On Barbarians, Greatswords, and Greataxes

[Chronos]

An interesting subtlety I just noticed: For barbarians and/or half-orcs, a greataxe (or lance) is a better weapon than a greatsword (or maul). Why? Because of the way the barbarian's Brutal Critical, or the half-orc's similar Savage Attacks, works. Both say that you roll only a single extra damage die on a crit. For a greataxe, that means rolling an extra d12, but for a greatsword or maul, the damage is 2d6, and so a single extra damage die is only an extra 1d6.

Was this intentional, to make the greataxe (with slightly lower average damage, and more variance) more appealing? Is this a good thing, or should it be houseruled to all of the weapon's dice?

[SiuiS]

I think that's a misunderstanding. I think a greatsword's "damage die" is 2d6. Unless there is precedent elsewhere in the text?

Whenever I read weapon dice bonuses like that, I think the easiest way to understand it is 4e's +1[W].

[Chronos]

I can't find anywhere that refers to multiple dice as a single "damage die". The closest thing I can find to saying what a die is is the "Game Dice" section on pg. 6, which clearly states that 3d8, for instance, is three dice.

[Garimeth]

I think that's a misunderstanding. I think a greatsword's "damage die" is 2d6. Unless there is precedent elsewhere in the text?

Whenever I read weapon dice bonuses like that, I think the easiest way to understand it is 4e's +1[W].

I read it like this also, though the OP makes me wonder...

Is the greatsword better if you have the great weapon fighting style, after all, its easier to roll max on a d6, and more likely to get to reroll your low numbers?

[DireSickFish]

I think that's a misunderstanding. I think a greatsword's "damage die" is 2d6. Unless there is precedent elsewhere in the text?

Whenever I read weapon dice bonuses like that, I think the easiest way to understand it is 4e's +1[W].

Mearls has confirmed that the OP has it correct. This was intentional to make the greataxe more appealing for barbarians. Without the ability to expand the crit range to crit more often the 1d12 takes a while to overtake the 2d6. I have not done the math but from what I remember for those who did do the math it takes more than 1 extra die on a crit to bump the average damage above the 2d6.

[DireSickFish]

I read it like this also, though the OP makes me wonder...

Is the greatsword better if you have the great weapon fighting style, after all, its easier to roll max on a d6, and more likely to get to reroll your low numbers?

Yes Great Weapon fighting syle is much better with a greatsword than greataxe.

[Garimeth]

Mearls has confirmed that the OP has it correct. This was intentional to make the greataxe more appealing for barbarians. Without the ability to expand the crit range to crit more often the 1d12 takes a while to overtake the 2d6. I have not done the math but from what I remember for those who did do the math it takes more than 1 extra die on a crit to bump the average damage above the 2d6.

So to confirm: 3d6 yields better average results than 2d12 / OR / over time the 2d6 outperforms the 1d12 so much that even a bonus d12 on crits is insufficent to make up for the difference?

[dukeofwolfsgate]

I think that's a misunderstanding. I think a greatsword's "damage die" is 2d6. Unless there is precedent elsewhere in the text?

Half-Orc
pg. 41 PH: "Savage Attacks. When you score a critical hit with a melee weapon attack, you can roll one of the weapon's damage dice on additional time and add it to the extra damage of the critical hit."

Barbarian
pg. 49 PH: "Brutal Critical: Beginning at 9th level, you can roll one additional weapon damage die when determining the extra damage for the critical hit with a melee attack. This increases to two additional dice at 13th level and three additional dice at 17th level."

RAW, it is just one additional die (i.e. 1d6 for greatsword and maul or 1d12 for greataxe) in both cases.

Chronos: I do think it was intentional, and I like that it makes the greataxe more distinctive from the other great-weapons. Some players have mentioned the lack of mechanical variation between weapons in this edition, so you might not want to houserule it out.

It also works the opposite way withe the Great Weapon Fighting style that some martial classes get. In that case, they get a better result from using a weapon with more damage dice.

[Chronos]

2d12 (average 13) is definitely better than 3d6 (average 10.5), but that's only when you crit. Most of your hits aren't crits, and then you're comparing 2d6 (average 7) versus 1d12 (average 6.5).

Great Weapon fighting style does seem to favor greatswords, though barbarians don't get that absent multiclassing.

[DireSickFish]

So to confirm: 3d6 yields better average results than 2d12 / OR / over time the 2d6 outperforms the 1d12 so much that even a bonus d12 on crits is insufficent to make up for the difference?

I think the math works something like this, correct me if I'm wrong.

2d6 avg = 7
4d6 avg = 14
5d6 avg = 17.5
1d12 avg = 6.5
2d12 avg = 13
3d12 avg = 19.5

So Normally withought savage attacker you get:
Greatsword Damage = 7*18/20+14*1/20= 7
Greataxe Damage = 6.5*18/20+13*1/20= 6.5

Now with savage attacker you get:
Greatsword 7*18/20+17.5*1/20=7.175
Greataxe 6.5*18/20+19.5*1/20=6.825

So when you crit you do more average damage with the greataxe right away but it does not increase your damage enough to make up for the fact that the greatsword does more damage per average hit. Now if you could control when you crit somehow the greataxe would be good for nova but that is not possible.

You have the same to hit both both so those shouldn't factor into the damage calculation.

The Greatsword is gaining 0.175 every extra dice and the Greataxe is gaining 0.325 every extra dice so with enough bonus dice on crit the greataxe will on average do more damage.

Edit: I also did not take into account advantage which the Barbarian can turn on at will which skews these percentages into critting more as the 20 becomes the most likely result.

[HarrisonF]

2d12 (average 13) is definitely better than 3d6 (average 10.5), but that's only when you crit. Most of your hits aren't crits, and then you're comparing 2d6 (average 7) versus 1d12 (average 6.5).

When you crit, you get the base damage doubled as well, so it is 3d12 (19.5) vs. 5d6 (17.5), so less of a percentage increase. Being a half-orc to get another die does help some though to 4d12 (26) vs. 6d6 (21).

[Person_Man]

DireSickFish is correct. The intent was to carve out a slightly better critical result for Half-Orc Barbarians with a Greatax.

But the Barbarian doesn't actually fill that intended niche particularly well. You actually end up with more frequent and higher critical damage by playing a Champion Fighter (Great Weapon Fighting Style, Improved Critical, Action Surge) or Assassin Rogue (Sneak Attack, auto-crit).

[MadBear]

This is why a few level champion fighter dip for Barbarians can be worth it (as well as picking up the GW fighting style). The barbarians crit rules + the half-orc trait + champion crit range= win when using the greateaxe.


(Also a champion/berserker/assassin would have insane DPR on the first round if they used a great ax, had high strength, and high dex.)

[SiuiS]

Mearls has confirmed that the OP has it correct. This was intentional to make the greataxe more appealing for barbarians. Without the ability to expand the crit range to crit more often the 1d12 takes a while to overtake the 2d6. I have not done the math but from what I remember for those who did do the math it takes more than 1 extra die on a crit to bump the average damage above the 2d6.

Ah, that would be good enough for me.


Half-Orc
pg. 41 PH: "Savage Attacks. When you score a critical hit with a melee weapon attack, you can roll one of the weapon's damage dice on additional time and add it to the extra damage of the critical hit."

I see. This is very clear.


Barbarian
pg. 49 PH: "Brutal Critical: Beginning at 9th level, you can roll one additional weapon damage die when determining the extra damage for the critical hit with a melee attack. This increases to two additional dice at 13th level and three additional dice at 17th level."

This, however, is not. That's sort of sloppy writing. Given the half Orc sets precedent though, my only complaint is that could have been clearer. :)

[Garimeth]

That math makes sense to me, thanks for that.

[Ralanr]

So the best kind of barbarian to use a greataxe are half-orc barbarians? That's kinda annoying. I get some races being better than others at certain classes, but using certain weapons? Why keep pushing the greataxe awesomeness on just the half-orcs?

Or maybe I'm misinterpreting this.

[Garimeth]

So the best kind of barbarian to use a greataxe are half-orc barbarians? That's kinda annoying. I get some races being better than others at certain classes, but using certain weapons? Why keep pushing the greataxe awesomeness on just the half-orcs?

Or maybe I'm misinterpreting this.

A little bit, not much. of the four possible extra dice on crit for being a half-orc barbarian, only one of those comes from being a half-orc. So 25%, and only on a crit.

[Easy_Lee]

A little bit, not much. of the four possible extra dice on crit for being a half-orc barbarian, only one of those comes from being a half-orc. So 25%, and only on a crit.

Yep, and the basic result is that if you want to use a great axe more effectively than a greatsword, you should play half orc champion or champion / barbarian, and should search for sources of advantage.

[unwise]

In the games I DM the damage dice used is not strictly linked to the weapons type. If a cleric with martial proficiency really wants to use a mace thematically, then he can find one that requires martial proficiency and does d8 damage. If the barbarian goes axe shopping, he can find some that do 2d6 and some that do d12, depending on their weighting, craftsmanship etc.

I want PCs with martial training using the weapons they want to use without penalty. For instance, one PC is themed around being a Spartan warrior. His specialist spears do 1d8 damage.

[Izha]

In the games I DM the damage dice used is not strictly linked to the weapons type. If a cleric with martial proficiency really wants to use a mace thematically, then he can find one that requires martial proficiency and does d8 damage. If the barbarian goes axe shopping, he can find some that do 2d6 and some that do d12, depending on their weighting, craftsmanship etc.

I want PCs with martial training using the weapons they want to use without penalty. For instance, one PC is themed around being a Spartan warrior. His specialist spears do 1d8 damage.


Yeah I agree with this 100%. Things like heavy maces and finesse spears don't break the game at all, but open a lot of cool concepts.

[Chronos]

If you're doing that, just make sure that you don't overlap too many special weapon properties at once. A weapon that can be finessed and is also eligible for Polearm Mastery, for instance, would probably be overpowered. But if it's just like some other weapon except a different damage type, or the like, that's probably OK.

[Easy_Lee]

A weapon that can be finessed and is also eligible for Polearm Mastery, for instance, would probably be overpowered.

How so? Both dexterity and strength have advantages and disadvantages.

[JNAProductions]

Dexterity tends to have more advantages. AC, Initiative, it's a more valuable saving throw, more skills...

[Easy_Lee]

Dexterity tends to have more advantages. AC, Initiative, it's a more valuable saving throw, more skills...

While strength has one of the most universally useful skills (athletics) and strength saving throws, such as escaping a gelatinous cube, tend to be the ones where if you don't succeed, you die. Strength also allows for 1 point higher AC from armor and does not require that you max strength to get the full AC benefit of armor.

In other words, they have pro's and con's, I think. The only reason why I can see a finesse pole being particularly good is if one used it with polearm mastery as a rogue to get attribute-to-bonus-attack damage, more opportunity attacks (for SA), and attack from a save range. Two of those three things are more easily done with crossbow expert, and the rogue is unlikely to have advantage on a foe who enters his reach from 10' away. Plus rogues are not naturally proficient in polearms, save the quarterstaff, and they don't do any more damage than a heavy crossbow.

So I'm not sure how a finesse polearm, in particular, would be OP.

[Chronos]

The main advantage of strength is that it lets you use Polearm Mastery. Most of the things that Athletics can do, Acrobatics can, too. Strength saving throws are far less common than Dex ones, and when it does come up, it's usually just something that will move you across the battlefield.

[Easy_Lee]

The main advantage of strength is that it lets you use Polearm Mastery. Most of the things that Athletics can do, Acrobatics can, too. Strength saving throws are far less common than Dex ones, and when it does come up, it's usually just something that will move you across the battlefield.

Okay, one thing at a time:

The main advantage of strength is not access to a feat. The main advantages are:

You can use it with any melee weapon - finesse limits choice, meaning fewer of the weapons you find will be usable
You can get AC 18 the moment you find plate armor - even Max DEX doesn't allow that without a feature, spell or shield
Push and grapple are actually useful, since these use athletics (strength)

Acrobatics doesn't apply to jumping, climbing, swimming, or several other common activities. It only applies to some, such as breaking free from a grapple (but not starting one). It would be more accurate if you had said that nearly anything which uses acrobatics can also use athletics.
Strength saving throws are less common, but the ones that exist tend to be things you really don't want to fail. Escaping the ogre's/giant's grasp, breaking free of the gelatinous cube, maintaining your grip on the side of the cliff, and so on.

All that said, this is a debate for another thread, since it hardly has to do with your original post.

[TheOOB]

Some quick math.

Greatsword deals 7 damage on average, Greataxe 6.5

Brutal Critical adds .175 average damage to a GS, and .325 average damage to a Greataxe

Normal: GS 7 GA 6.5
BC1: GS 7.175 GA 6.825
BC2: GS 7.35 GA 7.15
BC3: 7.525 GA 7.475

So, first we see that brutal critical isn't that amazing, and that under normal circumstances, a greatsword is just flat better. If you're attacking with advantage, BC adds twice as much damage(twice as much chance to crit), which means the GA will surpass GS at rank 2, but even at rank 3 it's only a .4 average damage increase in the GA favor, and I'd still argue the GS is a better weapon stronger consistent damage is better for the players than random bursts.

[Person_Man]

This is why a few level champion fighter dip for Barbarians can be worth it (as well as picking up the GW fighting style). The barbarians crit rules + the half-orc trait + champion crit range= win when using the greateaxe.

Sometimes. But you wouldn't want to delay access to Extra Attack (which has a huge impact on your damage output) and multi-classing in any way could delay or deny you access to higher level class abilities, more Rage, and a slightly higher Rage damage bonus.

[MadBear]

Sometimes. But you wouldn't want to delay access to Extra Attack (which has a huge impact on your damage output) and multi-classing in any way could delay or deny you access to higher level class abilities, more Rage, and a slightly higher Rage damage bonus.

This would be a hypothetical lvl 20 build which means you wouldn't take the other levels until lvl 15 or so.

[Chronos]

You can get AC 18 the moment you find plate armor - even Max DEX doesn't allow that without a feature, spell or shield
Why does everyone always say this is an advantage to strength? Anyone can get AC 18 the moment they find plate armor. Having a high dex doesn't prevent you from wearing armor. It just means that you have the option to not wear it if you don't want to or can't get any. The only difference not having 15 Str will make is that it means that your motion will be slowed a little, which really isn't all that big a deal.

[HoarsHalberd]

While strength has one of the most universally useful skills (athletics) and strength saving throws, such as escaping a gelatinous cube, tend to be the ones where if you don't succeed, you die. Strength also allows for 1 point higher AC from armor and does not require that you max strength to get the full AC benefit of armor.

In other words, they have pro's and con's, I think. The only reason why I can see a finesse pole being particularly good is if one used it with polearm mastery as a rogue to get attribute-to-bonus-attack damage, more opportunity attacks (for SA), and attack from a save range. Two of those three things are more easily done with crossbow expert, and the rogue is unlikely to have advantage on a foe who enters his reach from 10' away. Plus rogues are not naturally proficient in polearms, save the quarterstaff, and they don't do any more damage than a heavy crossbow.

So I'm not sure how a finesse polearm, in particular, would be OP.

For one thing, darkness devilsight combo bladelock with rogue would be terrifying, to get to him you have to enter a darkness area (instant disadvantage to hit) and move within ten foot (OA) and the rogue would have advantage on all attacks: (can see enemies who can't see him.) Combine this with armour of shadows if it was only a three level dip or a +1 studded leather if they're lucky and people will be fighting an AC 18 off-tank with disadvantage who can do up to 18d6 sneak attack damage a round.

[Easy_Lee]

For one thing, darkness devilsight combo bladelock with rogue would be terrifying, to get to him you have to enter a darkness area (instant disadvantage to hit) and move within ten foot (OA) and the rogue would have advantage on all attacks: (can see enemies who can't see him.) Combine this with armour of shadows if it was only a three level dip or a +1 studded leather if they're lucky and people will be fighting an AC 18 off-tank with disadvantage who can do up to 18d6 sneak attack damage a round.

Yeah but you can do the same thing with throwing daggers, without spending a feat. A Fighter 1 / blade pact warlock X can also do the same thing while attacking more targets, putting out higher damage per round, and casting EB as an opportunity attack via war caster. Oh, and it also gets near-full casting.

[Person_Man]

Why does everyone always say this is an advantage to strength? Anyone can get AC 18 the moment they find plate armor. Having a high dex doesn't prevent you from wearing armor. It just means that you have the option to not wear it if you don't want to or can't get any. The only difference not having 15 Str will make is that it means that your motion will be slowed a little, which really isn't all that big a deal.

You are correct. But many players hate "wasting" a high ability score by having both high Str and Dex, when one of those high scores could be put into Con or, if its required for your class, Int or Wis or Cha. And many players just get stuck with mediocre ability scores in the 15 to 13ish range. And many players aren't willing to eat the movement penalty, especially if they play some or all of their combats on a tabletop map, where precise movement speed is a lot more important.

A Cleric with mediocre ability scores is probably the best example. Heavy Armor Prof (from a Domain) and 15 Strength lets you get to 18 AC by level 3-4ish (depending on your DM) pretty easily without any movement penalty, and you could use a martial weapon that deals 2d6 + Str damage, and then your Dex can be 10 (freeing up the ability score points for Con or Wis or both). If you instead put that 10 into Str and 15 into Dex, you'd use Medium armor and would get 17 AC (1 point lower) and your base attacks would deal 1d8 or1d10 damage (since you'd have to use a Finesse or Ranged weapon), though you would have better Initiative and Dex Saves.

The math isn't that big of a deal either way, but it does matter on the margins for some builds.

[Ralanr]

Why does everyone always say this is an advantage to strength? Anyone can get AC 18 the moment they find plate armor. Having a high dex doesn't prevent you from wearing armor. It just means that you have the option to not wear it if you don't want to or can't get any. The only difference not having 15 Str will make is that it means that your motion will be slowed a little, which really isn't all that big a deal.

Actually if you're not proficient in heavy armor (this counts for any armor proficiency) you would get disadvantage on any ability check, saving throw, or attack roll that involves strength or dexterity and can't cast spells. Sure anyone wearing it can get the AC, but only the classes that are proficient can actually use it effectively. Sure a lower strength does slow you down by 10 feet, but no downside to using it other than that, more so for a dwarf. Then again I don't see anyone deciding to wear heavy armor or any armor they are not proficient with, so anyone that's not a fighter or paladin would need to waste a feet to gain that. Personally I do not like the idea that Dex is the best stat, and there are probably things that people forget to work with in strength (Like carrying capacity. How many DM's have their players keep track of the wieght of their items? I know my group and DM doesn't seem to since there is no bag on the character sheet (or there is and I'm too used to the pathfinder one))

Actually funny thing. That abilities dwarves get by not being slowed down by armor? Yeah that just means a dwarf who doesn't meet the strength requirements of an armor type isn't affected by that. I don't see anything in the armor that suggest heavy armor slows you down when wearing it. So a dwarf fighter could focus on a dex archery build and still use heavy armor for good AC. Not sure other combos but whatever. I just noticed that and didn't know if it was obvious.

[Chronos]

Well, sure, but whether you're proficient in armor is entirely unrelated to whether you choose to focus on Str or Dex.

[Ralanr]

That might depend on what class you're choosing to play or what play style you focus on. It's all subjective really. Say I wanted to make a swashbuckling fighter, I'll probably focus more on dexterity and use finesse weapons and not even bother to deal with having heavy armor. But if I played a dwarf instead of a human, I could decide to have that heavy armor even if I didn't roll good enough strength for it.

Course I'd imagine a lot of people who see they're proficient in heavy armor won't focus dex as much if they want to use it (the armor I mean). Then there is the option of what play style they want and since strength has more options (everything that is not a non thrown ranged weapon) to the benefits of their modifiers, players can focus on getting something like a greatsword. If they have heavy armor, then hey 18 AC, you don't have to worry too much about your defense and focus your weapon choice on offense.

Then we have barbarian who has unarmored defense. People keep saying that you should just make a Dex barb to max out the dex with con and make it less MAD. You see I don't get that, why not just max out the con and put your third highest score in dex (Which if by going point buy, could be a +2). So if you maxed out Con and had 14-15 Dex, your AC is 17. You also have resistance to basically all nonmagical damage (And bear gives more types of resistance) when raging and the benefits from danger sense. Course that's if you decide to go with three 15's in a point buy (which I may be doing the math wrong). Combine that maxed Con with their d12, that gives them a lot of health, plus their resistances with raging, means they are hard to put down. It'd be nice to have some investment in Dex when playing Barb, but doing so affects your damage output since all finesse weapons use one damage die (course this doesn't really hurt you if you're doing sword and board barb. Unless it requires strength damage, can't remember).

Course I could be overlooking things.

[Morty]

Mearls has confirmed that the OP has it correct. This was intentional to make the greataxe more appealing for barbarians.

Wait, seriously? That's kind of ridiculous.

[Oscredwin]

Barbarians use great axes and can cleave an enemy's head clean off in one blow. The designers tried to push this in 3rd and I think in 4th to the extent balance would allow. It's been a design goal for a while now.

[Ralanr]

Probably helps explain why barbarians don't get fighting styles (aside from fluff reasons). If barbarians had access to the great weapon fighting style then no one would ever use a greataxe for mechanical reasons.

Not that mechanics are the only reason people decide things they do in this kind of game.

[Chronos]

I think that the reason barbarians don't get fighting styles is the assumption that if they did, they'd all choose Great Weapon. Fighting styles aren't really meaningful if you're not choosing from a variety. Some fighters are all about the subtlety of a slender blade, some are about archery, some are about BIG WEPUN ARG!, and so on, but pretty much all barbarians are about BIG WEPUN ARG!.

[Oscredwin]

I expect they could get fighting styles, but they would have to take 1 off the rage damage bonus. It's nice to have some differentiation.

[Ralanr]

If they had fighting styles then their brutal critical ability would seem more pointless because you would only roll an extra 1d6 with a greatsword or maul (or just two d6 if you play half-orc, because half-orcs are best barbarians and we need to be reminded that apparently.) and thus the greataxe of 1d12 would never be used except for thematic purposes (and even then I'm not sure). With their brutal crit on a greataxe they get to roll the whole d12 (and another for Half-orc :smallannoyed: )for it which can potentially deal more damage (though I'm sure someone will prove this wrong with math).

It's not like every player who chooses barbarian is going to go full two handed weapon. I myself am going sword and board style with my barbarian. So far it's working pretty well (Yeah my damage is probably gonna start getting lower around the higher levels. I'm just focusing on keeping enemies away from my party and knocking em to the ground).

Honestly I'm not a fan of the brutal critical ability for barbarians, it's the first thing I'd be ok with seeing replaced with something else (if they got fighting styles then I bet the ability wouldn't be there.) though it does make critting more awesome. Which does support multiclassing if you wanna go crit fishing (though considering the capstone, it's a hard choice. Ok yeah people rarely get to level 20, but they can dream!))

Edit: Actually does the reroll ability for great weapon fighting apply to extra damage on crit rolls? Cause if so then damn that'd be crazy.

[SharkForce]

oddly enough, i've actually seen a fair number of barbarian builds that use a one-hander and a shield. so i could definitely see some competition for which combat style to pick :P

[TheOOB]

Why does everyone always say this is an advantage to strength? Anyone can get AC 18 the moment they find plate armor. Having a high dex doesn't prevent you from wearing armor. It just means that you have the option to not wear it if you don't want to or can't get any. The only difference not having 15 Str will make is that it means that your motion will be slowed a little, which really isn't all that big a deal.

Slower movement is a huge deal, if you can't get into melee you can't attack, and since charge is a feat in this edition not an inherent ability that's even more important. Besides, the good 2h weapons are all str based.

[Balor777]

Greatsword is better untill 9 level generaly until you INVEST into a greataxe setup.
What i mean invest? :
1)Once you get to 5 level you have your 2nd attack you have a good option of dipping 6th level in fighter
for the style.NO matter how you play your barbarrian that style bumps you up(Even with shield barbar setup).Since we are talking about 2handers and investment you SHOULD
take GW fighting for rerolls since you reroll critical damaeg die too.How many times you rolled that stupid "1" on critical strike?

2)Be a half orc.Yes.That extra die might help you take greataxe from 1st level.

If you do one or both 1) 2) Greataxe gets VERY powerfull.That 3-4d12 adds some good 20 to 30 average damage to your hit for 35-45 average damage crits.
All this at 9-10 level.

My favourite setup if you wanna play a barb is a half orc guy with 1 lvl dip at level 6 in fighter for the TWF style.
At 10 level you have a good 30% chances to crit with recless attack for 3 times your STR+RAGE damage for 3d8 crits.
Round damage: 3d8+15+9 vs 2d12+10+6 if you play 2hander barbarian.Thats 10 DPR more.

On the 2hander setup my conclusion is that you should play with greatsword even if you start as a half-orc because
the greatsword deals much more stable damage.That "not having rerolls" with greataxe can and will cause trouble to you.
One miss and two low d12 rolls will put you very low damage wise.And low damage will mean something from higher resourse usage to even death.

[Morty]

Barbarians use great axes and can cleave an enemy's head clean off in one blow. The designers tried to push this in 3rd and I think in 4th to the extent balance would allow. It's been a design goal for a while now.


I think that the reason barbarians don't get fighting styles is the assumption that if they did, they'd all choose Great Weapon. Fighting styles aren't really meaningful if you're not choosing from a variety. Some fighters are all about the subtlety of a slender blade, some are about archery, some are about BIG WEPUN ARG!, and so on, but pretty much all barbarians are about BIG WEPUN ARG!.

That's a lot of effort to ensure a class remains a one-trick pony.

[Oscredwin]

That's a lot of effort to ensure a class remains a one-trick pony.

The "one trick" is having a specific optimal weapon for damage that is different than a fighter's optimal weapon. I think some effort was made to ensure that different melee characters would prefer different weapons (barbarian vs fighter vs Paladin vs ranger vs rogue). Barbarians are very good with their athletics checks, which allows them to do all sorts of things like shoving, tripping, grappling, and most of the random maneuvers the player thinks of and the DM allows. They're less pigeonholed into a greataxe than a ranger is into archery.

[SharkForce]

Greatsword is better untill 9 level generaly until you INVEST into a greataxe setup.
What i mean invest? :
1)Once you get to 5 level you have your 2nd attack you have a good option of dipping 6th level in fighter
for the style.NO matter how you play your barbarrian that style bumps you up(Even with shield barbar setup).Since we are talking about 2handers and investment you SHOULD
take GW fighting for rerolls since you reroll critical damaeg die too.How many times you rolled that stupid "1" on critical strike?

2)Be a half orc.Yes.That extra die might help you take greataxe from 1st level.

If you do one or both 1) 2) Greataxe gets VERY powerfull.That 3-4d12 adds some good 20 to 30 average damage to your hit for 35-45 average damage crits.
All this at 9-10 level.

My favourite setup if you wanna play a barb is a half orc guy with 1 lvl dip at level 6 in fighter for the TWF style.
At 10 level you have a good 30% chances to crit with recless attack for 3 times your STR+RAGE damage for 3d8 crits.
Round damage: 3d8+15+9 vs 2d12+10+6 if you play 2hander barbarian.Thats 10 DPR more.

On the 2hander setup my conclusion is that you should play with greatsword even if you start as a half-orc because
the greatsword deals much more stable damage.That "not having rerolls" with greataxe can and will cause trouble to you.
One miss and two low d12 rolls will put you very low damage wise.And low damage will mean something from higher resourse usage to even death.

if you're gonna splash 1 fighter level on your barbarian, imo you may as well splash 3. level 2 gets you action surge, which is amazing. level 3 gets you a path, which for a barbarian looking to maximize damage should be champion (extra crit multiplier combines very well with extra crit range).

[HoarsHalberd]

Yeah but you can do the same thing with throwing daggers, without spending a feat. A Fighter 1 / blade pact warlock X can also do the same thing while attacking more targets, putting out higher damage per round, and casting EB as an opportunity attack via war caster. Oh, and it also gets near-full casting.

You had something of a point with your second, but don't lie with your first, a throwing dagger rogue would get no OA unless an enemy tried to run past them, wouldn't have the same damage die, wouldn't get to use their bonus action with dex bonus and wouldn't be able to do as well in actual melee.

The second is also wrong but is misundestood. The action surge with one extra attack would lead to, if all hit, 4d10 + 50 +1d4 (but requires second level fighter) once per short rest I think requiring 20 in two stats with only 4 ASIs and that's assuming you got a feat from variant human. Vs 2d10 +1d4 +8d6 +15 whilst being SAD every turn. Nova your build does 74.5 for one turn, whereas this build does 56.5 reliably. Yours drops to 2d10 + 30 + 1d4 after action surge 43.5. On OA from polearm mastery yours gets 1d10 + 10 according to dev tweet saying you have to use the polearm. Whereas mine gets 1d10 + 5 + 8d6. 15.5 vs 39.5. If you somehow managed to get such amazing stats to get two 20s and warcaster and PM on 4 ASIs (not possible with points buy but let's humour you) on other OAs you get 4d10 + 20 giving 42. For 2.5 difference that requires either an idiot foe or a BM to use commanding strike on you. Hex helps your numbers but can't be transferred in the attack chain. Mine will also have a huge advantage in getting two big stats on yours due to the rogue ASI difference and requiring one feat. Yours has better armour and a fighting style but the difference is still huge. (Aldo if invocations require character level then my build goes up 1d6 and gains access to the archetype capstone of rogues, two turns on the first turn, amazing power on the first turn, or the ATs that I can never remember.) Whilst yours is a better caster, it may as well focus on casting for all turns you don't action surge on because, 1.5 damage difference isn't worth the difference and mine is a much better skill monkey and can use cunning action.

In short. No they can't do the same thing.