An attempt to fix the Berserker

[saucerhead]

This is a 2nd attempt at fixing the Berserker sub-class. The original concept had issues with the loss of player control. This is a much simpler, more streamlined fix. Thank you for all the input from those that responded. I hope you will give me as much feedback on this version.

Path of the Berserker

Frenzy
Starting when you choose this path at 3rd level, as a bonus action you can go into a frenzy while you are raging. Alternatively, if you are wounded while you are raging, you can go into a frenzy as a reaction on your opponent's turn. Either way, for the duration of your rage you can make a single melee weapon attack as a bonus action on each of your turns. Additionally, you gain temporary hit points equal to your barbarian level at the start of your turn, every round for the duration of your rage. When your rage ends, you suffer one level of temporary exhaustion*.

Mindless Rage
Beginning at 6th level, you can’t be charmed, frightened or stunned while raging. If you are charmed or frightened when you enter your rage, the effect is suspended for the duration of the rage.

Intimidating Presence
Beginning at 10th level, you can use your action to frighten someone with your menacing presence. When you do so, choose one creature that you can see within 30 feet of you. If the creature can see or hear you, it must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw (DC equal to 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Charisma modifier) or be frightened of you until the end of your next turn. On subsequent turns, you can use your action to extend the duration of this effect on the frightened creature until the end of your next turn. This effect ends if the creature ends its turn out of line of sight or more than 60 feet away from you. If the creature succeeds on its saving throw, you can't use this feature on that creature again for 24 hours.

Relentless Retaliation
Starting at 14th level, when you take damage from a creature that is within 5 feet of you, you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against that creature. Additionally, all movement impairing effects that target you while you are raging, are reduced by half.


*Temporary exhaustion effects you for a set number of rounds based upon your Constitution, representing the time it takes to recover from entering a frenzy. Use the following equation: 8 - your constitution modifier = the number of rounds you are effected. (For example a Berserker with a 16 constitution and one level of temporary exhaustion would have disadvantage on ability checks for 6 rounds after his rage has ended.) They will have no further effect unless you enter another frenzy, which would cause you to gain an additional level of temporary exhaustion when that rage ends. Temporary exhaustion levels will stay with you until you have completed a long rest, at which point they are all removed.


I have read other threads addressing house rules and home brews for this sub-class. They range from removing the debilitating exhaustion effect completely, or having the exhaustion recovered on a short rest, to having the bonus action:frenzy attack tied to the reckless attack ability. These are good ideas, which will work at most tables, but they still somehow seem to miss the mark for me. I am presenting my ideas for the sub-class in the hopes of having some discussion about whether they make the Berserker more playable and flavorful.

First, let me explain that I have played GURPS for a long while before returning to the game of D&D. In that system, Berserk is considered a disadvantage and intentionally or not, players currently seem to see it as too much of one in the D&D system. Not many people want to play a berserker with the rules as written in the PHB. I still think playing a berserker could be fun, but the negatives do outweigh the positives. Being a Berserker should have disadvantages, but just not the way it is written.

In my mind, the Berserker Barbarian is a very dangerous person walking the edge of self control in combat. As a barbarian, they can rage on their turn, but don't necessarily have to enter into a frenzy. Why wouldn't they, if it gives them an extra attack every turn as a bonus action? Well as I said, it is about self control, and for me that means some wisdom rolls. In books, and comic books, going berserk is something that characters generally try to avoid, unlike in role playing games, where the idea of being a monster in combat is generally appealing. This is where I would start changing the rules of this sub-class.

If the Berserker wants to give up their self-control to voluntarily frenzy it costs them a bonus action, but they must already be in a rage. If, however, the Berserker is in their rage and gets wounded, they may enter their frenzy as a reaction on the enemy's turn. They lose control. If they do not wish to enter a frenzy when they are wounded, they must make a wisdom save. The DC for this save is 10 or half the damage taken from the wound, whichever is higher. Success means they keep their self-control and do not enter a frenzy, but every time they are wounded again they will have to make another wisdom save. Failure means they become frenzied against their will.

This is how the frenzy rules would work:

- The Berserker will gain temporary hit points equal to their level, plus their CON modifier, at the start of their turn for every round they are in their frenzy. (These do not accumulate or stack.)
- The Berserker is temporarily relieved of any exhaustion effects while frenzied. The levels of exhaustion return as soon as they end their frenzy.
- The Berserker must recklessly attack every turn they are in their frenzy.
- Each time the Berserker downs a foe, they may make a wisdom check to end this frenzy and regain their self-control. If they succeed the frenzy ends, but not their rage. If they fail, they remain berserk in this frenzy and recklessly attack the next foe.
- If they have no adjacent foes the Berserker must move to one and recklessly attack.
- If a foe isn't in range for a melee attack after they have moved, the Berserker will draw a missile weapon and attack with it.
- If they have no missile weapons and have not yet attacked this turn, the Berserker will make an improvised missile attack with whatever they are holding. Failing that they use something they are carrying or can pick up as a free action.
- If anyone attempts to restrain the Berserker while in their frenzy, they are immediately considered a foe.
- If there are no foes left to fight and they are still in a frenzy, the Berserker gets a wisdom saving throw, this is in addition to any wisdom check for having downed a foe. If this saving throw is failed, they are so far into madness they start attacking their friends and they are now considered as foes.
- If the Berserker is still in a frenzy when the rage should end, the frenzy will continue until they either succeed in a wisdom check, or there is no one left to attack (including friends) or they are rendered unconscious, or are slain.
- If the Berserker's frenzy continued past the time when the rage should have ended, the Berserker will have one added level of exhaustion when the frenzy ends.

Essentially, a Berserker barbarian can be as dangerous to his allies as he is to his enemies. There is a potential cost to making a mentally undisciplined Berserker, not to mention, the higher level the Berserker is, the more dangerous he becomes. I would additionally change:

- At 6th level, when a Berserker is in their frenzy, they are immune to the stunned condition.
- At 14th level, when a Berserker is in their frenzy, they are immune to the movement limiting effects of being hit by a sentinel feat attack.

[JNAProductions]

This is not a good change.

Limiting player control, ESPECIALLY to make them attack friends, is not fun.

[ShadowSandbag]

I agree, I think that while you certainly have a good goal, this isnt the way to do it. With this you either play your barbarian without having a subclass, or don't get to play your barbarian.

[Damon_Tor]

The one change I didn't mind was that ending the rage requires a wis save instead of having a simple duration, and that the barbarian doesn't get the exhaustion unless his rage goes longer than it's normal time limit. That's a pure buff, it's flavorful, and it doesn't strip the player of his agency.

[Zhorn]

I enjoyed this read. Still mulling over the frenzy adjustments on the appeal vs complexity vs balance aspect as there's a lot to account for (a bit too much really).

One of the later features I can see an immediate rewording need;

- At 14th level, when a Berserker is in their frenzy, they are immune to the movement limiting effects of being hit by a sentinel feat attack.
Too specific in calling out a single feat. Suggest to instead address an underlying effect or condition as to still have the intended effect without naming a feature that may not ever be present in a game. It's generally a cleaner design you'll see the rest of the classes and feats adhering to where the only abilities they reference by name are specific prerequisites of obtaining the feature in the first place (eg: subclass features only name other features within their class and subclass of a lower level, and class features only reference their own class features, etc)

examples:
At 14th level, while a Berserker is in their frenzy, they are immune to effect that would reduce their speed to 0.
At 14th level, while a Berserker is in their frenzy, movement impairing effects cannot reduce their speed to less than half of their base walking speed.

[saucerhead]

This is not a good change.

Limiting player control, ESPECIALLY to make them attack friends, is not fun.

Well, I'm a bit disappointed since I had hoped for more of a break down of the different parts, but if your opinion is this is not good and not fun, okay. There isn't much to discuss.



I agree, I think that while you certainly have a good goal, this isnt the way to do it. With this you either play your barbarian without having a subclass, or don't get to play your barbarian.

Again, it is unfortunate you too don't find anything worth discussing. I wasn't stating this is the way the berserker has to be. It was my intention to have a starting place for a discussion of ideas on what can be done to fix it. That and to see what others think the role of a berserker is, since the PHB makes them fairly dull.



The one change I didn't mind was that ending the rage requires a wis save instead of having a simple duration, and that the barbarian doesn't get the exhaustion unless his rage goes longer than it's normal time limit. That's a pure buff, it's flavorful, and it doesn't strip the player of his agency.

The original exhaustion rule seems too punitive for just gaining a bonus action attack on your turn. The frenzy attack is comparable to the hasted attack from the spell; each offers one added attack per turn. However, the negative effects are quite different once the minute expires in the Haste spell compared to the berserker's frenzy in the PHB. I was trying to think of a way to bridge the differences and thought it made more sense for the level of exhaustion to happen if the frenzy lasted longer than the intended one minute duration. ---But maybe I got the saving throw bit backwards. Maybe instead of having a wisdom save to end the frenzy, it should be a wisdom save to extend it. He would using his will power to push his body beyond its normal limits, and that is what would cause the exhaustion. Then if most fights only last four to five rounds, there would be no debilitating exhaustion. It would only be when the fight drags on or extends fighting against hordes or bosses.

What did you think of the idea when a berserker enters a frenzy, they can temporarily ignore the exhaustion penalties? It seems too easy. It means he is really only effected out of combat, where barbarians are already kind of limited in function. What if instead, the exhaustion is temporarily ignored for a number of rounds equal to the berserker's level? I will have to think on that.

Anyways, thanks for the input.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Beserker 3rd level is the only feature that it gets that I don't like and is just terrible.

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.

My groups...

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. This attack deals 1d4 base damage and you can't use your bonus action for other actions.

Simple and effective.

I also replace Cha with Str on intimidating presence. Big muscles are scary

[sengmeng]

The regular berserker has a harsh penalty for the best attack option available. That's it. Is it good? Not really, but it's so so so so much simpler. I would not trade it out for a different, and frankly annoying, penalty that's much more complicated. I think tying a loss of control to taking damage is a good direction to take, but it needs to be streamlined. After all, you're trying to replace "takes a level of exhaustion in exchange for a bonus action attack" with several paragraphs.

And any feedback should be appreciated, even a resounding no. It's information you didn't have before, even if it's not the information you wanted.

[saucerhead]

I enjoyed this read. Still mulling over the frenzy adjustments on the appeal vs complexity vs balance aspect as there's a lot to account for (a bit too much really).

One of the later features I can see an immediate rewording need;

Too specific in calling out a single feat. Suggest to instead address an underlying effect or condition as to still have the intended effect without naming a feature that may not ever be present in a game. It's generally a cleaner design you'll see the rest of the classes and feats adhering to where the only abilities they reference by name are specific prerequisites of obtaining the feature in the first place (eg: subclass features only name other features within their class and subclass of a lower level, and class features only reference their own class features, etc)

examples:
At 14th level, while a Berserker is in their frenzy, they are immune to effect that would reduce their speed to 0.
At 14th level, while a Berserker is in their frenzy, movement impairing effects cannot reduce their speed to less than half of their base walking speed.


Thank you for the input. I agree calling out the single feat, sentinel, instead of addressing the underlying condition is a mistake on my part. The idea was a berserker is an unstoppable beast in combat and movement limiting effects would not work normally against them. I like your suggestion. How about:
-At 14th level, while a Berserker is in their frenzy, any movement impairing effects targeting them are reduced by half.
So if the Berserker has 20 feet of movement left when they are hit by a sentinel the would still have 10 feet of movement and could potentially still close and attack, but if he only had 5 feet of movement left when he is hit, he is still stopped. This would have zero change on difficult terrain since it isn't targeted, but ray of frost would only slow them by 5 feet instead of 10 feet.

I agree I've made the entire frenzy ability "a bit too much", so I will try to address the different points. What did you think of the idea of starting the frenzy as a reaction to getting wounded?

[JNAProductions]

The issue with this is not in the execution (or at least, not entirely), it's in the concept.

As far as I can tell, this fix is about taking control away from the player in exchange for more power. That's not fun. You can literally put a Berserker on autopilot when they initiate a Frenzy, save for the decision to make a Wisdom save or not when downing a foe. (Side note-you don't have a DC.) The fact that this can easily result in attacking allies is just the icing on the cake in terms of the concept being a bad one.

[saucerhead]

Beserker 3rd level is the only feature that it gets that I don't like and is just terrible.

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.

My groups...

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. This attack deals 1d4 base damage and you can't use your bonus action for other actions.

Simple and effective.

I also replace Cha with Str on intimidating presence. Big muscles are scary

Thanks for your reply. I think your group's solution is good. It gives the Berserker a positive benefit in combat without the punishing exhaustion. Are they are using something like a sword pommel strike for a 1d4, similar to the PAM butt-end attack? I like that. I am looking at something a bit more than that though. If a bear totem barbarian takes PAM, he gets everything the Berserker has and more on top of his damage resistance. If your Berserker takes PAM he gains only the opportunity attack. It's not really equal, but then the Berserker would be free to choose some other feat and still have the bonus attack every round. Hmm. I do like your solution as it is simple and effective.

What did you think of the idea where the Berserker has to take the reckless attack every turn? I think most barbarians will reckless attack if given the choice anyway, but is the loss of agency in combat too much?


The regular berserker has a harsh penalty for the best attack option available. That's it. Is it good? Not really, but it's so so so so much simpler. I would not trade it out for a different, and frankly annoying, penalty that's much more complicated. I think tying a loss of control to taking damage is a good direction to take, but it needs to be streamlined. After all, you're trying to replace "takes a level of exhaustion in exchange for a bonus action attack" with several paragraphs.

And any feedback should be appreciated, even a resounding no. It's information you didn't have before, even if it's not the information you wanted.

Thanks for your reply. Yes, you are correct that I've over complicated the frenzy ability and it needs streamlining. So if you like the idea of entering a frenzy as a reaction to getting wounded on the enemy's turn, how did you feel about the loss of control making the Berserker recklessly attack every turn?

The very brief description of a Berserker in the PHB says: As you enter the berserker’s rage, you thrill in the chaos of battle, heedless of your own health or well-being. This sounds very similar to the wording of reckless attack ability, but is the loss of agency in combat too much? You can still choose which opponent and where you move, and nothing limits the type of attack either; you could still shove or grapple or do non-lethal damage. I'm just wondering, is it all that limiting if it is what most barbarians are going to do anyway?

As to appreciation of feedback, you are correct again. I don't think I have been disrespectful of anyones opinions. I want anyone's opinions. If someone dislikes my ideas in this thread, I am open to discussion, and changing those ideas, as well as encouraging people to share their own.

[saucerhead]

The issue with this is not in the execution (or at least, not entirely), it's in the concept.

As far as I can tell, this fix is about taking control away from the player in exchange for more power. That's not fun. You can literally put a Berserker on autopilot when they initiate a Frenzy, save for the decision to make a Wisdom save or not when downing a foe. (Side note-you don't have a DC.) The fact that this can easily result in attacking allies is just the icing on the cake in terms of the concept being a bad one.

Thank you for your clarification, and reply. I need to clarify too, that the disappointment expressed in my previous reply was really more at myself, not you. I had hoped that I had done a better job coming up with different points to improve the Berserker, but will admit it is a mess. If I offended you, I apologize.

There would a certain amount of loss of agency in combat. As I pointed out in a previous reply the brief description of the Berserker in the PHB does seem to portray the reckless attack's lack of concern for self preservation. If the Berserker is recklessly attacking every turn it is on autopilot to an extent. The player still gets to choose the opponent and the type of attack: shove, grapple etc. Isn't that what usually happens during combat?

As to the Berserker attacking allies, I am suggesting the player have an opportunity to regain self control and stop attacking (I was thinking of a DC of 10). Of course a Berserker that has dumped wisdom down to an 8 would be of great concern to his friends. Are you suggesting regaining self-control should be automatic? That would mean there isn't any real loss of control or battle madness, and the wisdom save to avoid or end frenzy is pointless. I understand you dislike the loss of agency and hate the thought of attacking allies. In games where I have been a player, it sucks having the DM dominate you character, but it still happens whether it is the result of a monster or spell, especially at higher tiers of play.

If we remove the loss of self-control, let alone the possibility of attacking allies, what do you think the role of a Berserker is? Are there no negative effects other than character/role-playing ones? There is very little flavor given in the PHB for the sub-class other than, they like to fight.

[JNAProductions]

I'm not offended. I dislike your design goal, but I'm not offended by it-that'd be kinda ridiculous. :P

And here's the thing-you can easily divorce the fluff from the crunch for just about ANYTHING in 5E. And that's okay. Rage needn't be fury, it can be a zen battle-trance. Frenzy isn't going frothing mad, it's overclocking your own body and brain to be able to strike even faster and more effectively, at the cost of exhausting yourself.

While I do agree that the current Frenzy is bad (not enough benefits, too much cost) taking away control from the player is just plain not fun. It's acceptable when the ENEMY does it to you (Dominate spells, for instance) but even then, they should be used sparingly. To have a feature that states "Sit this combat out until it's almost over and you can decide when exactly to roll your save" is... Not fun.

I wish I could give advice on how to implement it better, but the issue is, the concept itself is just bad. I wholeheartedly agree with the desire to fix the Berserker, but this is not how to do it. (At least, in my opinion.)

That being said, I do wish you the best of luck in this and future homebrews, and if your players like it, then more power to them. Hope your new year is off to a great start!

[zinycor]

Do you still get to attack with your bonus action when in frenzy or do you only get the temporary hit points?

[saucerhead]

I'm not offended. I dislike your design goal, but I'm not offended by it-that'd be kinda ridiculous. :P

And here's the thing-you can easily divorce the fluff from the crunch for just about ANYTHING in 5E. And that's okay. Rage needn't be fury, it can be a zen battle-trance. Frenzy isn't going frothing mad, it's overclocking your own body and brain to be able to strike even faster and more effectively, at the cost of exhausting yourself.

While I do agree that the current Frenzy is bad (not enough benefits, too much cost) taking away control from the player is just plain not fun. It's acceptable when the ENEMY does it to you (Dominate spells, for instance) but even then, they should be used sparingly. To have a feature that states "Sit this combat out until it's almost over and you can decide when exactly to roll your save" is... Not fun.

I wish I could give advice on how to implement it better, but the issue is, the concept itself is just bad. I wholeheartedly agree with the desire to fix the Berserker, but this is not how to do it. (At least, in my opinion.)

That being said, I do wish you the best of luck in this and future homebrews, and if your players like it, then more power to them. Hope your new year is off to a great start!

Well, you are not alone in disliking the loss of control idea, so I think it has to be scrapped. I was looking at the berserker as frothing mad, but you are correct the fluff and the crunch can be divorced. It allows the player to decide if he is a rabid, pants on head madman or a calculating killer. I will have to revise the initial concept. Thanks for your input and happy new year.



Do you still get to attack with your bonus action when in frenzy or do you only get the temporary hit points?

My thought was to allow both the bonus action attack and the temporary hit points when you frenzy. It seemed to me there weren't enough gains in the original sub-class, and too much of a downside. I will be revising this attempt to improve the Berserker. Thanks for your interest.

[saucerhead]

The initial post has been revised. Thank you to all those that responded for your input. The new version has all of the player loss of control issues removed. I hope you give me as much response to this 2nd attempt. :smallsmile:

[JNAProductions]

Okay. This is much better conceptually, but falls flat in execution. You've entirely removed the downside of Frenzy (Exhaustion that lasts 1-9 round AFTER your Rage ends means... Basically nothing. Rare indeed is the fight that lasts longer than 10 rounds) and added a pretty potent buff.

[DeTess]

I think your 'temporary exhaustion' idea is an interesting one, but I think it needs to last longer to matter. Maybe keep frenzy as it originally is, but also give the frenzy barbarian the ability to recover a level of exhaustion during a short rest. That way frenzy is still usable, just not all the time, and there is a cost attached to it, but some planning can negate it most of the time. You could fluff it as the Berserker's training allowing them to recover their energy far quicker than others.

[saucerhead]

Okay. This is much better conceptually, but falls flat in execution. You've entirely removed the downside of Frenzy (Exhaustion that lasts 1-9 round AFTER your Rage ends means... Basically nothing. Rare indeed is the fight that lasts longer than 10 rounds) and added a pretty potent buff.

I've actually reduced the size of the THP buff from the first attempt. It used to include the Con modifier, which was too much. As to the length of fights I think that is very dependent on DMs. One campaign I play in regularly has spells expire part way through fights, due to ending at one minute. That particular DM always has extended fights that come in waves. There is also the consideration that if the Berserker loses his rage, by either failing to take damage or failing to attack, he will have a few rounds of disadvantage. DMs can easily make this temporary exhaustion a factor, but if you feel it is too inconsequential, how long do you think it should be?


I think your 'temporary exhaustion' idea is an interesting one, but I think it needs to last longer to matter. Maybe keep frenzy as it originally is, but also give the frenzy barbarian the ability to recover a level of exhaustion during a short rest. That way frenzy is still usable, just not all the time, and there is a cost attached to it, but some planning can negate it most of the time. You could fluff it as the Berserker's training allowing them to recover their energy far quicker than others.

Your suggestion of recovering from exhaustion on a short rest is good, and it is one that I have heard before. I believe some tables probably use it already, and those tables also reduce short rests to five minutes and that would really make the Berserker much more playable. I just can't presume that short rests are five minutes, so I tried to come up with a rule suggestion. If the temporary exhaustion seems too short to matter, how long do you think it ought to be?

[Corran]

There are both things that I like here, and things that I don't like. Before going further, let me preface everything with this. I cannot opine confidently on the balance of your rules. For example, I do think that the amount of the temp hp is a bit too much, but that's just a gut feeling and not something I can easily back up (nor am I very interested in trying to do so). So expect me to talk mostly about ideas here but with little emphasis on their exact implementation.

All right. So, there is this one thing that I really really don't like, and I will take a crap on it, but before doing so, let me tell you what I like.

First of all, I like the idea of having to attack recklessly. When in berserk mode, you shouldn't have to make tactical choices, like, ''do I attack recklessly or not'', because this invalidates the roleplaying element in play. Which is that when in berserk mode, you are out to kill in very mindless, or instinctive if you prefer, way. The choice is instead backed up to when you enter berserk mode (or a rage that can potentially lead you to go berserk). Either way, having to attack recklessly is imo very much in line with what a berserker should do, and that's why I like it.

Now, having to attack recklessly can be very dangerous, because it can mean that you'll go down very quickly. Which is counterintuitive for a berserker. So, a defensive boost is in order. And I really like the idea of giving temp hp every round. Besides, being more durable while in berserk mode is thematic too imo.

So, as I see it, these are the two main benefits of going berserk. Ie, being justified to use reckless attack more often, and a boost in durability. The amount of temp hp makes it too much of a defensive buff for my liking. Because when you would already attack recklessly anyway, then berserk is strictly a defensive boost. So I'd try to tweak this a bit, so that the boost of going berserk can always offer something both defensively and offensively. For example, I might lower the temp hp to just con mod, or to proficiency bonus if you want it to scale with levels (it's still a very very considerable amount of temp hp and perhaps even more powerful than it should be), and I'd add an offensive boost of some kind (perhaps another attack, or a static bonus to damage, or whatever). Unless of course it is your intention to translate 'going berserk' mostly into being harder to kill.

I also like how going into berserk mode gets rid temporarily of exhaustion. If going berserk has a way to backfire, then adding reasons to risk it plays to the dicey nature of the subclass, cause it gives you more reasons to risk it.



There are some minor things that I don't like, such as having to resort to missile attacks instead of dashing towards an enemy, or that you get advantage on the wisdom roll when downing a foe (I think disadvantage might actually be more appropriate). But what I mainly dislike is this. Well, basically two things, but lets start with the smaller one. I dont see a considerable drawback in going berserk. The risk is when there are no more enemies to fight, which means that it's not so much of a risk. But here is what I really dont like. You hide everything (both positives and negatives) behind a roll. And since this is a subclass feature, which means that I want it to go off since I piked this subclass, I will want to fail that roll. Which does not make much sense to me as a player, and I also dont think it makes much sense from a narrative point of view. Cause as you have it, frenzy seems more like a taboo than something powerful that can actually sometimes backfire, hence as something dangerous/unreliable. I think it's best to split the feature into two parts. The positives and the negatives. And then hide the negatives behind a wisdom roll that you have to make when you choose to use this type of rage with the extra benefits. It makes for a subclass of a dicey nature, which I think is a good way to represent the berserker mechanically, only you decide whether to take the risk when you choose if you'll use the better rage that has a chance to backfire, and you make the wisdom roll exclusively for the chance to backfire, so that you'll have reason to succeed on it.

[DeTess]

Your suggestion of recovering from exhaustion on a short rest is good, and it is one that I have heard before. I believe some tables probably use it already, and those tables also reduce short rests to five minutes and that would really make the Berserker much more playable. I just can't presume that short rests are five minutes, so I tried to come up with a rule suggestion. If the temporary exhaustion seems too short to matter, how long do you think it ought to be?

I think you'd need something in the order of at least 10 minutes or so. In your current version the berserker could basically go from one fight to another without penalties (assuming the party takes a minute to loot the bodies and what-not). 10 minutes means that's not possible in as many situations, and means that there are situations where the berserker might be better off keeping their frenzy in reserve for the next fight.

[Frozenstep]

Frenzy.

So temporary exhaustion...for the most part, I kind of like the idea, but have some conflicting feelings on it.

Basically, unless the DM does extended combat by throwing lots and lots of enemies (I'd think this is rare. It just takes too much time to set up and is just more difficult to keep track of, but obviously exceptions exist), most combats don't last a minute. I'd say in my experience, on turn 3 the winner is pretty much already decided. However, if the barbarian goes down or is disabled and their rage ends, then suddenly they're put in a bad position, especially if they have several levels of temporary exhaustion. That's a nice risk that makes frenzying still feel a little dangerous.

But my problem is the downside doesn't show itself consistently enough to feel like a real bad thing. It's pretty hard to put a raging barbarian down, and once you get to level 6, most non-hp ways of taking a barbarian out of rage don't even work. I don't have a suggestion on how to fix this...

There's an element of win harder lose harder design here. Basically, if things go well, this class will make things go even better, since the downsides won't show themselves. If things don't go well and the barbarian is knocked out, they're probably on the losing end of a fight, and this class makes the situation even worse even if someone picks them up with a healing word. Now...that isn't necessarily the worst thing ever. Risk and reward is baked into the class. I just feel like the risk is a little too inconsistent to really make it feel compelling. I'm not sure how you fix that.

Don't be afraid to use an alternate exhaustion table too, to modify risk/reward for more frenzies in a day.

Anyway, the upsides...berserker already had the strongest offense, and now you give it an insane defense, too. Path of the battlerager gets their con mod worth of temporary hp, starting at level 6. Getting your level's worth is just too much. It's basically doubled in value against physical damage, the most common damage type, and basically cuts most attacks you'd receive from one attack in half if not more, which is already doing half damage against the highest hit dice class. I think it's too much.

Mindless rage.

Adding stun immunity...I get what you're going for, but it was already an insanely good feature, and further trivializes any risk this class could possibly experience.

[saucerhead]

First of all, I like the idea of having to attack recklessly. When in berserk mode, you shouldn't have to make tactical choices, like, ''do I attack recklessly or not'', because this invalidates the roleplaying element in play. Which is that when in berserk mode, you are out to kill in very mindless, or instinctive if you prefer, way. The choice is instead backed up to when you enter berserk mode (or a rage that can potentially lead you to go berserk). Either way, having to attack recklessly is imo very much in line with what a berserker should do, and that's why I like it.

Now, having to attack recklessly can be very dangerous, because it can mean that you'll go down very quickly. Which is counterintuitive for a berserker. So, a defensive boost is in order. And I really like the idea of giving temp hp every round. Besides, being more durable while in berserk mode is thematic too imo.

So, as I see it, these are the two main benefits of going berserk. Ie, being justified to use reckless attack more often, and a boost in durability. The amount of temp hp makes it too much of a defensive buff for my liking. Because when you would already attack recklessly anyway, then berserk is strictly a defensive boost. So I'd try to tweak this a bit, so that the boost of going berserk can always offer something both defensively and offensively. For example, I might lower the temp hp to just con mod, or to proficiency bonus if you want it to scale with levels (it's still a very very considerable amount of temp hp and perhaps even more powerful than it should be), and I'd add an offensive boost of some kind (perhaps another attack, or a static bonus to damage, or whatever). Unless of course it is your intention to translate 'going berserk' mostly into being harder to kill.

I also like how going into berserk mode gets rid temporarily of exhaustion. If going berserk has a way to backfire, then adding reasons to risk it plays to the dicey nature of the subclass, cause it gives you more reasons to risk it.



There are some minor things that I don't like, such as having to resort to missile attacks instead of dashing towards an enemy, or that you get advantage on the wisdom roll when downing a foe (I think disadvantage might actually be more appropriate). But what I mainly dislike is this. Well, basically two things, but lets start with the smaller one. I dont see a considerable drawback in going berserk. The risk is when there are no more enemies to fight, which means that it's not so much of a risk. But here is what I really dont like. You hide everything (both positives and negatives) behind a roll. And since this is a subclass feature, which means that I want it to go off since I piked this subclass, I will want to fail that roll. Which does not make much sense to me as a player, and I also dont think it makes much sense from a narrative point of view. Cause as you have it, frenzy seems more like a taboo than something powerful that can actually sometimes backfire, hence as something dangerous/unreliable. I think it's best to split the feature into two parts. The positives and the negatives. And then hide the negatives behind a wisdom roll that you have to make when you choose to use this type of rage with the extra benefits. It makes for a subclass of a dicey nature, which I think is a good way to represent the berserker mechanically, only you decide whether to take the risk when you choose if you'll use the better rage that has a chance to backfire, and you make the wisdom roll exclusively for the chance to backfire, so that you'll have reason to succeed on it.


Thanks for the detailed reply. It is great that you broke things down into what you do and don't like. Most of the ideas, like having to use a missile weapon if you can't reach an enemy for melee, or having to charge at enemies were poorly thought out, and I've removed them. It served little purpose in taking away control of the players actions when it was probably what they would do anyways. The Berserker isn't going to want to lose his rage and will almost always attack the next enemy some way, some how, so there was no point in saying they must.

In my mind it is a natural fit of the sub-class to always reckless attack if they frenzy, as the description of the ability matchs the description of the Berserker. I was unsure of whether it takes away to much control, as it didn't get very much response next to all the other problems in my first draft to fix the sub-class. You are correct that it will make the Berserker potentially fall to enemy attacks quickly, so I thought the temporary hit points would help. The number of them was way too many in the first draft, and truthfully they are probably still too many in the second draft.

I think most of the concerns, and dislikes you have raised have been removed, but thanks for pointing out the ideas you liked.

[saucerhead]

I think you'd need something in the order of at least 10 minutes or so. In your current version the berserker could basically go from one fight to another without penalties (assuming the party takes a minute to loot the bodies and what-not). 10 minutes means that's not possible in as many situations, and means that there are situations where the berserker might be better off keeping their frenzy in reserve for the next fight.

Thanks for your reply. I think you are right that the temporary exhaustion is too brief and needs a rework. I am still hesitant to make it a short rest, so the idea of upping it from rounds to minutes is a good one. It would definitely make life hard, if the Berserker has a DM using waves of enemies or extended fights though.



Frenzy.

So temporary exhaustion...for the most part, I kind of like the idea, but have some conflicting feelings on it.

Basically, unless the DM does extended combat by throwing lots and lots of enemies (I'd think this is rare. It just takes too much time to set up and is just more difficult to keep track of, but obviously exceptions exist), most combats don't last a minute. I'd say in my experience, on turn 3 the winner is pretty much already decided. However, if the barbarian goes down or is disabled and their rage ends, then suddenly they're put in a bad position, especially if they have several levels of temporary exhaustion. That's a nice risk that makes frenzying still feel a little dangerous.

But my problem is the downside doesn't show itself consistently enough to feel like a real bad thing. It's pretty hard to put a raging barbarian down, and once you get to level 6, most non-hp ways of taking a barbarian out of rage don't even work. I don't have a suggestion on how to fix this...

There's an element of win harder lose harder design here. Basically, if things go well, this class will make things go even better, since the downsides won't show themselves. If things don't go well and the barbarian is knocked out, they're probably on the losing end of a fight, and this class makes the situation even worse even if someone picks them up with a healing word. Now...that isn't necessarily the worst thing ever. Risk and reward is baked into the class. I just feel like the risk is a little too inconsistent to really make it feel compelling. I'm not sure how you fix that.

Don't be afraid to use an alternate exhaustion table too, to modify risk/reward for more frenzies in a day.

Anyway, the upsides...berserker already had the strongest offense, and now you give it an insane defense, too. Path of the battlerager gets their con mod worth of temporary hp, starting at level 6. Getting your level's worth is just too much. It's basically doubled in value against physical damage, the most common damage type, and basically cuts most attacks you'd receive from one attack in half if not more, which is already doing half damage against the highest hit dice class. I think it's too much.

Mindless rage.

Adding stun immunity...I get what you're going for, but it was already an insanely good feature, and further trivializes any risk this class could possibly experience.

Thanks for your reply. You are correct, the temporary hit points are too high. I will reduce it in the next draft and I agree the temporary exhaustion idea needs adjusting too. You make a good point about the win harder, lose harder element. A Berserker that has run out of rage would still be a good fighter, except in the temporary exhaustion period. If, however, you have only four players or no other strong melee characters, the Berserker isn't the way to go. That might be more of a group dynamic/table thing to look at though.

There has to be a downside for the combat gains, but the thing that makes the exhaustion tricky is potential differences in play: extended combats, frequency of rests, length of rests etc. It would be easy for a Berserker to sit for 10 minutes while someone searches the bodies or the room, but it makes it play bog down if there is a pursuit or somekind of time crunch. This isn't necessarily unique to the Berserker, as a monk without ki can still fight, and a warlock without spell slots can still cast cantrips. The Berserker without rage can still fight, just not well with exhaustion.

Yeah, immunity to stun might not be necessary either. Thanks again for the input.

[saucerhead]

Thanks to the replies in this thread, I have been thinking about the suggestion of making temporary exhaustion last until the Berserker takes a short rest. I am considering having it look like this:

*Temporary exhaustion levels effect you until you take a short rest to recover from the energy spent entering a frenzy. They will have no further effect unless you enter another frenzy, which would cause you to gain an additional level of temporary exhaustion when that rage ends. Temporary exhaustion levels will stay with you until you have completed a long rest, at which point they are all removed.*

So, after a Berserker ends his second frenzy he would have two levels of exhaustion: disadvantage on skill checks and half speed until he got a short rest. This is a fairly big downside for getting one extra attack, as a bonus action, per turn during a frenzy. But it is still an improvement from the original PHB rules of needing a long rest.

Is this still too much of a downside?

[Anymage]

Just spitballing here. But if you want to make frenzy painful without the issue of exhaustion being a long term drawback, allow a raging berserker to make a weapon attack as a bonus action at the cost of a hit dice. This does create a longer term penalty than most other class features if overused (you only get back half your total hit dice on a long rest, as opposed to all other resources being completely refreshed), but sidesteps how crippling exhaustion stacks can be without the clunkiness of something like "temporary exhaustion".

I'm going to want to see some playtesting before I get firmly behind the idea. (My table doesn't have a barb to test with.) But that might be a more fruitful avenue to explore.

[Theodoxus]

Just spitballing here. But if you want to make frenzy painful without the issue of exhaustion being a long term drawback, allow a raging berserker to make a weapon attack as a bonus action at the cost of a hit dice. This does create a longer term penalty than most other class features if overused (you only get back half your total hit dice on a long rest, as opposed to all other resources being completely refreshed), but sidesteps how crippling exhaustion stacks can be without the clunkiness of something like "temporary exhaustion".

I'm going to want to see some playtesting before I get firmly behind the idea. (My table doesn't have a barb to test with.) But that might be a more fruitful avenue to explore.

That's not horrible... but I think, taking a page from upthread, on the idea of extending the rage past a minute - either using a Wis save to go beyond, or a Wis save to not stop... how about instead, every bonus action frenzy taken, roll a Con save equal to the higher of 10 or 1/2 the damage dealt. On the first fail gain a level of exhaustion at the end of the Rage. (You wouldn't roll to save after the first one - the exhaustion wouldn't stack) - it's basically a reverse Concentration check. DC 10 might be low - I'll let you decide - but this would allow the player to access the risk on a round by round basis.

TBH, I've never liked the 5E approach to Rage in general and Frenzy specifically - especially in comparison to other, similar, class abilities like Horde Breaker or War cleric's extra attack. HB in particular is egregious as it uses no resources, just a specific condition clause.