Zealot Barbarian is bad? (Possible Tomb of Annihilation spoilers in later discussion)

[Segev]

I've seen it compared to Frenzied Berserker for being bottom of the heap in terms of Barbarian archetype choices. This concerns me, because I have a player in a game I'm running who is already dissatisfied with the way Barbarian doesn't play the way she expected it to, and yet insists it's "not about power" and "not about mechanics," and she's aiming for Zealot as the one she thinks "fits" the most aside from, possibly, Frenzied Berserker.

(Sadly, for the mechanics she keeps expecting it to have, a 2-level dip into Fighter would hit it a lot closer; she is not interested, because "fighter" is not her fluff. She wants the ability to buff hp from 3e.)

I was worried she'd go for Berserker, because it only compounds the dissappointing nature of Rage with Frenzy's doing-nothing-but-give-an-attack-on-a-bonus-action with a huge penalty that makes it not only just 1/day in practice, but makes it punitive to use it before the last encounter of the day. She's instead gotten interested in Zealot. That already has some issues because I'm running Tomb of Annihilation; I will not go into details as to why that's a problem for spoiler reasons, but anybody who knows the module and knows the Zealot's powers will see an obvious...issue.

Is Zealot bad even beyond this? Is it Frenzied Berserker bad, or close to it? What makes it weaker than other choices for the Barbarian? And are there any suggested fixes, either in general or in the face of the hopefully-obvious problem with it in this particular module?

[sophontteks]

Hmm. Who told you this?
Zealot and totem are normally both ranked as the best archtypes for barbarian. The guides here all rate it highly. Everything it has looks really solid

EDIT: I wouldn't be concerned about the zealots ribbon ability not working in tomb. Its just a ribbon, its loss isn't significant.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I don't know where you've seen Zealot place near the bottom of the list of subclasses, if anything it's a high middle bordering on second best (hard to dethrone Totem Barbarian).

The issue here is not that its Zealot, but that its a Zealot in ToA. In ToA, the defining feature of the Zealot simply doesn't work. I'd say it's still better than Berserker, Battlerager or Storm Herald by a landslide even without it.

[JackPhoenix]

Zealot's ribbon ability doesn't work in ToA. No big deal. It's still the most powerful barbarian subclass. Ancestor is better if you want to protect the rest of the party, totem offers slightly more versatility.


The issue here is not that its Zealot, but that its a Zealot in ToA. In ToA, the defining feature of the Zealot simply doesn't work. I'd say it's still better than Berserker, Battlerager or Storm Herald by a landslide even without it.

Defining feature of Zealot is extra radiant damage on attacks. Free resurrection is a ribbon.

[Daphne]

Zealot is considered by most the best subclass if you want to deal damage.

[MaxWilson]

If you want to address the elephant in the room, you could give Zealot's "Soul... Marked For Battle" an additional ToA-specific effect, such as a DC 10 Wisdom saving throw to avoid the issue. The issue would still be a big issue, and she'd have reason to want it resolved, but she'd be better than a normal person at avoiding it.

[Tiadoppler]

She's instead gotten interested in Zealot. That already has some issues because I'm running Tomb of Annihilation; I will not go into details as to why that's a problem for spoiler reasons, but anybody who knows the module and knows the Zealot's powers will see an obvious...issue.

Is Zealot bad even beyond this? Is it Frenzied Berserker bad, or close to it? What makes it weaker than other choices for the Barbarian? And are there any suggested fixes, either in general or in the face of the hopefully-obvious problem with it in this particular module?

Zealot is an excellent, powerful archetype for high damage and good survivability. In my opinion, that Tomb of Annihilation-specific problem is not that significant. If you wanted to give the player a similar ribbon to make up for it, perhaps you could consider replacing that ability (for this campaign) with Advantage on Death Saving Throws 3 times/day.

Being resurrected doesn't come up that often in my campaigns, but that's because of my DM style. I have absolutely never found the Zealot Barbarian to be underpowered, and my current campaign has two of them running around. One of them has never used his 'free resurrection' feature, because barbarians are just so tough. I've always considered that ability to be more like a ribbon ability (a small, nice addition) rather than a major feature. The truth is: all it does is save the party some money.

[Segev]

Alright. My own assessment was that it wasn't awful, but I saw at least one reference to it being about as bad (in the exhaustion thread), and I'm not nearly well-versed enough in 5e Barbarian mechanics to be confident that I didn't miss anything.

Thanks; that reassures me. Hopefully she'll enjoy the extra radiant damage and the like. (Certainly will be useful against the zombies that infest Chult.)

[ProsecutorGodot]

Defining feature of Zealot is extra radiant damage on attacks. Free resurrection is a ribbon.

Sure, the bonus damage is going to define their playstyle (as much as dealing a bit of extra damage once per turn can) but Warrior of the Gods ties closer to the rest of their class features. They're so zealously devoted to their god that keeping them dead is almost as difficult as killing them in the first place.

I guess it's still accurate to call it a ribbon, but I think it's a very important ribbon. Even if the feature rarely gets used, it is one of the first things you think about when the class is discussed. You can't say the same about a lot of other classes ribbon abilities.

[trollballz]

Having played through TOA, the radiant damage will be great in a number of places and will make them enjoy their subclass choice. Also I'm going to pile on and agree that Zealot is undoubtably one of the top barbarian paths.

[LudicSavant]

Zealot is quite possibly the strongest all-around Barbarian archetype.

All the resurrection ability does is save gold pieces. It's helpful but not the core of their power.

[Segev]

Regarding the ribbon...

She's taking up the worship of Kubazan, having encountered a cleric of tempus who was meditating on one of his statues near an outpost from Omu's brief and doomed attempt to re-establish itself after they took up the worship of the Nine Gods. She doesn't know he's dead and bound in the tomb, and I plan to work in hints to suggest she should go on a quest to find her god.

Fortunately, as a Zealot, it really is her devotion and not his power that empowers her.

Kubazan is the CG froghemoth trickster god who is "wild and spirited" and really likes fighting and physical challenges and bold action.

I'm trying to think of a replacement ribbon. It's way too early for them to be seeking Omu itself; they haven't even discovered the Death Curse is a thing yet (though foreshadowing and clues have been dropped so they'll be able to say "oh, that's what's going on" when they learn of it). So my initial thoughts of something to orient her towards his prison are off-base.

Her "holy experiences" with Kubazan are actually, so far, the doings of Chwinga who think he's cool and the trappings of a barbarian using tools and worshipping at this carved rock (statue) were inspiring.

Any thoughts on what a good replacement ribbon might be would be appreciated.

[MaxWilson]

All the resurrection ability does is save gold pieces. It's helpful but not the core of their power.

It's fairly close to the core of their flavor though. Which is why...


Regarding the ribbon...

Any thoughts on what a good replacement ribbon might be would be appreciated.

I suggest offering Zealots a saving throw to avoid the issue. Mechanically it's still not that powerful (because you don't want to trigger even a chance of the issue) but it gives the flavor back.

[LudicSavant]

It's fairly close to the core of their flavor though.

Yes, it is very fluffy. :smallsmile:

[Grek]

Zealot has some extremely good abilities and some pretty lame abilities:
Damage aura. While the damage basically one attack's worth (1d6 + 1/2 level), it can't miss, doesn't offer a save, has good damage typing, has great action economy (part of the same bonus action you were already going to use for Rage at the start of the fight) and gives even more action economy on the backend (enemies wishing to escape must give up their action to disengage, or let you make an opportunity attack). Very good, one of the choicest features of the archetype.
Warrior of the Gods. This is is basically useless in Tomb of Annihilation, but it was mostly useless in the first place. Revivify only becomes available at level 5 and by that point 300gp more or less doesn't break the bank. If you want to replace this ribbon, why not the ability to converse with frogs? Let it work on dead frogs as well, but only once she thinks to try. Or if something prompts her to do so.
Zealous Focus. Lets you auto-succeed a saving throw in exchange for ending your rage. This puts a firm ceiling on how bad any one failed save can be, letting you act in situations of unknown danger (enemy wizards, trapped tombs, possibly cursed treasure) without having to worry too much. Also synergizes with Relentless Rage, which lets you make Consititution saves to cancel damage that would drop you below 0 hit points. Great power.
Zealous Presence. Gives big buffs to your team for one round. Can be great if the party is large or you've picked up a bunch of allies for the scene. Can also be handy in out of combat situations where everyone needs to make a save against something. But generally one of the less impressive non-ribbons for Zealot.
Rage Beyond Death. Even more unkillability on an already hard to kill character. Even if you fail a Relentless Rage saving throw, you can keep fighting at 0 hit points for as long as you rage. Even if you fail three death saving throws, you don't die until the rage ends. And you can still stabilize yourself with healing, a healing kit (which even a barbarian can use) or three successful death saving throws. Which you can provide for yourself using Zealous Focus.

[LudicSavant]

Zealous Focus. Lets you auto-succeed a saving throw in exchange for ending your rage.
Zealous Focus doesn't end your rage, nor does it auto-succeed.


Starting at 6th level, the divine power that fuels your rage can protect you. If you fail a saving throw while you're raging, you can reroll it, and you must use the new roll. You can use this ability only once per rage.

It's basically Indomitable, usable (#ofRages) times per day.

[Grek]

Ah, I was looking at the UA version. Which is considerably better.

[Pex]

Zealot is fine, but I would be annoyed to play it in Tomb of Annihilation. I don't care if it's a "ribbon". It's a ribbon the DM is taking away from me because of the module. It's not about DM tyranny I like to rant about. I know full well it's the point of the module. I'm actually blaming the module. but I don't think it's the module's fault since it came about before Zealot. It's more the point when I play a class, any class, I would get annoyed if the campaign/DM says "Nope, you can't do that." That is what the player could be reacting to. She wants to play something but told she can't play the way she wants because the campaign won't let her. That disappointment loses incentive to play it. You need to find a patch for that disappointment.

[Vogie]

If you wanted to You could give it the Strength of the Grave ribbon that the Shadow Sorcerer has in lieu of the Warrior of the Gods. You can adjust it to be based on Wis, Str or Con to separate it from charisma

[Willie the Duck]

I've seen it compared to Frenzied Berserker for being bottom of the heap in terms of Barbarian archetype choices. This concerns me, because I have a player in a game I'm running who is already dissatisfied with the way Barbarian doesn't play the way she expected it to, and yet insists it's "not about power" and "not about mechanics," and she's aiming for Zealot as the one she thinks "fits" the most aside from, possibly, Frenzied Berserker.

(Sadly, for the mechanics she keeps expecting it to have, a 2-level dip into Fighter would hit it a lot closer; she is not interested, because "fighter" is not her fluff. She wants the ability to buff hp from 3e.)

This is actually that part that interests me. Instead of getting an extra 4 Con's worth of HP margin (that still needs to be healed afterward), the raging barbarian takes half damage (so, sort of double hit points, admittedly with some constraints and non-stacks, but also means that they aren't bleeding from every pore at the end of the fight and demanding cures ASAP). I can see preferring how one or the other system works for one reason or the other, but finding oneself with the other doesn't seem like it should feel like a massive letdown. Do you know any more about this?

[Arial Black]

I planned a PC for this campaign, and I chose zealot barbarian (based, I assure you entirely coincidentally) on the WildStorm comic character 'Zealot', knowing that the ribbon would not work!

Why? Because if you had this ribbon ability, being raised in a tradition that values this ability and the mind-set that goes with it, and knowing that there is something going on in the world which prevents it working, wouldn't you be highly motivated to go and solve it? By, y'know, smashing stuff?

That was my PC's motivation. The loss of the ribbon in game terms (saving 300gp to not be dead anymore) is rendered moot by the loss of everyone's ability to not be dead anymore at all!

[MaxWilson]

This is actually that part that interests me. Instead of getting an extra 4 Con's worth of HP margin (that still needs to be healed afterward), the raging barbarian takes half damage (so, sort of double hit points, admittedly with some constraints and non-stacks, but also means that they aren't bleeding from every pore at the end of the fight and demanding cures ASAP). I can see preferring how one or the other system works for one reason or the other, but finding oneself with the other doesn't seem like it should feel like a massive letdown. Do you know any more about this?

Heh. I just Googled "3E Barbarian" and looked at the Rage bonuses, and I'd say that if she wants to trade away 5E Rage bonuses for +4 Str +4 Con and +2 on Wisdom saves, let her! It's almost a pure downgrade except for the extra +2 to-hit.

If you offer her the option and she declines, it may at least cause her to think harder about what she really liked about the 3E barbarian.

[No brains]

I suppose if it doesn't conflict with the exact fluff/ crunch of ToA and you want to be cool about it:
Warrior of the gods (at least this time) specifically overrides the revival ban. The barbarian's soul just doesn't go anywhere, so it's not stolen or sent to an irretrievable spot, it's just trapped in a broken body. That's the reason why you don't need diamonds to make like a 'soul radio crystal' or something.

Ultimately, it's up to you to decided if the unbridled recklessness of free Zealot rezzes clashes too hard with the tone of the ToA plot. Can 1 boi who refuses to die topple the tone of the hopeless jungle of death?

[Willie the Duck]

Heh. I just Googled "3E Barbarian" and looked at the Rage bonuses, and I'd say that if she wants to trade away 5E Rage bonuses for +4 Str +4 Con and +2 on Wisdom saves, let her! It's almost a pure downgrade except for the extra +2 to-hit.

If you offer her the option and she declines, it may at least cause her to think harder about what she really liked about the 3E barbarian.

About the only thing I can find that is strictly better is there is no 'attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage' requirement, which makes it easier for a beginning player. I can see how, if you are used to one, the other might seem like too much trouble. However, OP's comment that she "wants the ability to buff hp from 3e" seems like she doesn't realize how much better taking half damage is (provided, of course, that one does take half damage, so for her perhaps Totem barb would be better).

[Segev]

Zealot is fine, but I would be annoyed to play it in Tomb of Annihilation. I don't care if it's a "ribbon". It's a ribbon the DM is taking away from me because of the module. It's not about DM tyranny I like to rant about. I know full well it's the point of the module. I'm actually blaming the module. but I don't think it's the module's fault since it came about before Zealot. It's more the point when I play a class, any class, I would get annoyed if the campaign/DM says "Nope, you can't do that." That is what the player could be reacting to. She wants to play something but told she can't play the way she wants because the campaign won't let her. That disappointment loses incentive to play it. You need to find a patch for that disappointment.Oh, she doesn't even know about that part, yet. They haven't discovered the death curse; they will after this dungeon, when they bring back the body of the merchant prince's son she hired them to retrieve and the priests can't revive him.


This is actually that part that interests me. Instead of getting an extra 4 Con's worth of HP margin (that still needs to be healed afterward), the raging barbarian takes half damage (so, sort of double hit points, admittedly with some constraints and non-stacks, but also means that they aren't bleeding from every pore at the end of the fight and demanding cures ASAP). I can see preferring how one or the other system works for one reason or the other, but finding oneself with the other doesn't seem like it should feel like a massive letdown. Do you know any more about this?


About the only thing I can find that is strictly better is there is no 'attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage' requirement, which makes it easier for a beginning player. I can see how, if you are used to one, the other might seem like too much trouble. However, OP's comment that she "wants the ability to buff hp from 3e" seems like she doesn't realize how much better taking half damage is (provided, of course, that one does take half damage, so for her perhaps Totem barb would be better).Part of it is that she didn't read her powers, and got very frustrated when she didn't get the bonus hp she expected when she waited to Rage until near the end of combat. The rest of us were encouraging her to rage to begin with, and she kept insisting "it wouldn't help; I'm not in melee." Something about taking half damage seems less attractive to her. To be fair, a non-bear-totem barbarian doesn't take half damage from everything, so bonus hp are better in that they do apply to everything. Otherwise, I'd just offer to have raging double her current hp instead of halving damage.

I suspect she'll get used to it; the main thing is that I'm trying to make sure she doesn't consistently have unpleasant surprises, as that can ruin fun and keep one dwelling on such negatives and forgetting the positives. (I was worried she'd fixate on Frenzied Berserker and be perpetually disappointed by it for that reason.) I suspect she'd quite like Second Wind from the Fighter, but I also doubt she'd be willing to multiclass.

[Thulsa-D00M]

Part of it is that she didn't read her powers, and got very frustrated when she didn't get the bonus hp she expected when she waited to Rage until near the end of combat.


I suspect she'll get used to it; the main thing is that I'm trying to make sure she doesn't consistently have unpleasant surprises, as that can ruin fun and keep one dwelling on such negatives and forgetting the positives. (I was worried she'd fixate on Frenzied Berserker and be perpetually disappointed by it for that reason.) I suspect she'd quite like Second Wind from the Fighter, but I also doubt she'd be willing to multiclass.


Sounds like the best way to prevent unpleasant surprises is to make her read. Your fighter multiclass idea could work. The fluff is that she is an unusually skilled barbarian. But she has to actually read about action surge and second wind in order to see how cool they are on a raging barbarian.

[NatureKing]

She did get bonus HP. She got resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and Slashing damage, basically doubling HP. If she is worried about elemental damage, there are ways to gain specific ones.

[Segev]

She did get bonus HP. She got resistance to bludgeoning, piercing and Slashing damage, basically doubling HP. If she is worried about elemental damage, there are ways to gain specific ones.
No, she would have gotten extra hp if she’d raged sooner. She waited until she was running low, expecting the boost to keep her going.

But I do take your point. My goal is to minimize opportunity for further confusion.

[Witty Username]

Zealot is fine, Zealot is fun. I don't know about the Tomb but if a player has plans to die, the plan should be improved upon.
I have great contempt for players that don't read. In our group we have had some success with flashcards, reading and addition is hard for one of our players so we have his attack lines written on a notecard so it is easy to find and also so we can pass it around as needed if he needs help with the math.

[JackPhoenix]

No, she would have gotten extra hp if she’d raged sooner. She waited until she was running low, expecting the boost to keep her going.

But I do take your point. My goal is to minimize opportunity for further confusion.

That's not confusion, it's laziness. If she can't be bothered to read what her abilities do, why should you bother to explain them to her beforehand?

[MaxWilson]

That's not confusion, it's laziness. If she can't be bothered to read what her abilities do, why should you bother to explain them to her beforehand?

The fact that people were even reminding her in play to Rage, and she still proceeded on her incorrect assumptions from a different game, limits my sympathy. She made a mistake; hopefully she will learn from it; DM isn't obligated to change anything unless this becomes a recurring theme.

[qube]

Zealot really doesn't need it (as pointed out, it's just a ribbon)
but if you're conceren.

if it would come up, change the ability to 'if you roll < 10 on your last death saving throw, it counts as 11 instead' or something like that

[SVamp]

The fact that people were even reminding her in play to Rage, and she still proceeded on her incorrect assumptions from a different game, limits my sympathy. She made a mistake; hopefully she will learn from it; DM isn't obligated to change anything unless this becomes a recurring theme.

Yeah ... limited sympathy is putting it mildly. I can’t stand people who are lazy-dumb, refuse good advise (opinionated-dumb), and then complain about how dissapointed/upset/whatever they are when it blows up in their face (entitled-dumb). Guess I can’t stand purposely dumb people, lol :smalltongue: . (I am very patient with unintelligent people, it’s not the same thing, one is an attitude problem)

[Arial Black]

...if a player has plans to die, the plan should be improved upon.

Love it! :smallsmile:

This should be tattooed on the inside of every player's eyelids!

[NatureKing]

No, she would have gotten extra hp if she’d raged sooner. She waited until she was running low, expecting the boost to keep her going.

But I do take your point. My goal is to minimize opportunity for further confusion.

The boost would have kept her going - if past editions gave +6 HP when raging, then provided she had more than 6HP when popping it, she effectively gained it. What's the difference?

[Willie the Duck]

The boost would have kept her going - if past editions gave +6 HP when raging, then provided she had more than 6HP when popping it, she effectively gained it. What's the difference?

12 hp. You need to halve your damage on 12 hp of damage to equate to a 6 hp gain. Regardless, the point was that in 3e it did not matter when you popped the rage, so long as you are in the positive. In 5e, you only benefit from the rage when you experience the damage during the rage, so the tactical decision is to rage as early as you can (...have a reasonable chance of keeping your rage going).

[Segev]

12 hp. You need to halve your damage on 12 hp of damage to equate to a 6 hp gain. Regardless, the point was that in 3e it did not matter when you popped the rage, so long as you are in the positive. In 5e, you only benefit from the rage when you experience the damage during the rage, so the tactical decision is to rage as early as you can (...have a reasonable chance of keeping your rage going).

Now that you mention it, the bit I bolded was a concern she kept bringing up as to why she was delaying until she got into melee. (I forget if you lose rage if you don't attack in melee, or don't attack at all - i.e. whether ranged attacks can maintain the rage.) Assuming ranged attacks work to keep it going, she could have, in retrospect, kept raging just fine, but she wasn't confident of this at the time. This was the first fight of the campaign, where they were trying to subdue an ankleosaurus who'd gotten spooked and was rampaging in the harbor. (This brought the party together, and also brought them to the positive attention of Zindar.)

Thanks to the suggestions I've gotten, I'm thinking of doing something like having her incarnate as a Chwinga if she dies, and allow the Chwinga she's become to reuinte with her body if anybody casts an appropriate life-restoring spell, material component or no. Probably a Chwinga with limited spell abilities, or at least lacking the power to give Charms.

[Willie the Duck]

Now that you mention it, the bit I bolded was a concern she kept bringing up as to why she was delaying until she got into melee. (I forget if you lose rage if you don't attack in melee, or don't attack at all - i.e. whether ranged attacks can maintain the rage.) Assuming ranged attacks work to keep it going, she could have, in retrospect, kept raging just fine, but she wasn't confident of this at the time. This was the first fight of the campaign, where they were trying to subdue an ankleosaurus who'd gotten spooked and was rampaging in the harbor. (This brought the party together, and also brought them to the positive attention of Zindar.)

Aside: yes ranged attacks work. The attack requirement is an odd addition that certainly looks burdensome. Especially if you have something like a Str-based, sword-and-board barbarian who might have to drop their melee weapon, draw a javelin, throw it, and wait until next round to pick up their melee weapon (when playing that character, I had him fight exclusively with javelins just for that reason). Depending on how your DM rules it, an opponent who can turn invisible, hide in plain sight, or simply move out of your movement + long range in a turn can really ruin your day. It is vaguely reminiscent of those 3e debates about that editions frenzied berserker and stealth characters abusing the 'if they cannot see an opponent, they attack their friends' clause. Managing your actions such that you can get an attack in every turn is clearly part of the mechanical offset for the class abilities, but it really does put barbarians in the same camp as rogues in that they seem like a class for someone new to the game (/edition), but actually require a lot of mechanical acumen to play well.

It does make thematic sense that a raging barbarian ought to be incentivized to attack, but if the dragon is flying away, running after it at full tilt ought to be a better decision than slowly walking towards it while making sure to throw a javelin each round.

Honestly speaking, the more you describe it, the more this all makes sense. First fight of a campaign, newish to the edition (if she's still looking for 3e barbarian abilities, I'm assuming she's very recently moved over from 3e, yes?), ability has a clause that sounds burdensome... this is sounding more and more sympathetic. OTOH it's also sounding like a problem that will resolve itself without you needing to do anything -- she'll get used to the ability and with how hard it is to keep rage going. It still may or may not mean she'll get the character she wanted to play, but one thing ToA gives you is opportunities to replace characters :smalltongue:.

[Segev]

Aside: yes ranged attacks work. The attack requirement is an odd addition that certainly looks burdensome. Especially if you have something like a Str-based, sword-and-board barbarian who might have to drop their melee weapon, draw a javelin, throw it, and wait until next round to pick up their melee weapon (when playing that character, I had him fight exclusively with javelins just for that reason). Depending on how your DM rules it, an opponent who can turn invisible, hide in plain sight, or simply move out of your movement + long range in a turn can really ruin your day. It is vaguely reminiscent of those 3e debates about that editions frenzied berserker and stealth characters abusing the 'if they cannot see an opponent, they attack their friends' clause. Managing your actions such that you can get an attack in every turn is clearly part of the mechanical offset for the class abilities, but it really does put barbarians in the same camp as rogues in that they seem like a class for someone new to the game (/edition), but actually require a lot of mechanical acumen to play well.

It does make thematic sense that a raging barbarian ought to be incentivized to attack, but if the dragon is flying away, running after it at full tilt ought to be a better decision than slowly walking towards it while making sure to throw a javelin each round.

Honestly speaking, the more you describe it, the more this all makes sense. First fight of a campaign, newish to the edition (if she's still looking for 3e barbarian abilities, I'm assuming she's very recently moved over from 3e, yes?), ability has a clause that sounds burdensome... this is sounding more and more sympathetic. OTOH it's also sounding like a problem that will resolve itself without you needing to do anything -- she'll get used to the ability and with how hard it is to keep rage going. It still may or may not mean she'll get the character she wanted to play, but one thing ToA gives you is opportunities to replace characters :smalltongue:.

And to be fair to her, she remembered the "must attack every round" when I didn't; I would have completely forgotten that rule and not called her on it if she'd forgotten it, too. Which suggests she did read the class, just didn't quite recall all the finer points of what she does and does not get, and ran on bad assumptions about the bonus hp. I agree, charging after it shouting nasty things about its parentage ("Your father was a yellow-bellied kobold!") should be enough to keep it going. I suppose that's one thing the Path of the Berserker has going for it: the bonus action would let you ... wait, no, that's got to be melee.

That does it, here's an attempted fix for the Path of the Berserker. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?589417-Another-Frenzied-Berserker-fix-Action-Surge-for-Exhaustion) Probably won't see it in my game, as I'm pretty sure she's got her heart set on Zealot at this point, but this was bugging me enough to throw that together, now.

[NatureKing]

12 hp. You need to halve your damage on 12 hp of damage to equate to a 6 hp gain. Regardless, the point was that in 3e it did not matter when you popped the rage, so long as you are in the positive. In 5e, you only benefit from the rage when you experience the damage during the rage, so the tactical decision is to rage as early as you can (...have a reasonable chance of keeping your rage going).
That's what I said?

If you Rage at 6HP, in 3.5e, you have 12HP. If you rage in 5e at 6HP, short of magic, you effectively have 12HP. Does it matter if that HP is there before or after the hit in 5e or 3.5E? It is still the same heal gain, if not more so in 5e.

[Segev]

That's what I said?

If you Rage at 6HP, in 3.5e, you have 12HP. If you rage in 5e at 6HP, short of magic, you effectively have 12HP. Does it matter if that HP is there before or after the hit in 5e or 3.5E? It is still the same heal gain, if not more so in 5e.

Well, it matters whether you gain 6 hp when you're at 1, or you had to use the ability while at 6 hp to get the benefit of "gaining 6 hp."

[Willie the Duck]

That's what I said?

If you Rage at 6HP, in 3.5e, you have 12HP. If you rage in 5e at 6HP, short of magic, you effectively have 12HP. Does it matter if that HP is there before or after the hit in 5e or 3.5E? It is still the same heal gain, if not more so in 5e.

Huh. You're right. Didn't read carefully. However, I was responding to "The boost would have kept her going - if past editions gave +6 HP when raging, then provided she had more than 6HP when popping it, she effectively gained it. What's the difference?" And there is a difference. In 5e you get more benefit from raging before you take the damage, not when you get down to 6 hp (or other 'about to drop' threshold). The rage actually will work better in 5e be using it earlier, so long as you can strategize to keep it going.