Pugilist barbarian thoughts?

[Spacehamster]

Thought about home brewing a barbarian path that lays weapons aside and instead gets the monk martial die progression, what other perks should a barb like this get you guys? :)

[Lalliman]

The first thing I always say when someone makes an unarmed subclass: don't use the monk's damage die progression. The enlarging damage die is part of the monk's power curve. Other classes have their own power curve. It doesn't make sense to carry it over.

I'd focus a lot on grappling and shoving, with features such as:
- Dealing a small amount of damage whenever you shove someone, to represent forcefully slamming them into the ground.
- Ability to grapple as an opportunity attack.
- Ability to shove and grapple creatures of a larger size category.

The Berserker's Retaliation also makes a lot of sense, I think, since counterattacking is essential in many punch-based martial arts.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Thought about home brewing a barbarian path that lays weapons aside and instead gets the monk martial die progression, what other perks should a barb like this get you guys? :)

I don't have anything for this myself, but I know that Submortimer's thoughts can be found here (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2015/12/path-of-brawler.html)!

[Spacehamster]

I don't have anything for this myself, but I know that Submortimer's thoughts can be found here (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2015/12/path-of-brawler.html)!

That one looks fun, thx! :)

[GlenSmash!]

The first thing I always say when someone makes an unarmed subclass: don't use the monk's damage die progression. The enlarging damage die is part of the monk's power curve. Other classes have their own power curve. It doesn't make sense to carry it over.

I'd focus a lot on grappling and shoving, with features such as:
- Dealing a small amount of damage whenever you shove someone, to represent forcefully slamming them into the ground.
- Ability to grapple as an opportunity attack.
- Ability to shove and grapple creatures of a larger size category.

The Berserker's Retaliation also makes a lot of sense, I think, since counterattacking is essential in many punch-based martial arts.

I agree with the damage dice progression. Barbarians already get Rage damage progression. If the barbarian has Tavern Brawler it actually averages out to being pretty similar to a Monks aver damage per hit. 1d4+Strength+Rage vs. Monk Die + Dex. Of course the Monk gets more hits with Martial arts and Flurry of blows, and potential riders to those hits like Stunning Strike.

Most flavors of Barbarian that have the Tavern Brawler and Prodigy feats (expertise in athletics) would make fine pugilists, and even better grapplers.

Alternatively, I just add some fist weapons to the game. Makes Unarmed Strike damage 1d6 and considered to have the Heavy property so it can work with GWM.

[Spacehamster]

I agree with the damage dice progression. Barbarians already get Rage damage progression. If the barbarian has Tavern Brawler it actually averages out to being pretty similar to a Monks aver damage per hit. 1d4+Strength+Rage vs. Monk Die + Dex. Of course the Monk gets more hits with Martial arts and Flurry of blows, and potential riders to those hits like Stunning Strike.

Most flavors of Barbarian that have the Tavern Brawler and Prodigy feats (expertise in athletics) would make fine pugilists, and even better grapplers.

Alternatively, I just add some fist weapons to the game. Makes Unarmed Strike damage 1d6 and considered to have the Heavy property so it can work with GWM.

A barbarian should do more damage than a monk tho, the barbs sctick is not a mobile striker its a blunt force tank/frontline dmg dealer so don´t see any harm in him doing more damage
than a monk?

[GlenSmash!]

A barbarian should do more damage than a monk tho, the barbs sctick is not a mobile striker its a blunt force tank/frontline dmg dealer so don´t see any harm in him doing more damage
than a monk?

They do more damage than Monks already.

They question really is "Should they do more damage with Fists?"

Answers on that are likely to vary.

If I was going to bump Unarmed Barbarian damage, I would rather do something like increase Rage damage for Unarmed Strikes, rather than have a scaling die like the monk.

Personally I think a Barbarian can already do respectable damage with fists and be a better grapper/shover than a monk ever could be. So I would prefer a Path that enhanced Grappling/Shoving over Damage.

As has already been mentioned, allowing the Barb to Grapple Huge creatures would be a big bonus, and damage on Grapples and Shoves would make a pretty unique style of play. Or have Unarmed Attacks knock foes prone which would be similar to Stunning Strike, but enough to feel different enough to me to be interesting. Or maybe something weird like being able to sustain a grapple without using a free hand, like pining a foe with your body weight. Hmm maybe that one would only work if the foe is also prone.

[alchahest]

I think upping the damage to 1D4, but not scaling it works. however, on a crit, your damage die is replaced with a D8 (and likewise all additional dice from the crit and brutal critical)

[trctelles]

Thought about home brewing a barbarian path that lays weapons aside and instead gets the monk martial die progression, what other perks should a barb like this get you guys? :)

Don't know if you know DawnforgedCast, but the dude made a homebrew totem warrior to fit Ayla from Chrono Trigger into it. He does exactly what you intend on doing. He calls it the "Raptor" totem spirit. Check it out on YouTube: (5E D&D) Chrono Trigger Characters: Ayla :smallwink:

[Mortis_Elrod]

i like the idea of a fist based barbarian like most. When it comes to the scaling i think that having 1d4 or 1d6 but double rage damage on fists is enough. gives that hard hitting PUNCH.

abilties to consider:
-crit on objects (realy hones in the forceful blows you can do.)

-reaction to hit back against someone who hit you in melee range. Iconic Trading Blows.

-something akin to Ki abilties. Maybe a choice of Cross, Uppercut, Knock out punch.

in addition to the shove/grapple ideas mentioned above. Obviously all of this together is a bit much but this is enough to make something really, fun.

[Mith]

I just like the idea because I enjoy the idea of the Fist of the Forest PrC in 3.5.

[CircuitEngie]

I think the barbarian would be fine with a d4 unarmed, most of the barb damage comes from static rage and STR modifiers anyway.

Just brainstorming:
3) unarmed attacks are now 1d4+STR
3) While raging, if you use the attack action to only attack with your unarmed strikes or attempt to grapple a target, you can make an additional unarmed attack or grapple attempt as a bonus action.
6) add your strength modifier to any intimidation checks you make where the target can see you.
6) Your unarmed strikes count as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to non-magical weapons.
10) Knockout punch: When you critically hit a creature with your unarmed strikes, you can knock the creature prone if it is no more than two size categories larger than you.
10) Creatures that are two size categories larger than you are do not automatically succeed on grapple checks.
14) When you enter your rage, you can gain the effects of the Enlarge option of the Enlarge/Reduce spell (no concentration required). This lasts until your rage ends.

[alchahest]

as far as I know, creatures two sizes larger than you do not automatically succeed on grapple checks anyways

[Lalliman]

A barbarian should do more damage than a monk tho, the barbs sctick is not a mobile striker its a blunt force tank/frontline dmg dealer so don´t see any harm in him doing more damage
than a monk?
That wasn't my problem. I agree that the punching barbarian should have good damage. I'd go for d6 unarmed damage with a bonus action attack, thus making it just like two-weapon fighting. But I oppose the way in which Martial Arts scales. If you apply a scaling damage die to the barbarian, you're adding a damage progression where there previously was none. The class becomes more back-loaded than it's supposed to be.

[GlenSmash!]

as far as I know, creatures two sizes larger than you do not automatically succeed on grapple checks anyways

That's because you can't even make grapples against a creature more than one size larger than you.


Grappling

When you want to grab a creature or wrestle with it, you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them. The target of your grapple must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach.

[Flashy]

Martial arts scaling grants damage progression up to 1d10, the same as a longsword wielded in two hands. Since a barbarian can already wield a longsword in two hands I really don’t get what the problem is. You’re not adding any other martial arts features, who cares if a high level barbarian is rolling a d10 for damage with fists instead of a weapon?

[GlenSmash!]

Martial arts scaling grants damage progression up to 1d10, the same as a longsword wielded in two hands. Since a barbarian can already wield a longsword in two hands I really don’t get what the problem is. You’re not adding any other martial arts features, who cares if a high level barbarian is rolling a d10 for damage with fists instead of a weapon?

Personally, because I dislike taking things that are unique to one class and giving them to another class.

I'd much rather think of something unique to do with what I am trying to accomplish.

[Lalliman]

Martial arts scaling grants damage progression up to 1d10, the same as a longsword wielded in two hands. Since a barbarian can already wield a longsword in two hands I really don’t get what the problem is. You’re not adding any other martial arts features, who cares if a high level barbarian is rolling a d10 for damage with fists instead of a weapon?
I'm assuming you want the unarmed barbarian to actually fight unarmed, not with a longsword. If your method for doing that is to up the damage of unarmed strikes, you're better off putting the damage at d10 right away and balancing around that. If your method for making unarmed strikes worthwhile involves something else (e.g. bonus attacks), then you're facing a problem. Either the damage output is balanced at low level and too high at high level, or it's too low at low level and balanced at high level.

It was never about the amount of damage, it's about the concept of scaling. It's a part of the monk's design, but it fundamentally makes no sense for other classes. A barbarian's weapons don't increase their damage die with level, so neither should their unarmed strikes. The class isn't designed to accommodate that without breaking the intended balance point.

[Flashy]

A barbarian's weapons don't increase their damage die with level, so neither should their unarmed strikes. The class isn't designed to accommodate that without breaking the intended balance point.

I guess I’m just not seeing why marginally underperforming the possible barbarian damage curve is a serious problem. The system already allows a barbarian to do between 1d4+Str+rage and 2d6+Str+rage depending on what weapon they’re choosing. I’m not really bothered by a barbarian doing 1d6, 1d8, and then 1d10. It maybe down-skews them by a couple dpr, but it’s a marginal difference and one that evens out over the course of the game.

I’m not arguing that this HAS to be an aspect of a pugilist barbarian (and I totally understand not wanting to copy and paste other classes’ features), but I’m honestly confused about the idea that implementing a damage progression is a problem in a class that already includes both ends of the spectrum as default options. If a barbarian with a hand-axe and a barbarian with a maul are both fine (and in 5e they basically are) then why is a feature that scales from one to the other a problem?

I think we agree that it’s not a problem if you don’t add bonus attacks though? If so, that’s the only point I was really trying to make.

[The_Jette]

Question: have you considered taking a monk and fluffing him with barbarian abilities instead of giving the barbarian monk abilities?

[Mortis_Elrod]

Question: have you considered taking a monk and fluffing him with barbarian abilities instead of giving the barbarian monk abilities?

I think that is a different idea altogether. The idea is to make a pugilist subclass of barbarian. A Path of the Furious Fist if you will. Thats a completely different thematic than what a monk inspires. Mechanicaly the op wants something completely different than the monk anyway.


Here's what i would do.

level 3: d6 unarmed strikes. They receive double the rage bonus. Auto crit on objects.
level 6: Style choice
Out Fighter: if you take the disengage or dodge action, you can do an unarmed strike as bonus action.
In fighter: When you are hit with a melee attack you can try to punch the attack away. Reaction to Attack the attackers roll. If yours wins you take no damage.
Wrestler: You can shove or grapple as a bonus action after dealing damage with an unarmed strike.

level 10: ignore difficult terrain, you got good footwork. Additionally immune to first level of exhaustion.
level 14: Knock out Punch. once per long rest o something. land 2 consecutive hits on same target you can deliver a third as bonus action. If hits it crits.

[GlenSmash!]

Question: have you considered taking a monk and fluffing him with barbarian abilities instead of giving the barbarian monk abilities?

I think an Monk with the Outlander background is awesome. Rather than training in a Monastery, he observed how animals fought, and tried to mimic them eventually creating his own style.

However that is a very different thought exercise that making a Barbarian Path that focus on unarmed combat.

[The_Jette]

I think that is a different idea altogether. The idea is to make a pugilist subclass of barbarian. A Path of the Furious Fist if you will. Thats a completely different thematic than what a monk inspires. Mechanicaly the op wants something completely different than the monk anyway.

Now I want to make a Monk archetype called the Path of the Furious Fist...

[Dudewithknives]

I think that is a different idea altogether. The idea is to make a pugilist subclass of barbarian. A Path of the Furious Fist if you will. Thats a completely different thematic than what a monk inspires. Mechanicaly the op wants something completely different than the monk anyway.


Here's what i would do.

level 3: d6 unarmed strikes. They receive double the rage bonus. Auto crit on objects.
level 6: Style choice
Out Fighter: if you take the disengage or dodge action, you can do an unarmed strike as bonus action.
In fighter: When you are hit with a melee attack you can try to punch the attack away. Reaction to Attack the attackers roll. If yours wins you take no damage.
Wrestler: You can shove or grapple as a bonus action after dealing damage with an unarmed strike.

level 10: ignore difficult terrain, you got good footwork. Additionally immune to first level of exhaustion.
level 14: Knock out Punch. once per long rest o something. land 2 consecutive hits on same target you can deliver a third as bonus action. If hits it crits.


1. that damage is broken as hell. a d6 where a monk has a d4 at that level, and doubling rage bonus on top means
@ level 3 a barbarian with 16 str does ~10.5 damage per hit while raging, a monk does 5.5
@ level 5 the barbarian is at 18 str now so he does 11.5 the monk gets slightly better with their 18 dex and can do 7.5 damage per hit
@ level 9 the barbarian rage damage goes up by 1 and their str should be 20 so that means their unarmed goes to 14.5 damage per hit, monk is at 8.5
If it makes it to level 17 a monk can average at most 11.5 per hit without magic items, a barbarian did that at level 5. @ 17 the barbarian averages 16.5 a hit even with just a d6 damage.

This is on top of the fact they have a D12 HD and a monk has a D8, and have resistance to weapon type damage while raging on top of all that.

2. Barbarians do not get a fighting style for a reason, they are incredibly powerful without one. Your styles are also very overpowered. Outfight lets people attack while taking actions other than the attack action. Infight is the best parry ability in the game. Wrestler is the best part of tavern brawler for free.

3. The level 10 ability does not make much sense, why would they ignore rough terrain? That is also from the mobile feat. Barbarians are not known for being acrobats. Ignoring the first level of exhaustion would almost never come up but it is crazy good.

4. The level 14 ability is not so bad.

[Mortis_Elrod]

1. that damage is broken as hell. a d6 where a monk has a d4 at that level, and doubling rage bonus on top means
@ level 3 a barbarian with 16 str does ~10.5 damage per hit while raging, a monk does 5.5
@ level 5 the barbarian is at 18 str now so he does 11.5 the monk gets slightly better with their 18 dex and can do 7.5 damage per hit
@ level 9 the barbarian rage damage goes up by 1 and their str should be 20 so that means their unarmed goes to 14.5 damage per hit, monk is at 8.5
If it makes it to level 17 a monk can average at most 11.5 per hit without magic items, a barbarian did that at level 5. @ 17 the barbarian averages 16.5 a hit even with just a d6 damage.

This is on top of the fact they have a D12 HD and a monk has a D8, and have resistance to weapon type damage while raging on top of all that.

2. Barbarians do not get a fighting style for a reason, they are incredibly powerful without one. Your styles are also very overpowered. Outfight lets people attack while taking actions other than the attack action. Infight is the best parry ability in the game. Wrestler is the best part of tavern brawler for free.

3. The level 10 ability does not make much sense, why would they ignore rough terrain? That is also from the mobile feat. Barbarians are not known for being acrobats. Ignoring the first level of exhaustion would almost never come up but it is crazy good.

4. The level 14 ability is not so bad.

Barbarian does more damage than that already. The whole point is that barbarians don’t scal like monks at all. Monk will be doing more attacks that will scale anyway. Comparing a barbarian with a great axe (the more used option) it’s where t should be. The rage bonus is a mere +2 until 9th level which is like adding dueling fighting style to the barbarian but only with his unarmed strikes are while also spending a resource(rage). To put it in perspective, great axe barbarian will swing for 11.5 avg while raging while the unarmed one is punching out 10.5 and the war pick one is doing the same damage 10.5
And the handaxe dualwielding one is doing 14 avg but spending bonus actions every turn (also can’t do on the turn of raging)


Also the monk is doing 11 avg damage no resource spending except for bonus action and can spend a resource that increases that to 16.5.

This changes at 5th level with extra attack
Greataxe: 2d12+12 = 26avg
Fist: 2d6 + 16 = 23 avg
Dual wielding hand axes: 24.5 avg
Monk no flurry: 3d6 + 12= 22.5 avg or 30 with flurry

And at 9 fist increases to 29 avg
At 11 monk no flurry does 3d8 + 15 = 28.5 and 38 avg with flurry
The next change is at 16 for the barbarian to 33
Monk level 17 means 31.5 avg without flurry and 42 with flurry

Barbarian doesn’t even win in the end at level 20
2d6 + 30 = 37 avg

So what does this amount to? It means that the barbarian is shoving more force out but can only pump out two hits while the monk is doing almost as much or more damage but is a lot faster. So exactly like the design philosophy between the classes. I’m not even including other archetypes that could potentially do more that are already official or feats.


Out fight is like cunning action or step of the wind only you can attack only once while the other two allow extra attack to happen. Also only allows unarmed strikes so there that other limit.

In fight might be something to consider changing, but just because it’s a unique ability doesn’t mean much. This is like deflect missle only affects melee only . If my wording it’s off i apologize but you aren’t supposed to be able to do damage with this if that’s the concern.

Wrestling can be modified but less than half a fest being a class feature isn’t op.

Honestly for level 10 I’m at a loss on what to put here. But flavor wise boxers have excellent footwork, and that’s what I’m trying to capture here. This is leaning on the subclasses flavor more than the class itself. The stamina thing should be obvious, pugilist have excellent stamina and can push through exhaustion more than most.


Any suggested substitutions? I kind of made this on the fly.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Now I want to make a Monk archetype called the Path of the Furious Fist...

Maybe “Way of the Northern Fist” ? Fist of the North Star is more monkish.

[Dudewithknives]

Barbarian does more damage than that already. The whole point is that barbarians don’t scal like monks at all. Monk will be doing more attacks that will scale anyway. Comparing a barbarian with a great axe (the more used option) it’s where t should be. The rage bonus is a mere +2 until 9th level which is like adding dueling fighting style to the barbarian but only with his unarmed strikes are while also spending a resource(rage). To put it in perspective, great axe barbarian will swing for 11.5 avg while raging while the unarmed one is punching out 10.5 and the war pick one is doing the same damage 10.5
And the handaxe dualwielding one is doing 14 avg but spending bonus actions every turn (also can’t do on the turn of raging)


Also the monk is doing 11 avg damage no resource spending except for bonus action and can spend a resource that increases that to 16.5.

This changes at 5th level with extra attack
Greataxe: 2d12+12 = 26avg
Fist: 2d6 + 16 = 23 avg
Dual wielding hand axes: 24.5 avg
Monk no flurry: 3d6 + 12= 22.5 avg or 30 with flurry

And at 9 fist increases to 29 avg
At 11 monk no flurry does 3d8 + 15 = 28.5 and 38 avg with flurry
The next change is at 16 for the barbarian to 33
Monk level 17 means 31.5 avg without flurry and 42 with flurry

Barbarian doesn’t even win in the end at level 20
2d6 + 30 = 37 avg

So what does this amount to? It means that the barbarian is shoving more force out but can only pump out two hits while the monk is doing almost as much or more damage but is a lot faster. So exactly like the design philosophy between the classes. I’m not even including other archetypes that could potentially do more that are already official or feats.


Out fight is like cunning action or step of the wind only you can attack only once while the other two allow extra attack to happen. Also only allows unarmed strikes so there that other limit.

In fight might be something to consider changing, but just because it’s a unique ability doesn’t mean much. This is like deflect missle only affects melee only . If my wording it’s off i apologize but you aren’t supposed to be able to do damage with this if that’s the concern.

Wrestling can be modified but less than half a fest being a class feature isn’t op.

Honestly for level 10 I’m at a loss on what to put here. But flavor wise boxers have excellent footwork, and that’s what I’m trying to capture here. This is leaning on the subclasses flavor more than the class itself. The stamina thing should be obvious, pugilist have excellent stamina and can push through exhaustion more than most.


Any suggested substitutions? I kind of made this on the fly.

You can also still use a shield with this subclass.

Step of the wind uses Ki, it is not free. Cunning action is one of the best features a rogue gets and you just added it to a barbarian, it also does not allow multi-attack because rogue do not get multi-attack.
The reason that insight is broken is because it can effect melee. Deflect arrows lessens damage, it does not automatically make an attack miss. The reason deflect arrows is not considered broken is because most things in the game either use spells at range, which it does not effect, or they use melee which it also does not effect. Infight would essentially be used every round you are ever attacking because you are melee yourself.

If multclassing is involved this gets even worse. 1 level of monk and you will be bonus attacking every round with the same high damage bonus attack.

You just cherry picked the best abilities from other classes and feats to make an unarmed fighter.

[Mortis_Elrod]

You can also still use a shield with this subclass.

Step of the wind uses Ki, it is not free. Cunning action is one of the best features a rogue gets and you just added it to a barbarian, it also does not allow multi-attack because rogue do not get multi-attack.
The reason that insight is broken is because it can effect melee. Deflect arrows lessens damage, it does not automatically make an attack miss. The reason deflect arrows is not considered broken is because most things in the game either use spells at range, which it does not effect, or they use melee which it also does not effect. Infight would essentially be used every round you are ever attacking because you are melee yourself.

If multclassing is involved this gets even worse. 1 level of monk and you will be bonus attacking every round with the same high damage bonus attack.

You just cherry picked the best abilities from other classes and feats to make an unarmed fighter.

Barbarianis always gonna be tankier than a monk and monks aren’t going to do more damage per hit than a barbarian. None of these things change with these features. Outfight is a simple fix then, only while raging or 3 times per short or long rest. Though monks ki is a resource it replenishes very quickly.
Also this would be a whole 4 levels later than the rogue or monk, and there’s a bit of an opportunity cost.

In fight should reduce the damage then not cancel it outright. I’ll agree there it might need to be replaced.

In general for any homebrew or test material you shouldn’t multiclassing with it anyway.

I didn’t Cherry pick anything. I thought of thematic ways a pugilist barbarian might fight and these are some of the ideas I came up with and the way they could be represented in 5e. I didn’t notice the similarities between other class’s features until after the fact and I use those features as examples of not being able without some precedent.

[MadBear]

Looking through here, I'd probably run it something like:

3- Offensive ability
6- Defensive ability
10- Utility ability
14- Better offensive ability

3rd level- Path of the Pugislist: Starting at 3rd level, your fists become as thick and dense as rocks. Whenever you make an attack, using an unarmed strike you're fists deal 1d4 damage and you deal 2X the normal rage damage per attack.

Additionally, whenever you make an unarmed strike on your turn, you can as a bonus action, make an additional unarmed strike adding your strength/dexterity to the damage.

6th level- Resilient: The brutal training that you have put your body through makes it more reslient then the normal person. While raging, you are immune to the poison, paralyzed, and stunned status effects. These conditions will return upon the ending of a rage

10th level- Show Boat: When fighting any foe 1v1, the pugilist can win over a crowd of anyone watching. As an action the pugilist can make all observers within 30 ft that can see him to make a Wisdom saving throw (8+proficiencey + charisma) or be charmed by the pugilist for as long as they're within sight of the pugilist.

14th level- Combo: Once per short rest while raging, the pugilist can make a massive knockout combo shots at their opponent. Make an attack roll with advantage for each of your normal attacks, each attack that hits deals maximum damage to your opponent. After using this ability all attack rolls against you next round have advantage, and you don't benefit from your dexterity bonus to AC.

[Avonar]

Looking through here, I'd probably run it something like:

3- Offensive ability
6- Defensive ability
10- Utility ability
14- Better offensive ability

3rd level- Path of the Pugislist: Starting at 3rd level, your fists become as thick and dense as rocks. Whenever you make an attack, using an unarmed strike you're fists deal 1d4 damage and you deal 2X the normal rage damage per attack.

Additionally, whenever you make an unarmed strike on your turn, you can as a bonus action, make an additional unarmed strike adding your strength/dexterity to the damage.

6th level- Resilient: The brutal training that you have put your body through makes it more reslient then the normal person. While raging, you are immune to the poison, paralyzed, and stunned status effects. These conditions will return upon the ending of a rage

10th level- Show Boat: When fighting any foe 1v1, the pugilist can win over a crowd of anyone watching. As an action the pugilist can make all observers within 30 ft that can see him to make a Wisdom saving throw (8+proficiencey + charisma) or be charmed by the pugilist for as long as they're within sight of the pugilist.

14th level- Combo: Once per short rest while raging, the pugilist can make a massive knockout combo shots at their opponent. Make an attack roll with advantage for each of your normal attacks, each attack that hits deals maximum damage to your opponent. After using this ability all attack rolls against you next round have advantage, and you don't benefit from your dexterity bonus to AC.

These are...no, just no. Do not steal half of what makes the monk special because you want a punchy barbarian. Everything here other than the Combo (which is a more powerful Reckless Attack) is a feature of a different class. Taking features and giving them to other classes is a terrible way to add content or homebrew.

For the general thread:

Why would a pugilist be a barbarian anyway? Barbarians are NOT known for skillful footwork and fighting, they are known for getting angry and hitting hard. Who is known for skillful combat? Monks and fighters. If you don't want to reflavour a Monk, look at doing something to a Fighter.

And I very much disagree that a Barbarian should be better at unarmed combat than a Monk. Barbarian gets angry and hits hard, Monk uses years of training and channeling magic-like ki to strike critical points. A Monk could totally be able to do more damage.

[MadBear]

These are...no, just no. Do not steal half of what makes the monk special because you want a punchy barbarian. Everything here other than the Combo (which is a more powerful Reckless Attack) is a feature of a different class. Taking features and giving them to other classes is a terrible way to add content or homebrew.

For the general thread:

Why would a pugilist be a barbarian anyway? Barbarians are NOT known for skillful footwork and fighting, they are known for getting angry and hitting hard. Who is known for skillful combat? Monks and fighters. If you don't want to reflavour a Monk, look at doing something to a Fighter.

And I very much disagree that a Barbarian should be better at unarmed combat than a Monk. Barbarian gets angry and hits hard, Monk uses years of training and channeling magic-like ki to strike critical points. A Monk could totally be able to do more damage.

did you even read it? Steal half of the monk stuff? Not even close. Really, you just sound angry that someone wants to play a barbarian who's really good at hitting things with their fist. And the reason the barbarian should probably do more damage then the monk, is because that's the only thing they've got going for them. The monk can tie people up, stun them for their friends, and is highly mobile. the barbarian deals damage.

For the level 3 ability, I gave the barbarian a way to have a decent unarmed option. You might as well say the normal barbarian rips off the fighter because he can swing a sword. Letting the barbarian make a bonus action unarmed attack is barely anything. A 1 level dip in fighter gets them that without the restrictions that it be unarmed. So unless, everyone who makes a bonus action attack is stealing from the monk, I honestly don't get where you're coming from.

The level 6 ability is fairly meh, in my opinion. What I actually did was look at what the frenzy barbarian gets and change it to match a rough and tumble fighter. The level 6 barbarian ability is supposed to be some sort of defensive buff. So instead of getting immunity to fear, it was the ability to shrug off debilitating blows. Though if that's too close to monk for you, feel free to think of something better. It's just the level 6 ability should be some sort of defensive buff.

The level 10 ability isn't in any way close to anything the monk can do. In fact it was a silly idea that gave the barbarian a way to win over the crowd the way a pit fighter could. It's strictly worse then the frenzy barbarians ability.


The level 14 ability is probably too powerful, but I'm not a number cruncher so I'm not positive. It just sounded like a cool way mechanic to give this archetype a niche ability no one else gets.

[Avonar]

did you even read it? Steal half of the monk stuff? Not even close. Really, you just sound angry that someone wants to play a barbarian who's really good at hitting things with their fist. And the reason the barbarian should probably do more damage then the monk, is because that's the only thing they've got going for them. The monk can tie people up, stun them for their friends, and is highly mobile. the barbarian deals damage.

For the level 3 ability, I gave the barbarian a way to have a decent unarmed option. You might as well say the normal barbarian rips off the fighter because he can swing a sword. Letting the barbarian make a bonus action unarmed attack is barely anything. A 1 level dip in fighter gets them that without the restrictions that it be unarmed. So unless, everyone who makes a bonus action attack is stealing from the monk, I honestly don't get where you're coming from.

The level 6 ability is fairly meh, in my opinion. What I actually did was look at what the frenzy barbarian gets and change it to match a rough and tumble fighter. The level 6 barbarian ability is supposed to be some sort of defensive buff. So instead of getting immunity to fear, it was the ability to shrug off debilitating blows. Though if that's too close to monk for you, feel free to think of something better. It's just the level 6 ability should be some sort of defensive buff.

The level 10 ability isn't in any way close to anything the monk can do. In fact it was a silly idea that gave the barbarian a way to win over the crowd the way a pit fighter could. It's strictly worse then the frenzy barbarians ability.


The level 14 ability is probably too powerful, but I'm not a number cruncher so I'm not positive. It just sounded like a cool way mechanic to give this archetype a niche ability no one else gets.

Ok, let me lay out my feelings on the whole thread. From what I've seen, people want to homebrew a Barbarian that can use his fists and make it a better option for unarmed fighting than playing Monk. It's not building around a concept, it's having an idea and trying to make something for it as powerful as possible, regardless of balance.

Is there a reason why a Monk cannot be flavoured as a pugilist?

Is there a reason why you can't go Battlemaster Fighter with Tavern Brawler? Just house rule that you can use some manouvers with unarmed attacks.

My main issue is that Barbarian is a silly choice for this, it's only being chosen so that the character would have the rage damage and resistance rather than for any sense of cohesion. Barbarian is a terrible choice for a pugilist.

As for your suggestions. The Monk always has a bonus action attack, that's something special for them. Hit multiple times for less damage. However you want to give the same thing to a Barbarian, but make it even better by allowing double rage damage too? That's 2 attacks at level 3, 3 attacks at level, every attack +4 damage. By level 5, that's 3d4 + 24 damage every round. On top of that, you get the Barbarian hit dice, the Barbarian resistances, the Barbarian grappling abilities...

The level 6 ability - FAR too powerful. First up, immunity to poison makes no sense (and is another Monk speciality, a high level one at that). Immune to Paralyzed and Stunned too, extremely powerful. Perhaps give advantage on saves to recover from stunned or paralyzed conditions instead. What it should be I have no idea, because I don't really think this should be a barbarian thing.

Level 10 - Not taken from the Monk but there are other classes that get bonus Charm abilities (Ancients Paladin for one I believe?). As not taking it from the Monk but still taking something that is a feature of another class.

Level 14 - I don't really have an issue with this honestly, if you limit it to unarmed strikes. It's making a 4 on a d4.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Ok, let me lay out my feelings on the whole thread. From what I've seen, people want to homebrew a Barbarian that can use his fists and make it a better option for unarmed fighting than playing Monk. It's not building around a concept, it's having an idea and trying to make something for it as powerful as possible, regardless of balance.

Is there a reason why a Monk cannot be flavoured as a pugilist?

Is there a reason why you can't go Battlemaster Fighter with Tavern Brawler? Just house rule that you can use some manouvers with unarmed attacks.

My main issue is that Barbarian is a silly choice for this, it's only being chosen so that the character would have the rage damage and resistance rather than for any sense of cohesion. Barbarian is a terrible choice for a pugilist.

As for your suggestions. The Monk always has a bonus action attack, that's something special for them. Hit multiple times for less damage. However you want to give the same thing to a Barbarian, but make it even better by allowing double rage damage too? That's 2 attacks at level 3, 3 attacks at level, every attack +4 damage. By level 5, that's 3d4 + 24 damage every round. On top of that, you get the Barbarian hit dice, the Barbarian resistances, the Barbarian grappling abilities...

The level 6 ability - FAR too powerful. First up, immunity to poison makes no sense (and is another Monk speciality, a high level one at that). Immune to Paralyzed and Stunned too, extremely powerful. Perhaps give advantage on saves to recover from stunned or paralyzed conditions instead. What it should be I have no idea, because I don't really think this should be a barbarian thing.

Level 10 - Not taken from the Monk but there are other classes that get bonus Charm abilities (Ancients Paladin for one I believe?). As not taking it from the Monk but still taking something that is a feature of another class.

Level 14 - I don't really have an issue with this honestly, if you limit it to unarmed strikes. It's making a 4 on a d4.

I feel like my ideas subverted a lot of your issues. I showed the math on how 1d6 unarmed strikes with double rage bonus are not showing up more than a monk more than 1 or 2 points and then being completely outdone by the monk who flurries.

The key for that one is to not give the barbarian a way to make more than his normal amount of attacks. And again this is the same design philosophy as the devs show. Barbarian hits hard, monk hits many times. Both are about equal and the monk beats the barbarian in any other case.

Madbears suggestions aren’t bad, and his level 6 suggestion represents a a healthier sturdier Constitution, which is very Barbarian and pugilist both. Too strong though it’s a start.



If you have an issue of feutres from other classes being mixed around you must like 5e. There are ALOT of features that get passed around in official material already, and people often use them again because it’s a set precedent. I feel like half the people don’t want recycled features, and the other have shut down anything unique because nobody else can do X.

[Avonar]

I feel like my ideas subverted a lot of your issues. I showed the math on how 1d6 unarmed strikes with double rage bonus are not showing up more than a monk more than 1 or 2 points and then being completely outdone by the monk who flurries.

The key for that one is to not give the barbarian a way to make more than his normal amount of attacks. And again this is the same design philosophy as the devs show. Barbarian hits hard, monk hits many times. Both are about equal and the monk beats the barbarian in any other case.

Madbears suggestions aren’t bad, and his level 6 suggestion represents a a healthier sturdier Constitution, which is very Barbarian and pugilist both. Too strong though it’s a start.



If you have an issue of feutres from other classes being mixed around you must like 5e. There are ALOT of features that get passed around in official material already, and people often use them again because it’s a set precedent. I feel like half the people don’t want recycled features, and the other have shut down anything unique because nobody else can do X.

Well, could you please answer my main problem I have with all of this:

Why does Barbarian make more sense than Fighter or Monk?

There is no problem playing something that is a sub-optimal decision if it's fun or interesting. Play a Variant Human starting with the Tavern Brawler feat.

[alchahest]

a punching, grappling barbarian would make a fantastic Tarzan analog, the bare-chested bareknuckle pulp savage with iron thews. Howard was a fan of the sweet science.

Pulp Savage:

level 3: your unarmed strikes deal D6 damage, and you may grapple opponents as if you were one size larger than you are. You also gain swimming and climbing speed equal to your walking speed. If you have any class features or feats or other abilities that increase die sizes for simple weapons or unarmed weapons, only apply the highest die, this ability does not stack with the monk's martial arts ability or the tavern brawler feat, as examples.

6- when hit by an attack, you may use your reaction to enter rage prior to taking the damage from the attack. In addition you are immune to any disease or illness caused by eating spoiled, rotten, or raw food.

10- Your unarmed attacks count as magical for the purposes of defeating resistance. They are not otherwise magical. In addition while you are not wearing armor, you can dash as a bonus action, and you ignore difficult terrain.

14- While grappling an opponent, if you have nothing in your non-grappling hand, you can attempt to apply a chokehold to your opponent. Using an action, your opponent must make a constitution save vs DC 8+str+proficiency. a failure results in the target receiving one level of exhaustion. You may continue to add levels of exhaustion each turn, until your target succeeds on a constitution save - If the target succeeds, or the grapple is released, all levels of exhaustion gained by the chokehold are removed at the end of their next turn.

[Mortis_Elrod]

Well, could you please answer my main problem I have with all of this:

Why does Barbarian make more sense than Fighter or Monk?

There is no problem playing something that is a sub-optimal decision if it's fun or interesting. Play a Variant Human starting with the Tavern Brawler feat.

I agree that there’s nothing wrong with grabbing tavern brawler on a barbarian and calling it a day.

And a fighter or monk can probably make just as much sense if not more.

But to get back to the topic, this isn’t a question of “barbarian or fighter “ for the subclass, it’s “if it was Barbarian how would you do it”. And I think the barbarian is a class that can find a lot of flavor and being a simple passionate guy that likes to hit very hard with his own hands. No mystism, and not even a lot of training. A Barbarian pugilist would be more akin to an anime character just pushing past more limits by sheer will or rage and having only minimal training to focus that a bit more.

Fighter could definetly do it, but there’s a certain aesthetic to getting really really mad and just breaking walls with your fist.


So maybe it’s a question on theme here. Is Pugilist the right name for a barbarian like this?


Edit: on another note there’s a type of character I’ve always wanted to play that think best fits the barbarian. And that’s a feral barbarian. Much more rabid and doesn’t use weapons, and takes on a kind of transformation while raging. Not merely another animal via wildshape, but something truly primal and maybe even monstrous or perhaps demonic in nature. Seems odd to me that this doesn’t already exist as being a raging demonic monster of destruction seems something ONLY the barbarian can pull off without a spellcaster turning into a pit fiend or balor.

[Finlam]

While we're on the subject of a punching Barbarian: is it possible to create this build without home-brew?

The best I've got right now is to go Path of the Zealot since the level 3 ability gives you extra damage on all attacks against the first creature you attack. Combine with 3 levels of monk for missile deflection, and 3 ki to spend on dodges, disengages, and the occasional flurry; this also nets you a d4 unarmed strike die and the ability to bonus action unarmed strike.

If you're not completely married to never using weapons and you're OK with using some weapons, you could go for Kensei which would net you +2 AC basically every round (you don't have to attack with a Kensei weapon, just hold i.e. it could be for defense only).

So out of a 3 level monk investment you get:

3 ki to dodge, disengage, or flurry
+2 AC every round
Projectile Deflection
d4 unarmed strike die
Bonus action unarmed strike
+10ft movement


That's not too bad, and Path of the Zealot would go a long way toward bringing that damage up; doubly so since you can still use Strength on all your attack and get the benefit of extra rage damage and reckless attack if you so desire.

Alternatively, it seems like the only other option is going straight barbarian with the Tavern Brawler feat which nets you:

d4 unarmed strike
bonus action grapple when you hit with an unarmed strike
prof in improvised weapons (for the lols)

Not quite as much synergy, but it only costs a feat and could be up and going at level 1 with vHuman as opposed to requiring a level of monk. Another feat to consider would be the Prodigy feat from Xan's as you could get expertise in Athletics to really milk those bonus action grapples or a single level of rogue.


Either way, it seems like it's a concept which is not well supported by RAW. So you may be better off with home-brew as the other options seem to require a lot of level dips or a heavy feat investment for sub-par payout. If you play with a lenient GM and the party is not very optimized you'd probably do OK, but I think you might feel a bit left behind if you play in an optimized party.

[Mith]

The easiest way to do this in my opinion is re skin attacks with a Greatsword (2d6) as fist strikes at 1d6/fist. Investing in Tavern Brawler allows for them to do the bonus action grapple. Even though they hit similar to a Great sword, they do not qualify for Great Weapon Master feat, or if they do, they cannot be using a shield. Maybe I would only allow the switch over if they play a few levels with the Tavern brawler Feat to invest in the style before upgrading to d6 fists.

[MadBear]

Ok, let me lay out my feelings on the whole thread. From what I've seen, people want to homebrew a Barbarian that can use his fists and make it a better option for unarmed fighting than playing Monk. It's not building around a concept, it's having an idea and trying to make something for it as powerful as possible, regardless of balance.

Ok, I see where you're coming from. Let me make a quick couple of points then.

1. I doubt the OP wants to make a unarmed barbarian whose straight up better then a monk regardless of balance. If that was the case, they probably wouldn't bother posting it to the thread.

2. While I can't speak the the OP's motives, I can say I personally, would love to see an archetype for a non-monk unarmed fighter. Don't get me wrong, I love the monk, but sometimes you want something that doesn't feel mystic the way Ki does. Monks also give off the feeling a extreme discipline and focus, that maybe doesn't mesh with how you feel your character's abilities arise. That doesn't make the monk badwrongfun, but it's also a little unfair to criticize others because they want a class the plays differently.

3. In this case, an unarmed barbarian archetype could fill a role in someone elses vision. Take a favorite guilty pleasure of mine "Bloodsport". Frank Dux and the antagonist are definitely monks. Their disciplined master unarmed fighters. But there's an American Biker fighter in their that is really fun to see named Ray Jackson. He doesn't have amazing flip kicks or what not, no he just beats the ever living crap out of his opponents. Jackson is an unarmed fighter who doesn't really fit the monk mold, and barbarian makes more sense.

So I guess what I'm saying is you're usually better off if you give people the benefit of the doubt, because I don't think what you're saying others want is, actually what they want. They're here looking for advice on how to make a balanced new class that blends aspects of 2 different classes in as reasonable a way as possible.

And if we're talking balance, the barbarian should have fewer attacks then the monk (no flurry of course), but his hits should be harder in some way. He's more Fezzic from Princess Bride, then Bruce Lee. Of course they'll have some similarities, (the same way a eldritch knight and paladin share some similar themes), but overall the tone is different.