personal curiosity) or ranger/monk because I've heard good things about PF2 and how it improves those two to 5e. Or hell if you want to take two monsters from the two or Artificer vs Alchemist/Inventor I'd be excited to see any of it
Interesting video, thanks. I've been playing D&D (or Pathfinder since P2e came out) for over 40 years and I have never reach level 20 with any character. Also, this is just me but..., Barbarian isn't a character class its an ancestry. Barbarians can be Bards (skalds), Witches/Sorcerers (witch doctors), Clerics (shamans), Warriors (Fighters) and everyone's favorite the Berserker (basically the Barbarian from the Players Core). That's how I do it in P2e at my table because we ran a Northman/Viking like campaign once and this is the only thing that made sense at the time and it just stuck.
The dnd barbarian getting more crit dice isn't as great as you might think; recall that a crit is a 20 and only a 20 unless you multiclass for some uncommon features. With reckless, that's only a 9.5% per attack to crit, and it adds only extra dice, not other flat extra damage. Also, it's generally better to use 2d6 weapons instead of 1d12, so you're really only adding 1d6 for every brutal crit.
May I suggest a quite bold "class" comparison? Witch and Warlock, both gain power through a patron, but they work in absolutely different ways. But I'm really curious if you can have the same concept and "feel" in each class.
i tried doing this while learning pf2, just as an exercise of "can i build this character concept in here, so i can help my future players?" the 5e character was an archfey pact of the tome lock and as much as i tried to twist around the witch, it turned out to just be better to reflavor a fey bloodline sorc, which was a nice in real time lesson in "flavor is free"
Rage in PF2 is as follow : "You tap into your inner fury and begin raging. You gain a number of temporary Hit Points equal to your level plus your Constitution modifier. This frenzy lasts for 1 minute, until there are no enemies you can perceive, or until you fall unconscious, whichever comes first. You can't voluntarily stop raging. While you are raging: You deal 2 additional damage with melee Strikes. This additional damage is halved if your weapon or unarmed attack is agile. You take a -1 penalty to AC. You can't use actions with the concentrate trait unless they also have the rage trait. You can Seek while raging. After you stop raging, you lose any remaining temporary Hit Points from Rage, and you can't Rage again for 1 minute." Agile is as follow : "The multiple attack penalty you take with this weapon on the second attack on your turn is -4 instead of -5, and -8 instead of -10 on the third and subsequent attacks in the turn." MAP (multiple attack penalty) is as follow : "If you use an action with the attack trait more than once on the same turn, your attacks after the first take a penalty called a multiple attack penalty. Your second attack takes a -5 penalty, and any subsequent attacks take a -10 penalty. The multiple attack penalty doesn’t apply to attacks you make when it isn’t your turn (such as attacks made as part of a reaction). You can use a weapon with the agile trait to reduce your multiple attack penalty." Meaning that a *Finesse* Barbarian build is actually viable. But hey, it's just a Theory... EDIT : PS : If you want to make a character in PF2 you can use Pathbuilder 2e. (it's basically DnD Beyond for Pathfinder 2e and it's mostly free as only optional creation rules are behind the paywall)
intimidation, in raw, can be used with strenghs. there is a thing that allow the roll to be used with another ability score than the expected one. (source: donjon master guide). so you don't really need charisma if you intimidate with your raw strenghs and/or constitution (dependong on how you intimidate the person). it's sadly a somewhat unknown rules, and even if known, is rarely usable outside of intimidation (and i've heard a case for intelligence(stealth) as in using your wit to stay out of sight/drawing attention rather than hiding in complicated spots with dexterity)
Love the concept of the video in terms of comparing them as closely as possible with as many of the same choices in both systems. I would like to see a comparison without that restriction, though - make the strongest conceptual Barbarian in both systems and compare them. I'd also like to have seen maybe a character breakdown at the start and at the end where we see both character sheets - obviously with the addendum that a +25 to hit in PF2e at level 20 is reasonable when AC is over 40 for some monsters, which wouldn't happen in DnD
As a p2e enjoyer, I would like to point out that: 1) critical hits in pathfinder 2e are more common than in 5e if the party works well as a unit (even at level 1, flanked+magic weapon+inspire courage+demoralize can allow for a 10% increase in critical hit chance, while in 5e the only thing affecting critical hit chance is advantage or disadvantage) 2) the barbarian would get a striking weapon as soon as level 4. What does a striking weapon do? Exactly what brutal critical does 3) in p2e, the Barbarian is not the critical hit fisher that reckless attack allows it to be in 5e. The Fighter and the Gunslinger are more adept to this role
Nice video, it's fun to see how a pf2e player sees the 5e class. I know you kept to phb but Barbaria Path of the beast would fit more with wolf instinct barbarian, in case anyone want to check.
Very good video without shitting on one or the other System, but in theory you would need to add the whole barbarian feats for pathfinder (or at least say which you picked) and all barbarian features for DnD5e. That would truly show the difference of the two Systems as well as the class difference.
Having watched a 5e Bear Totem Barbarian walk off comedic amounts of damage while raging, I can appreciate the limitations of Barbarian damage resistance in PF2e more.
14:30 and DnD 5e has the "partially Shapeshifts into chosen animal" Barbarian, too, in the form of the Path of the Beast. Perhaps that comparison would have been interesting. Meanwhile, PF2e recently got the elemental Barbarian that DnD 5e has as the Storm Herald. 21:15 I think that is the most important part of those comparisons. Not "this system lets you do a cool thing and the other does not" (like PF2e letting Barbarians cast the Earthquake spell every 10 minutes.) I think comparing clerics, druids or Sorcerers would be interesting. comparng Wizards would likely be just sad for 5e.
i think casters in 5e would stomp Pf2 casters, at least based on the power of their spells. PF2 casters on the other hand are really good to take archetype feats
@@enrif3099I’d argue it depends on what you consider power to be. If we’re talking straight up damage, then probably. But as someone that runs plenty of PF2e campaigns, I’ve been told by several of my 5e refugees that non-blaster spells more often than not work better in the PF2e system than their 5e counterparts in that system. But yes, I agree a comparison video between the two would be cool.
also in 5e need to keep attacking of beeing targets of attacks or your rage ends, that mean if the enemies kite the barbarian and ignored (and the barbarian do not have range weapons) they rage end wasting 1 full use of.... Pathfinder in the other hand the rage it not end if there are enemies live (I usually let them concider unconcius enemies as not foe so they can have something to interrogate) and they can't end they rage by they own will
Reckless attack has multiple purposes in 5e. 1) up's your damage by getting ya more hits and crits. 2) it DRAWS AGGRO. Your barbarian is easier to hit, and being so much beefier in the early game, you can afford to take those hits. They are likely half damage ANYWAY, since you'll likely be raging every fight. (note, after like level... 5, the casters will be able to aggro dump just fine on their own with misty step or shield or healing or cc effects or fireball nuke or counterspell and you'll be an easier mark *anyway*). 3) At the late game, you might as well reckless because your AC cap without magic or multiclass is 22 (and you'll likely be below that if you decided to bump Dex 3rd) and you'll be fighting things with +12-17 to hit.
Also one of my Barbarians learn about that concentration thing really fast. We're all new, and I double checked him using demoralize in his first fight. He knows better and realized he had an out, and I think he rebuilt to use it in the future.
Giving you a like and a comment to help bump your video. I would love to see me more these. A lot of us came from d&d and for me the comparison helps me learn pf2e more. Kudos.
The next one I thought of would be Artificer vs Inventor. You could make a Construct Inventor vs Artillerist or Battle Smith. I say Artillerist as the cannon is essentially a pet vs an upgradeable/modifiable weapon.
Now you need to take these characters and put them through an actual combat scenario with an equivalent enemy and/or head to head match useing their respective combat systems.
Awesome. I don't know much about d&d but it's always good to learn different things that we can actually homebrew. So more of these please, any class would be great. I appreciate your explanations.
Crits in PF2e are much much easier to get than in DnD because crits are just hitting your opponent's AC+10. If you were getting bonus dice on each of those that would be insane. That's why DnD's crit bonus is higher, there's only a 5% chance of it coming into play on any unmodified attack.
Though I understand you only wanted to use the base PHB and Core Rulebook for this comparison, I think a better analog for the Animal Instinct PF2 barb is the 5e Beast barb. It may be more beneficial to open the book base you're pulling from. More options on both sides means more opportunities to align.
I'd really love to see the Barbarian Remaster do more with Animal Instinct Barbarian's Animal Rage Feat! Make it more than a cosmetic feat. And if it's staying cosmetic, then... make it like second level? I wish that you could command an animal while Raging EDIT: Path of the Beast mighta been another apt comparison for PF2e's Animal Instinct, You gain (a) natural weapon, some additional movement abilities, and a neat cooperative feature- along with rabies transference, which is kinda funny
I'd love for this to be a swries! This was a really interesting way to look at the two systems and highlight their different approaches. It was also helpful for me as someone who's trying to help their group get into PF2e, because this could help them understand some of the main differences they might feel playing a familiar class in a new system!
you know aj, I actually made it thru hundreds of videos without seeing it. Now I can't unsee the vampiric Nonat. Incidentally, they grind those down if you do braces as a kid. ( a fellow former vampire)
I like both systems, but I think its not fair to PF2 to glaze over just how much more fleshed out a PF character is out of combat. They both get some features which you did a good job highlighting, but in trying to be fair there was some impression that they go roughly equal amount of that stuff. In my experience building characters for each, PF characters get so much more of that than a 5E character does. Some of the gap can be closed by consciously giving up combat choices for non combat ones in 5E, but often you still can't get to an equal amount as a PF character, and when you do, you have given up a LOT of your combat power to accomplish it. For example, you might use two of your feats for non-combat features, but then not only did you not take combat feats, you probably need to not take combat feats the other times you get feat choices in order to just pump into ability scores to keep up on that front. PF does a much better job of segregating those choices so you don't have to give up combat power in order to get non combat options. I do still love the extent to which you can mechanically optimize for combat in 5E though, which is a lot harder to do satisfyingly in PF.
I know you said only players hand book but the path of the beast in 5e is probably a perfect 1 to 1 for animal instinct, would have loved to see that comparison.
Here's a fun one I think you should try: 5e Artificer vs PF2 Inventor. I essentially tried doing this when making my first PF2 character and nearly wanted to quit PF2 altogether.
Great video. I think barbarian is a great way to show it. They do differ a little as the 5e version is more of a proper tank and pf2e is more damaged only byt both can make amazingly high number of damage and can last a while. I'll love to see the extreme here with something like ranger where I feel like while they share thematic overlap how we get there is different. 5e ranger is a great hoard killer where pf2e is focused on single target.
I enjoyed the video, but I do think you did 5e dirty. I think the most appropriate comparisons should have been the Fury instinct and the berserker path. Or if you're doing totem warrior, at least make him a bear totem warrior! That's by fat the most iconic totem warrior IMO.
Its Good. The only thing is where I do understand your hesitations about limited rages for Barbarians for 5e thats actually a good thing. At low levels your start out with 2 and 3 rages and the thing is you hardly ever would have to go Beyond those amount of combats per day. So if your fighting so often your literally not doing any if world/story building
I think it’s more about actual choices in combat. Isn’t it true that in 5e, your rage ends if you don’t attack or get attacked in a round? That sort of limits what you can do. I realize that as a Barbarian, you’re almost always going to spend your time attacking and/or one other action. But sometimes moving to heal an ally is just more important (at least in PF2e). In 5e, that might be enough to end your rage. And starting it back up would cost you one of those Rage resources. In PF2e you can attack a creature, then move your speed over to your friend and apply healing via Battle Medicine or Lay On Hands, neither of which have the Concentrate trait. If you’ve taken the Medic Archetype and the Doctor’s Visitation feat, you can even combine your movement and Battle Medicine check into one action. So you can Stride up to a creature, Attack, then Stride over & heal your buddy. Alternatively, depending on the situation, the battlefield, and whether or not you picked up an Ancestry feat giving you a rank 1 spell, you can cast Jump. Also lacking the Concentrate trait, this spell lets you jump 30 feet in any direction with one action (usually it takes two, and you have to roll). This is extremely useful for jumping over difficult terrain to get to your ally or to an enemy. Granted, most Barbarians make great natural jumpers anyway. But for those that don’t pick up the Quick Jump skill feat, this lets them make that jump in one action. I realize these things might be extremely situational in 5e. But in PF2e they tend to come up often enough that doing them and not needing to worry about losing your rage can be pretty important.
@@Captainpigraven I get what your saying but it really is more to sure up the balance the storytelly and combat. For example for barbarian most of there kit is designed around combat and particularly their rage so they offer the most utility to their allies by fighting. Like by recklessly attacks your gonna become a high priority threat for the opponent and by them gaining advantage when attacking you that gives them bonus incentive to attack you. So in a typical low to medium lvl combat what you find is your teammates are the ones scrambling to stablize and prevent the Barbarian from dying/fainting cause even if they don't like him if he drops the rest of them ate fair game.
@@Nightmareblackop Maybe I misunderstood this question. You questioned Nonat’s concern on only getting a limited number of rages per day in 5e. I believe your point was basically, “you start with enough for most combats, at least in most campaigns.” I’m paraphrasing, obviously. But I think that’s the gist of what you were saying, right? My point was that, at least in PF2e, there are enough variables that can happen in a combat situation where maybe 3-5 rages per day just wouldn’t be enough. The healing situation was just one example. Another might be that, again, at least in PF2e, when you fall unconscious you lose your rage. You can pick up a feat that lets you enter it again. But in 5e, if you fell unconscious (and assuming you lose your rage), that’s just one more incident where you must use up another rage. And as you said, the Barbarian in combat will likely be focusing on the enemy, hence they’ll be drawing aggro. As a result, it’s not rare for the Barbarian to be the first to drop in a fight, despite all the HP. Sure, in most cases someone else will be the one to heal the big guy if he needs it, or he’ll spend an action to self-heal. But PF2 fights can be very tough, and sometimes it’s just not enough. There are spells and magical abilities that creatures have in PF2 that can instantly knock a Barbarian out of their rage. One of the most common examples is Calm Emotions. This spell is great for players, but just as good for GMs when there is a Barbarian in the party. Some enemies have this spell already, and it’s rather common for a GM to add it to an enemy they homebrew for their campaign. I assume there’s a similar spell in 5e. And if so, that’s yet another example of where you’d have to lose your rage and need another one. Another example is movement. While most often it is true that a Barbarian (and combatants in general) wants to stay in the same general vicinity, sometimes you just have to move. If your spellcaster or something is somewhat far away but gets hit with a crit and is in bad shape, it is entirely possible that maybe you want to get to him and protect him, so he can properly heal himself or get somewhere else w/o being attacked again. Assuming your base speed of 25, you stride and drag/carry him away. Depending on how far the distances are, it’s entirely possible you’ve moved away from creatures and those enemies can’t attack you. In PF2, this is fine and can be done while in rage. But in 5e, because you aren’t attacking or getting hit, you lose rage. And that’s yet another example of a situation that uses up a rage. Again, the majority of the time it doesn’t matter. In both systems, the main goal of the Barbarian is to get in the middle of the fray and kick butt. And typically that is what happens…so having a finite number of rages isn’t going to matter. But in PF2, there are just so many situations that can come up where you might lose your rage, or you would if it used 5e combat rules, and having a finite number of them would not only being mechanically terrible, but also just feel bad. I believe part of this is just due to the way the different combat systems work. At least according to my 5e refugee players, there is far more player movement during PF2 combat. Less than 20% of creatures have Attack Of Opportunity, so movement can often be safe. Indeed, in many combats it is tactically crucial.. Similarly, combat strategy often tends to be more predicated strictly on the relationship between damage/HP. While plenty of 5e creatures have different attacks or abilities, the main path to success is less through actual combat choices via the GM and more about attrition with regards to hit points. As a result, player builds are often built to maximize damage over anything else. On the other hand, PF2 offers players and GMs a more robust set of combat choices, with player agency in battles being the focus. Because enemies also get these choices, but are typically strong and hit hard on top of that, it allows for a more dynamic battlefield. Attrition becomes less HP/damage based every battle and instead changes to a variable. Sometimes it’s stopping enemy movement, or shutting down their reactions. Other times it can be about hit and run tactics, breaking off chunk gains here and there but staying on the move to avoid AoE attacks. Sometimes it’s encouraging enemy movement, where wasting opponent actions by forcing them to advance is a superior scheme. Other times it’s about drawing aggro via a Barbarian and drawing several lower level creatures into a trap. The list goes on. I’m not trying to say one is better than another. While I personally prefer PF2, I’m well aware there are many people whom prefer that straight hack & slash style of gameplay, and I respect that. My point here is that due to ever changing variables in PF2 combat, there’s just more opportunity to not use rage as a Barbarian on any given turn. And as a result, having a finite number of rage uses per day might actually matter far more often in PF2 than it does in 5e. If you implemented the “Barbarian must be attacking at least once per round, or be the target of an attack once per round, or they lose rage” rule into PF2, things would get even worse. While attacking is typically the optimal strategy for a PF2 Barbarian, as I pointed out sometimes it’s not a viable option. There are times where it’s not even a good choice. If you also imported the 3-5 rages per day rule, your PF2 Barbarian would be gimped, both mechanically and from a player agency perspective. I realize there’s still a chance I’m missing your point. Your original comment discussed a concern over worrying about a battle mechanic over time dedicated to world building, or something of that sort. I honestly don’t see the connection. World building and social roleplay is pretty GM-specific. I’ve been running multiple PF2 campaigns a week since it’s 2019 inception, and I’m much more social roleplay heavy than combat-heavy. And many of my 5e refugees have even stated that they’re used to a bit more combat, lol. But I devoted the same amount of time to social roleplay and world building in PF1 & D&D 3.5, so that’s nothing new. I largely ignored that part of the original comment because I wasn’t sure what to make of it. I just don’t see how the mechanics of a player build in relation to the mechanics of combat gameplay relate in any way to in-game social roleplay or world building.
The point of the 5e Totem Barbarian is to pick and choose different animals as you go, like building a totem pole. Sticking with one animal when you don't like what it gives you is unnecessary.
10:14 You are mixing up Agile and Finesse. Agile is about MAP reduction for multiple attacks. Agile is something you only find on weapons with 1D6 damage max. It is on small, quick weapons. Sweep and Backswing are what I call the "Barbarians Agile". Those Traits bonus is like a "lesser Agile", but in turn you can find it on stronger weapons and it does not cut your Rage Bonus damage. - For me at least, PF2 Animal is probably the weakest barbarian subclass. You need a fallback weapon and armor just to deal with being knocked unconscious/out of rage. Or being attacked before you can rage. Other PF2 subclasses at least are still functional without Rage, Animal less so.
Unarmored/unarmed dex barbarian is perfectly viable in pf2e- the halving of rage damage is on AGILE(multiple attack penalty trait) not FINESSE(dex to hit trait)
@@amelialonelyfart8848 They aren't weak IMO. Caster are the ones that are broken in 5e specially "arcane" casters. It's a inherent problem after all when caster can create earthquakes and fighters can't...
Speaking of Barbarian's rage in 5e, isn't it funny that for the berserker subclass, their main feature, frenzy rage, gives them exhaustion levels just because it can? 6 of those and you dead. So on top of having a limited number of rages per day, if a berserker goes into frenzy twice, they'll get screwed for the next day with disadvantage on ability checks iirc (or was it attacks first?)
God this is making me remember how much the animal instinct barb is kinda not amazing at low levels in PF2E. Would be nice if the granted unarmed attacks had Agile without the rage penalty and they had unarmored status bonus to Speed to really give that feral fantasy. Forced to use weaker attacks without cool tags and your rage bonus is the lowest possible and has no interesting damage types. Plus no low level Animal Instinct Barb Feats. Being straight up kinda bad for the first five levels (the most important levels as that’s also how players would get an impression of the game) is kinda just bad design, expression, and balance for a game that boasts so much on those as specialties.
Ive found that when i play 5e (which is rare now outside bg3) even when it is full on point buy i still use standard arrays because i get frustrated when my character can only really do one or two things and then just shouldnt bother trying everything else
Like the video. Would be nice to see it with the other classes (some of them like wizard, cleric, bard, rogue, witch, champion after the remastered comes out)
um i was thinking for your starting race, you would want catfolk or elf because,i forget if this is so but i think you cant wear heavy armor as a barbarian so you could use your dex bonus to get a little better AC. sure strength is good but getting hit less is better, i think.
@Nonat1s, whaere did you gat this art for PF orc? Is it from some rulebook or what? Im asking just because in my country there is a ccg that used this art in a newest set, did they just steal it?
Can't rage all the time? PF1e's burn rider with hot Siccatite armor and Regenerative Vigor rage power says otherwise. As long as the fire remains which it does when you put on the armor, your rage goes on
Strength should be 17 on the D&D side. Also, a better parallel for the D&D subclass would have been path of the beast, rather than the path of the totem. Also, the critical hit damage comparison was unfair. In 5E, that's up to 4 extra weapon dice of damage (half-orc, brutal critical at 9, 13, 17), but you only get those nova moments 5-10% of the time. In PF2E, critical hits are likely to happen much more often, but you're stuck with only using the bite attack... or another unarmed strike. Which leads to the question of whether you could take the monk or martial artist archetype to get another type of unarmed strike that'll be more effective, and give you the option to do other types of damage. Gorilla stance can be used in armor, and your attacks get backswing, forceful and grapple, and the aesthetic of walking around on all fours (like a wolf does) fits pretty well. Or if you're dead set on staying strictly within the core rulebook, you could take dragon stance or mountain stance. Each has their own perks, though you'll want to retrain out of mountain stance at level 6, once animal skin becomes available.
Admittedly id love to see you do the same thing but with troll lord games castles and crusades version of the barbarian. Its even available to buy for free from their website
Hey this is minor but there is a barbarian path of the beast which augments the barbarians body, one that might match up with the mechanics of the pf2e Barbarian subclass you chose much better 👍
I'm a PF2 player who's about to try DnD 5e for the first time, and I'm planing for my character to be a Barbarian. You couldn't have released this video in a more perfect time lmao
@@markberghel275 So far I have played mostly casters in PF2, so I knew I wanted my next character to be a martial, no matter the system. Then in our DnD server one friend began trying to warn me that martials in this system get completely overshadowed by optimized casters, while the DM scolded him for discouraging me of trying out the martial folk, BUT they both agreed that Barbarians were generally a lot of fun and easy to grasp for beginners, so I went with that!
Brutal Critical pf2 vs. 5e isn't a really fair comparison honestly. 5e it's a bonus die (or at higher levels, multiple dice) one in twenty attacks. It's a passive ability that there's a moderate chance you may not see trigger even a single time in a session. Sure it seems nice, but mathematically it's an ability that rarely comes up. Meanwhile, because of how much easier it is to crit in Pf2, if that same ability was granted to Barbarians, it would be incredibly potent. Not to mention in Pf2, anyone with a weapon with the Deadly trait essentially gets 5e's Brutal Critical for free.
I really like this video - would love to see more of these. (In fact have been missing you lately, buddy. Let's grab a beverage (G-Fuel?) together and you can talk emphatically at me about PF2e.) Looking forward to the response to playtest tomorrow and the late but still anticipated Kineticist class review.
All characters should be M.A.D. Make players make hard choices. You shouldn't be good at all things. Penalties and weaknesses are just as important as bonuses and benefits.
I'm not familiar with D&D's current Psychic / Psionic class, but I'd love to see a comparison between the Pathfinder Psychic from Dark Archive and something similar from 5e.
nonat may be the first person I've seen pick totem warrior as their barbarian subclass and go for anything other than the bear
Lmao was thinking the same thing
Eagle is actually good to, bonus action dash can be really useful to stay in the fight, also that they get disadvantage to AoO against you is also useful to clear a path for your friends.
@@reyvagabond3344 YoUr FrIeNdS
Sorry I just like how Nonat kept exaggerating it lol
Hey, I took several Eagle totem features when I was building a dragon-themed Barbarian once.
Grabbing somebody and then flying straight up and dropping them may not be as good as just cleaving them with a greatsword, but it's a lot more interesting.
@@centurosproductions8827 That's actually a really cool way to reflavor Eagle
I will be that girl for comedic effect and engagement only: "Um ackshually, agile weapons aren't the ones that add Dexterity to your hit rolls?" *pushes up glasses*
N E R D lol
Agile was the pf1e enchantment, though
Nop, but you and he have messed up. If you're talking about pathfinder, that is. Agile weapons gave you a -4 on the second attack and a -8 on the third and subsequent attacks, whereas with a normal weapon it would be -5 and -10. That's why you get half the damage, the chance of you being able to hit more than one attack in the same turn is higher.
@@cadetstar Yes, but that added Dex to Damage not to Hit.
Pathfinder barbarians halve the bonus damage for AGILE weapons, not finesse. You can still use dexterity to hit.
I would like to say brutal critical in 5e is deceptive based on how crits work in that system. Namely it’s only like an increase of 1 or so damage overall and is a damage source you have no control over which is a bit disappointing for several high level class features
All half orcs get the same feature at 1st level as well as several other features, barbarians don't get it until 9th level with that being the only feature they get, it's incredibly disappointing. In my games I make it that they can double the total damage of their crits, with it eventually increasing to triple the damage at 13th level, and finally quadruple the damage at level 17
It's a bad feature... But cool overall. Sometimes a feature is useless but flavorful and cool haha.
I think a huge part of this is because damage seems a lot higher in pf2e than dnd 5e. Just looking at the weapon scaling of magical items it really favors pf2e in making big numbers. Not saying that good or bad, as someone new pathfinder I find it interesting and it seems a good way to make the bigger weapons feel stronger
@@josuecosta1399I think I get what you're saying, but if something is *too* weak then it's no longer cool to me 😅
@@m.b.8701 Hahaha that is true.
I would've gone with Beast barbarian vs Pathfinder's Animal Instinct. Beast lets you morph to get natural attacks, which is more analogous to the animal instinct.
I can see why he went with the totem tho since he is trying to limit himself to the core rulebooks of each charecter.
He was going CRB/PHB only as part of the challenge
Predator's Pounce is even better than it appears as it has the Rage trait. Meaning at the level you get it (12th) the 11th level class ability Mighty Rage let's you combine that Predator's Pounce with your Rage action. So you Rage and as part of that Stride and Strike.
I'll add to this. It is also one action, meaning you can Ready it.
@@KingTreeN[insert meme of them saying "This. Changes. Everything!"]
But no, seriously, it is so good.
I think he also forgot to mention in 5e, rage ends if you don't attempt an attack or get attacked. Not always too hard to do, but there are times where between helping a downed member with a potion or attacking and keeping the rage you are locked out of some actions at a huge cost.
Yep. While in Pathfinder you only end your rage if you stop seeing an enemy.
Which can be silly as well but it is far easier to work with.
@@CommissarMitch well, no. the rule state as follow :
"You tap into your inner fury and begin raging. You gain a number of temporary Hit Points equal to your level plus your Constitution modifier. This frenzy lasts for 1 minute, until there are no enemies you can perceive, or until you fall unconscious, whichever comes first."
Meaning if you can still hear, smell or feel it presence, you stay in Rage (so I assume, RAI it's if all ennemies are either dead or fled out of pursuit range)
@@Commandant_Aeon You are correct. I misremembered
Technically, a closer analogue to PF2's Animal Barbarian in D&D 5e would be Path of the Beast from Tasha's Couldron of Everything. Going PHB only, though, Totem is a solid choice.
Also, For the D&D Barb, they also get unlimited uses of Rage at level 20.
This was a really fun video, loved the well thought out comparisons.
As for the 5E rage limits, very much agree with that as a weird flavour choice. I *suspect* that the limitation is there because, like you pointed out, Rage in 5E is basically exclusively a positive/bonus effect rather than a conscious trade-off, and so balance-wise somebody decided that there would be a cap per-day.
Plus, it's a tweak to previous editions, where they got a certain number of rounds-per-day of Rage, and after that couldn't rage any more.
@@centurosproductions8827 Oh that's a really interesting point regarding iterations. I will definitely say that Barbarian was never one of the classes that was really on my radar so I am very much not familiar with most of the nuts and bolts from previous editions. Really going to that granular level of rounds per day sounds like just too much book-keeping minutia for my personal tastes. :)
Note on 5e Barbarians and AC, half-plate is generally what you want for AC as it'll beat out your unarmoured defence unless you have really high stats (to a degree that is unrealistic if using 5e's point buy/standard array). So generally medium armour is preferable here, so long as they're not using *heavy* armour, all their features work.
Edit: And they lack proficiency in heavy armour anyway.
Edit2: Also find it funny you mentioned Brutal Critical as a cool feature, when, to me, it's a symptom of how weak higher level class features for martials in 5e is.
I think the word "friends" might actually be there for things like Charm/Dominate Person-being charmed makes you consider the charmer "a friendly acquaintance" even if they aren't technically your ally. 🤔
I like the concept behind this video. It's interesting to consider how the rules reward or restrict players choices and how that impacts gameplay.
I think it would be interesting to take a character from outside the TTRPG community and try to make a character sheet for them in each system. (Like any character from a show, video game, or movie who would fit into the DND/PF2 genre.)
Great video! Thematically, I feel like Path of the Zealot and Path of the Giant would compare well with Spirit Instinct and Giant Instinct, but they're pretty different mechanically.
True, and while he did say he was sticking to the core rulebooks of each system for the sake of simplicity, I feel that a slightly better option for the Animal Instinct would have been Path of the Beast, which also has a shapeshifting sort of feel to it, granting the user natural weapons to attack with, although it is more heavily implied that the shapeshifting is rooted in lycanthropy.
I would say that 5e crits can be fine with the brutal critical, but it wouldn't work quite as well as it does with Pathfinder. Because of how much damage and how frequent crits happen in Pathfinder, not to mention any weapons that have the deadly/fatal traits. It's very easy to spike damage in that regard, but in 5e, they only ever get it on a nat 20.
Howdy Nonat1. Hope things are going better for you.
Really nice video! I like this type of direct comparison between the two systems. I think an interesting follow up could be to try to make a character in both systems that uses classes or other elements that don't have a direct obvious equivalent class/subclass/ancestry, like making a 5e warlock and trying to match it as closely as possible in theme and/or play style in PF2e. I've done a lot of theory crafting for converting specific Warlock builds, so it'd be interesting to see your take on something like that!
A few things.
1: DnD having Brutal Critical from the start makes sense for that system as it is a 5% chance to critically hit. If a Barbarian had it so all their weapons had the Deadly/Fatal traits I feel we players would riot.
2: DnD Barbarian Rage stops if you fail to attempt to hit an enemy. So if you are out of range or magically held in place for your turn, your limited Rage ends. Pathfinder rage only ends early if you stop seeing an enemy.
3: Pathfinder Rage is only halfing damsge from Agile weapon. You can still use DEX. It just pushes you away from using stuff like Daggers and Light Hammers.
D&D and PF2e have different design philisophies.
D&D 5e gives all major class abilities at the beginning and let's them scale decently or adds more uses to them, which makes all classes front loaded, until level 3 they get all their major abilities and usually some more at levels 5, 9, 13 and 17, or one level lower or higher.
Classes are also more like packages, which makes the system good for beginner and casual players.
There is a scaling with bounded accuracy and ASI's, but for the most part you want new things to improve stuff.
PF2e also gives you some interesting stuff at the beginning, but it usually doesn't scale or just becomes a nice bonus later on, with the focus spells and all that. It starts to give you cool and mechanically stronger things the longer you play, like Quickened Spell or the cool archetypes like eldritch archer or beast gunner.
If D&D 5e is Playmobil, PF2e is like Lego, letting you build extremely variable characters and giving you the mechanical complexity to sink into it, so the system is overwhelming (not even a question) for completely new players.
It's also much more balanced, giving incremental increases to your stats at every level up, scaling the enemies the same way, especially with the crit ranges.
I've thought recently about how comparing dnd 5e to pf2e feels to me a lot like comparing games like elden ring and monster hunter; yeah you can look how certain weapon classes compare to each other or how their combat feels or even stuff as precise as how rolling feels between each game, but at the end of the day you have to step back and realize that they're not the same game and what draws in new players and what compels veterans to stay between each is going to be completely different and usually contradictory. what someone may like about one or the other may be the thing that someone else hates (ie I saw a post where someone hated pf2e adding level to proficiency because to them it felt functionally the same as adding nothing, whereas I see it as mechanical proof that your character is getting better at what they do and are becoming stronger).
D&D 5e is like a blogpost of someone's homemade chocolate chip cookie recipe. Sure there are some typos, and the instructions can get vague at times. But the person writing this is entertaining, is telling funny stories, and the sheer amount of likes and comments on this website means they have to be doing something right.
Pathfinder 2e is a Lab Report breaking down the composition of a chocolate chip cookie. Sure there's a ton of terminology that you don't pick up on right away, and even when you do there are still some sentences you have to read twice to fully understand. But the paper is written flawlessly, perfectly legible, clean graphs of data, goes into detail. You can't help but be impressed from the sheer display of execution
Some people are willing to learn the fine details of a cookie, some people just wanna eat a cookie. Nothing wrong with either of those, just don't act one's better than the other
Honestly, I'd love a series comparing the two, I really would like to see the Paladin and Champion juxtaposed (mostly for personal curiosity) or ranger/monk because I've heard good things about PF2 and how it improves those two to 5e. Or hell if you want to take two monsters from the two or Artificer vs Alchemist/Inventor I'd be excited to see any of it
Interesting video, thanks.
I've been playing D&D (or Pathfinder since P2e came out) for over 40 years and I have never reach level 20 with any character.
Also, this is just me but..., Barbarian isn't a character class its an ancestry. Barbarians can be Bards (skalds), Witches/Sorcerers (witch doctors), Clerics (shamans), Warriors (Fighters) and everyone's favorite the Berserker (basically the Barbarian from the Players Core). That's how I do it in P2e at my table because we ran a Northman/Viking like campaign once and this is the only thing that made sense at the time and it just stuck.
The dnd barbarian getting more crit dice isn't as great as you might think; recall that a crit is a 20 and only a 20 unless you multiclass for some uncommon features. With reckless, that's only a 9.5% per attack to crit, and it adds only extra dice, not other flat extra damage. Also, it's generally better to use 2d6 weapons instead of 1d12, so you're really only adding 1d6 for every brutal crit.
I enjoyed! This is a great format!
May I suggest a quite bold "class" comparison? Witch and Warlock, both gain power through a patron, but they work in absolutely different ways. But I'm really curious if you can have the same concept and "feel" in each class.
i tried doing this while learning pf2, just as an exercise of "can i build this character concept in here, so i can help my future players?"
the 5e character was an archfey pact of the tome lock and as much as i tried to twist around the witch, it turned out to just be better to reflavor a fey bloodline sorc, which was a nice in real time lesson in "flavor is free"
Rage in PF2 is as follow :
"You tap into your inner fury and begin raging. You gain a number of temporary Hit Points equal to your level plus your Constitution modifier. This frenzy lasts for 1 minute, until there are no enemies you can perceive, or until you fall unconscious, whichever comes first. You can't voluntarily stop raging. While you are raging:
You deal 2 additional damage with melee Strikes. This additional damage is halved if your weapon or unarmed attack is agile.
You take a -1 penalty to AC.
You can't use actions with the concentrate trait unless they also have the rage trait. You can Seek while raging.
After you stop raging, you lose any remaining temporary Hit Points from Rage, and you can't Rage again for 1 minute."
Agile is as follow :
"The multiple attack penalty you take with this weapon on the second attack on your turn is -4 instead of -5, and -8 instead of -10 on the third and subsequent attacks in the turn."
MAP (multiple attack penalty) is as follow :
"If you use an action with the attack trait more than once on the same turn, your attacks after the first take a penalty called a multiple attack penalty. Your second attack takes a -5 penalty, and any subsequent attacks take a -10 penalty.
The multiple attack penalty doesn’t apply to attacks you make when it isn’t your turn (such as attacks made as part of a reaction). You can use a weapon with the agile trait to reduce your multiple attack penalty."
Meaning that a *Finesse* Barbarian build is actually viable. But hey, it's just a Theory...
EDIT : PS : If you want to make a character in PF2 you can use Pathbuilder 2e. (it's basically DnD Beyond for Pathfinder 2e and it's mostly free as only optional creation rules are behind the paywall)
intimidation, in raw, can be used with strenghs.
there is a thing that allow the roll to be used with another ability score than the expected one. (source: donjon master guide).
so you don't really need charisma if you intimidate with your raw strenghs and/or constitution (dependong on how you intimidate the person).
it's sadly a somewhat unknown rules, and even if known, is rarely usable outside of intimidation (and i've heard a case for intelligence(stealth) as in using your wit to stay out of sight/drawing attention rather than hiding in complicated spots with dexterity)
Love the concept of the video in terms of comparing them as closely as possible with as many of the same choices in both systems.
I would like to see a comparison without that restriction, though - make the strongest conceptual Barbarian in both systems and compare them. I'd also like to have seen maybe a character breakdown at the start and at the end where we see both character sheets - obviously with the addendum that a +25 to hit in PF2e at level 20 is reasonable when AC is over 40 for some monsters, which wouldn't happen in DnD
As a p2e enjoyer, I would like to point out that:
1) critical hits in pathfinder 2e are more common than in 5e if the party works well as a unit (even at level 1, flanked+magic weapon+inspire courage+demoralize can allow for a 10% increase in critical hit chance, while in 5e the only thing affecting critical hit chance is advantage or disadvantage)
2) the barbarian would get a striking weapon as soon as level 4. What does a striking weapon do? Exactly what brutal critical does
3) in p2e, the Barbarian is not the critical hit fisher that reckless attack allows it to be in 5e. The Fighter and the Gunslinger are more adept to this role
Nice video, it's fun to see how a pf2e player sees the 5e class.
I know you kept to phb but Barbaria Path of the beast would fit more with wolf instinct barbarian, in case anyone want to check.
Very good video without shitting on one or the other System, but in theory you would need to add the whole barbarian feats for pathfinder (or at least say which you picked) and all barbarian features for DnD5e.
That would truly show the difference of the two Systems as well as the class difference.
"..probably gains a wolf mouth while raging" WAIT WHAT
But NONAT, how can you make the same Barbarian when the governing systems and rules are so different...? :D
12:30 we need to talk about this, at best, medicore choice of animal.
Having watched a 5e Bear Totem Barbarian walk off comedic amounts of damage while raging, I can appreciate the limitations of Barbarian damage resistance in PF2e more.
14:30 and DnD 5e has the "partially Shapeshifts into chosen animal" Barbarian, too, in the form of the Path of the Beast. Perhaps that comparison would have been interesting. Meanwhile, PF2e recently got the elemental Barbarian that DnD 5e has as the Storm Herald.
21:15 I think that is the most important part of those comparisons. Not "this system lets you do a cool thing and the other does not" (like PF2e letting Barbarians cast the Earthquake spell every 10 minutes.) I think comparing clerics, druids or Sorcerers would be interesting. comparng Wizards would likely be just sad for 5e.
i think casters in 5e would stomp Pf2 casters, at least based on the power of their spells. PF2 casters on the other hand are really good to take archetype feats
comparing it to Storm Herald would be hilarious, this subclass is ridiculously weak
@@enrif3099I’d argue it depends on what you consider power to be. If we’re talking straight up damage, then probably. But as someone that runs plenty of PF2e campaigns, I’ve been told by several of my 5e refugees that non-blaster spells more often than not work better in the PF2e system than their 5e counterparts in that system.
But yes, I agree a comparison video between the two would be cool.
3:25 you get low light vision which can be upgraded with a feat
also in 5e need to keep attacking of beeing targets of attacks or your rage ends, that mean if the enemies kite the barbarian and ignored (and the barbarian do not have range weapons) they rage end wasting 1 full use of.... Pathfinder in the other hand the rage it not end if there are enemies live (I usually let them concider unconcius enemies as not foe so they can have something to interrogate) and they can't end they rage by they own will
Personally, I would have chosen fury i stinct and berserker path for the closest.
It would be interesting to compare spells between both systems
Reckless attack has multiple purposes in 5e. 1) up's your damage by getting ya more hits and crits. 2) it DRAWS AGGRO. Your barbarian is easier to hit, and being so much beefier in the early game, you can afford to take those hits. They are likely half damage ANYWAY, since you'll likely be raging every fight. (note, after like level... 5, the casters will be able to aggro dump just fine on their own with misty step or shield or healing or cc effects or fireball nuke or counterspell and you'll be an easier mark *anyway*). 3) At the late game, you might as well reckless because your AC cap without magic or multiclass is 22 (and you'll likely be below that if you decided to bump Dex 3rd) and you'll be fighting things with +12-17 to hit.
Also one of my Barbarians learn about that concentration thing really fast. We're all new, and I double checked him using demoralize in his first fight. He knows better and realized he had an out, and I think he rebuilt to use it in the future.
I'd like to see ranger or rogue next, but I would probably recommend doing a caster next
Giving you a like and a comment to help bump your video. I would love to see me more these. A lot of us came from d&d and for me the comparison helps me learn pf2e more. Kudos.
The next one I thought of would be Artificer vs Inventor. You could make a Construct Inventor vs Artillerist or Battle Smith. I say Artillerist as the cannon is essentially a pet vs an upgradeable/modifiable weapon.
Now you need to take these characters and put them through an actual combat scenario with an equivalent enemy and/or head to head match useing their respective combat systems.
Awesome. I don't know much about d&d but it's always good to learn different things that we can actually homebrew. So more of these please, any class would be great. I appreciate your explanations.
Crits in PF2e are much much easier to get than in DnD because crits are just hitting your opponent's AC+10. If you were getting bonus dice on each of those that would be insane. That's why DnD's crit bonus is higher, there's only a 5% chance of it coming into play on any unmodified attack.
Though I understand you only wanted to use the base PHB and Core Rulebook for this comparison, I think a better analog for the Animal Instinct PF2 barb is the 5e Beast barb. It may be more beneficial to open the book base you're pulling from. More options on both sides means more opportunities to align.
I'd really love to see the Barbarian Remaster do more with Animal Instinct Barbarian's Animal Rage Feat! Make it more than a cosmetic feat. And if it's staying cosmetic, then... make it like second level?
I wish that you could command an animal while Raging
EDIT: Path of the Beast mighta been another apt comparison for PF2e's Animal Instinct, You gain (a) natural weapon, some additional movement abilities, and a neat cooperative feature- along with rabies transference, which is kinda funny
I'd love for this to be a swries! This was a really interesting way to look at the two systems and highlight their different approaches. It was also helpful for me as someone who's trying to help their group get into PF2e, because this could help them understand some of the main differences they might feel playing a familiar class in a new system!
you know aj, I actually made it thru hundreds of videos without seeing it. Now I can't unsee the vampiric Nonat. Incidentally, they grind those down if you do braces as a kid. ( a fellow former vampire)
I like both systems, but I think its not fair to PF2 to glaze over just how much more fleshed out a PF character is out of combat.
They both get some features which you did a good job highlighting, but in trying to be fair there was some impression that they go roughly equal amount of that stuff. In my experience building characters for each, PF characters get so much more of that than a 5E character does.
Some of the gap can be closed by consciously giving up combat choices for non combat ones in 5E, but often you still can't get to an equal amount as a PF character, and when you do, you have given up a LOT of your combat power to accomplish it. For example, you might use two of your feats for non-combat features, but then not only did you not take combat feats, you probably need to not take combat feats the other times you get feat choices in order to just pump into ability scores to keep up on that front. PF does a much better job of segregating those choices so you don't have to give up combat power in order to get non combat options.
I do still love the extent to which you can mechanically optimize for combat in 5E though, which is a lot harder to do satisfyingly in PF.
Okay, did your editor photoshop your teeth to be even sharper? I swear they're even brighter white than the rest of your teeth.
More please the Barbarian has plenty of friend to compare
I know you said only players hand book but the path of the beast in 5e is probably a perfect 1 to 1 for animal instinct, would have loved to see that comparison.
I really liked this and would definitely watch a series of comparisons.
Here's a fun one I think you should try: 5e Artificer vs PF2 Inventor. I essentially tried doing this when making my first PF2 character and nearly wanted to quit PF2 altogether.
Great video. I think barbarian is a great way to show it. They do differ a little as the 5e version is more of a proper tank and pf2e is more damaged only byt both can make amazingly high number of damage and can last a while. I'll love to see the extreme here with something like ranger where I feel like while they share thematic overlap how we get there is different. 5e ranger is a great hoard killer where pf2e is focused on single target.
Cool idea. I would love more if this idea
Half orcs in Pathfinder don't get darkvision, they have lowlight vision. They need to take an ancestry feat to get darkvision.
I would love to see this for every class!
I enjoyed the video, but I do think you did 5e dirty. I think the most appropriate comparisons should have been the Fury instinct and the berserker path. Or if you're doing totem warrior, at least make him a bear totem warrior! That's by fat the most iconic totem warrior IMO.
Would love to see you compare what I feel is an extremely underloved class in both systems, a druid, make it a wildfire druid for the fun of it.
Great vid dude. love this content! Do a Goblin Wolf Rider next, or Bear rider if you can swing it!
Cant wait for you to do this with Fighters lol
Its Good. The only thing is where I do understand your hesitations about limited rages for Barbarians for 5e thats actually a good thing. At low levels your start out with 2 and 3 rages and the thing is you hardly ever would have to go Beyond those amount of combats per day. So if your fighting so often your literally not doing any if world/story building
I think it’s more about actual choices in combat. Isn’t it true that in 5e, your rage ends if you don’t attack or get attacked in a round? That sort of limits what you can do. I realize that as a Barbarian, you’re almost always going to spend your time attacking and/or one other action. But sometimes moving to heal an ally is just more important (at least in PF2e). In 5e, that might be enough to end your rage. And starting it back up would cost you one of those Rage resources. In PF2e you can attack a creature, then move your speed over to your friend and apply healing via Battle Medicine or Lay On Hands, neither of which have the Concentrate trait.
If you’ve taken the Medic Archetype and the Doctor’s Visitation feat, you can even combine your movement and Battle Medicine check into one action. So you can Stride up to a creature, Attack, then Stride over & heal your buddy.
Alternatively, depending on the situation, the battlefield, and whether or not you picked up an Ancestry feat giving you a rank 1 spell, you can cast Jump. Also lacking the Concentrate trait, this spell lets you jump 30 feet in any direction with one action (usually it takes two, and you have to roll). This is extremely useful for jumping over difficult terrain to get to your ally or to an enemy. Granted, most Barbarians make great natural jumpers anyway. But for those that don’t pick up the Quick Jump skill feat, this lets them make that jump in one action.
I realize these things might be extremely situational in 5e. But in PF2e they tend to come up often enough that doing them and not needing to worry about losing your rage can be pretty important.
@@Captainpigraven I get what your saying but it really is more to sure up the balance the storytelly and combat. For example for barbarian most of there kit is designed around combat and particularly their rage so they offer the most utility to their allies by fighting. Like by recklessly attacks your gonna become a high priority threat for the opponent and by them gaining advantage when attacking you that gives them bonus incentive to attack you. So in a typical low to medium lvl combat what you find is your teammates are the ones scrambling to stablize and prevent the Barbarian from dying/fainting cause even if they don't like him if he drops the rest of them ate fair game.
@@Nightmareblackop Maybe I misunderstood this question. You questioned Nonat’s concern on only getting a limited number of rages per day in 5e. I believe your point was basically, “you start with enough for most combats, at least in most campaigns.” I’m paraphrasing, obviously. But I think that’s the gist of what you were saying, right?
My point was that, at least in PF2e, there are enough variables that can happen in a combat situation where maybe 3-5 rages per day just wouldn’t be enough. The healing situation was just one example. Another might be that, again, at least in PF2e, when you fall unconscious you lose your rage. You can pick up a feat that lets you enter it again. But in 5e, if you fell unconscious (and assuming you lose your rage), that’s just one more incident where you must use up another rage. And as you said, the Barbarian in combat will likely be focusing on the enemy, hence they’ll be drawing aggro. As a result, it’s not rare for the Barbarian to be the first to drop in a fight, despite all the HP. Sure, in most cases someone else will be the one to heal the big guy if he needs it, or he’ll spend an action to self-heal. But PF2 fights can be very tough, and sometimes it’s just not enough.
There are spells and magical abilities that creatures have in PF2 that can instantly knock a Barbarian out of their rage. One of the most common examples is Calm Emotions. This spell is great for players, but just as good for GMs when there is a Barbarian in the party. Some enemies have this spell already, and it’s rather common for a GM to add it to an enemy they homebrew for their campaign. I assume there’s a similar spell in 5e. And if so, that’s yet another example of where you’d have to lose your rage and need another one.
Another example is movement. While most often it is true that a Barbarian (and combatants in general) wants to stay in the same general vicinity, sometimes you just have to move. If your spellcaster or something is somewhat far away but gets hit with a crit and is in bad shape, it is entirely possible that maybe you want to get to him and protect him, so he can properly heal himself or get somewhere else w/o being attacked again. Assuming your base speed of 25, you stride and drag/carry him away. Depending on how far the distances are, it’s entirely possible you’ve moved away from creatures and those enemies can’t attack you. In PF2, this is fine and can be done while in rage. But in 5e, because you aren’t attacking or getting hit, you lose rage. And that’s yet another example of a situation that uses up a rage.
Again, the majority of the time it doesn’t matter. In both systems, the main goal of the Barbarian is to get in the middle of the fray and kick butt. And typically that is what happens…so having a finite number of rages isn’t going to matter. But in PF2, there are just so many situations that can come up where you might lose your rage, or you would if it used 5e combat rules, and having a finite number of them would not only being mechanically terrible, but also just feel bad.
I believe part of this is just due to the way the different combat systems work. At least according to my 5e refugee players, there is far more player movement during PF2 combat. Less than 20% of creatures have Attack Of Opportunity, so movement can often be safe. Indeed, in many combats it is tactically crucial..
Similarly, combat strategy often tends to be more predicated strictly on the relationship between damage/HP. While plenty of 5e creatures have different attacks or abilities, the main path to success is less through actual combat choices via the GM and more about attrition with regards to hit points. As a result, player builds are often built to maximize damage over anything else.
On the other hand, PF2 offers players and GMs a more robust set of combat choices, with player agency in battles being the focus. Because enemies also get these choices, but are typically strong and hit hard on top of that, it allows for a more dynamic battlefield. Attrition becomes less HP/damage based every battle and instead changes to a variable. Sometimes it’s stopping enemy movement, or shutting down their reactions. Other times it can be about hit and run tactics, breaking off chunk gains here and there but staying on the move to avoid AoE attacks. Sometimes it’s encouraging enemy movement, where wasting opponent actions by forcing them to advance is a superior scheme. Other times it’s about drawing aggro via a Barbarian and drawing several lower level creatures into a trap. The list goes on.
I’m not trying to say one is better than another. While I personally prefer PF2, I’m well aware there are many people whom prefer that straight hack & slash style of gameplay, and I respect that. My point here is that due to ever changing variables in PF2 combat, there’s just more opportunity to not use rage as a Barbarian on any given turn. And as a result, having a finite number of rage uses per day might actually matter far more often in PF2 than it does in 5e.
If you implemented the “Barbarian must be attacking at least once per round, or be the target of an attack once per round, or they lose rage” rule into PF2, things would get even worse. While attacking is typically the optimal strategy for a PF2 Barbarian, as I pointed out sometimes it’s not a viable option. There are times where it’s not even a good choice. If you also imported the 3-5 rages per day rule, your PF2 Barbarian would be gimped, both mechanically and from a player agency perspective.
I realize there’s still a chance I’m missing your point. Your original comment discussed a concern over worrying about a battle mechanic over time dedicated to world building, or something of that sort. I honestly don’t see the connection. World building and social roleplay is pretty GM-specific. I’ve been running multiple PF2 campaigns a week since it’s 2019 inception, and I’m much more social roleplay heavy than combat-heavy. And many of my 5e refugees have even stated that they’re used to a bit more combat, lol. But I devoted the same amount of time to social roleplay and world building in PF1 & D&D 3.5, so that’s nothing new.
I largely ignored that part of the original comment because I wasn’t sure what to make of it. I just don’t see how the mechanics of a player build in relation to the mechanics of combat gameplay relate in any way to in-game social roleplay or world building.
The point of the 5e Totem Barbarian is to pick and choose different animals as you go, like building a totem pole. Sticking with one animal when you don't like what it gives you is unnecessary.
10:14 You are mixing up Agile and Finesse. Agile is about MAP reduction for multiple attacks. Agile is something you only find on weapons with 1D6 damage max. It is on small, quick weapons.
Sweep and Backswing are what I call the "Barbarians Agile". Those Traits bonus is like a "lesser Agile", but in turn you can find it on stronger weapons and it does not cut your Rage Bonus damage.
- For me at least, PF2 Animal is probably the weakest barbarian subclass. You need a fallback weapon and armor just to deal with being knocked unconscious/out of rage. Or being attacked before you can rage. Other PF2 subclasses at least are still functional without Rage, Animal less so.
Unarmored/unarmed dex barbarian is perfectly viable in pf2e- the halving of rage damage is on AGILE(multiple attack penalty trait) not FINESSE(dex to hit trait)
Okay time to see 5e get stomped. 2e barbarians are just insane.
Just imagine D&D5e Fighters vs PF2e Fighters. I truly cannot get over how bizarrely limited and weak fighters are in 5e.
@@amelialonelyfart8848 They aren't weak IMO. Caster are the ones that are broken in 5e specially "arcane" casters.
It's a inherent problem after all when caster can create earthquakes and fighters can't...
Speaking of Barbarian's rage in 5e, isn't it funny that for the berserker subclass, their main feature, frenzy rage, gives them exhaustion levels just because it can? 6 of those and you dead. So on top of having a limited number of rages per day, if a berserker goes into frenzy twice, they'll get screwed for the next day with disadvantage on ability checks iirc (or was it attacks first?)
great vid! would love to see a similar video for wizards
God this is making me remember how much the animal instinct barb is kinda not amazing at low levels in PF2E. Would be nice if the granted unarmed attacks had Agile without the rage penalty and they had unarmored status bonus to Speed to really give that feral fantasy.
Forced to use weaker attacks without cool tags and your rage bonus is the lowest possible and has no interesting damage types. Plus no low level Animal Instinct Barb Feats.
Being straight up kinda bad for the first five levels (the most important levels as that’s also how players would get an impression of the game) is kinda just bad design, expression, and balance for a game that boasts so much on those as specialties.
Ive found that when i play 5e (which is rare now outside bg3) even when it is full on point buy i still use standard arrays because i get frustrated when my character can only really do one or two things and then just shouldnt bother trying everything else
Have you heard about Paizo releasing a small play test for starfinder 2e
Like the video. Would be nice to see it with the other classes (some of them like wizard, cleric, bard, rogue, witch, champion after the remastered comes out)
Loved the comparison and would LOVE to see a Rogue comparison!
um i was thinking for your starting race, you would want catfolk or elf because,i forget if this is so but i think you cant wear heavy armor as a barbarian so you could use your dex bonus to get a little better AC. sure strength is good but getting hit less is better, i think.
@Nonat1s, whaere did you gat this art for PF orc? Is it from some rulebook or what? Im asking just because in my country there is a ccg that used this art in a newest set, did they just steal it?
Can't rage all the time? PF1e's burn rider with hot Siccatite armor and Regenerative Vigor rage power says otherwise. As long as the fire remains which it does when you put on the armor, your rage goes on
Now run a fight against each, both using their own rulesets against each other. 1st lvl, 5th lvl, 10th.
Very cool. I really like these types of videos . Could you please do the monk? 😊😊😊😊
5e Barbarian: BEEG DAMAGE
PF2 Barbarian: fighter, but worse
i would love to see you make more of these comparative videos, the obvious one would be the ranger in each system
Strength should be 17 on the D&D side. Also, a better parallel for the D&D subclass would have been path of the beast, rather than the path of the totem. Also, the critical hit damage comparison was unfair. In 5E, that's up to 4 extra weapon dice of damage (half-orc, brutal critical at 9, 13, 17), but you only get those nova moments 5-10% of the time. In PF2E, critical hits are likely to happen much more often, but you're stuck with only using the bite attack... or another unarmed strike.
Which leads to the question of whether you could take the monk or martial artist archetype to get another type of unarmed strike that'll be more effective, and give you the option to do other types of damage. Gorilla stance can be used in armor, and your attacks get backswing, forceful and grapple, and the aesthetic of walking around on all fours (like a wolf does) fits pretty well. Or if you're dead set on staying strictly within the core rulebook, you could take dragon stance or mountain stance. Each has their own perks, though you'll want to retrain out of mountain stance at level 6, once animal skin becomes available.
unarmored def is a trap just wear med armour
I had to mention your headphone hair... Because I often have the same going on 😅
Admittedly id love to see you do the same thing but with troll lord games castles and crusades version of the barbarian.
Its even available to buy for free from their website
Hey this is minor but there is a barbarian path of the beast which augments the barbarians body, one that might match up with the mechanics of the pf2e Barbarian subclass you chose much better 👍
I'm a PF2 player who's about to try DnD 5e for the first time, and I'm planing for my character to be a Barbarian. You couldn't have released this video in a more perfect time lmao
If you like PF2 barbarian, you'll LOVE being a 5e barbarian. You'll actually get to deal damage!
@@markberghel275 So far I have played mostly casters in PF2, so I knew I wanted my next character to be a martial, no matter the system.
Then in our DnD server one friend began trying to warn me that martials in this system get completely overshadowed by optimized casters, while the DM scolded him for discouraging me of trying out the martial folk, BUT they both agreed that Barbarians were generally a lot of fun and easy to grasp for beginners, so I went with that!
Is there an errata I don’t know about? My book says that half orcs only get low light vision, not dark vision.
Brutal Critical pf2 vs. 5e isn't a really fair comparison honestly.
5e it's a bonus die (or at higher levels, multiple dice) one in twenty attacks. It's a passive ability that there's a moderate chance you may not see trigger even a single time in a session. Sure it seems nice, but mathematically it's an ability that rarely comes up.
Meanwhile, because of how much easier it is to crit in Pf2, if that same ability was granted to Barbarians, it would be incredibly potent. Not to mention in Pf2, anyone with a weapon with the Deadly trait essentially gets 5e's Brutal Critical for free.
any chance of making a similar Druid video?
I really like this video - would love to see more of these. (In fact have been missing you lately, buddy. Let's grab a beverage (G-Fuel?) together and you can talk emphatically at me about PF2e.) Looking forward to the response to playtest tomorrow and the late but still anticipated Kineticist class review.
The beast path would have been a better comparison as they also shift into there animal (half way at least)
wouldn't the animal instinct subclass be closer to beast barbarian of dnd?
All characters should be M.A.D. Make players make hard choices. You shouldn't be good at all things. Penalties and weaknesses are just as important as bonuses and benefits.
you are a singing dancing barbarian ? ok :P
How about AD&D 1e Barbarian compared to PathFinder 2e Fury Barbarian with Rogue Free Archetype?
I'm not familiar with D&D's current Psychic / Psionic class, but I'd love to see a comparison between the Pathfinder Psychic from Dark Archive and something similar from 5e.
Dnd 5e has none
@@darkhol222Warlock I guess...
@@thestylemage2092 sounds absurdly, but warlock is more like magus