really Cavalier is the best melle class in the game. Beserker/Barbarian are a bad joke and Fighter does have better weapon bonuses but does not have the same natural resistances to poison and fear. Not to mention undead turning + small priest spells.
Also you tend to roll better intiall attributes because the minimum stats are high for 3 so you can re-roll for big scores.
I believe there is no one best class. Some classes are better for some, other classes for others, both in terms of power (knowing how to play a class effectively) and for fun/roleplaying/rounding out a party/etc. To those that believe there is one class to rule them all:
really Cavalier is the best melle class in the game. Beserker/Barbarian are a bad joke and Fighter does have better weapon bonuses but does not have the same natural resistances to poison and fear. Not to mention undead turning + small priest spells.
Also you tend to roll better intiall attributes because the minimum stats are high for 3 so you can re-roll for big scores.
What in gods name are u talking about? Rofl. Just felt the need to squeeze your cavalier love somewhere, and this was the closest thread you could find? Also, Berserker shits on Cavalier any day of the week, especially with True Grandmastery.
really Cavalier is the best melle class in the game. Beserker/Barbarian are a bad joke and Fighter does have better weapon bonuses but does not have the same natural resistances to poison and fear. Not to mention undead turning + small priest spells.
Also you tend to roll better intiall attributes because the minimum stats are high for 3 so you can re-roll for big scores.
There isn't really a whole lot of difference between a Barbarian and Cavalier if we're talking the whole saga (which I assume we are since you talk of Turn Undead and Paladin spells).
In BG1 it comes down to better AC and poison immunity vs more HP and missile weapons. Not the easiest things to compare but they're both useful.
In BG2 I'd consider them functionally the same.
Unless you lack a cleric then a Paladin's Turn Undead is a bit redundant.
What spells will a Cavalier use most? Armour of Faith, DUHM and maybe Death Ward. A Barbarian's damage resistance caps out at 5% less than AoF but he has more HP, Rage and DUHM are similar in their effect on stats, and Death Ward can be cast on you by a cleric. The tactics with both will be very similar in the end - buffed up warriors with lots of immunities, damage resistance, high str for big damage hits.
EDIT: Summon Deva can be useful, but again it might be redundant depending on the spells the rest of your party use.
Paladins have those high minimums in those all important stats wis and cha which actually gimps you if you're trying to min/max. For example if you wanted to go 18/18/18/11/13/17 for mindflayer protection it's actually really hard as a Paladin, whereas it's almost impossible not to be able to get 18/18/18/16/3/3 as a fighter since that's a 76 and the minimum is 75.
- +3 bonus to hit and damage against all demonic and draconic creatures (how many dragons and demons do you fight in Baldurs Gate 1?)
- Can cast Remove Fear once per day for every level (a cleric can make your whole party immune to fear with a level 1 spell)
- Immune to Fear, Morale Failure, and all Poison effects (again, a cleric can take care of all this)
- 20% resistance to Fire and Acid (once again, clerics can increase your Fire resist too, as well as several items)
- Weapon Specialization (++) (meh)
- Can use any weapon (yeah, but no Carsomyr in Baldur's Gate 1)
- Can use any armor (meh)
- +2 bonus to all Saving Throws (nice, but most of the times an enraged Barbarian wont need to make a ST)
- Turn Undead, Protection From Evil, Lay on Hands, Detect Evil, and Cure Disease (The only useful skill from these is lay on hands for some quick healing mid-combat. But it will be kinda useless at low levels. The other skills are better done by, once again, a cleric)
- Spell Casting (starting at level 9, priest spells only) (uhmm who do you think does this better? yeah, a cleric)
Weaknesses
- Cannot use Missile Weapons
- Must maintain Good alignment
- If party reputation drops below 6, becomes a Fallen Paladin, loses all Paladin abilities, and is the equivelant of a Fighter (cannot regain Paladin status)
TL;DR: I would chose a Cavalier only if there are no healers (cleric/druid) in my party. And even in that situation, i would probly play an undead hunter (immune to Level Drain and Hold>>>>Immune to Fear).
But if i have a cleric, then i would definitely pick a barbarian over a cavalier.
And let's not forget that in BG1, ranged weapons are king. Although the cavalier does rock my socks, the inability to use the better missile weapons is definitely a solid negative.
1. You argue that cleric druid can cast the same spells, yet the cavaliers abilities are totally passive. You dont have to waste precious casting time on spells. Unless your just buffing your whole party before combat all the time which is kind of lame and amateurish. They cast dispel magic also in BG2 unlike BG1.
2. Missile weapons? Really not an issue considering my cavalier uses flail + shield proficient and wears the anti-missile boots. Also why are you using a barbarian with missile weapons seems absurd to me lore-wise which is half the argument about choosing a barb over a berserker on this thread.
3. Demons and Draconian creatures may not be in BG1 a lot however most players I would assume would play BG2 EE with their former BG1 EE character.
4. Just because you play a good alignment doesn't mean it isnt fun. You can still make good/neutral choices in dialog and still get different results.
5. I always pick human, I find other races less superior so I guess for me it really isnt an issue cause i'm so racist (cept for my half-elf sorcerer)
6. Edit; I use throwing axes as a missile weapon anyway with my +2 proficient in axes so there goes the lame argument about missile weapons. Not to mention the handy returning axes you in BG2
1: The Cavalier's abilities that are totally passive are also totally personal. Not only can a divine caster simply handle these things, they handle them for their entire party along with doing other useful stuff, whilst causing the same against their foes. Since a Fighter/Cleric can happily combine "immune to fear" with "nullifying enemy spellcasters", "setting someone on fire", "saving the life of the party tank", "party scout", "party trapfinder", "Poison nullifier" and "Stripping Enemy Buffs" all at the same time with spell slots spare, I suggest you stick to comparing lowly peons pure fighter classes, spellcasting has never been fair.
2: Barbarians don't throw axes in lore? And aren't ultimately better at it than Cavaliers thanks to better speed and faster levelling?
3: +3 bonus to hit and damage is actually a fairly tiny bonus around the time you'll be facing dragons and demons often enough to class this as anything more than a gimmick. Meanwhile, a Barbarian can and will be Raging for the full Strength bonus of +7 to hit, +14 damage. Against everyone. Yes, you can offhand Crom Faeyr, which denies another partymate from doing so, but they'll still have immunities and be regenerating thanks to their also 25 Con score.
4: Irrelevant. You are fully capable of playing a Lawful Good Barbarian.
5: Humans are essentially the weakest race in the game. They literally have no value outside of Dual Classing and the ability to be the racist classes.
Cavaliers, whilst a valuable class, are not the best pure class in melee, I'd expect that more likely to be the Berserker. They get more immunities, they get an on-demand +2/+2 bonus against every potential target, rather than rare, telegraphed opponents, and they can actually master weapons for an extra attack per round. Start introducing multiclasses and dual classes and Cavalier's not even top ten.
I would suggest the liberal use of fire or acid sirrahs.
You're missing one thing. A high level cavalier is pretty much a F/C with better weapon options, and slightly faster leveling. Though this is mainly due to a bug (but hey if R/C with full druid casting is legit, F the rules) which gives them full caster level rather then a heavily penalized one (with a max of 9). They don't get as many casts yes, but their spells are just as strong level-wise since the caster level is messed up. Yes a cleric has more spells, but they're largely wasted as a single F/C or any paladin with spell casting, can easily buff up to nigh indestructible levels with 85% DR (using SoF/Hardiness/DoEH), with 25 str/dex/con, and a bunch of free immunities that completely eliminate having to cast certain spells in the first place. And no real restrictions aside from keeping your rep high. Yes their stats are a bit harder to roll for, but *shrug* not everything in life is supposed to be free (I'm working on implementing the actual PnP berserker kit in my game...it's no where near as OP as that overpowered garbage BI put in BG)
I think a cavalier's immunity to poison is a big advantage in BG1, where there are a lot of spiders and wyverns to deal with. But a barbarian's immunities to level drain, backstab, stun, maze, etc. are bigger advantages in BG2, when going up against vampires, shadow thieves, liches, and various other magic-using enemies.
Having played as both classes through BG2, I definitely preferred the barbarian. In fact, the barbarian is probably my favorite class to play BG2.
the thing is, barbarians tend to fail saves more often to hold person, confusion and other mind effecting spells as well which makes their combat advantage redundant. The paladins Charisma and Willpower are naturally a lot higher.
the thing is, barbarians tend to fail saves more often to hold person, confusion and other mind effecting spells as well which makes their combat advantage redundant. The paladins Charisma and Willpower are naturally a lot higher.
Paladin's get a straightforward +2 to saves irrespective of their stats, Dwarf Barbarians get +5 to saves for 18+ Con.
@ZanathKariashi As I said before, functionally how is: A Cavalier with Armour of Faith + Hardiness + Defender of Easthaven + DUHM + any other cleric buffs to fill the immunity gaps.
Different from:
A Barbarian with Rage + Hardiness + Defender of Easthaven + any other cleric buffs to fill the immunity gaps?
5% damage resistance advantage for the Cavalier, 10 HP (on average) advantage for the Barbarian.
Except the cavalier can lay on hands himself in a pinch (0 cast speed), so the 10 hp average isn't even a real bonus in the barbs favor (even counting a potential 25 con after all bonuses while raging) Cav effectively has up to 68 additional hp from lay on hands at max level.
Except the cavalier can lay on hands himself in a pinch (0 cast speed), so the 10 hp average isn't even a real bonus in the barbs favor (even counting a potential 25 con after all bonuses while raging) Cav effectively has up to 68 additional hp from lay on hands at max level.
And the Barbarian can drink a potion so the difference is really 68 minus whatever the HP is replenished by a superior healing potion (40?) assuming the Cavalier is maximum level.
My point is that while there are minor differences, they are both going to be buffed up warriors with high damage resistance, high damage output and lots of immunities, essentially 95% the same.
So, Berserkers get more immunities and their rage gives them AC, while Barbarians get less immunities and their rage gives them an AC penalty?
So Berserkers get a better rage, and grand master, and barbarians get damage resistance and a slightly bigger hit dice?
Am I reading into this wrong when I'm thinking Berserkers are definitely going to have an edge early game when the extra to hit from going past 2 pips and the ac from their rage is better, and the Barbarian is going to have an edge late game with damage resistance when AC and to hit aren't going to matter as much because everyones to hit is inflated?
Whilst Cavaliers do get Lay on Hands, it's worth noting that Barbarian rage heals the barbarian for the HP bonus by level it gives.
This means if your Level 9+ Barbarian's Con bonus is 18 and they rage, they will get a 22 Con, and therefore gain +6 HP a level instead of +4, giving them a 18 HP that doesn't go away when Rage ends. This is in addition to the 1-2 points of regeneration from your high Con.
If their Con starts at 15, then the +4 Rage bonus per level restores 36 HP per rage.
With Tomes and other boosts, a Dwarven Barbarian can hit 21 Con naturally, and bump all the way up to 25, which regenerates 3 HP during the 30 second duration, and a humble +9 HP, meaning only 12 HP restored per Rage.
At cap - which is 6 levels higher for the Barbarian than the Cavalier's cap, the Barbarian may rage eleven-odd times, restoring, for the humblest Dwarven Barbarian, 120 Hitpoints per day. For the feeble 15 Con Elven Barbarian, they're healing 360 HP per day.
The con bonus to regen is irrelevant because only the highest regen is used. So if you have even a mere ring of regen, your con regen is ignored. Unless you're left with only the worst regen items (which you won't be, as there's plenty to go around), the barbs con bonus is largely ignored, and bare in mind, the paladins DUHM gives +2 more to every stat then the barbs rage does (at lvl 18), so the paladin can hit 25 with 19's, while the barb needs 21's and lasts a lot longer then the barbs rage does, so they end up with roughly the same up time by the end. So yes, the 68 from a LoH is still superior.
And no, a potion is not part of the barbarian's class features and could just as easily be acquired by a cavalier, so it doesn't count at all for this comparison.
Neither can block imprisonment, and there's only 3 places in the un-modded game you can be mazed (2 are traps that you likely won't even go near, unless you're trying to get absolutely every item in the game), and the IMoD is so easy to get it's not even worthwhile to consider level drain immunity as a benefit since it's OTHER benefit makes it the weapon of choice for undead slaying, and the cavaliers innate disease, poison, fear and charm immunities have everything covered, except free-action which is easily replaced by items or other party members without sacrificing anything (or they can just cast the spells themselves at higher levels). (or the amulet of power for classes that can wear it). While admittedly the ring of gaxx easily replaces the disease and poison immunity, it also completely devalues con based regen since it's 2x as fast as the best con regen, which is overwritten.
Though yes, I totally agree that every class (except a shapeshifter) is perfectly viable for any situation if you get the gear and items to cover your weaknesses. And even the shapeshifter can solo the game, it's just VERY annoying since your primary benefit becomes useless about 2/3 of the way through SoA, basically immediately after you get it, and I can't really fault them, since it's the developer's fault they don't have their proper abilities. (Though that doesn't change the fact I dislike certain classes (*cough* Berserker*cough*) because they in no way resemble their PnP kit incarnation (Restricted to leather, no ranged, their rage is like Minsc's) and have ridiculously OP abilities with no actual penalty.
Also not to be taken, barbarian rage means that you lose total control of your character and will also attack your friendlies. I still dont see the benfit over cavalier because of this as well. You constantly have to keep your party members away or make them run when chosen by a raging barb/beserk.
Barbarian Rage does not prevent you from controlling your character at all. In fact, a Barbarian can still use spell scrolls whilst raging without hindrance.
You may wish to try playing a class other than Cavalier before trying to suggest class balance.
Currently only Minsc's Berserk has a chance to cause loss of control each round (has has fewer immunities) (though that IS how the PnP berserker kit is supposed to work as well).
Enrage and Barbarian Rage are just boosts, though Enrage has a downside of penalizing your stats for a short while after the rage ends and can't be done immediately back to back (but lasts 2x as long as barbarian rage does).
If you're going to dual-class, Berserker. If not, Barbarian.
Berserker advantages over Barbarian:
Can Dual-Class More immunities while raging Can put 5 points into weapon skills Wear heavier armor
Barbarian advantages over Berseker: Larger bnuses from raging (+4 to CON and STR) d12 HP (Max Barbarian HP is 18 HP higher than maximum Berserker HP) Immunity to backstab Faster movement Damage Resitance Doesn't get fatigued after raging.
If you're dualclassing, choose the Berseker. Fighter/Mage is so hideously overpowered that all challenge disappears from the game and no class can compete with it. If you want to play a pure class, the single biggest advantage of the Berserker disappears.
Pure Berseker against Pure Barbarian:
The extra 1/2 attack from 5 proficiency points is certainly nice. However, it does mean a great deal of specialization and time to reach it. This means that for a large portion of the saga, the Berserker will not have it's biggest advantage over the Barbarian. He'll only get grandmastery in SoA. Even once he gets it, he'll only be fully effective with one type of weapon until ToB. The Barbarian gets the same number of proficiency points as a fighter. Because he doesn't place five points into a single weapon type, he can spread his around to a much wider number of weapon types, allowing him to utilize more of the weapons that he finds. If a Berserker is putting his points into longswords, he'll be very good with them. Unfortunately, he won't get much use out of the Flail of Ages for a long time. If he does put his proficiency points into a wide variety of weapons, he'll be delaying his acquisition of grandmastery even longer and will negate much of the point of playing a Fighter. But a Barbarian doesn't have to worry about that. He can reach full effectiveness with his primary weapon type at character creation, spending the rest of his proficiency points on whatever weapons he wants. Having the ability to gain grandmastery is certainly an advantage, but utilizing that ability is not without costs.
A Barbarian's extra HP is extremely useful, especially at low levels, where enemies can frequently OHK characters. Plus the faster movement is very nice for charging mages and archers before they can do much damage. The backstab immunity doesn't come up much, but is extremely helpful when it does.
I see it this way: In BG1, The Barbarian's larger bonuses from rage, faster speed, and higher HP will make it outclass the Berseker, especially since the Berseker won't have grandmastery then. Immunity to imprisonment won't do much good when nobody uses it in BG1. By SoA, the higher-end plate armors, and grandmastery will even the playing field. Immunity to imprisonment is nice, but only a handful of enemies will use it. For those times, slayer form, immunity to undead scrolls, and immunity to magic scrolls will suffice. During this time, Barbarian damage resistance will start to kick in, helping to offset the lack of heavy armor.
By ToB, AC is mostly irrelevant, and very powerful medium armor is available anyway, meaning that the Berserker's armor advantage mostly disappears. At this point, the Barbarian's higher HP, larger THAC0 and damage bonuses from raging, absurdly high CON from raging, faster movement, greater versatility from spread-out proficiencies, and damage resistance start to outweigh the imprisonment immunity and that extra 1/2 attack from grandmastery.
In conclusion:
If dual-classing: Berseker wins hands-down.
If playing a single class:
Barbarian will be better at low levels (BG1) They'll be mostly even with the Berseker perhaps having a slight advantage at mid-levels (most of SoA) Barbarian will be better at high levels (End of SoA, all of ToB)
The Barbarian seems to be the winner if playing single-class, especially in BG1.
I'd definitely prefer being able to roll a Barbarian/Druid for my Shamanistic needs, but hopefully multiclassing will be externalised sooner, rather than later, and I'll be able to roll some oddball mixes.
lol don't mess with my rabbit or I'll KILL YOU RAAARGH!!!
Also not to be taken, barbarian rage means that you lose total control of your character and will also attack your friendlies. I still dont see the benfit over cavalier because of this as well. You constantly have to keep your party members away or make them run when chosen by a raging barb/beserk.
This is proof that you have never played a barbarian/berserk in your life.
Also not to be taken, barbarian rage means that you lose total control of your character and will also attack your friendlies. I still dont see the benfit over cavalier because of this as well. You constantly have to keep your party members away or make them run when chosen by a raging barb/beserk.
This is proof that you have never played a barbarian/berserk in your life.
Must have confused Minsc as a barbarian/berserker or used the cursed sword
Also not to be taken, barbarian rage means that you lose total control of your character and will also attack your friendlies. I still dont see the benfit over cavalier because of this as well. You constantly have to keep your party members away or make them run when chosen by a raging barb/beserk.
This is proof that you have never played a barbarian/berserk in your life.
The Barbarian gets the same number of proficiency points as a fighter. Because he doesn't place five points into a single weapon type, he can spread his around to a much wider number of weapon types, allowing him to utilize more of the weapons that he finds. If a Berserker is putting his points into longswords, he'll be very good with them. Unfortunately, he won't get much use out of the Flail of Ages for a long time. If he does put his proficiency points into a wide variety of weapons, he'll be delaying his acquisition of Grandmastery even longer and will negate much of the point of playing a Fighter. But a Barbarian doesn't have to worry about that. A Barbarian's extra HP is extremely useful, especially at low levels, where enemies can frequently OHK characters. Plus the faster movement is very nice for charging mages and archers before they can do much damage. The backstab immunity doesn't come up much, but is extremely helpful when it does.
This is a great point too, and another reason I personally favor the barbarian. Given that BG2 has such a variety of powerful melee weapons to choose from - i.e: flail of ages, celestial fury, returning throwing axes, etc. - and very few, if any, NPCs who are proficient in such weapons, I'd personally prefer to specialize in several weapon types than just GM in a single one. Of course, you can do the same with the berserker class too, but then you'd be forsaking what is the main selling point of the class.
Comments
Also you tend to roll better intiall attributes because the minimum stats are high for 3 so you can re-roll for big scores.
There isn't really a whole lot of difference between a Barbarian and Cavalier if we're talking the whole saga (which I assume we are since you talk of Turn Undead and Paladin spells).
In BG1 it comes down to better AC and poison immunity vs more HP and missile weapons. Not the easiest things to compare but they're both useful.
In BG2 I'd consider them functionally the same.
Unless you lack a cleric then a Paladin's Turn Undead is a bit redundant.
What spells will a Cavalier use most? Armour of Faith, DUHM and maybe Death Ward. A Barbarian's damage resistance caps out at 5% less than AoF but he has more HP, Rage and DUHM are similar in their effect on stats, and Death Ward can be cast on you by a cleric. The tactics with both will be very similar in the end - buffed up warriors with lots of immunities, damage resistance, high str for big damage hits.
EDIT: Summon Deva can be useful, but again it might be redundant depending on the spells the rest of your party use.
Paladins have those high minimums in those all important stats wis and cha which actually gimps you if you're trying to min/max. For example if you wanted to go 18/18/18/11/13/17 for mindflayer protection it's actually really hard as a Paladin, whereas it's almost impossible not to be able to get 18/18/18/16/3/3 as a fighter since that's a 76 and the minimum is 75.
Strengths
- +3 bonus to hit and damage against all demonic and draconic creatures (how many dragons and demons do you fight in Baldurs Gate 1?)
- Can cast Remove Fear once per day for every level (a cleric can make your whole party immune to fear with a level 1 spell)
- Immune to Fear, Morale Failure, and all Poison effects (again, a cleric can take care of all this)
- 20% resistance to Fire and Acid (once again, clerics can increase your Fire resist too, as well as several items)
- Weapon Specialization (++) (meh)
- Can use any weapon (yeah, but no Carsomyr in Baldur's Gate 1)
- Can use any armor (meh)
- +2 bonus to all Saving Throws (nice, but most of the times an enraged Barbarian wont need to make a ST)
- Turn Undead, Protection From Evil, Lay on Hands, Detect Evil, and Cure Disease (The only useful skill from these is lay on hands for some quick healing mid-combat. But it will be kinda useless at low levels. The other skills are better done by, once again, a cleric)
- Spell Casting (starting at level 9, priest spells only) (uhmm who do you think does this better? yeah, a cleric)
Weaknesses
- Cannot use Missile Weapons
- Must maintain Good alignment
- If party reputation drops below 6, becomes a Fallen Paladin, loses all Paladin abilities, and is the equivelant of a Fighter (cannot regain Paladin status)
TL;DR: I would chose a Cavalier only if there are no healers (cleric/druid) in my party. And even in that situation, i would probly play an undead hunter (immune to Level Drain and Hold>>>>Immune to Fear).
But if i have a cleric, then i would definitely pick a barbarian over a cavalier.
Since a Fighter/Cleric can happily combine "immune to fear" with "nullifying enemy spellcasters", "setting someone on fire", "saving the life of the party tank", "party scout", "party trapfinder", "Poison nullifier" and "Stripping Enemy Buffs" all at the same time with spell slots spare, I suggest you stick to comparing
lowly peonspure fighter classes, spellcasting has never been fair.2: Barbarians don't throw axes in lore? And aren't ultimately better at it than Cavaliers thanks to better speed and faster levelling?
3: +3 bonus to hit and damage is actually a fairly tiny bonus around the time you'll be facing dragons and demons often enough to class this as anything more than a gimmick. Meanwhile, a Barbarian can and will be Raging for the full Strength bonus of +7 to hit, +14 damage. Against everyone. Yes, you can offhand Crom Faeyr, which denies another partymate from doing so, but they'll still have immunities and be regenerating thanks to their also 25 Con score.
4: Irrelevant. You are fully capable of playing a Lawful Good Barbarian.
5: Humans are essentially the weakest race in the game. They literally have no value outside of Dual Classing and the ability to be the racist classes.
Cavaliers, whilst a valuable class, are not the best pure class in melee, I'd expect that more likely to be the Berserker. They get more immunities, they get an on-demand +2/+2 bonus against every potential target, rather than rare, telegraphed opponents, and they can actually master weapons for an extra attack per round. Start introducing multiclasses and dual classes and Cavalier's not even top ten.
I would suggest the liberal use of fire or acid sirrahs.
Having played as both classes through BG2, I definitely preferred the barbarian. In fact, the barbarian is probably my favorite class to play BG2.
@ZanathKariashi
As I said before, functionally how is:
A Cavalier with Armour of Faith + Hardiness + Defender of Easthaven + DUHM + any other cleric buffs to fill the immunity gaps.
Different from:
A Barbarian with Rage + Hardiness + Defender of Easthaven + any other cleric buffs to fill the immunity gaps?
5% damage resistance advantage for the Cavalier, 10 HP (on average) advantage for the Barbarian.
My point is that while there are minor differences, they are both going to be buffed up warriors with high damage resistance, high damage output and lots of immunities, essentially 95% the same.
So Berserkers get a better rage, and grand master, and barbarians get damage resistance and a slightly bigger hit dice?
Am I reading into this wrong when I'm thinking Berserkers are definitely going to have an edge early game when the extra to hit from going past 2 pips and the ac from their rage is better, and the Barbarian is going to have an edge late game with damage resistance when AC and to hit aren't going to matter as much because everyones to hit is inflated?
Whilst Cavaliers do get Lay on Hands, it's worth noting that Barbarian rage heals the barbarian for the HP bonus by level it gives.
This means if your Level 9+ Barbarian's Con bonus is 18 and they rage, they will get a 22 Con, and therefore gain +6 HP a level instead of +4, giving them a 18 HP that doesn't go away when Rage ends. This is in addition to the 1-2 points of regeneration from your high Con.
If their Con starts at 15, then the +4 Rage bonus per level restores 36 HP per rage.
With Tomes and other boosts, a Dwarven Barbarian can hit 21 Con naturally, and bump all the way up to 25, which regenerates 3 HP during the 30 second duration, and a humble +9 HP, meaning only 12 HP restored per Rage.
At cap - which is 6 levels higher for the Barbarian than the Cavalier's cap, the Barbarian may rage eleven-odd times, restoring, for the humblest Dwarven Barbarian, 120 Hitpoints per day. For the feeble 15 Con Elven Barbarian, they're healing 360 HP per day.
And no, a potion is not part of the barbarian's class features and could just as easily be acquired by a cavalier, so it doesn't count at all for this comparison.
Neither can block imprisonment, and there's only 3 places in the un-modded game you can be mazed (2 are traps that you likely won't even go near, unless you're trying to get absolutely every item in the game), and the IMoD is so easy to get it's not even worthwhile to consider level drain immunity as a benefit since it's OTHER benefit makes it the weapon of choice for undead slaying, and the cavaliers innate disease, poison, fear and charm immunities have everything covered, except free-action which is easily replaced by items or other party members without sacrificing anything (or they can just cast the spells themselves at higher levels). (or the amulet of power for classes that can wear it). While admittedly the ring of gaxx easily replaces the disease and poison immunity, it also completely devalues con based regen since it's 2x as fast as the best con regen, which is overwritten.
Though yes, I totally agree that every class (except a shapeshifter) is perfectly viable for any situation if you get the gear and items to cover your weaknesses. And even the shapeshifter can solo the game, it's just VERY annoying since your primary benefit becomes useless about 2/3 of the way through SoA, basically immediately after you get it, and I can't really fault them, since it's the developer's fault they don't have their proper abilities. (Though that doesn't change the fact I dislike certain classes (*cough* Berserker*cough*) because they in no way resemble their PnP kit incarnation (Restricted to leather, no ranged, their rage is like Minsc's) and have ridiculously OP abilities with no actual penalty.
Barbarian Rage does not prevent you from controlling your character at all. In fact, a Barbarian can still use spell scrolls whilst raging without hindrance.
You may wish to try playing a class other than Cavalier before trying to suggest class balance.
Enrage and Barbarian Rage are just boosts, though Enrage has a downside of penalizing your stats for a short while after the rage ends and can't be done immediately back to back (but lasts 2x as long as barbarian rage does).
Berserker advantages over Barbarian:
Can Dual-Class
More immunities while raging
Can put 5 points into weapon skills
Wear heavier armor
Barbarian advantages over Berseker:
Larger bnuses from raging (+4 to CON and STR)
d12 HP (Max Barbarian HP is 18 HP higher than maximum Berserker HP)
Immunity to backstab
Faster movement
Damage Resitance
Doesn't get fatigued after raging.
If you're dualclassing, choose the Berseker. Fighter/Mage is so hideously overpowered that all challenge disappears from the game and no class can compete with it. If you want to play a pure class, the single biggest advantage of the Berserker disappears.
Pure Berseker against Pure Barbarian:
The extra 1/2 attack from 5 proficiency points is certainly nice. However, it does mean a great deal of specialization and time to reach it. This means that for a large portion of the saga, the Berserker will not have it's biggest advantage over the Barbarian. He'll only get grandmastery in SoA. Even once he gets it, he'll only be fully effective with one type of weapon until ToB. The Barbarian gets the same number of proficiency points as a fighter. Because he doesn't place five points into a single weapon type, he can spread his around to a much wider number of weapon types, allowing him to utilize more of the weapons that he finds. If a Berserker is putting his points into longswords, he'll be very good with them. Unfortunately, he won't get much use out of the Flail of Ages for a long time. If he does put his proficiency points into a wide variety of weapons, he'll be delaying his acquisition of grandmastery even longer and will negate much of the point of playing a Fighter. But a Barbarian doesn't have to worry about that. He can reach full effectiveness with his primary weapon type at character creation, spending the rest of his proficiency points on whatever weapons he wants. Having the ability to gain grandmastery is certainly an advantage, but utilizing that ability is not without costs.
A Barbarian's extra HP is extremely useful, especially at low levels, where enemies can frequently OHK characters. Plus the faster movement is very nice for charging mages and archers before they can do much damage. The backstab immunity doesn't come up much, but is extremely helpful when it does.
I see it this way: In BG1, The Barbarian's larger bonuses from rage, faster speed, and higher HP will make it outclass the Berseker, especially since the Berseker won't have grandmastery then. Immunity to imprisonment won't do much good when nobody uses it in BG1. By SoA, the higher-end plate armors, and grandmastery will even the playing field. Immunity to imprisonment is nice, but only a handful of enemies will use it. For those times, slayer form, immunity to undead scrolls, and immunity to magic scrolls will suffice. During this time, Barbarian damage resistance will start to kick in, helping to offset the lack of heavy armor.
By ToB, AC is mostly irrelevant, and very powerful medium armor is available anyway, meaning that the Berserker's armor advantage mostly disappears. At this point, the Barbarian's higher HP, larger THAC0 and damage bonuses from raging, absurdly high CON from raging, faster movement, greater versatility from spread-out proficiencies, and damage resistance start to outweigh the imprisonment immunity and that extra 1/2 attack from grandmastery.
In conclusion:
If dual-classing: Berseker wins hands-down.
If playing a single class:
Barbarian will be better at low levels (BG1)
They'll be mostly even with the Berseker perhaps having a slight advantage at mid-levels (most of SoA)
Barbarian will be better at high levels (End of SoA, all of ToB)
The Barbarian seems to be the winner if playing single-class, especially in BG1.