Best Frenzy Changes/Fixes

[R.Shackleford]

Frenzy is perhaps one of the most hated class features in 5e so I would like to see what people have done to change it or fix it.

Mine, that I posted in another thread that had nothing to do with Barbarians...

Ending Frenzy:
When you end your frenzy you must succeed on a DC 15 (16 or 17?) Con Save or gain a level of exhaustion. If you have rages remaining for the day you have advantage on the roll. During a short rest you may attempt this saving throw again to reduce the level of exhaustion by 1, to a minimum of 1.

I don't have the DC worked out but the bones of the feature is there.

[Kryx]

Frenzy doesn't cost a bonus action (So it actually helps people with Polearm/GWM)
Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy. (Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?406548-Berserker-Better-for-a-Featless-Build&p=19242234#post19242234))

[Nifft]

Would it hurt anything to just have the exhaustion from Frenzy wear off after 5 minutes?

It would still have the desired tactical combat effect ("be sure to FINISH THEM or you're screwed for the rest of the encounter") without the undesired strategic effect ("use your class feature once and you're screwed for the rest of the day").

[R.Shackleford]

Would it hurt anything to just have the exhaustion from Frenzy wear off after 5 minutes?

It would still have the desired tactical combat effect ("be sure to FINISH THEM or you're screwed for the rest of the encounter") without the undesired strategic effect ("use your class feature once and you're screwed for the rest of the day").

I would just up it to 1 hour, but don't require a short rest, however if you frenzy again then the levels stack and your hour is reset with the new exhaustion level.

[Naanomi]

Yeah enter frenzy as free action and first frenzy per long rest doesn't give exahustion has been working well at our table

[Kryx]

Frenzy as a free action is a 14% increase in DPR for GWM and 23-24% for Polearm+GWM.
Based on that and the fact that frenzy is limited I think allowing it as a free action is acceptable.

Though I think Frenzy's exhaustion recovery should follow the normal recovery rules, except: "Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy. Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?406548-Berserker-Better-for-a-Featless-Build&p=19242234#post19242234)"

[N810]

(Homebrew rules)
I think my DM only hands out exhaustion after I have used all of my frenzies,
and then exhaustion goes away after a long rest.
oh also it's a free action to activate frenzy/rage/reckless. :redcloak:

Edit: fixed

[Kryx]

also it's a free action to activate frenzy/rage/reckless. :redcloak:
Frenzy is not free to use the benefit of:

FRENZY
Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level. you can go into a frenzy when you rage. if you do so, for the duration of your rage you can make a single melee weapon attack as a bonus action on each of your turns after this one. When your rage ends, you suffer one level of exhaustion (as described in appendix A).

[TurboGhast]

Frenzy costs an additional rage use to activate, instead of inflicting exhaustion when it ends. Level 20 Barbarians can rage infinitely, but only frenzy 3 times per day.

This fix is meant to keep it a strategic choice of whether to frenzy or not, while making sure that frenzy doesn't make you near useless after using it.

[Malifice]

I just use the 1/day frenzy doesn't exhaust you.

[Tarvil]

I like the exhaustion effect with frenzy, so I thought making it more powerful instead of less problematic. Maybe Frenzy would give Barbarian something like... extra action each turn? Yes, it's strong as hell, but it would be still 1-2 per day ability, with serious consequences if abused.

[Nowhere Girl]

I have to wonder if simply removing the exhaustion thing entirely wouldn't be the best fix?

I mean, is frenzy really so amazing that it needs an exhaustion mechanic? A bonus attack is nice, sure, but Polearm Master says "hi" on that front, and the Bearbarian ability to say "I RESIST ALL OF THE DAMAGE" is a pretty amazing thing frenzy barbarians will never have.

[Kryx]

I have to wonder if simply removing the exhaustion thing entirely wouldn't be the best fix?
For GWM Frenzy adds about 20% DPR. For Polearm+GWM Frenzy is about 8%. GWM is ok, but Polearm+GWM isn't - especially for the cost of exhaustion.
Exhaustion is not as bad as people think. The rules basically limit it to once per day or more if you really want to push it.

The fix is to make frenzy valuable (remove bonus action) and allow it to be used once or twice without being so detrimental.

My houserule for frenzy: "Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy. "

[Kryx]

Sorry, I redid my math. Polearm+GWM frenzy is worth about 30% more DPR than normal for 1 minute - that's insane. Before the value was about 4% at best.

The Polearm+GWM Barbarian without Frenzying does ~40-50% more DPR than a Polearm+GWM Fighter.. Adjusting frenzy to be better would just make it ~50-60%

I think the base barbarian does a bit too much damage. Allowing frenzy freely should be ok if the base DPR isn't so high. For instance reducing the rage damage hugely makes a difference.

Though I'm not sure the route to go here...

[TopCheese]

Sorry, I redid my math. Polearm+GWM frenzy is worth about 30% more DPR than normal for 1 minute - that's insane. Before the value was about 4% at best.

The Polearm+GWM Barbarian without Frenzying does ~40-50% more DPR than a Polearm+GWM Fighter.. Adjusting frenzy to be better would just make it ~50-60%

I think the base barbarian does a bit too much damage. Allowing frenzy freely should be ok if the base DPR isn't so high. For instance reducing the rage damage hugely makes a difference.

Though I'm not sure the route to go here...

Frenzy could just be *bonus action attack: 1d6+str damage*

Better than polearm damage wise but not insanely more powerful.

You could drop the exhaustion.

[Nowhere Girl]

For GWM Frenzy adds about 20% DPR. For Polearm+GWM Frenzy is about 8%. GWM is ok, but Polearm+GWM isn't - especially for the cost of exhaustion.

What I mean is you don't need frenzy for an extra attack. You can just go totem, get resistance to ALL OF THE DAMAGE FOREVER (except psychic), and use a polearm to get a bonus action attack as well. Plus reach and a reaction attack against anyone entering your reach.

I really don't see why frenzy needs exhaustion at all. Can anyone actually sell me on the need for exhaustion post-frenzy? My instinct would be to houserule it out entirely.

[Malifice]

What I mean is you don't need frenzy for an extra attack. You can just go totem, get resistance to ALL OF THE DAMAGE FOREVER (except psychic), and use a polearm to get a bonus action attack as well. Plus reach and a reaction attack against anyone entering your reach.

I really don't see why frenzy needs exhaustion at all. Can anyone actually sell me on the need for exhaustion post-frenzy? My instinct would be to houserule it out entirely.

Compare (Barb 4) Bear totem + Polearm master + halberd (against) Frenzy + GWM feat + greataxe.

2 x (d12+str+12) at +0 (with advantage). Half damage from melee weapons. 43 DPR (if both hit)

vs

1 x(d10+str+2) at +5 (with advantage) and 1 x (1d4+str+2) bonus attack at +5 with advantage. Half damage from everything barring psychic; free reaction attack at d10+str+2. 28.5 DPR (if all three hit). Reach.

Bear totem is totally overrated in my view. The additional damage types it coveres are not encountered all that often (most damage is B, P or S).

It's one great ability is that you can use it in heavy armor unlike normal rage.

[Nowhere Girl]

Compare (Barb 4) Bear totem + Polearm master + halberd (against) Frenzy + GWM feat + greataxe.

2 x (d12+str+12) at +0 (with advantage). Half damage from melee weapons. 43 DPR (if both hit)

vs

1 x(d10+str+2) at +5 (with advantage) and 1 x (1d4+str+2) bonus attack at +5 with advantage. Half damage from everything barring psychic; free reaction attack at d10+str+2. 28.5 DPR (if all three hit). Reach.

Bear totem is totally overrated in my view. The additional damage types it coveres are not encountered all that often (most damage is B, P or S).

It's one great ability is that you can use it in heavy armor unlike normal rage.

That's great, but I have bad news that blows your whole argument apart:

Halberds and glaives work with Great Weapon Master, too. Yeah, you can take both. Oops.

Meanwhile, frenzy barbarians completely suck all the way until level 15, and they only stop sucking then if your GM is kind enough to allow you to rage endlessly forever.

[Malifice]

That's great, but I have bad news that blows your whole argument apart:

Halberds and glaives work with Great Weapon Master, too. Yeah, you can take both. Oops.

Yes they can. But we're not comparing a Barbarian 4 with a Barbarian 8. We're comparing like with like.


Meanwhile, frenzy barbarians completely suck all the way until level 15, and they only stop sucking then if your GM is kind enough to allow you to rage endlessly forever.

They really truly dont suck that bad. An extra attack each round at (1d12+15) with advantage is the absolute balls.

I do have an issue with Frenzy giving you exhaustion though. I allow it to be used 1/ long rest without exhaustion. You get one nova per day for free, but the rest tire you out.

[Strill]

Honestly? I like frenzy as written.

Exhaustion isn't as crippling as it seems at first glance, because you gotta remember two things:

Multiple sources of disadvantage or advantage do not stack, ever.
If you ever have advantage and disadvantage on a d20 roll, they cancel each other out.

One level of exhaustion gives you disadvantage on ability checks, which sucks. You are also a barbarian. Feral Instinct gives you permanent advantage on initiative checks at 7th level, and you have advantage on strength checks whenever you are raging (whether you are frenzied or not). Even if it didn't cost exhaustion, and you were just limited to once per day, it would still be crap compared to Wolf totem or Bear totem.

[Malifice]

Even if it didn't cost exhaustion, and you were just limited to once per day, it would still be crap compared to Wolf totem or Bear totem.

Wolf totem is seriously under rated.

[Strill]

Wolf totem is seriously under rated.

Seriously. It's probably the best class feature in the game from levels 1-4.

[JoeJ]

What AC are you assuming? The amount of extra damage you get from GWM depends on that; a 4th level barbarian with 16 Strength and a great axe does less damage against AC 16 or better with GWM than without it.

Without GWM, a 4th level berserker with 16 Strength and a great axe does (6.5 + 2 + Strength) x 2, or (2 x Strength) + 17 on a hit while using frenzy.

A 4th level totem warrior with 16 Strength, the Polearm Master feat, and a halberd does (5.5 + 2 + Strength) + (2.5 + 2 + Strength), or (2 x Strength) + 12 on a hit.

That's an advantage of (5 x chance of hitting) dpr for the berserker, with no feats invested vs. one feat for the totem warrior.

edit: I also didn't take into account criticals, although there too the advantage would go to the berserker because of the larger weapon damage die.

(I'd still rather play the totem warrior, though, because I like the cool animal powers.)

[Malifice]

What AC are you assuming? The amount of extra damage you get from GWM depends on that; a 4th level barbarian with 16 Strength and a great axe does less damage against AC 16 or better with GWM than without it.

Without GWM, a 4th level berserker with 16 Strength and a great axe does (6.5 + 2 + Strength) x 2, or (2 x Strength) + 17 on a hit while using frenzy.

A 4th level totem warrior with 16 Strength, the Polearm Master feat, and a halberd does (5.5 + 2 + Strength) + (2.5 + 2 + Strength), or (2 x Strength) + 12 on a hit.

That's an advantage of (5 x chance of hitting) dpr for the berserker, with no feats invested vs. one feat for the totem warrior.

(I'd still rather play the totem warrior, though, because I like the cool animal powers.)

GWM + berserker has much higher DPR than polearm master + bear.

I mean, sure the polearm master can pick up GWM at 8th level. The Berserker gets a free 'Robilars gambit' reaction attack himself by virtue of the path ability to compensate for the reaction attack of the polearm master at around the same level (and has that feat slot free for the extra +2 to Str).

I dont like the auto cripple of the frenzy ability though. It makes berserk barbarians suck at anything outside of combat, and that is a feature I strongly dislike.

It balances better when you give them 1 exhaustion free frenzy per day. Quick, no fuss, and protects player choice.

[Kryx]

Let me be a bit more clear with my numbers by providing graphs.

The Barbarian does more damage than the Fighter by a significant amount.

http://i.imgur.com/0djpIby.png
This is with -5/+10. You can see that the Polearm+GWM fighter does less damage than the Barbarian even when the Barbarian isn't raging. In that case the Barbarian is trading AC for additional offence, but they resist damage so that tradeoff cost is heavily muted.

The numbers change only slightly by removing -5/+10.

I find this troubling.

Seemingly the balance should be that a barbarian does about ~90% the damage of a fighter normally, and then ~110% while raging and maybe ~130% while frenzying.
Though providing advantage to hit you does change those numbers... maybe 100, 120, 140. Though I guess that is where the numbers currently are for the most part (off by maybe 10% on the barbarian's favor)
The numbers are better without -5/+10

[Malifice]

Let me be a bit more clear with my numbers by providing graphs.

The Barbarian does more damage than the Fighter by a significant amount.

http://i.imgur.com/0djpIby.png
This is with -5/+10. You can see that the Polearm+GWM fighter does less damage than the Barbarian even when the Barbarian isn't raging. In that case the Barbarian is trading AC for additional offence, but they resist damage so that tradeoff cost is heavily muted.

The numbers change only slightly by removing -5/+10.

I find this troubling.

Seemingly the balance should be that a barbarian does about ~90% the damage of a fighter normally, and then ~110% while raging and maybe ~130% while frenzying.
Though providing advantage to hit you does change those numbers... maybe 100, 120, 140. Though I guess that is where the numbers currently are for the most part (off by maybe 10% on the barbarian's favor)
The numbers are better without -5/+10

Do these numbers include fighter action surge and sup dice?

[Kryx]

Do these numbers include fighter action surge and sup dice?
The numbers I posted earlier actually had less DPR than they should've for the Barbarian as I put my lower rage damage houserule over to "RAW" - the numbers are meant to be the RAW numbers.
The numbers do account for normal superiority dice damage. I calculate the total damage and divide it by 24 round in a day - though I'm starting to mix a bit here as the barbarian doesn't divide total uses by rounds per day (I'll fix this)
This doesn't account for tripping or other good situations which would indeed boost the DPR.

So here are the numbers assuming a fighter who is getting sup damage dice every round (bad assumption, but you'll see the point).
http://i.imgur.com/LVOIGrE.png
Action surge is equivalent to Reckless Attacking Rage, but raging lasts a minute (more later) while action sure is once (multiple later). Frenzy does nothing as expected.

I'll instead make some numbers assuming he uses trip or riposte (likely trip has better numbers)

[PoeticDwarf]

Frenzy is perhaps one of the most hated class features in 5e so I would like to see what people have done to change it or fix it.

Mine, that I posted in another thread that had nothing to do with Barbarians...

Ending Frenzy:
When you end your frenzy you must succeed on a DC 15 (16 or 17?) Con Save or gain a level of exhaustion. If you have rages remaining for the day you have advantage on the roll. During a short rest you may attempt this saving throw again to reduce the level of exhaustion by 1, to a minimum of 1.

I don't have the DC worked out but the bones of the feature is there.
The DC 15 con save seems low. A level 20 barbarian with as many frenzies as he wants has a +13 con save, with lucky #dexbased (or the luck feat) it maybe happens once per 50 days. I would say that the DC is 15 and the save goes up with 5 every time you end a frenzy that day again. If you try to reduce the level of exhaustion with a short rest the DC also goes up with 5.

[TopCheese]

The DC 15 con save seems low. A level 20 barbarian with as many frenzies as he wants has a +13 con save, with lucky #dexbased (or the luck feat) it maybe happens once per 50 days. I would say that the DC is 15 and the save goes up with 5 every time you end a frenzy that day again. If you try to reduce the level of exhaustion with a short rest the DC also goes up with 5.

I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Level 20 should have a very very powerful feature. Druids become onions and clerics call down the wrath of deities... So supersaiyan frenzy is ok.

[metaridley18]

Our DM just ruled that Frenzy allows our barbarian to ignore any levels of exhaustion he's already accumulated. In all other ways it's the same.

Mechanically it ends up working well: he can use it multiple times in a day if he wants, but the 'perpetual' limit is once a day, otherwise he ends up building levels of exhaustion faster than they can dissipate. He can nova really hard in one day, but then he gets progressively weaker and needs a very long rest to become useful again.

Even without that rule, as someone else pointed out, getting an extra attack at full damage (2d6+Str+2 or 1d12+Str+2 for most Barbs) is a Very Big Deal. I don't think Frenzy as written is nearly as bad as it looks on paper.

[Strill]

I calculate the total damage and divide it by 24 round in a dayAnd did you account for advantage from Trip Attack?

[Kryx]

And did you account for advantage from Trip Attack?
I recalculate everything to include it. I also more accurately calculated chance to kill based on DMG health
I assume 25 rounds (5 encounters of 5 rounds each) and 2 short rests.

I'll post the updated numbers in a bit, or you can view them on the spreadsheet. I'm still working on them - I believe the houserules ones are correct, I'll have to verify the RAW ones again.

[Malifice]

The numbers I posted earlier actually had less DPR than they should've for the Barbarian as I put my lower rage damage houserule over to "RAW" - the numbers are meant to be the RAW numbers.
The numbers do account for normal superiority dice damage. I calculate the total damage and divide it by 24 round in a day - though I'm starting to mix a bit here as the barbarian doesn't divide total uses by rounds per day (I'll fix this)
This doesn't account for tripping or other good situations which would indeed boost the DPR.

So here are the numbers assuming a fighter who is getting sup damage dice every round (bad assumption, but you'll see the point).
http://i.imgur.com/LVOIGrE.png
Action surge is equivalent to Reckless Attacking Rage, but raging lasts a minute (more later) while action sure is once (multiple later). Frenzy does nothing as expected.

I'll instead make some numbers assuming he uses trip or riposte (likely trip has better numbers)

I don't think those numbers are accurate.

Have you factored 3 action surges and 12 dice per AD?

And the massive DPR spike of precise strike plus GWM?

[Kryx]

I don't think those numbers are accurate.

Have you factored 3 action surges and 12 dice per AD?

And the massive DPR spike of precise strike plus GWM?
As I said above I recalculated all the numbers. I'll post them soon when I'm confident in the math.
I believe trip is a better dpr increase than precise strike.

[Malifice]

As I said above I recalculated all the numbers. I'll post them soon when I'm confident in the math.
I believe trip is a better dpr increase than precise strike.

You combine them. You switch GWMs plus 10 damage on, then swing. If you hit you deal (2d6+13) damage, expend a dice adding a d8 to that damage, and force the save vs being tripped. If you miss, you instead expand the dice to add to the attack roll to turn it into a hit (dealing 2d6+13). With such reliable and high damage, you get the bonus action cleave from GWM most turns (and this stacks with action surge but not with frenzy).

[Kryx]

Tripping and then getting 3 attacks at advantage (or 7 with action surge, which is what I assume for all possible uses of action surge) is significantly better than ensuring that one hit.

There is no way precise would have higher dpr.

[Malifice]

Tripping and then getting 3 attacks at advantage (or 7 with action surge, which is what I assume for all possible uses of action surge) is significantly better than ensuring that one hit.

There is no way precise would have higher dpr.

You're looking at it in an either or binary sense.

If you miss you trigger precise. If you hit you trigger tripping. The d8 dice almost cancels out the -5 from GWM. Rinse and repeat till the creature dies or is prone.

Of course you would rather hit and trip over miss and precise. But in practice you roll the dice and then decide what to do after seeing the result. In practice it's devastating.

When crunching the numbers you need to factor the above in.

[Coidzor]

The numbers I posted earlier actually had less DPR than they should've for the Barbarian as I put my lower rage damage houserule over to "RAW" - the numbers are meant to be the RAW numbers.

Why do you have a houserule to lower rage damage? :smallconfused:

[Kryx]

You're looking at it in an either or binary sense.

If you miss you trigger precise. If you hit you trigger tripping. The d8 dice almost cancels out the -5 from GWM. Rinse and repeat till the creature dies or is prone.
Over 25 rounds there are 12-18 superiority dice (depending on level).
Those 12-18 dice are most efficiently spent on tripping. Precise can help, but hitting on 1 attack does not compare to tripping and getting advantage on the rest.

If we were comparing over less rounds (not wise) then sure precise would be an optional, but if there are more rounds than dice then the most efficient usage for DPR is to attempt to trip.



Of course you would rather hit and trip over miss and precise. But in practice you roll the dice and then decide what to do after seeing the result. In practice it's devastating.

When crunching the numbers you need to factor the above in.
It's still worse over a whole day than always tripping. It allows reliable burst damage on a boss, sure, but that's not what DPR is about. DPR is the most damage over time - at which tripping is the best option.
What you're looking for is a way to visualize burst damage.




Why do you have a houserule to lower rage damage? :smallconfused:
My houserules are based on numbers. My numbers have shown barbarians to be the top DPR class by a significantly margin for a while. My recent adjustments to calculating fighters have helped fighter DPR, but Barbarian still wins.
It's only 1 damage off the normal rage damage and actually helps the balance a lot.

[Malifice]

Over 25 rounds there are 12-18 superiority dice (depending on level).
Those 12-18 dice are most efficiently spent on tripping. Precise can help, but hitting on 1 attack does not compare to tripping and getting advantage on the rest.

If we were comparing over less rounds (not wise) then sure precise would be an optional, but if there are more rounds than dice then the most efficient usage for DPR is to attempt to trip.



It's still worse over a whole day than always tripping. It allows reliable burst damage on a boss, sure, but that's not what DPR is about. DPR is the most damage over time - at which tripping is the best option.
What you're looking for is a way to visualize burst damage.




My houserules are based on numbers. My numbers have shown barbarians to be the top DPR class by a significantly margin for a while. My recent adjustments to calculating fighters have helped fighter DPR, but Barbarian still wins.
It's only 1 damage off the normal rage damage and actually helps the balance a lot.

You're reducing it to a binary argument. Again.

I agree tripping is better. But you don't always hit - in those cases precise is better as it turns 0 damage into 20 damage.

[Kryx]

You're reducing it to a binary argument. Again.

I agree tripping is better. But you don't always hit - in those cases precise is better as it turns 0 damage into 20 damage.
It's a matter of resources. Again. (we can both be passive aggressive, but that's really unnecessary)

If there were more dice than rounds then sure you could spend those dice doing other things, but currently the most efficient DPR choice is tripping. If a fighter can spend all 18 dice on the most efficient option then he should do that instead of spending 10 on the best option and 8 on a worse DPR option.

[Malifice]

It's a matter of resources. Again. (we can both be passive aggressive, but that's really unnecessary)

If there were more dice than rounds then sure you could spend those dice doing other things, but currently the most efficient DPR choice is tripping. If a fighter can spend all 18 dice on the most efficient option then he should do that instead of spending 10 on the best option and 8 on a worse DPR option.

Mate I agree. It's just that tripping won't always be available. If the fighter is lucky enough to hit, then yes trip is better. But you also have to factor into your numbers that 4.5 rolls that miss, don't (assuming a d8).

[Strill]

Mate I agree. It's just that tripping won't always be available. If the fighter is lucky enough to hit, then yes trip is better. But you also have to factor into your numbers that 4.5 rolls that miss, don't (assuming a d8).

His point is that it doesn't matter that tripping won't be available. You're not in any rush to spend your dice. There will be plenty more rounds during which you can spend your dice, even if you do miss.

[Kryx]

Mate I agree. It's just that tripping won't always be available.
With RAW (using -5/+10) and a hit chance of 40% that is indeed correct.
Even then though over 25 rounds it's more efficient to miss that attack and not trip than it is to ensure that the attack hits.

That's not how it'd work in practice as you'd want to ensure you hit the boss so you can trip him, but that's how it works for DPR as over 25 rounds its more efficient to use ALL dice for tripping than it is to spend some on precise.




But you also have to factor into your numbers that 4.5 rolls that miss, don't (assuming a d8)
My trip numbers do indeed include miss chance, chance to prone, etc.

[Malifice]

With RAW (using -5/+10) and a hit chance of 40% that is indeed correct.
Even then though over 25 rounds it's more efficient to miss that attack and not trip than it is to ensure that the attack hits.

That's not how it'd work in practice as you'd want to ensure you hit the boss so you can trip him, but that's how it works for DPR as over 25 rounds its more efficient to use ALL dice for tripping than it is to spend some on precise.




My trip numbers do indeed include miss chance, chance to prone, etc.

I look at it with a single roll.

Example (vs AC 15, assuming hit bonus of +5). With GWM on, and precise and tripping attack, a roll of 1-10 misses, a roll of 10.5-14 hits (thanks to precise strike), and a roll of 15-19 deals extra damage and possibly trips. A 20 is a crit.

How do you factor in advantage on subsequent attacks from tripping in your numbers?

[Kryx]

I look at it with a single roll.

Example (vs AC 15, assuming hit bonus of +5). With GWM on, and precise and tripping attack, a roll of 1-10 misses, a roll of 10.5-14 hits (thanks to precise strike), and a roll of 15-19 deals extra damage and possibly trips. A 20 is a crit.

How do you factor in advantage on subsequent attacks from tripping in your numbers?
You can see the numbers on google docs. The houserules fighter (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1301284741) is the most up to date. I need to update the RAW Fighter.

The Fighter has 3 states:

normal - the amount of rounds he's not using his dice to trip or action surge.
tripping - the amount of rounds he's using his Superiority dice to trip.
action surging - the amount of rounds he's using his action surge.


Lets assume 20 for ease. At 20 a fighter has 6 action surge uses and 18 Superiority dice. That's 3x the amount of dice as action surge uses so I assume action surge is always used during a round where the enemy is tripped (tripping is ~39% chance so that assumption is ok).
So at 20 he's spending 6 rounds tripping and action surging (112.4 DPR), he's spending 12 rounds tripping (49.9 DPR), and 7 rounds normal attacking (41.1 DPR). For a total of .24*112.4 + .48*49.9 + .28*41.1 = 26.976 + 23.952 + 11.508 = 62.4 DPR.

Enemy HP at 20 is around 302 based on the DMG's table and my multiplier that uses a value about 80% of that table (as it estimates high for resistances and other things). I use this to calculate the chance to kill something for GWM's sake. I assume the average enemy is around 85% HP for the sake of "chance to kill".

Enemy AC is 19 at 20.

Normal hit chance is 65%. Hit chance on advantage is 88%. With prone being likely 39% of the time that's an average 74% chance to hit (.65*.61 + .88*.39). For Action surging since prone chance is above the amount of time he can action surge I assume action surge is always chosen when the enemy is prone and therefore has the 88% chance to hit, which alters GWM chances as well. I do the same stuff with crit.


I gotta get back to work. You can see this on my spreadsheet - please do point out any errors.

[Hawkstar]

Compare (Barb 4) Bear totem + Polearm master + halberd (against) Frenzy + GWM feat + greataxe.

2 x (d12+str+12) at +0 (with advantage). Half damage from melee weapons. 43 DPR (if both hit)
This is not a given, and invalidates the whole damn argument you're trying to make.

GWM is not +10 Per Hit. You have to account for accuracy.

[Nowhere Girl]

Every time I look in this thread, I am just left even more certain that the best fix to frenzy is just to pick up a pen and cross out the section about exhaustion post-frenzy. It is completely unnecessary.

[Malifice]

This is not a given, and invalidates the whole damn argument you're trying to make.

GWM is not +10 Per Hit. You have to account for accuracy.

Against AC 15 (2x1d12+15 at +0) is better than (1d1d10+5 and 1d4+5 at+5), particularly with advantage.

[Theodoxus]

Every time I look in this thread, I am just left even more certain that the best fix to frenzy is just to pick up a pen and cross out the section about exhaustion post-frenzy. It is completely unnecessary.

If I could "Like" your post, I totally would.

Honestly, I just think exhaustion as a mechanic wasn't well thought out - as I've noted before, being able to be on your deathbed (1 HP after being knocked out, perhaps even with 2 missed death saves) to fully recovered with 8 hours of rest, but you swing your big ole axe as a bonus attack for a minute and you're wiped for the whole day? Um, break verisimilitude much?

I'd prefer fixing that, tbh, and then throw it on more class abilities that are similar to Frenzy.

Definitely have exhaustion be reduced 1 level on a short rest. Probably add a level of exhaustion after all your Action Surges are used up. Add a level of exhaustion for every minute of combat (10 rounds) spent taking an attack action. (Probably won't come up very often, given the speed of combat, but it would give classes that don't normally need a short rest (rogue) a reason to take a breather... I'm sure there's others.

[TopCheese]

If I could "Like" your post, I totally would.

Honestly, I just think exhaustion as a mechanic wasn't well thought out - as I've noted before, being able to be on your deathbed (1 HP after being knocked out, perhaps even with 2 missed death saves) to fully recovered with 8 hours of rest, but you swing your big ole axe as a bonus attack for a minute and you're wiped for the whole day? Um, break verisimilitude much?

I'd prefer fixing that, tbh, and then throw it on more class abilities that are similar to Frenzy.

Definitely have exhaustion be reduced 1 level on a short rest. Probably add a level of exhaustion after all your Action Surges are used up. Add a level of exhaustion for every minute of combat (10 rounds) spent taking an attack action. (Probably won't come up very often, given the speed of combat, but it would give classes that don't normally need a short rest (rogue) a reason to take a breather... I'm sure there's others.

Friend and I, back during the playtest era, thought that giving martials more hit dice than normal and then allowing them to spend those hit dice on healing and maneuvers would be a great mechanic. So many (depending on class) would be replenished during a short rest.

Frenzy could be worth 2 hit dice, power attack could be worth a variable amount, and even give the Rogue some way of boosting sneak attack (blinding target, etc) by expending energy.

I might actually look into this idea again.

Edit

If I could upvote both posts I totally would.

[N810]

How about you are only get exhausted from Frenzy if you are using GWM and/or a pole arm. :smallwink:

[Nowhere Girl]

If I could "Like" your post, I totally would.

Honestly, I just think exhaustion as a mechanic wasn't well thought out - as I've noted before, being able to be on your deathbed (1 HP after being knocked out, perhaps even with 2 missed death saves) to fully recovered with 8 hours of rest, but you swing your big ole axe as a bonus attack for a minute and you're wiped for the whole day? Um, break verisimilitude much?

I'd prefer fixing that, tbh, and then throw it on more class abilities that are similar to Frenzy.

Definitely have exhaustion be reduced 1 level on a short rest. Probably add a level of exhaustion after all your Action Surges are used up. Add a level of exhaustion for every minute of combat (10 rounds) spent taking an attack action. (Probably won't come up very often, given the speed of combat, but it would give classes that don't normally need a short rest (rogue) a reason to take a breather... I'm sure there's others.

You could do all of that, for sure ... I personally wouldn't, but I could see the argument. However, I agree with your fix to exhaustion, having it reduced by a level after a Short Rest. I'd probably have it reduced by several levels with a Long Rest, or maybe just wiped out entirely.

With Path of the Berserker barbarians, my question is basically this: "Was there some significant advantage frenzy gave them over Totem barbarians that warranted a counter-balancing nerf?" Because if there was, I just don't see it. Totem abilities are every bit as good as Berserker abilities, or in some cases arguably even superior. And while an extra attack with a bonus action is nice, there are feats that can produce that as well (sure, at a smaller damage die, but still), which significantly offsets what is probably frenzy's biggest thing. It's not as if Berserker barbarians can take a feat to get something that's nearly equivalent to "resist all of the damage forever except psychic."

I don't think the decision to impose exhaustion on Berserker barbarians was a carefully reasoned one. I don't think they were looking for a way to balance a too-powerful mechanic. I think someone just remembered that barbarians got tired after a rage in 3x and said, "Hey, shouldn't we bring that thing back?" And then they looked at frenzy and said, "Oh, I bet you'd get tired after a frenzy, because frenzying should be harder than raging because frenzying and stuff. Let's make frenzy cause exhaustion!"

And then they all went out for donuts.

[nolas85]

Thoughts on ruling that while frenzied, barbarians ignore penalties from exhaustion and exhaustion levels gained by frenzy reset after a long rest? This would make exhaustion effects cumulative outside of combat hampering roleplaying significantly at the tradeoff of better combat capability. I feel this makes more sense with the testosterone rage that frenzy seems to be in my mind.

[Lombra]

I know that this isn't the place for me... but frenzy works wonderfully as it is... never loose rage again just because that guy is one dash away, heal up and keep raging, shove/grapple and keep raging. You guys have no idea on how to play a berserker and are too scared of exhaustion, which only influences badly the barbarian from exhaustion 4 and above.

[nolas85]

Our DM just ruled that Frenzy allows our barbarian to ignore any levels of exhaustion he's already accumulated. In all other ways it's the same.

Mechanically it ends up working well: he can use it multiple times in a day if he wants, but the 'perpetual' limit is once a day, otherwise he ends up building levels of exhaustion faster than they can dissipate. He can nova really hard in one day, but then he gets progressively weaker and needs a very long rest to become useful again.

Even without that rule, as someone else pointed out, getting an extra attack at full damage (2d6+Str+2 or 1d12+Str+2 for most Barbs) is a Very Big Deal. I don't think Frenzy as written is nearly as bad as it looks on paper.

Totally just noticed this. I like the mechanic as my earlier post mentions. I do think that the limitation is rather huge because after the first encounter, Frenzy perpetually counters more of what it means to be a barbarian. Additionally, I feel like everybody is discounting the amazing amount of control a barbarian can have on a fight. For the first encounter of the day, a frenzy barbarian can equal a wolf totem barbarian. Worried about getting advantage? ok well how about you shove (with advantage), knock the enemy prone, and then use your frenzy bonus action to attack in addition to giving every other melee character advantage.

The problem, as has been pointed out earlier, is that the exhaustion from frenzy reduces your capabilities every subsequent combat. After the first combat you negate the benefits of rage and feral instinct, after the second combat you negate fast movement, after the third combat you negate reckless attack (actually need it to be normal) and danger sense....I get that an extra attack can be powerful but is it really worth all of those penalties? Mind you it's an extra weapon attack which means it's limited in what you can do. Meanwhile a totem barb is laughing as they grapple two opponents continually because they always have advantage and give the entire party advantage in the process or soak up enough damage for 2.5 players.

[R.Shackleford]

Frenzy gives you, depending on level, extra attack or extra attack 2 that you can use for 1 minute at a time max.

There is no reason this should exhaust the barbarian when a lot of classes gain extra attack, like 2 levels later and the Fighter gains extra attack 2 and 3... And no one gains exhaustion from being able to make those extra attacks all day long.

Within the game, it makes very little sensearly that only the barbarian is punished.

The best fix would be to just remove the exhaustion.

Want to have a draw back to using Frenzy? Say you lose a hit dice or two when you frenzy.

"Whenever you go into rage you may expend a hit dicell in order to be able to make an additional attack..."

[Zman]

What necromancy is this?!

And yes, just remove exhaustion, and yes it's balanced well enough. I also require each attack while Frenzied to be reckless, it just feels right.

[Kryx]

You could instead remove the bonus action cost which keeps it viable with the standard high damage builds. Keep exhaustion.

I also add this: "Once per day when you finish a long rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy"

I'd also recommend making charger a default option to all players. Helps Barbarians never lose rage:

When you use your action to Dash, you can use a bonus action to make one melee weapon attack or to shove a creature. If you move at least 10ft. in a straight line immediately before taking this bonus action, you either gain a +5 bonus to the attack's damage roll or push the target up to 10 feet away from you (if you succeed in pushing).

[Giant2005]

Upon activating Frenzy, I give players a choice of what to pay for their Frenzy with: either 1 level of exhaustion as usual, or 1 of their remaining uses of Rage.

[Sindeloke]

I'd also recommend making charger a default option to all players. Helps Barbarians never lose rage: [Charge feat as baseline]

We just fixed Rage at the source; it applies its damage bonus to thrown weapons and doubles their range, it lasts so long as you a) attack, b) are attacked, c) take damage, d) make a Str/Con check or save.

Hold person is still pretty dangerous, but a bad throw against a web or a mage blinking up to the top of a nearby wall is now, appropriately, fuel for rage rather than a cheap way to end it. Between being rewarded for trying to overcome most obstacles between you and killing somebody, and being able to use javelins or throwing axes in a genuinely useful way, it's rare for an enemy to waste a barb's rage without deliberate effort.

Secondary effect, rage becomes a useful exploration tool, meaningfully granting advantage when doors need to be broken down or a river needs to be swum against. You theoretically have the bag-of-rats issue where a barb can just break random crap to spam strength checks, but if you've got that kind of player they could just attack their bag of rats with RAW anyway, and your problem is not actually the rules.

Oh and with frenzy, if you consider the subclass worth salvaging, I agree with the folks saying just drop the exhaustion entirely. I get that the thing is meant to emulate the frenzied berserker and its steep penalties for frenzy, but the whole idea of class features that punish you for using them is some retro nonsense at this point, like negative ability score modifiers and alignment restrictions, and it shouldn't be in the game.

[Kryx]

We just fixed Rage at the source
Charge as a default option isn't meant to fix rage. It's just a nice side effect.
I disliked creatures dashing and running up and doing nothing. Having them make 1 attack was much more enjoyable for PCs and NPCs.



PAM and GWM (the highest damage options) compete with the bonus action. Frenzy would still be a bad choice without exhaustion. That action economy competition has to be resolved for it to be worthwhile.

[R.Shackleford]

You could instead remove the bonus action cost which keeps it viable with the standard high damage builds. Keep exhaustion.

I also add this: "Once per day when you finish a long rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy"

I'd also recommend making charger a default option to all players. Helps Barbarians never lose rage:


Upon activating Frenzy, I give players a choice of what to pay for their Frenzy with: either 1 level of exhaustion as usual, or 1 of their remaining uses of Rage.

Within the game this makes zero sense.

Wouldn't people start getting exhausted after using Extra Attack or Extra Attack 2? Frenzy is giving extra attack 2 levels early (not much) but usable only for a minute a couple times per day.

A level 5 barbarian with the same exact ability scores doesn't get exhausted when using Extra Attack. A character with PAM doesn't get exhausted using their BA attack all day long.

Nah, frenzy's exhaustion just doesn't work within the system as it is presented. It just isn't consistent with the basic rules of the game.

[Kryx]

As I wrote above Frenzy is still not a good option even if you remove exhaustion.

It does nearly nothing for the highest damage builds as a result of it's bonus action cost. Without solving that Frenzy is not a viable option in comparison to PAM/GWM.

[nolas85]

Except that you do more damage than pam/gwm and don't have to wait until lvl 8 to use it

[Kryx]

Except that you do more damage than pam/gwm and don't have to wait until lvl 8 to use it
PAM/GWM can be obtained at level 1 on a VHuman or at 4. Neither way is level 8.

The damage increase from weapon size of 2d6>d10 is lost by the loss of the reaction attack from PAM.

[nolas85]

The reaction attack is great but also situational. It won't always trigger. Also damage on 2d6/1d12 is always higher than 1d4. Lastly, it takes two feats for that to work while the frenzy barb can use one of those to increase his str making him not only hit harder but also more often which is huge when you're taking a -5 penalty to your attack

[Zman]

As I wrote above Frenzy is still not a good option even if you remove exhaustion.

It does nearly nothing for the highest damage builds as a result of it's bonus action cost. Without solving that Frenzy is not a viable option in comparison to PAM/GWM.

But, should it be compared directly to PAM and GWM? Frenzy is a Rage feature that should be balanced against other Rage features such as Bear, Wolf, and Eagle. Also, taking Fenzy is not mutually exclusive with taking PAM or GWM. PAM and GWM are passive damage boosts where Frenzy is an active short term damage boost, one that still works to increase PAM and GWM damage. We need to ask the question, should Frenzy grant a damage boost akin to PAM or GWM, especially if we are using Houserules that bring PAM and or GWM down?

Exhaustion makes Frenzy actively bad, but removing it does allow it to function as intended, a long rest limited use damage boost.


PS I'm really thinking of stealing Charge as game default...

[nolas85]

I think charge is unnecessary and people need to be more creative with keeping rage. You can't reach someone with normal move? Ok why not throw a spear? Unless I recall incorrectly, you need only make an attack against an opponent or be attacked. I think that thinking makes you more viable anyways because you can't forget about range as I did with my s/b paladin

[Kryx]

Exhaustion makes Frenzy actively bad, but removing it does allow it to function as intended, a long rest limited use damage boost.
My point is that intention is flawed when used with the highest damage options (GWM/PAM).
Frenzy adds ~5% to PAM Barbarian.
Frenzy adds ~6-12% to GWM to PAM Barbarian.

[Giant2005]

Within the game this makes zero sense.

Wouldn't people start getting exhausted after using Extra Attack or Extra Attack 2? Frenzy is giving extra attack 2 levels early (not much) but usable only for a minute a couple times per day.

A level 5 barbarian with the same exact ability scores doesn't get exhausted when using Extra Attack. A character with PAM doesn't get exhausted using their BA attack all day long.

Nah, frenzy's exhaustion just doesn't work within the system as it is presented. It just isn't consistent with the basic rules of the game.

Frenzy is swinging 50% to 100% more than someone of your skill and strength is ordinarily capable of doing. It is overclocking your own body.
Those other means of getting extra attacks aren't the same - they are the result of training your body and mind to be faster, stronger, and more precise. They are upgrading the hardware of your own body.

[nolas85]

Following assumptions, str 16 (base) human option pushes that to 17. At lvl 4 PAM gets 2 attacks one at d10 and one at d4. With GWF that's an average of 34 damage with the huge assumption that both hit (5.5+13 and 2.5+13) The frenzy barb also gets two attacks both using d12 and str is one modifier higher because they can increase it at 4th. This totals an average of 41 (6.5+14 and 6.5+14). Thus you see an increase of 20% over PAM. The assumption that both will hit is also crazy but I'm on my phone and don't want to figure out those percentages right now.

[nolas85]

Frenzy is swinging 50% to 100% more than someone of your skill and strength is ordinarily capable of doing. It is overclocking your own body.
Those other means of getting extra attacks aren't the same - they are the result of training your body and mind to be faster, stronger, and more precise. They are upgrading the hardware of your own body.

That still doesn't balance it against any other option and that is the core issue. There is no reason a class ability should detract from every other ability gained by that class and also be out shown by feats.

[Zman]

My point is that intention is flawed when used with the highest damage options (GWM/PAM).
Frenzy adds ~5% to PAM Barbarian.
Frenzy adds ~6-12% to GWM to PAM Barbarian.

I know what your point is, and I'm asking why does Frenzy need to offer significant boosts to a PAM or GWM Barbarian? It wouldn't be the first feature that was less effective when combined with another feature. It does function and add some benefit to those builds, and a very solid short term boost to other builds that aren't relying on their bonus action. If you remove the bonus action cost to Frenzy, PAM and GWM receive a substantially large(in absolute terms) damage boost which is only relatively moderate(in relative terms) when looking at PAM or GWM baseline. I thing we need to look at damage boosts not in terms relative the existing damage of that fighting style, but in either absolute increase terms or relative to the expected median game damage for a martial. Frenzy still adds a small increase in absolute damage to PAM and GWM without blowing the ceiling off expected damage, but removing the bonus action cost then gives a moderate boost to PAM and GWM which does blow expected damage out of the water.

If we shift our paradigm Frenzy looks just fine with exhaustion removed.

[Kryx]

http://i.imgur.com/waM7hm3.png
Full math is available https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1741155585 on lines 83, 107, and 113.

As you can see the difference is practically negligible between polearm and polearm berserker. There is no reason to go berserker unless you're playing level 14+ (where retaliation kicks in).
Pure greatsword berserker also loses until 14.

_______________________________________


I know what your point is, and I'm asking why does Frenzy need to offer significant boosts to a PAM or GWM Barbarian?
Yes. You're offering an archetype that is based on high damage that is completely negated by a feat. The much better option is to go bear and take PAM. It's a worthless option unless you're playing without feats (most games use feats).

[R.Shackleford]

I think charge is unnecessary and people need to be more creative with keeping rage. You can't reach someone with normal move? Ok why not throw a spear? Unless I recall incorrectly, you need only make an attack against an opponent or be attacked. I think that thinking makes you more viable anyways because you can't forget about range as I did with my s/b paladin

It isn't just for the barbarian tho.


Frenzy is swinging 50% to 100% more than someone of your skill and strength is ordinarily capable of doing. It is overclocking your own body.
Those other means of getting extra attacks aren't the same - they are the result of training your body and mind to be faster, stronger, and more precise. They are upgrading the hardware of your own body.

Which is exactly what extra attack , extra attack 2, extra attack 3, PAM, and other additional attacks.

They are all "overclocking" your body compared to a normal person of your race.

Frenzy is no different. Rage already over-clocks your body and doesn't exhaust you.

So no, still makes less than zero sense when you take the rest of the game into account.

[jas61292]

It isn't just for the barbarian tho.



Which is exactly what extra attack , extra attack 2, extra attack 3, PAM, and other additional attacks.

They are all "overclocking" your body compared to a normal person of your race.

Frenzy is no different. Rage already over-clocks your body and doesn't exhaust you.

So no, still makes less than zero sense when you take the rest of the game into account.

You are focused far too much on the mechanics. Yes they all give you the same number of attacks. No, the method in which they do so is not the same. Frenzy does it by pushing your body beyond its limits. Not simply beyond the normal limits of a person, but your own, personal limits. It is clearly different than a fighter who is just trained to be quicker with his attacks.

[nolas85]

Yes they all give you the same number of attacks.

Therein lies the problem. They get the same number of attacks yet the zerker is at a disadvantage compared to EVERYBODY else. You're good for one combat. The second combat, you're not even as good as a baseline fighter.

[R.Shackleford]

You are focused far too much on the mechanics. Yes they all give you the same number of attacks. No, the method in which they do so is not the same. Frenzy does it by pushing your body beyond its limits. Not simply beyond the normal limits of a person, but your own, personal limits. It is clearly different than a fighter who is just trained to be quicker with his attacks.

Actually what brought me here was the thematic implication of Extra Attack, Feat Bonus attacks, and Rage's fluff.

Frenzy = Extra Attacks. There is really no difference when a barbarian swings their sword twice with frenzy and when they do it without it. If you are going to exhaust the barbarian for this then it should be because of rage, not for doing something already do all day.

Everyone wants this mechanic to punish the barbarian for making attacks... For mechanical reasons. Because it seems "unbalanced" (which it aint). I'm looking at it from a in game logical sense first and then mechanics second.

Roleplaying: Makes no sense to give barbarian exhaustion when no one else is punished (including barbarians who are or are not raging) for doing the exact same thing.

[nolas85]

The graph above is wrong for this reason. You're assuming that the frenzy barbarian is doing nothing with the extra feat they have available to them which was used by the PAM/GWF barb. You severely underestimate the advantage +1 to hit has in a system that doesn't have many bonuses in the first place and furthermore when you take a -5 penalty to hit. Additionally, the reaction attack from PAM WILL NOT trigger every round. I used the formula randbetween to generate 25 dice roles (12 rounds). That equated to 24 attacks from the frenzy and 25 from the PAM barb. The frenzy barb hit two more times due to the +1 to hit totaling 266.5 average damage while the PAM barb generated an average of 197.5. To make up the difference, the PAM barb would need to generate 4 additional reaction attacks and hit on ALL of them. There is some statistical variance there due to sample size but not enough to make up the difference.

This was using an opponent with 16 AC (not unreasonable)

[nolas85]

What necromancy is this?!

BTW, sorry to regenerate an apparently dead thread.

[Kryx]

The graph above is wrong for this reason. You're assuming that the frenzy barbarian is doing nothing with the extra feat
I'm assuming the Barbarian took an ability score increase as PAM and GWM are not good options. The +1 to hit is included in those calculations.

Those calculations are correct.

[N810]

What if he took sentinel instead to generate another attack, say about 1/2 of the time.

[Kryx]

What if he too sentinel instead to generate another attack, say about 1/2 of the time.
Sentinel is heavily DM dependent as therefore very difficult to estimate how often it procs.

Barbarian Focused - Some DMs will use the fluff of reckless attack as a lure (see Reckless Attack and Why It's Great (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?494971-Reckless-Attack-and-Why-It-s-Great)) while other GMs will have their creatures figure out that the Barbarian is still rather tanky.
Team Composition - It also entirely depends on team composition - are there other melee allies in the party that are typically hit?
Positioning - Are the turns synced enough that the other melee ally is next to you? Does the enemy attack while adjacent to you, or from the other side?

So an assumption would widely vary.

If I were forced to pick a number based on my experience I'd put Sentinel much lower - probably around 25% of the time. With that estimation it's probably close to +1 to hit and +1 damage. But that estimation is probably not true for all games.

[Zman]

http://i.imgur.com/waM7hm3.png
Full math is available https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1741155585 on lines 83, 107, and 113.

As you can see the difference is practically negligible between polearm and polearm berserker. There is no reason to go berserker unless you're playing level 14+ (where retaliation kicks in).
Pure greatsword berserker also loses until 14.

_______________________________________


Yes. You're offering an archetype that is based on high damage that is completely negated by a feat. The much better option is to go bear and take PAM. It's a worthless option unless you're playing without feats (most games use feats).


Ok, thanks for throwing the graph up there, but I disagree with your conclusions. What would have been very helpful would have been putting a Greatsword Bear Barbarian up there without PAM or GWM as a comparison, if we had done that we would have show how dramatic of a damage boost, +50-100% damage output, Frenzy is. Frenzy, as your graph supports, is a short time massive boost to damage which puts it up there with the best damage dealing feats in the game. And, if a character is a Frenzy barbarian and has one or both of those feats they see a small, but relevant boost to damage.

What I think is the real problem is that using PAM for comparison is a very high damage bar, effectively equaling PAM(Being marginally behind 3-13 and surpassing PAM 14+) is actually a good boost to damage when taken in context of all melee damage methods. PAM deals a bit too much damage, and I know your houserule for it is to remove the Bonus Action attack which IMO will get the job done but might be too far. I've finally decided on how I think PAM's bonus action attack needs to be fixed, by making it a d6 damage with no ability modifier to damage. So instead of adding an attack for d4+Str or 5.5-7.5 Damage, it is only a d6 or 3.5 Damage attack.

Basically the problem isn't that Frenzy isn't good enough on its own, it is, but the point of comparison, PAM, is too good. Even using PAM as a baseline a Frenzy Barbarian does deal more damage while frenzied, and it is the difference between a d4+Str and a D10+Str or 3 Damage, or about 2-2.7 Damage per turn after to hit is calculated. If an archtype that is supposed to be dealing great damage and does that, but is negated by a feat the problem does not lie with the ability, it lies with the feat.

[nolas85]

Alright, here's the math behind it and the assumptions are as follows:
STR 17 human barbarian
Level 4
PAM+GWF feats vs GWF+(+2)STR
using reckless attack
target AC = 16

The PAM+GWF has a 42% chance to hit with advantage due to the +1 bonus (3 str, 3 prof, -5 GWF)

The frenzy barb has a 45.5% chance to hit with advantage due to the +2 bonus (4 str, 3 prof, -5 GWF)

This was found by using the binomdist function in excel set up as follows. =binomdist(1,2,.3,0) and =binomdist(1,2,.35,0) for the PAM and frenzy respectively. This means that we're looking for the chance of 1 success out of 2 trials with a .3 and .35 chance of success for each which is cumulative.

From there it's a matter of averaging the damage per attack based on percent chance to hit. Frenzy averages 20.5 on a hit (6.5 weapon + 4 str + 10 GWF) which becomes 9.3275 for each swing. Multiply this by 2 for 2 attacks and you get 18.655 average damage.

PAM+GWF averages 18.5 damage on the main attack and 15.5 on the bonus attack which equates to 7.77+6.51 (with percentages factored in) for a cumulative total of 14.28. Assuming they get a reaction attack that becomes 22.05 (add another 7.77) which surpasses the frenzy barb.

I think the frenzy barb will dish out more damage in an encounter because you can't expect to get a reaction attack every round. I understand that sentinel makes that more likely if you aren't fighting an intelligent opponent but that also pushes you to 8th level.

At the end of the day, I feel that the two options are just as viable and the situation will determine which is better than the other. I still feel that compounding exhaustion on top of a frenzy barb is unnecessary as it makes PAM+GWF the clear choice instead of one based on flavor.

[Giant2005]

Which is exactly what extra attack , extra attack 2, extra attack 3, PAM, and other additional attacks.

They are all "overclocking" your body compared to a normal person of your race.

Frenzy is no different. Rage already over-clocks your body and doesn't exhaust you.

So no, still makes less than zero sense when you take the rest of the game into account.

Extra Attack, Extra Attack 2, and Extra Attack 3 don't give a level 3 character extra attacks. PAM can, but it does it via very different means - it enhances efficiency (by getting an extra hit out of a single movement) rather than overclocks, and it does less damage as a consequence.
As I said in the cited quote, those means of gaining extra attacks are different - they are due to an increase in skill/strength/talent/whatever. You are essentially saying a sprinter's body shouldn't have any more strain on it for having a good run by overdosing on an adrenaline injection, because sprinters that have trained a whole lot more can achieve similar results without the injection.

[nolas85]

What would have been very helpful would have been putting a Greatsword Bear Barbarian up there without PAM or GWM as a comparison, if we had done that we would have show how dramatic of a damage boost, +50-100% damage output, Frenzy is.

I think the reason we're comparing frenzy to PAM+GWF is because as a bear barb you can pick up those two feats to become more effective than a frenzy barb. That makes any player who picks frenzy as a path one purely based on RP which I'm totally fine with. Hell that's exactly what I did. The problem exists where I'm penalized for actually RPing my barbarian and not trying to min/max.

[nolas85]

it enhances efficiency (by getting an extra hit out of a single movement) rather than overclocks, and it does less damage as a consequence.

Where does it say that it's with one fluid movement? How does that compare to the flurry of blows ability which has a similar effect as frenzy (more attacks actually)? The feat specifies that you make an extra attack with the opposite end of the weapon. By my logic that's another movement....just saying.

[Specter]

I'm late to this party, but as I said before the only thing I would do is give the Frenzy no exhaustion from level 10 onwards. Even if you need to replace it with Intimidating Presence.

As for the graph above, if you take Lucky as your feat instead of PAM as non-Frenzy Barbarians would, you can turn many misses into hits, thus increasing DPR. Or Sentinel, for the sweet reaction attacks that pair well with Retaliation. Just bcause you can't calculate it precisely, doesn't mean it's bad.

[Zman]

I think the reason we're comparing frenzy to PAM+GWF is because as a bear barb you can pick up those two feats to become more effective than a frenzy barb. That makes any player who picks frenzy as a path one purely based on RP which I'm totally fine with. Hell that's exactly what I did. The problem exists where I'm penalized for actually RPing my barbarian and not trying to min/max.

And as I pointed out the problem is not with the Frenzy ability, it is with the Pam and/or GWM feats. Frenzy does what it is supposed to do and really spikes a Barbarian's damage output. Also, Frenzy does not require a feat investment.

[R.Shackleford]

Extra Attack, Extra Attack 2, and Extra Attack 3 don't give a level 3 character extra attacks. PAM can, but it does it via very different means - it enhances efficiency (by getting an extra hit out of a single movement) rather than overclocks, and it does less damage as a consequence.
As I said in the cited quote, those means of gaining extra attacks are different - they are due to an increase in skill/strength/talent/whatever. You are essentially saying a sprinter's body shouldn't have any more strain on it for having a good run by overdosing on an adrenaline injection, because sprinters that have trained a whole lot more can achieve similar results without the injection.

That level 3 character has specific ability scores. That level 3 character will have the same ability scores at 4 if they pick up PAM and at level 5 when they get extra attack. Yet none of these features exhaust the Barbarian. They could attack for a few hours and not get winded.

Why doesn't the exhaustion go away once the Barbarian hits level 11 then? Are you telling me that the Fighter, who no matter what ability scores they have, should be able to attack 3 times per turn all day long but if a barbarian does it for (no more, but usually less) a minute then they get exhausted? How does that make a lick of sense?

It doesn't matter if you get abilities in different ways, that is putting mechanics over in-game logic/immersion (because you have to mechanically balance things), attacking one more time than normal doesn't exhaust in any other situation and it shouldn't for the barbarian.

If you was going to use this "logic" (#Dr.Evil) of overclocking (which isn't a real thing in 5e) then the Exhaustion would be tied to the Rage and not to the Extra Attack.

However because people thought the Barbarian would be mechanically broken they just had to add in a severe punishment for anyone wanting to go a pretty iconic route.

[nolas85]

To beat a dead horse (because that's what barbarians do) is everybody ignoring the fact that a lvl 20 fighter with PAM is getting 5 attacks per round with no disadvantage while a lvl 20 frenzy barb is getting 3 with exhaustion after? Even without PAM the fighter is doing more in a round than a zerker. I agree with Shackleford in that frenzy for exhaustion makes no mechanical sense. Sure you get it early but guess what.....it doesn't really get any better than that.

Yeah I think PAM is kinda broken since attacks are rather limited. Personally I thought the opportunity attack against someone entering your range was a good enough benefit. Then again I also tend to think that GWF and Sniper (a little more so) are also broken.

[R.Shackleford]

To beat a dead horse (because that's what barbarians do) is everybody ignoring the fact that a lvl 20 fighter with PAM is getting 5 attacks per round with no disadvantage while a lvl 20 frenzy barb is getting 3 with exhaustion after? Even without PAM the fighter is doing more in a round than a zerker. I agree with Shackleford in that frenzy for exhaustion makes no mechanical sense. Sure you get it early but guess what.....it doesn't really get any better than that.

Yeah I think PAM is kinda broken since attacks are rather limited. Personally I thought the opportunity attack against someone entering your range was a good enough benefit. Then again I also tend to think that GWF and Sniper (a little more so) are also broken.

Not just mechanical sense, but immersion/roleplaying sense either.

[Zman]

To beat a dead horse (because that's what barbarians do) is everybody ignoring the fact that a lvl 20 fighter with PAM is getting 5 attacks per round with no disadvantage while a lvl 20 frenzy barb is getting 3 with exhaustion after? Even without PAM the fighter is doing more in a round than a zerker. I agree with Shackleford in that frenzy for exhaustion makes no mechanical sense. Sure you get it early but guess what.....it doesn't really get any better than that.

Yeah I think PAM is kinda broken since attacks are rather limited. Personally I thought the opportunity attack against someone entering your range was a good enough benefit. Then again I also tend to think that GWF and Sniper (a little more so) are also broken.

Well I'm one who has removed exhaustion for frenzy in their Houserule, and mandated reckless attack for that matter.

Now, five attacks seems seems way better than three, but we can't discount the Barbarian also has +4 damage per attack from Rage, has an additional +2 to hit and +2 to damage from Str, and then we factor in a Reaction attack almost every turn, and then we factor in advantage for Reckless Attack.

Not sure the PAM fighter can match that damage. 4xd10+D4+25=54 + less Likily d10+5 Reaction for Fighter vs 3d12+33 = 52.5 + Likily d12+11 Reaction for the Barb before factoring in the Barb has an additional +2 to hit and advantage putting the frenzy barbarian over the top.


Now, Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter are broken and need to be fixed too, as does PAM. Frenzy isn't the problem, the feats are.

[R.Shackleford]

Well I'm one who has removed exhaustion for frenzy in their Houserule, and mandated reckless attack for that matter.

Now, five attacks seems seems way better than three, but we can't discount the Barbarian also has +4 damage per attack from Rage, has an additional +2 to hit and +2 to damage from Str, and then we factor in a Reaction attack almost every turn, and then we factor in advantage for Reckless Attack.

Not sure the PAM fighter can match that damage. 4xd10+D4+25=54 + less Likily d10+5 Reaction for Fighter vs 3d12+33 = 52.5 + Likily d12+11 Reaction for the Barb before factoring in the Barb has an additional +2 to hit and advantage putting the frenzy barbarian over the top.


Now, Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter are broken and need to be fixed too, as does PAM. Frenzy isn't the problem, the feats are.

Well, Frenzy is one problem and the feats are another problem.

Punishing players is not a good game design. It's one thing to have drawbacks but it is another thing to give such a bad debuff to a player for 24 (or more) hours for (at most) 1 minute of use.

[nolas85]

Well I'm one who has removed exhaustion for frenzy in their Houserule, and mandated reckless attack for that matter.

I really like that option. I'm actually playing a zerker that uses rage as a conditional benefit. That being if he's hit then he enters his rage on the next turn. I feel it's more to the crazy adrenaline pumped barbarian feel.


Now, Great Weapon Master and Sharpshooter are broken and need to be fixed too, as does PAM. Frenzy isn't the problem, the feats are.

If there was a like option I would have given it for this. I tried explaining to a DM that sharpshooter was stupid broken for an archer when you factor in that they can (and should) also pick up the +2 to hit from fighting style and it fell largely on deaf ears.

All that being said, I think these (except for frenzy) are situations that are only a consideration if you're trying to min/max a character. Ideally every player is focused more on role playing and simply wants to be as effective as everyone else in combat.

[nolas85]

...it is another thing to give such a bad debuff to a player for 24 (or more) hours for (at most) 1 minute of use.

It could also be an issue with exhaustion. I was talking to one of my more experienced DMs today and I think he agrees that it's crazy how difficult it is to remove exhaustion. Personally I feel that lesser restoration should remove one level while greater removes all (similar to the equivalent level potion of vitality). The fact that it is easier to remove exhaustion by killing the character and then casting revivify is beyond stupid.

[R.Shackleford]

It could also be an issue with exhaustion. I was talking to one of my more experienced DMs today and I think he agrees that it's crazy how difficult it is to remove exhaustion. Personally I feel that lesser restoration should remove one level while greater removes all (similar to the equivalent level potion of vitality). The fact that it is easier to remove exhaustion by killing the character and then casting revivify is beyond stupid.

Hahaha I hadn't even thought of that.

Well, when you are on the same level as "drown to heal"* you are pretty darn bad.


Note: In 3.5 and Pathfinder (because they couldn't be bothered to looking at and fixing any rules) you can heal yourself by RAW when you are at negative HP by having a character drown your PC. It takes your -7 HP to 0 hp... lol.

[Zman]

Well, Frenzy is one problem and the feats are another problem.

Punishing players is not a good game design. It's one thing to have drawbacks but it is another thing to give such a bad debuff to a player for 24 (or more) hours for (at most) 1 minute of use.

I'll repeat, I have been a vocal proponent of removing the exhaustion penalty for Frenzy for a long time.


I really like that option. I'm actually playing a zerker that uses rage as a conditional benefit. That being if he's hit then he enters his rage on the next turn. I feel it's more to the crazy adrenaline pumped barbarian feel.



If there was a like option I would have given it for this. I tried explaining to a DM that sharpshooter was stupid broken for an archer when you factor in that they can (and should) also pick up the +2 to hit from fighting style and it fell largely on deaf ears.

All that being said, I think these (except for frenzy) are situations that are only a consideration if you're trying to min/max a character. Ideally every player is focused more on role playing and simply wants to be as effective as everyone else in combat.

If you check my Tweaks in my sit, you can see all my balance tweaks. Sharpshooter is broken for many reasons, 600' longbow shots into 3/4ths cover with a net +2 from Archery then -5/+10 on top is jus silly. Both GWM and Sharpshooter needed to be limited to one big attack per round like I suggest, or removed as Kryx suggests.

[R.Shackleford]

I'll repeat, I have been a vocal proponent of removing the exhaustion penalty for Frenzy for a long time.


I didn't say you wasn't?

But frenzy and feats are two separate problems. Yeah they relate but just fixing one isn't going to fix the other.

[Zman]

I didn't say you wasn't?

But frenzy and feats are two separate problems. Yeah they relate but just fixing one isn't going to fix the other.

No, but when comparing one to the others as your baseline means they are both in play. Frenzy is fine if you remove exhaustion, PAM and GWM are not and when compared with Frenzy, Frenzy looks like a poor option even when exhaustion is removed.

[R.Shackleford]

No, but when comparing one to the others as your baseline means they are both in play. Frenzy is fine if you remove exhaustion, PAM and GWM are not and when compared with Frenzy, Frenzy looks like a poor option even when exhaustion is removed.

Again.

What I said is that we have two distinct problems. I didn't say anything about if you or if you didn't say anything about a hosuerule. I'm talking about the base rules.

Frenzy and Feats.

Fixing one doesn't fix the other. Doesn't matter what your fix is.

Even if you fix frenzy, feats like GWM will still be a problem.

You seemed to have been under the impression that fixing frenzy fixes everything. No. You would still have the feats to deal with.

Edit: You seem to take things way too personal and change things into like attacks against you even when people aren't saying anything against you.

[nolas85]

statistically speaking frenzy w/out exhaustion should be more powerful than PAM. I'm not completely opposed to PAM simply because it means other classes can fill the damage roll that the frenzy barb fills. I'm all about more options and ways to achieve the same end state. I feel that tends to make the game more about how you play your character and less about what specific abilities make your character a god. That being said, if PAM were to stay that does make a fighter more OP at higher levels since they end up getting 4 base attacks. Maybe that means that class needs a bit of reworking since that's not even factoring in the bonuses they get from archetypes or fighting styles. Immediate thoughts being make the 3rd and 4th attacks bonus actions similar to flury of blows....just a thought.....and also probably a completely separate discussion.

[Zman]

Again.

What I said is that we have two distinct problems. I didn't say anything about if you or if you didn't say anything about a hosuerule. I'm talking about the base rules.

Frenzy and Feats.

Fixing one doesn't fix the other. Doesn't matter what your fix is.

Even if you fix frenzy, feats like GWM will still be a problem.

You seemed to have been under the impression that fixing frenzy fixes everything. No. You would still have the feats to deal with.

Edit: You seem to take things way too personal and change things into like attacks against you even when people aren't saying anything against you.

What are you talking about?

I strongly suggest you go back and reread my posts where I repeatedly say that both Frenzy(removing exhaustion) and the broken feats need to be fixed. Pretty sure I've reinterred this repeatedly. Literally the things you've been saying in this post are consistent with my points of view, you are the one who responded to me as if that has not been my consistant position, I was reiterating my position, more forcefully each time as you failed to grasp it.

I'm not taking things too personally, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't getting frustrated by your lack of understanding.

[Kryx]

I'm a bit late in my reply, but I want to reiterate my point because I think you missed it a bit ago Zman. nolas captured it a bit. The point I'm making is that the bear barbarian will go GWM or PAM. So we're comparing nearly the same damage while one archetype gets resistance to all damage but psychic.

No feats games are entirely different. The argument I'm making is that this archetype should be viable in games with feats (the vast majority of games).

I agree with your point on PAM and have made changes myself (removed the bonus action attack), but then the issue just moves to GWM.


@Specter: You're right that a Berseker does have the extra feat to burn, but nothing compares to the resistance to all damage except psychic. That ability is so strong I feel it should be given to all barbarians as it's choice is by far the best choice.

[Skylivedk]

Frenzy doesn't cost a bonus action (So it actually helps people with Polearm/GWM)
Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy. (Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?406548-Berserker-Better-for-a-Featless-Build&p=19242234#post19242234))


I like the simplicity of this solution, but I dislike that it further pidgeon holes the barbarian to use two-handed weapons.

In my current campaign, I'm looking at doing the following:

Frenzy adds 1 damage die extra which scales in the following way:
When rage is +2 damage, it is a d4
When rage is +3 damage, it is a d6
When rage is +4 damage, it is a d8

We use a die because the players find it more fun than static mods.

- and I'll include the "Remove an Exhaustion level during a short rest once per day"

I'm in doubt about allowing the bonus die to crit and would love some of the mathmagicians to see if it is too much (Kryx?)

[Zman]

I'm a bit late in my reply, but I want to reiterate my point because I think you missed it a bit ago Zman. nolas captured it a bit. The point I'm making is that the bear barbarian will go GWM or PAM. So we're comparing nearly the same damage while one archetype gets resistance to all damage but psychic.

No feats games are entirely different. The argument I'm making is that this archetype should be viable in games with feats (the vast majority of games).

I agree with your point on PAM and have made changes myself (removed the bonus action attack), but then the issue just moves to GWM.


@Specter: You're right that a Berseker does have the extra feat to burn, but nothing compares to the resistance to all damage except psychic. That ability is so strong I feel it should be given to all barbarians as it's choice is by far the best choice.

Maybe I should reread my earlier responses and try and figure out why you guys seem to think I missed that. My point, which I feel got missed as well, is that balancing Frenzy against PAM and GWM is using the wrong levels of damage for comparison. Frenzy, once you remove exhaustion, does what it is supposed to do, it significantly increases damage for a short time. But, when comparing the class feature to Overpowered feats PAM and GWM, is unfair to Frenzy and not a problem with Frenzy itself but with the feats. Attempting to balance Frenzy against PAM and GWM is the wrong direction, you need to balance PAM and GWM off of it.

So, when you suggest removing the bonus action cost for the Frenzy attack, I see that as a poor avenue to take because Frenzy was just fine as soon as it's exhaustion penalty is removed, and now you've escalated the damage ceiling of the game even further unless you make further alterations to the game. That being said, in a game that is using your PAM and GWM as inherent weapon properties and other house rules it is much better, but that needs to be specified clearly when advocating for the bonus action cost removal.

It boils down to you advocating a stronger buff for Frenzy and integration of PAM and GWM as weapon properties, while I advocate a smaller buff and a toning down of PAM and GWM as feats. Both ways work to fix the majority of underlying problems, but both need to be explained. Either way Frenzy itself is less of a problem than the feats it was being compared to to gauge damage, and that is something we both agree upon.


Edit: About Bear being so good, my fix it to add Radient and Necrotic to the list of non resisted damage types, don't care how tough you are, can't shrug off soul burn or soul rot, haha.

[Kryx]

Lets make things incredibly simple here: Compare Berserker vs Bear with PAM. The damage is nearly the same (within 5%) and the Bear is much tankier. That's the core issue. That is true in RAW and true in your houserules where PAM retains its bonus action.

With those rules in place there is no reason to pick Berserker. A player would be much better served by picking bear for the additional tankiness.



It boils down to you advocating a stronger buff for Frenzy and integration of PAM and GWM as weapon properties, while I advocate a smaller buff and a toning down of PAM and GWM as feats.
It boils down to allowing the archetype fill it's purpose. If the tanky archetype can achieve just as much damage there is never a choice to be made.
Berserker should work with the highest damage option in the game. It doesn't really matter to me if that means it's a punch that does d4+str+rage or what it looks like. Frenzy should not be incompatible with cleaving and TWF.

So really the compatibility matters the most to me here it seems.

I view this guy as being able to frenzy:
http://www.blogcdn.com/massively.joystiq.com/media/2009/01/redheadslayersidebar.jpg


http://i.imgur.com/hz3rhlj.png
Totally within the normal bounds. 14+ is retaliation strike.

[Zman]

Lets make things incredibly simple here: Compare Berserker vs Bear with PAM. The damage is nearly the same (within 5%) and the Bear is much tankier. That's the core issue. That is true in RAW and true in your houserules where PAM retains its bonus action.

With those rules in place there is no reason to pick Berserker. A player would be much better served by picking bear for the additional tankiness.



It boils down to allowing the archetype fill it's purpose. If the tanky archetype can achieve just as much damage there is never a choice to be made.
Berserker should work with the highest damage option in the game. It doesn't really matter to me if that means it's a punch that does d4+str+rage or what it looks like. Frenzy should not be incompatible with cleaving and TWF.

To give you an idea of how much stronger it is than normal GWM in my houserules:
http://i.imgur.com/hz3rhlj.png
Totally within the normal bounds. 14+ is retaliation strike.

Incredibly simple is good. In understand this comparison, and the problem lies with the feat power, not frenzy. So, you've run the math on my houserule already, or are you just guessing?? I think you're guessing.
Lvl3 2d12+2xStr+2xRage vs 1d10+Str+d6+2xRage+Reaction D10+Str+Rage Frenzy Wins
Lvl5 3d12 +3xStr +3xRage vs 2d12+2xStr+D6+3xRage +Reactiond10+Str+Rage Frenzy Wins
At lvl14 Frenzy pulls away by a large margin.

Now, this difference is not huge, but what your incredibly simple explanation lacks is that a Frenzy Barbarian that takes PAM is even stronger through lvl14, and had the feat available, so comparing Frenzy vs Bear+PAM is not a good comparison as you can also compare Frenzy + Pam vs Bear +PAM. You claimed "no reason to pick berserker", I say that is demonstrably false. The Tanky archetype can't achieve just as much damage as both archetypes can pick PAM and the Frenzy Barbarian deals more damage using PAM. A Frenzy Barbarian upgrades the bonus attack for PAM from a d6+Rage to a d10+Str +Rage or netting 5-9 damage on that hit. A Frenzy Barbarian benefits from PAM's reaction attack as well, they are not mutually exclusive. How does Frenzy not work with PAM or GWM, in fact it does, just not as well as it does with a character who did not opt for those feats, but it still offers guaranteed improvement over both.

Now, Frenzy being incompatible with Cleave and TWF is somewhat problematic, sure cleave does not have a bonus action to be used, and that is more of a problem with your weapon property houserule, and less so if it was a chosen feat in mine. TWF is problematic, stock TWF Frenzy is only a +Str to offhand attack, in my houserules it doesn't benefit from the additional offhandattack at 11th level and if the Berserker had the TWF Fighting style it doesn't benefit at all. They definitely do not synergize that well, but are far from unworkable.

I would point that your bold statement presented as concrete is merely your opinion and bolting it doesn't make it carry more weight. I can try it too, Frenzy and PAM are not mutually exclusive and a Berserker with PAM is stronger than a Bear Totem with PAM.. Actually, I messed that up, you presented an opinion, my statement is actually fact. This is true in both Stock PAM and my Houserule PAM, but the improvement is more appropriate with my houserules.

Not sure your graph is correct, your houserules simply adds another attack while frenzied and should just proportionally increase damage based on the number of attack, 1,2,3 for +100%, +50%, or +33% damage depending on if the bonus action attack triggers and that would be averaged out based on your calculated cleave chance. I.e. At lvl 3 it should be between a +50% and +100% increase in damage depending on cleave chance.

[Kryx]

Frenzy doesn't work with TWF.
PAM does 5% more damage (not worth it)
GWM does ~7-12% more damage (questionably worth it).

Those are the numbers. GMs can decide if the second two are incompatible or not.

As I edited in above: compatibility matters the most to me here it seems.
I view this guy as being able to frenzy:
http://www.blogcdn.com/massively.joystiq.com/media/2009/01/redheadslayersidebar.jpg
By RAW and the "just remove exhaustion" camp TWF doesn't work with Frenzy.


Regarding the spreadsheet on my houserules: The barbarian is not raging and frenzying at all times. See "Settings" line 64 to see how often he's raging and line 66/68 to see how often he's frenzying.
Removing the exhaustion makes it so the barbarian is frenzying as much as he is raging and would greatly increas DPR.

[TripleD]

Frenzy seems like one of those things that needs to be re-written from the ground up. It's supposed to be about whipping yourself into such a bezerker rage that you can accomplish superhuman abilities.

Weird idea, what if we made it analogous to the the Battlemaster? Only instead of picking refined martial techniques, you pick crazy stuff you can do when you go full Donald Duck.

Headbutt - Opponent makes a constitution save or is stunned.

Brutal Throw - Shove or knock prone with thrown weapons.

Primal Scream - Bonus action to do 1d6 psychic damage (WIS save for half) to all enemies within earshot.

Rip it out and show 'em - after reducing an enemy to 0 hit points, you may use a bonus action to force all enemies with line of sight to make a WIS save or be shaken until the end of your next turn.

Just examples, no time to work on it today.

[nolas85]

I think that's a very interesting idea and like the concept. My only reservation is frenzy is unique the way it currently is. With the proposed change it becomes a different take on the battlemaster.

[Theodoxus]

Seems like a couple options to fix Frenzy. Simplest would be to make it an Action Surge, every round for up to 10 rounds. That would resolve the bonus action problem (so TWF, PAM, cleave, etc work), would vastly increase the damage output, still allow for actions outside of attacking and definitely make Exhaustion a suitable penalty.

[TripleD]

I think that's a very interesting idea and like the concept. My only reservation is frenzy is unique the way it currently is. With the proposed change it becomes a different take on the battlemaster.

I was hoping that it would be more like the Sorcerer to Monk. Both use a "points" pool, but to different effects.

After playing around a bit though, I realized it wouldn't work. The Battlemaster has 16 options to choose from. It can pull that off because the Fighter is very "subclass heavy". With Barbarians though, the meat of the class comes from the base; the subclasses just help to define it more. If you give that many options to the Beserker you end up with something that it strictly superior to the Totem Warrior.

I finally arrived at a homebrew I like. It turns Frenzy into a "super rage". Take everything that rage does and turn it up a bit:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?495569-Path-of-the-Beserker-Rewrite

[JDCGW]

Seems like a couple options to fix Frenzy. Simplest would be to make it an Action Surge, every round for up to 10 rounds. That would resolve the bonus action problem (so TWF, PAM, cleave, etc work), would vastly increase the damage output, still allow for actions outside of attacking and definitely make Exhaustion a suitable penalty.

How about something like this (a mashup of frenzy, haste, and relentless rage)? It keeps the bonus action free, allows fun combos like intimidating presence+attack, and has a penalty that's easier to avoid as the character levels.

Frenzy
Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, you can go into a frenzy when you rage. If you do so, for the duration of your rage you gain an additional action on each of your turns. This action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only) action. When your rage ends, make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw. If you fail, you suffer one level of exhaustion (as described in appendix PH-A). Each time you use this feature after the first, the DC increases by 5. When you finish a short or long rest, the DC resets to 10.

[nolas85]

Seems like a couple options to fix Frenzy. Simplest would be to make it an Action Surge, every round for up to 10 rounds. That would resolve the bonus action problem (so TWF, PAM, cleave, etc work), would vastly increase the damage output, still allow for actions outside of attacking and definitely make Exhaustion a suitable penalty.

That might be simple but in no way balanced. I think you forget that action surge gives you more bonus actions and if you have multiple attacks then you get those as well. For example, a lvl 5 fighter with PAM who uses action surge gets 6 attacks that round. Two attacks using extra attack gained at 5th and a bonus attack using PAM which then doubles. That would be ridiculous!


How about something like this (a mashup of frenzy, haste, and relentless rage)? It keeps the bonus action free, allows fun combos like intimidating presence+attack, and has a penalty that's easier to avoid as the character levels.

Frenzy
Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, you can go into a frenzy when you rage. If you do so, for the duration of your rage you gain an additional action on each of your turns. This action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only) action. When your rage ends, make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw. If you fail, you suffer one level of exhaustion (as described in appendix PH-A). Each time you use this feature after the first, the DC increases by 5. When you finish a short or long rest, the DC resets to 10.

I honestly like the bonus action cost. Sure it doesn't allow you to take full advantage of PAM (or any other feat that uses a bonus action) but I think that's the point. Extra actions, be they attacks or special actions, are limited for a reason. The more things that you have which grant you these the more in conflict with each other they become. This is good because it means you need to be selective about what you do to solve the problem in front of you. It also increases your versatility without making you a raging agro 12 "actions" per turn monkey.

The intimidating presence/attack combo you mention already exists with the extra attack from frenzy as a bonus action. The reason it frenzy doesn't specify that you need to take an attack action in order to trigger the bonus attack from frenzy (as I recall, don't exactly have a PHB at work with me). The PHB also states that you can take actions in any order meaning frenzy is one of the few abilities where you can attack using your bonus action and then do something completely different such as disengage if you want. Now I don't personally feel that disengage makes sense with a zerker but it does make the ability more powerful than other like abilities.

[Kryx]

Action surge gives you one additional action. That does not include a bonus action.

[nolas85]

Valid but that's still two extra attacks (assuming the character is 5th level) as opposed to the singular bonus action attack currently granted by frenzy. I read "On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action" to mean you could possibly get another bonus action. I suppose it's referring to the fact that you may or may not have a bonus action to use normally hence the verbiage "possible bonus action."

[Isidorios]

Frenzy doesn't cost a bonus action (So it actually helps people with Polearm/GWM)
Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can remove a level of exhaustion that you gained from using Frenzy. (Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?406548-Berserker-Better-for-a-Featless-Build&p=19242234#post19242234))


Best answer right here.
seconding /thread.

[Isidorios]

Valid but that's still two extra attacks (assuming the character is 5th level) as opposed to the singular bonus action attack currently granted by frenzy. I read "On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action" to mean you could possibly get another bonus action. I suppose it's referring to the fact that you may or may not have a bonus action to use normally hence the verbiage "possible bonus action."

Then you read it wrong. You only get one bonus action and one reaction per turn, Period.

[nolas85]

Hence why I began my comment with "valid" agreeing that it doesn't grant you an additional bonus action. You still get you're attack plus any additional attacks granted by the class feature "extra attack" since that only specifies "you may attack 'x' times, instead of once, when you take the attack action on your turn." 'x' being twice for a 5th level barbarian/fighter or more for higher level fighters. Even without the bonus action, making frenzy grant an additional "attack action" every round is ridiculously overpowered. JDCDW was closer by specifying that the action can be used to make one melee weapon attack. This still grants a PAM frenzy barb 4 attacks at 5th level but that's up to you and your DM to decide if it's balanced. I think it isn't so I don't play with it that way but that's just me.

[JDCGW]

Hence why I began my comment with "valid" agreeing that it doesn't grant you an additional bonus action. You still get you're attack plus any additional attacks granted by the class feature "extra attack" since that only specifies "you may attack 'x' times, instead of once, when you take the attack action on your turn." 'x' being twice for a 5th level barbarian/fighter or more for higher level fighters. Even without the bonus action, making frenzy grant an additional "attack action" every round is ridiculously overpowered. JDCDW was closer by specifying that the action can be used to make one melee weapon attack. This still grants a PAM frenzy barb 4 attacks at 5th level but that's up to you and your DM to decide if it's balanced. I think it isn't so I don't play with it that way but that's just me.

A good reason to move the extra Frenzy attack away from the bonus action is to allow two-weapon fighting to compliment Frenzy rather than compete with it. As is, Frenzy plus two-weapon fighting is basically pointless.

[nolas85]

I agree with your logic that a crazy barbarian should have an advantage when going agro with two weapons instead of only one. You could change it to say you may use a bonus action to make a melee weapon attack with each weapon you are holding. That would give you two extra attacks with TWF and not make a PAM frenzy barb too overpowered. My concern is that if you remove the bonus action then there's almost no reason to go TWF instead of PAM with a barbarian since you can also add GWF to PAM and all of the other attacks.

[JDCGW]

I agree with your logic that a crazy barbarian should have an advantage when going agro with two weapons instead of only one. You could change it to say you may use a bonus action to make a melee weapon attack with each weapon you are holding. That would give you two extra attacks with TWF and not make a PAM frenzy barb too overpowered. My concern is that if you remove the bonus action then there's almost no reason to go TWF instead of PAM with a barbarian since you can also add GWF to PAM and all of the other attacks.

Speaking of PAM, what advantages does a Frenzy barbarian (no PAM) have over a Totem barbarian that also has PAM? The Totem barbarian at level 5 is getting 3 attacks a turn with no penalty all the time, while the Frenzy barbarian at level 5 gets 3 attacks per turn only with the hefty penalty of the Frenzy ability. And if the Frenzy barbarian also takes PAM, then what's the point of the Frenzy ability? All of this seems out of balance.

Anyway, GWM + PAM has a lot of issues outside of its possible interaction with an improved Frenzy.

[nolas85]

That's why much of the previous discussion revolved around removing the exhaustion effect from frenzy. When you crunch numbers (assuming no exhaustion) frenzy will deal more damage on average than PAM since all of your dice are at their highest and you retain the ability to increase ability scores or spend the feat elsewhere. In that way a frenzy barb is able to dish out slightly more damage than another barb and expand other roles.

[Kryx]

When you crunch numbers (assuming no exhaustion) frenzy will deal more damage on average than PAM.
5% more to be precise. Definitely not worth taking the archetype for that. Better off going Bear unless you're playing at 14+ where retaliation strike matters.

[N810]

heheh....
I just hit LVL 14
let the good times roll. :thog:

[nolas85]

Actually if you reference the actual statistics calculated on page 3 it's closer to a 30% increase in damage factoring in the greater weapon damage dice, higher strength, and improved chance to hit between level 3-4 and a 26% increase in damage from level 5 and on. This excludes reaction attacks which will bring PAM closer but my discussion on the likelihood of it actually surpassing are already mentioned earlier.

[Zman]

The problem is multifaceted, Frenzy is too weak given its steep penalty, and certain feats like PAM and GWM are too strong.

Currently, I think we can all agree or nearly agree that the exhaustion penalty is too much and should be removed or heavily mitigated.

I think we can all agree that the Frenzy Barbarian doesn't hold up well against a Bear PAM or Bear GWM Barbarian, mainly due to the Bonus action opportunity cost. Tangentially, TWF doesn't work well with Frenzy.

Making Frenzy better without mitigating PAM or GWM, say by removing the bonus action cost of Frenzy, comes with the problem if making PAM and GWM significantly more powerful and moves the upper limits of build damage in the game. This is a possible solution that has some merit, but comes with its own set of problems.

Leaving Frenzy alone sans Exhaustion while toning down PAM and GWM leaves the bounds of expected damage in tact, often lowering at will expected damage and makes Frenzy a high damage option, but comes with the problem of TWF interaction not being fixed.

Or alternatively you can rewrite/tweak Frenzy, PAM, GWM, and even TWF to create a new balance point.

Or some combination of the above.

There is multiple ways to skin a cat. But, what must be asked is what is the best fix for a particular group, and how much change is going to be tolerated or is wanted. Here is where many opinions will diverge and the best solution is subjective.

For Instance Kryx buffs Frenzy fixing its interaction with TWF and rips apart PAM and GWM into inherent weapon properties. While I leave Frenxy mostly intact and opt for smaller toning down of PAM and GWM. Which of us is right? Yes. We both are in our own way, Kryx creates a better balance between the styles, but it requires more significant changes to the rules while I use changes that are smaller in scope and focus on mitigating the problems. Where Kryx rewrites the weapon interactions from the ground up to eliminate the problems to create balance, I instead take what is already there and bend it towards balance focusing one better, not perfect. We both largely achieve our individual goals, but both or neither may be the right fix for a particular game and group, and trust me, if you ask us neither thinks their solutions are "perfect" and are always looking to improve them.

A single aspect of a fix, when looking at complex interactions, needs to be considered carefully and taken in context of the other changes as even a simple change can have unintended consequences.

[N810]

Perhaps swapping out Intimidating Presence with some other ability....
Like one that lets you recover a level of exhaustion on a short rest and completely recover on a long rest.
Maybe call it Savage Endurance or something like that.

You could throw in a DC Con check for the short rest if that's too powerful.

[nolas85]

The way my DM has modified it appears to be working rather well for me currently. It doesn't solve the TWF issue referenced above but I think I provided an easy way to circumvent it. As it stands, first use of frenzy causes me to not act for the round after it ends (like a haste effect). Every other use of frenzy adds a level of exhaustion as it originally indicates. Furthermore, while frenzied my character ignores exhaustion effects. This allows me to remain viable in combat but deal with the RP consequences outside of combat. The TWF fix would simply be to state that the bonus attack granted from frenzy allows you to attack with each weapon you're carrying. This would grant an additional attack with a two handed weapon / S&B or two extra attacks if you were dual wielding.

[Lollerabe]

Nobody commented on Skylivedks suggestion (since he is my dm id love some feedback on it) which was to make frenzy add a damage dice that scales and get rid of frenzy=extra attacks entirely.

That would make frenzy work well with TWF, id suggest removing exhaustion as well. Getting penalized for using a core class feature seems dumb to me, another legacy concept.

Maybe frenzy could be add 1dx (that scales with rage damg) to all your weapon attacks, and the berserker dosent have to use a BA to enter rage. That would make the berserker the best DPR barb, which I believe was the intention

[N810]

I duno I suspect it might be a bit overpowered... :vaarsuvius:

[Zman]

Nobody commented on Skylivedks suggestion (since he is my dm id love some feedback on it) which was to make frenzy add a damage dice that scales and get rid of frenzy=extra attacks entirely.

That would make frenzy work well with TWF, id suggest removing exhaustion as well. Getting penalized for using a core class feature seems dumb to me, another legacy concept.

Maybe frenzy could be add 1dx (that scales with rage damg) to all your weapon attacks, and the berserker dosent have to use a BA to enter rage. That would make the berserker the best DPR barb, which I believe was the intention

Ok, went back and gave it a closer look....

It is an interesting take on the ability, definitely a large change. I have some pretty significant problems with it, by adding the extra damage die to each hit you reward higher attack builds to a much greater degree than lower attack builds.

At level 1 a Berserker nets a potential 2.5 damage.
At level 1 a PAM Berserker nets an additional 5-7.5 damage depending on the Reaction.

Basically, the Frenzy Barbarian doesn't gain much out of his ability, but the already very powerful builds using PAM or GWM often benefit +50-100% when compared to a non feat Barbarian. This poses the problem of making PAM and GWM Barbarians much better than they already are and boosts their already sky high damage even higher. The problem gets better at lvl 14 when compared to PAM.

The damage increase at low levels is pretty insignificant compared to even stock Frenzy for non feat builds. The combat effectiveness bonus doesn't effect builds equally and benefits the most powerful builds to an increased degree.

In summary

Lackluster benefits at low levels
Large disparity in benefits for fighting styles
Mediocre benefit for "poor" fighting styles
Disproportionately large benefit for "good" fighting styles and feats.



I like the simplicity of this solution, but I dislike that it further pidgeon holes the barbarian to use two-handed weapons.

In my current campaign, I'm looking at doing the following:

Frenzy adds 1 damage die extra which scales in the following way:
When rage is +2 damage, it is a d4
When rage is +3 damage, it is a d6
When rage is +4 damage, it is a d8

We use a die because the players find it more fun than static mods.

- and I'll include the "Remove an Exhaustion level during a short rest once per day"

I'm in doubt about allowing the bonus die to crit and would love some of the mathmagicians to see if it is too much (Kryx?)

[DanyBallon]

Kryx, what would be the comparison on DPR if PAM didn't exist?

Does Frenzy get much better to justify it's exhaustion penalty?

[Kryx]

Kryx rewrites the weapon interactions from the ground up to eliminate the problems to create balance
To be fair I don't start from scratch. I just move the feats to default properties.

nolas85, if you only look at 1 encounter or ignore the adventuring day which classes are based on then the number is different. In general Frenzy happens in 1 encounter a day, maaaaybe 2. Take that DPR and then compare it to non-frenzy DPR and weighted average them.
I do all of this when determining 5%.


Regarding flat damage: I evaluated it here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21037745. Based on how much it improves TWF I wouldn't recommend it.

[Lollerabe]

Hmm so an extra attack that isn't a BA would be better ? I guess if we were to implement the bonus damg die, exhaustion might be fair after all? What about frenzy just doubling your rage damg? Granted it would also benefit TWF the most, but I wouldn't mind TWF coming out the winner for once.

[nolas85]

To be fair I don't start from scratch. I just move the feats to default properties.

nolas85, if you only look at 1 encounter or ignore the adventuring day which classes are based on then the number is different. In general Frenzy happens in 1 encounter a day, maaaaybe 2. Take that DPR and then compare it to non-frenzy DPR and weighted average them.
I do all of this when determining 5%.


Regarding flat damage: I evaluated it here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21037745. Based on how much it improves TWF I wouldn't recommend it.

Yes I did look at one encounter. The proposed change (being removing exhaustion) means that you will likely be using frenzy every time you rage hence the one round comparison. PAM obviously wins out overall when you look at greater than rage number encounters in a day.
I ran some more numbers and will include the spreadsheet when I get home. The comparison was average damage for PAM alone, GWF alone, PAM+GWF, and Frenzy+GWF. Assuming every situation except PAM+GWF took the str increase at 4th the results were as follows for 5th lvl barb targeting AC 16 with a base 17 str (19 after increase for those applicable):

PAM alone: 3 attacks (2 normal + 1 PAM) = average damage of 22.08/round
Frenzy alone: 3 attacks (normal) = average damage of 25.92/round
GWF alone: 2 attacks (normal) = average damage of 21.385/round
PAM+GWF: 3 attacks (2 normal + 1 PAM) = average damage of 25.83/round
Frenzy+GWF: 3 attacks (normal) = average damage of 32.0775/round

Removing the exhaustion restriction alone makes frenzy a much more viable option since it becomes useful beyond one encounter. Even with exhaustion damage doesn't suffer for the first three uses of the ability (everything else does though) thus frenzy is the superior DPS option.

Somewhat surprising to me is that frenzy alone actually surpasses PAM+GWF due to the increased chance to hit. Ultimately this is taking into account the average damage you can expect to deal per round over an extended fight. Yes that might fluctuate from round to round but at the end it should look similar to what I've computed.

[Zman]

To be fair I don't start from scratch. I just move the feats to default properties.

nolas85, if you only look at 1 encounter or ignore the adventuring day which classes are based on then the number is different. In general Frenzy happens in 1 encounter a day, maaaaybe 2. Take that DPR and then compare it to non-frenzy DPR and weighted average them.
I do all of this when determining 5%.


Regarding flat damage: I evaluated it here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21037745. Based on how much it improves TWF I wouldn't recommend it.

True, but I was trying to illustrate the different approaches towards the same goal and difference in design goals.
One thing that can be lost in translation when looking at your aggregated damage for burst abilities such as Frenzy may undervalue them. The ability to momentarily increase your damage output is valued higher than having a slightly higher passive damage even if the aggregate damage is the same or averages out. An example would be taking 40 swings and getting 25 hits in an adventuring day, you have to abilities, one adds +1 Damage per hit, the other adds +25 damage once per day. The impact of a single massive burst to damage can have a greater effect than having it spread out over the course of a day. You have the burst of damage exactly when you need it, while the residual damage is often there when it is not needed. In this way things like Frenzy, Action Surge, Divine Smite can be undervalued when aggregated into your calculations. If you just aggregate Action Surge damage over the course of the day it misses what is its best quality, not its average damge increase, its effective double of damage for a turn in a burst.

When saying it does 5% more damage, it may be more useful to say it does +15% additional damage while active, but that only aggregates out to +5% over the course of an adventuring day. Totally made up numbers meant to illustrate a point.

Nice of you to crunch those number for them, it definitely benefits TWF too much, and you'd show it benefiting PAM in much the same way with the potential for two additional attacks per turn, one bonus the other a reaction.

[Kryx]

@Lollerabe: The graph I linked is with doubling the rage.

@Zman: Ya, there are definitely different approaches. Sorry, I was a bit nit picky in my hurry to get back to overwatch. I agreed with what you wrote, was just nit picking. :P


When saying it does 5% more damage, it may be more useful to say it does +15% additional damage while active, but that only aggregates out to +5% over the course of an adventuring day.
Ya, I'll word things a bit different.
5% is the aggregated difference when comparing over an adventuring day with the RAW rules. There definitely is a difference in burst and that does matter, but it doesn't really alter the valuation in my eyes.

The most important thing to me is that frenzy works with TWF. GWM you could argue is fine. PAM less so - I'd still argue that, but everyone can see that it doesn't work with TWF and that doesn't fit the flavor imo. Exhaustion is irrelevant to me without that being fixed.

[Zman]

@Lollerabe: The graph I linked is with doubling the rage.

@Zman: Ya, there are definitely different approaches. Sorry, I was a bit nit picky in my hurry to get back to overwatch. I agreed with what you wrote, was just nit picking. :P


Ya, I'll word things a bit different.
5% is the aggregated difference when comparing over an adventuring day with the RAW rules. There definitely is a difference in burst and that does matter, but it doesn't really alter the valuation in my eyes.

The most important thing to me is that frenzy works with TWF. GWM you could argue is fine. PAM less so - I'd still argue that, but everyone can see that it doesn't work with TWF and that doesn't fit the flavor imo. Exhaustion is irrelevant to me without that being fixed.

I think we agree pretty often but are both cut from the same cloth that we'll still disagree about how exactly we agree or by how much, haha.

I agree, the TWF Frenzy interaction is problematic and bothers me. It does offer a damage boost in one respect, that the bonus attack now benefits from adding your ability modifier to an additional main hand attack, not a bonus to the second attack. Unfortunately after 11th level with a second offhand attack you basically get nothing out of Frenzy for TWF. Your fixes work a bit extra as you've removed PAM and GWM so you don't have the additional bonus attack to consider and can approach it with a flat additional attack. I don't see a problem with the Pam interaction, and see that limited bonus action as a balancing factor. For me, I don't see an easy fix that doesn't involve more complicated fixes elsewhere and IMO making it just an additional attack with no action cost makes it too good compared to the Totem options. I'm stuck in a pickle about finding a fix that also falls in the right power range. I guess I look at it as removing Exhaustion fixes the biggest glaring issue with Frenzy in the active penalty that stops a character to using the ability more than once a day, the bonus action interaction with TWF is an unfortunate side effect, but far from the first of such interactions in the game.

[nolas85]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SgMg-FEgTeJa7hXfHovZtdQqYhqy1VzbNTJpXKDmpas

Here's the spreadsheet I created to include graphs next to the data. I assumed an encounter averaged 5 rounds but can modify if necessary. I also saw the 6-8 encounter max note in the DMG and went with 6 encounters to compare average damage. Per Zman's previous comment I also listed potential damage which does portray a very different picture. You'll note that the numbers for average damage per round are different than I posted previously. I was doing the binomdist formula incorrectly. It was only looking for one success and didn't account for the chance that both d20 rolls could be successful. As such, i took the inverse of the probability that there would be no successes to accurately calculate the probability of at least one success (how advantage should be factored).

Based on the data presented, Frenzy is the superior damage ability clearly for the 1st three encounters. It becomes base average damage (or GWF damage) for the remaining three encounters and loses out to PAM in the 5th encounter. Ultimately it depends on the campaign setting. In one campaign I'm in we don't often face more than 3 or 4 encounters since the DM has scaled them up due to the number of people. That means encounters go quicker but are usually more taxing (moot point there because I'm a paladin in that one). My zerker campaign is relatively new so I guess I'll find out if my DM adheres to the 6-8 encounter max or not. I'll run this again with the added dice instead of bonus attack rule to see what it looks like if anybody is interested.

[Skylivedk]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SgMg-FEgTeJa7hXfHovZtdQqYhqy1VzbNTJpXKDmpas

Here's the spreadsheet I created to include graphs next to the data. I assumed an encounter averaged 5 rounds but can modify if necessary. I also saw the 6-8 encounter max note in the DMG and went with 6 encounters to compare average damage. Per Zman's previous comment I also listed potential damage which does portray a very different picture. You'll note that the numbers for average damage per round are different than I posted previously. I was doing the binomdist formula incorrectly. It was only looking for one success and didn't account for the chance that both d20 rolls could be successful. As such, i took the inverse of the probability that there would be no successes to accurately calculate the probability of at least one success (how advantage should be factored).

Based on the data presented, Frenzy is the superior damage ability clearly for the 1st three encounters. It becomes base average damage (or GWF damage) for the remaining three encounters and loses out to PAM in the 5th encounter. Ultimately it depends on the campaign setting. In one campaign I'm in we don't often face more than 3 or 4 encounters since the DM has scaled them up due to the number of people. That means encounters go quicker but are usually more taxing (moot point there because I'm a paladin in that one). My zerker campaign is relatively new so I guess I'll find out if my DM adheres to the 6-8 encounter max or not. I'll run this again with the added dice instead of bonus attack rule to see what it looks like if anybody is interested.

I would love to see that! From Kryx' calculations there is a spike at level 11, I'm not sure I get (which seems to affect TWF more than GWM; due to house rules re TWF perhaps?).

[nolas85]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B4SX0o9dujkTRDU0aHBmYUZUYkE

I'm assuming the change to frenzy keeps the additional damage that rage adds and also tacks another d4/d6/etc on top of that. I had to add the GWF columns to the right because for whatever reason I forgot about those options. It's in the 2nd tab labeled below. Not sure about the spike at 11. You should see an increase in damage at 9th and 16th as frenzy and rage increase but that will be a universal shift upwards for all. Keep in mind that this isn't factoring in any of the other barbarian abilities. That could be another reason but I don't see what would show up at 11th level to do that.

Just realized I forgot to add the PAM reaction attack for round 1 and 3. New numbers looks like this for 6 encounters:

Frenzy+PAM: 878.7
Frenzy+PAM+GWF: 846.525

[Lollerabe]

Minor thing Nolas - GWF is the fightstyle which barbs can't get unless they multiclass, GWM is the feat, just so people don't get confused by your otherwise awesome sheet :)

[Kryx]

Comparing at only one level isn't the best view of the whole progression, but it can be ok for a snapshot. With that mindset lets take a look:


AC: You're assuming a level 5 barbarian is attacking 16 AC. Based on the DMG that would generally be a CR 8 enemy. Based on my calculations from the MM monster math (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1829796671) that would mean the enemy is a CR 9. I would recommend aiming for CR = level which would result in an AC of about ~14.4 with a weighted average assuming the level 5 barbarian fights an equal distribution of enemies within 3 levels of him (so CR 2 to CR 8). If you just wanted the average for a CR 5 that could be 15.2.
Rage damage is +2 at level 5, not +3.
Strength Assuming 17 strength on all barbarian's isn't such a great option. For example TWF is best served by pumping his strength while GWM and PAM are best served by taking their feats. Probably best to set strength values for each build option. It seems you kind of did that, but it's in the formulas. They'd be best when exposed below.
What is "Base"? If it's just a greatsword wielding guy then best to give him a higher strength.
Opportunity Attack not included. Though to be fair by my assumptions and calculations it's not very impactful so I won't hold that against you, just pointing it out.
You left off Critical hits. They contribute a fair amount. Generally 5% more DPR, but that varies per build.
PAM's provoke going off in round 1 and 3 (40%) looks good to me. In actual play I'd estimate some combats it happens more often (3 or 4) and some less often (1 or 2). I'd place that around 50%, but 40% is close enough.
You left off GWM's Cleave. It's a huge value and can't be ignored.
6*5 = 30 rounds a day is in the ballpark of the DMG recommendations. Though I calculated their expectations based on XP and some assumptions about the difficulty of encounters. See line 16-26 on Settings (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=2091322934). You could easily modify the expectations, but you wouldn't vary far beyond the ~25 per day I got.
You've left off rage uses: A barbarian only has 3 rage uses at level 5. That means for 3 of the encounters it is not using rage.
Your average damage has some weird calculations: "=AVERAGE(1,2,3,4,5,6)*2" is more clear than "((12+1)/2)". You add 4, which is Strength? But you have strength listed as 17. Probably best to reference the cell here. Rage should be +2, but I mentioned that above. I wonder if it's better to use 2d6 for GWM as a barbarian could use a sword or maul. They're more likely to use an axe, but should we really punish the build out of damage because the axe is inferior? It's a debate I had as well.
Frenzy should still be taking GWM as -5/+10 with reckless attacks is far too good to pass up when it's available. It's the most value per feat in the game.
Frenzy assumes 3 encounters. Assuming you're using RAW (as otherwise, why would you not frenzy every encounter) which would accrue 3 exhaustion per day. Most games don't have days to kill between combat. Imo a Barbarian would likely use 1 a day and use 2 on bigger days with bosses. I place that at 1.5 on the average day.
Graph labels. if you include A1:H1 you'll get labels on your graphs and that'll help. They're also rather compact. If you click on the actual graph part you can move and resize to get rid of the white space around it.


After those things are fixed we can draw some conclusions with your sheet. :)

[nolas85]

Comparing at only one level isn't the best view of the whole progression, but it can be ok for a snapshot. With that mindset lets take a look:


AC: You're assuming a level 5 barbarian is attacking 16 AC. Based on the DMG that would generally be a CR 8 enemy. Based on my calculations from the MM monster math (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=1829796671) that would mean the enemy is a CR 9. I would recommend aiming for CR = level which would result in an AC of about ~14.4 with a weighted average assuming the level 5 barbarian fights an equal distribution of enemies within 3 levels of him (so CR 2 to CR 8). If you just wanted the average for a CR 5 that could be 15.2.
Rage damage is +2 at level 5, not +3.
Strength Assuming 17 strength on all barbarian's isn't such a great option. For example TWF is best served by pumping his strength while GWM and PAM are best served by taking their feats. Probably best to set strength values for each build option. It seems you kind of did that, but it's in the formulas. They'd be best when exposed below.
What is "Base"? If it's just a greatsword wielding guy then best to give him a higher strength.
Opportunity Attack not included. Though to be fair by my assumptions and calculations it's not very impactful so I won't hold that against you, just pointing it out.
You left off Critical hits. They contribute a fair amount. Generally 5% more DPR, but that varies per build.
PAM's provoke going off in round 1 and 3 (40%) looks good to me. In actual play I'd estimate some combats it happens more often (3 or 4) and some less often (1 or 2). I'd place that around 50%, but 40% is close enough.
You left off GWM's Cleave. It's a huge value and can't be ignored.
6*5 = 30 rounds a day is in the ballpark of the DMG recommendations. Though I calculated their expectations based on XP and some assumptions about the difficulty of encounters. See line 16-26 on Settings (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1d-9xDdath8kX_v7Rpts9JFIJwIG3X0-dDUtfax14NT0/edit#gid=2091322934). You could easily modify the expectations, but you wouldn't vary far beyond the ~25 per day I got.
You've left off rage uses: A barbarian only has 3 rage uses at level 5. That means for 3 of the encounters it is not using rage.
Your average damage has some weird calculations: "=AVERAGE(1,2,3,4,5,6)*2" is more clear than "((12+1)/2)". You add 4, which is Strength? But you have strength listed as 17. Probably best to reference the cell here. Rage should be +2, but I mentioned that above. I wonder if it's better to use 2d6 for GWM as a barbarian could use a sword or maul. They're more likely to use an axe, but should we really punish the build out of damage because the axe is inferior? It's a debate I had as well.
Frenzy should still be taking GWM as -5/+10 with reckless attacks is far too good to pass up when it's available. It's the most value per feat in the game.
Frenzy assumes 3 encounters. Assuming you're using RAW (as otherwise, why would you not frenzy every encounter) which would accrue 3 exhaustion per day. Most games don't have days to kill between combat. Imo a Barbarian would likely use 1 a day and use 2 on bigger days with bosses. I place that at 1.5 on the average day.
Graph labels. if you include A1:H1 you'll get labels on your graphs and that'll help. They're also rather compact. If you click on the actual graph part you can move and resize to get rid of the white space around it.


After those things are fixed we can draw some conclusions with your sheet. :)

-I fixed the rage damage on the second sheet for frenzy adding a d4, I'll fix it for the original chart tonight to reflect accurately.
-Strength was listed as 17 base because that's what PAM+GWM would be at while every option that only required one or fewer feats would be able to boost STR to 19
-Rage uses was factored in. If you look at encounter 4+ you'll notice that it references the per encounter damage of the version without frenzy (ie. Frenzy+GWM starts adding just GWM at encounter 4)
-The cleave attack from GWM only comes into play in the base version. PAM+GWM uses the bonus attack for PAM. Frenzy+GWM uses the bonus attack for frenzy. I'll add it in round 1 and 3, similar to PAM, for GWM alone.
-With extra crit damage an axe is the best option for a barbarian. greatsword only adds an extra d6 with brutal critical (I think that's what it's called) while an axe adds a d12. Average damage on a greatsword is slightly higher (7 vs 6.5) but that hardly makes up the difference.
-I was assuming no exhaustion with frenzy. I can add that in but I think that would only accentuate the issue with adding exhaustion to frenzy.
-There should be labels on it already. I'll check when I get home as I can't download it at work.
-Anything with TWF was using d8 base, anything with PAM was using d10 base, anything else was using d12 base.
-Since it's a normal distribution, adding the minimum and maximum damage then dividing by 2 gets you the same result. It wouldn't work if this weren't normal and is really a different way to get to the same end-state.
-Good call on base rage damage. I added it during frenzy but didn't account for normal rage with the feat options. I'll add this modification when I get home.

[Kryx]

Level used: Ah, I just thought through GWM+PAM. If you're going to compare that then you should move the comparison to level 8. We can't assume Vuman otherwise every other build gets an extra feat which isn't currently accounted for.

I'd lay it out thusly:
TWF: +5 Str
GWM: +4 Str, GWM
PAM: +4 Str, PAM
PAM+GWM: +3 Str, PAM+GWM

Cleave from GWM heavily depends on enemies. It averages about 40% over all levels with damage + crit chance. 2/5 seems good.

1d12 is worse than 2d6 until level 13.
9th:
6.5 + ((6.5 + 6.5) * .0975) = 7.7675
7 + ((7 + 3.5) * .0975) = 8.02375
13th:
6.5 + ((6.5 + 6.5 + 6.5) * .0975) = 8.40125
7 + ((7 + 3.5 + 3.5) * .0975) = 8.365

You assumed no exhaustion, but still frenzied only 3 encounters? Doesn't make sense. I thought this comparison was for RAW and your other one was for the houserules. If you're removing exhaustion then it frenzy should be on rage uses.

Weapon damage may work how you have it, but it is easiest to understand when you do it via averages like I put above. Adding 1 to the maximum amount doesn't work as soon as you start using 2d6 (which you likely should).

Rage usage does not seem to be factored in PAM for example just adds the following encounter with no difference in damage. Same with Frenzy.


Will you fix the other issues? AC? Opportunity Attack? Crits? # of encounters (unless you're assuming a lower AC than average as the encounters are easier)?

Also you need a Frenzy + TWF and Frenzy + PAM.

[nolas85]

I ignored frenzy+TWF because the option is clearly subpar. You limit the damage dice you can use and there's no reason to use a bonus attack for TWF as opposed to frenzy since you don't add str to TWF bonus attack (multiclass can fix this but you delay access to other features as well). Frenzy+PAM also seems like a waste since the bonus attack is better spent with the frenzy attack and you lower your damage dice but you do get the option of a reaction attack and sustained damage after the 3rd encounter so I'll throw it in to see what it does.

Yes I'll include crit chance and modify the AC. My understanding was that 6 encounters was appropriate for a one day comparison. The two different spreadsheets are designed to represent Frenzy with no exhaustion and then frenzy with no extra attack but bonus damage dice respectively. I plan to stick with human since I feel it allows the easiest comparison. The chart will look much different depending on what race is selected and would necessitate a new chart for each race for an accurate comparison. I'm not really willing to do that quite yet. Additionally, human allows access to requisite feats at the earliest opportunity. I'm also inclined to leave opportunity attacks out because there is no set formula for predicting when you will get one. I'm willing to concede on PAM+GWM reaction attacks since you have more control over that triggering as a character but significantly less so for opportunity attacks.

[Zman]

Working on my classes damage spreadsheet for my houserules vs the stock game and I noticed some very interesting things about Frenzy and the Barbarian. Removing Exhaustion blows expected damage out of the park late game and can spike expected DPR over 60. Basically as the number of rages per day increases to the point that the Barbarian can be Frenzied all the time it is crazy. Exhaustion as a method of curbing that is the right direction, just a terrible implementation.

What I now suggest is Removing the exhaustion effect, but only allowing the Berserker to enter a Frenzy once per Short/Long Rest. That effectively limits it to three Frenzies per day which works just fine at low levels, makes Frenzy special, and doesn't blowup at late game. It treats Frenzy like a moderate term damage boost.


Basically, if you removing exhaustion make sure you curb Frenzy in some way as it will work just fine at low levels, but become problematic at higher levels.

[Kryx]

Working on my classes damage spreadsheet for my houserules vs the stock game and I noticed some very interesting things about Frenzy and the Barbarian. Removing Exhaustion blows expected damage out of the park late game and can spike expected DPR over 60. Basically as the number of rages per day increases to the point that the Barbarian can be Frenzied all the time it is crazy. Exhaustion as a method of curbing that is the right direction
Exactly what I've been saying, but in less words. :P

Your suggestion above would accomplish what you want while maintaining balance. 1/short rest is a good balance point.

[Zman]

Exactly what I've been saying, but in less words. :P

Your suggestion above would accomplish what you want while maintaining balance. 1/short rest is a good balance point.

You are also suggesting making the bonus attack not require a bonus action and then that can be combined with anything that grants a bonus action attack like Cleave or Polearm and that is quite problematic too, actually potentially more so. Basically, I kept arguing against this portion of your Frenzy changes, your Once per day removal of Exhaustion is a good balance point as well, essentially the difference between 2 or potentially 3 Frenzies a day.

Essentially I was looking at the early game balance of my fix and didn't look at what it did post lvl 12. For some reason how rapidly the number of rages scaled just didn't sink in or my memory of it didn't quite sync with reality haha.

[Kryx]

Keeping the bonus action cost prevents twf and is an unacceptable option without further modifications imo.
Removing bonus action cost in my houserules makes twf, polearm, and GWM all within the expected range. You can verify this on my sheet.

[Zman]

Keeping the bonus action cost prevents twf and is such an unacceptable option without further modifications imo.
Removing bonus action cost in my houserules makes twf, polearm, and GWM all within the expected range. You can verify this on my sheet.

It does in aggregate for your modifications, but you reworked GWM and PAM substantially. Though, aren't you concerned with Spike Damage for Frenzy for say a TWF Berserker. That is 6 Attacks, which have Ab+Rage... based on my napkin math that is 62 Damage Per round using standard AC at 11th level for ~40% of the Encounters. Sure, it may average out within the normal range, but that is really a massive spike in line with a lvl 11 Polearm GWF Fighter Action Surging every single round. I know it aggregates out ok, but man that is some crazy sustained damage output. It is the same raw DPR at lvl 11 while Frenzied that a lvl 20 Barbarian with Great Axe Frenzied does(sans GWM) stock. Sure, because of your limitations Frenzy for TWF aggregates out to an acceptable range but you have ~40% of the game that is at a sustained level of DPR that is greater than other classes' resource dependent Novas on par with a Fighter Action Surging every round or a Paladin Smiting non stop.

[Kryx]

"Substantially reworked" is rather inaccurate at best. I removed -5/+10 which many on this forum decry. I removed the bonus action attack from PAM which is also cited as an issue. Making things default is not necessary for that balance, though does help things.
I'd appreciate it if you didn't mischaracterize the change.

Frenzy is not 6 attacks. Frenzy gives one extra attack which takes us from 3 to 4. Normal attack, extra attack, twf offhand, frenzy = 4.

[Zman]

"Substantially reworked" is rather inaccurate at best. I removed -5/+10 which many on this forum decry. I removed the bonus action attack from PAM which is also cited as an issue. Making things default is not necessary for that balance, though does help things.
I'd appreciate it if you didn't mischaracterize the change.

Frenzy is not 6 attacks. Frenzy gives one extra attack which takes us from 3 to 4. Normal attack, extra attack, twf offhand, frenzy = 4.

I call removing half of each feat and incorporating the other half into the default game substantial in my opinion, and that is in addition to the additional offhand attack at 11th level, adding AB to offhand damage into the stock game. Gahh, not 6, but at 11th Extra Attack 2, Offhand 2, Frenzy 1 for a total of 5 Attacks, or a DPR of ~52. I misspoke when I said 6, and we both were wrong, haha. Either way, a sustained DPR over 50 at 11th level for ~40% of the adventuring day is quite an imbalance even if it aggregates out to reasonable which was my initial point. Also, Greater Restoration is problematic for your variant as it can scale DPR quite high and be sustained for most of the adventuring day if there is a Bard, Cleric, or Druid in the party willing to devote a spell slot or two into making the Berserker even more crazy.

[rudy]

I've implemented a simple fix for this in my game. Path of the Berserker gets the following addition right at 3rd level:


Tireless Rage
The effects (but not the condition) of exhaustion are suspended whenever you are raging. Further, all levels of exhaustion gained from Frenzy count as one level for the purposes of removing them via spells or rest.

I've liked the way this has worked out so far. It's neat because the Barbarian can Frenzy more and more throughout the day, but then as soon as the combat is over they're slumping over. If they do it several times in the day, the condition gets worse and worse when they don't have bloodlust driving them.