Keeping Rage going

[Mr Adventurer]

Rage says:

"It ends early if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then."

This can be a bit tricky - if there's difficult terrain or just too much distance between the next set of enemies, or they come in waves. You have to be attacking or taking damage every round.

Could you damage yourself in a pinch? What sort of rules might this be?

Use an object to slice yourself with your current weapon? What sort of damage?

[stoutstien]

Rage says:

"It ends early if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then."

This can be a bit tricky - if there's difficult terrain or just too much distance between the next set of enemies, or they come in waves. You have to be attacking or taking damage every round.

Could you damage yourself in a pinch? What sort of rules might this be?

Use an object to slice yourself with your current weapon? What sort of damage?

toss a javelin is the standard fall back in this instance.
a few times i have seen a totem barbarian smash an alchemist fire on themselves. doubles as a light source.

[Dr. Cliché]

I mean, you only have to attack the creature (there's no requirement that the attack be effective). So you could probably move your speed and then throw the nearest object at them. A vase. A rock. A chair. The party wizard. Your own foot.

[Lupine]

toss a javelin is the standard fall back in this instance.
a few times i have seen a totem barbarian smash an alchemist fire on themselves. doubles as a light source.

I guess alchemist fire is one way to keep the rage going. In addition, that's intimidating as all ****. You just watched someone pour alchemist fire on themselves, and not only are they not rolling on the ground, they're fighting better for it.

Flaming barbarians sound terrifying

[Trask]

I would let a barbarian do something like pound on their wounds, gnaw their weapon handle, or anything else suitably hardcore to deal 1 point of damage to themselves and keep their rage going.

[Hytheter]

If I was the DM, I'd probably forget that Rage is supposed to end early when it would have come up, and then later decide it's fine to just let it ride anyway. I'm not sure the restriction is really needed, and removing it beats having characters comically injure themselves on purpose just to keep it going.

[Teaguethebean]

I mean, you only have to attack the creature (there's no requirement that the attack be effective). So you could probably move your speed and then throw the nearest object at them. A vase. A rock. A chair. The party wizard. Your own foot.

Yeah I was chasing an enemy that was running away and my barb/rogue threw his Rapier at them.

[HappyDaze]

Perhaps if barbarians took a little blue pill they could keep their rage going longer?

[Mr Adventurer]

Persistent Rage, the 15th level class feature, means your rage never ends early; so I suppose that's the balance point at the other end.

I've raised this with my DM too, he says there's a Crawford ruling somewhere that disallows it, so there's that. He hasn't ruled it out though.

I love the alchemist's fire idea though! They can't catch you if you are on fire!

[stoutstien]

Perhaps if barbarians took a little blue pill they could keep their rage going longer?

"If your rage persist longer then 5 minutes...... contact your friends and brag"

[GlenSmash!]

My Barbarians carry Longbows. If there is a foe within 600ft from me I can keep Rage going.

[redwizard007]

My Barbarians carry Longbows. If there is a foe within 600ft from me I can keep Rage going.

Yeah. If you cant find a way to attack at range then shame on you.

I actually had a barbarian in a campaign I'm running rush into the next room of a dungeon to continue his rage. Bad guys had heard fighting and were ready for him. It all worked out in his favor. It's the first time this player has been rewarded (over 4 editions) for playing like Leroy Jenkins.

[NorthernPhoenix]

If you wanna minmax, bows are fine. Otherwise just be a Barbarian and throw something!:smallfurious:

[NOMster]

anytime is a good time to throw the rogue halfling at an enemy.

[Teaguethebean]

If you wanna minmax, bows are fine. Otherwise just be a Barbarian and throw something!:smallfurious:

How is carrying a bow minmaxing?

[JoeJ]

anytime is a good time to throw the rogue halfling at an enemy.

Hey, it worked for the X-Men!

[HiveStriker]

I mean, you only have to attack the creature (there's no requirement that the attack be effective). So you could probably move your speed and then throw the nearest object at them. A vase. A rock. A chair. The party wizard. Your own foot.
Wow. Never realized. I guess I always read wrong as need to actually "hit"...
That does make maintaining rage much easier at low levels than I always thought... XD:smalltongue:

If you wanna minmax, bows are fine. Otherwise just be a Barbarian and throw something!:smallfurious:


How is carrying a bow minmaxing?
He was probably speaking of "effective range to maintain threat" minmaxing.

But that's indeed overkill. Especially since it requires you to actually drop your melee weapon.
Whereas Javelin allows you a throw up to 120 feet and can be drawn with free action and shot with one-hand while you keep your dear two-handed one in the other.
Of course, as Dr. Cliché suggests, even a pebble grabbed from ground would technically work...

Of all ideas so far, I really like the "flaming Barbarian" the most. XD

[LudicSavant]

How is carrying a bow minmaxing?

Low standards.

Anywho, carrying a bow only goes so far, tactical enemies will often deny Barbarians a target to attack at all.

[Tanarii]

Chuck a javelin (or handaxe, whatever) is the traditional method, as long as you’re in within range. Doesn’t require using your action or dropping your melee weapon to change weapons, unlike switching up to a bow.

[dragoeniex]

I'm laughing because I recently started using a variant of "the flaming barbarian."

Scourge Aasimar zealot. Can't quite reach the target? Light up yourself and everyone else.

[Pex]

Trouble is sometimes you need to do an Action that’s not an attack but must be done, usually Use An Object. You intend to attack next round, but for this round you just have to do something else even though you are raging and attacked the previous round. If you don’t take damage, bye bye rage. Note it’s taking damage, not being attacked. An opponent can still attack you, but if he misses bye bye rage.

It is a major downer, but you can’t do anything about it. I’d rather that limitation didn’t exist and let Relentless Rage be something else.

[AdAstra]

Rage is a very strong ability already. It’s fine to not like losing it, but it’s not like it makes the Barbarian underpowered. Plus, there’s a very valid game design principle at work with the rage-loss. The properties of rage, and many Barbarian abilities, are designed to allow and encourage a very frantic and aggressive style, rewarding it with significant risk reduction and improved damage/accuracy. Yet the limitations also encourage strategy, like making sure that you’re either attacking and/or taking damage as often as possible, and the risk/reward of Reckless Attack. If you removed Rage’s limitations too early, I think the ability would be lesser for it.