Barbarians Feel Weak

[Amechra]

I'm not talking about power-level here.

When I sit down to play a Barbarian, I want to play a character who uses their overwhelming brute strength to solve their problems. Being a seething cauldron of wrath backed up with a wall of muscles is my jam.

And yet... Barbarians don't feel strong. If you grab a non-raging Barbarian and slap them next to any other character with the same Strength, they're equal. Heck, a Champion Fighter or Bard could have a better bonus to doing Strength-based things than our Barbarian with a lower actual strength score. That just feels wrong, and that's before we get to how a Fighter can technically hit Strength 20 before a Barbarian can due to getting more ASIs. Sure, Barbarians get Indomitable Might and Primal Champion... at the end of Tier 4. Tier 4. And if I want to do something simple like "carry more stuff than it looks like I should", I have to play a Totem Warrior.

But what about Rage, I might hear you ask? As long as you're raging, you have Advantage on most things that require Strength, so shouldn't that be enough? I say no. For a lot of your career, Rage feels too precious to use it for anything other than combat, because it's your big combat buff and a lot of your combat-related subclass features are tied to it. If I have 2-3 Rages per long rest and there's an expectation of 6-8 encounters in that timespan? I'm not going to waste one of them to get Advantage on a single check or saving throw - that would be absurdly wasteful.

And they don't feel strong, even while raging. Sure, I have a good chance to shove people around or grapple them... but I can still only shove them 5ft, and I'm still slowed down when dragging people around. I want to be able to send people flying like a Battlemaster Fighter or a Swords Bard can. I want to be able to fireman-carry someone like they barely weigh anyone, then use them as a bludgeoning weapon. Heck, I can't even meaningfully lift more than I normally can while enraged, unless the DM takes pity on me and lets me make a Strength check (they certainly don't have to - I'm away from my books, but it's not on the list of examples for Strength checks on the SRD).

On a related note, I wish the Unarmored AC for Barbarians was 13+Con instead of 10+Dex+Con. Seriously, I think it's the only form of AC calculation that relies on two secondary stats, and essentially forces you to play a dumb meat-head stereotype if you're at all interested in rocking the shirtless badass look. Heck, the "optimal" way to play a Barbarian is for them to wear the heaviest armor they can and use a polearm like some kind of bargain-bin Fighter or Paladin. That legitimately frustrates me - the optimal way to play a Barbarian class should be "rip off your shirt and beat everyone to death with whatever's at hand".

...

Anyway, I'm rambling. So I'll stop.

[stoutstien]

Barbarians are in a rough place with the exception of the path of ancestral guardian. they are both largely ineffective and boring(IMO). I think a large potion of the blame lays on the low value STR holds in game combined with feat taxes.

some small changes I've made:
-replace rage damage with +STR. they hit harder, more often, and are STRONG.

-brutal critical maximizes crit damage on bonus damage dice

-automatically enters rage after being hit by a critical hit

some general changes ive made to the game that help them indirectly:
-most of the big feats have been moved onto the weapons which frees up feats which IMO helps a lot in the expiration/social pillars. also added STR requirements for some weapons.

-some ability checks have have a minimum Ability score needed to attempt the check. an example would be something like smashing down a metal door in one blow has a STR threshold of 12 and a DC of 15 so the rogue with 10 STR + expertise in athletics has no chance to break it down in one swing where the barbarian with 18 STR can attempt it.

[Chaosmancer]

I can see where you are coming from. Agree with most of it.

Nitpick? Monks are 10+Dex+Wis, and while I can see Con being a secondary stat and wisdom not, Con is essential for Barbarians.

And I think that is where I am, and why the barbarian doesn't bother me for not being as strong as I like. Because their actual niche is closer to being the toughest.

Actually, one ability I'd love to give them, and just haven't gotten around to yet, is a Constitution version of Evasion, where they will take no damage on a success and half on a fail. Because Barbarians are tough


Barbarians are in a rough place with the exception of the path of ancestral guardian. they are both largely ineffective and boring(IMO). I think a large potion of the blame lays on the low value STR holds in game combined with feat taxes.

some small changes I've made:
-replace rage damage with +STR. they hit harder, more often, and are STRONG.

-brutal critical maximizes crit damage on bonus damage dice

-automatically enters rage after being hit by a critical hit

some general changes ive made to the game that help them indirectly:
-most of the big feats have been moved onto the weapons which frees up feats which IMO helps a lot in the expiration/social pillars. also added STR requirements for some weapons.

-some ability checks have have a minimum Ability score needed to attempt the check. an example would be something like smashing down a metal door in one blow has a STR threshold of 12 and a DC of 15 so the rogue with 10 STR + expertise in athletics has no chance to break it down in one swing where the barbarian with 18 STR can attempt it.

Hmm.

I ended up changing Rage damage to scale more evenly.
1st to 4th -> +2
5th to 8th -> +3
9th to 12th -> +4
13th to 16th -> +5
17 up -> +6

I also made it so you can reckless on an attack of opportunity (just makes more sense to me)

I like the Brutal Crit idea, that could be real nice.

[Chaos Jackal]

Well, the barbarian's class features leave a lot to be desired in many cases... The base chassis is good enough, but fades away from around mid-tier 2 till essentially tier 4 (maybe even capping), and the subclasses are often a case of either interesting but weak features or boring but decent (not particularly strong for the most part) features.

So yeah, as far as looking to be the strongest badass with an axe to walk around, no, they can't really pull it off. Probably because the intention isn't to make them appear stronger but, as Chaosmancer noted, make them look the toughest. The barbarian isn't supposed to necessarily beat a champion in arm wrestling, they're supposed to match them in arm wrestling while being able to shrug off pain, fear and even death.

How well does that work? Well enough, for the most part, though their unarmored defense really is disingenuous, given that Dexterity and rage don't mesh so well. So their fantasy is in that weird spot where you can't appear as strong as the strongest and tougher than the toughest simultaneously. You can look really damn tough, but that might just mean you're not as strong. The riskier rage benefits of 3.5 are arguably more thematic in that regard. They did feel practically unkillable and monstrous during their rage, even if it wasn't the case many times. At least they looked the part.

Primal Champion could've been something rolled into rage, in that regard. Or their Unarmored Defense could've been 13+Con. But yeah, as it stands, for a good third of their career (which might end up being more than half of an actual game) a barbarian isn't particularly notable for anything.

[Amechra]

Nitpick? Monks are 10+Dex+Wis, and while I can see Con being a secondary stat and wisdom not, Con is essential for Barbarians.

Monks want their stats to go Dex > Wis > Con > Everything Else, so their AC is based off of their highest two stats.

Barbarians want their stats to go Str > Con > Dex > Everything Else, so their unarmored AC is based off their second and third highest stats. If you try to go Dex-focused, you're ignoring all of your "be good at fighting" features.

---

I get that "the toughest" is the fantasy they're selling, but that's... yeah. The whole berserker archetype is someone who can take a hit to the chin and then hit back like a truck, not an ineffectual punching bag.

[Man_Over_Game]

No, you're right. That's what I felt playing a Barbarian. The only thing that ever really feels "strong" is their ability to grapple a single target using the normal grapple rules, and the Rage damage they deal (which ironically works better with smaller weapons than big ones).

I tried to address some of these MADness issues with my Prestige options (Storm Herald replaces Dexterity with Strength, Berserker replaces Strength with Dexterity), but they don't really solve any problems related to making the Barbarian feel more powerful.



A fix I could see is something like making your minimum roll on Strength Checks to be equal to your Barbarian level (so a level 10 Barbarian can't ever roll less than 10 on the die).

Or modify Rage to be a Short Rest mechanic, so you can utilize it between fights.

Whatever the solution is, it'd be hard to implement in a way that cut down on relevant multiclassing or feat selection. Accessible grappling is gained through Tavern Brawler, while knocking a target Prone is through Shield Master, etc. You'd probably also want it to scale with level, so a bigger barbarian feels more barbarian than a small barbarian.

Actually... rather than making those things accessible, you could just make them more powerful. Tie it into Rage for scaling, or something.

For example:
When you take a successful Shove action against a creature while Raging, you may first move the creature an additional amount of feet equal to your Rage bonus x 5 in a direction you choose.

Additionally, your Rage bonus is considered doubled on actions you take against creatures you are grappling.

That way, you could be a Shield-slamming behemoth, or a heroic luchador. Grapple them and then throw them 30 feet into the air. Or pull them back into your team before kicking their knee to knock them prone.


Monks want their stats to go Dex > Wis > Con > Everything Else, so their AC is based off of their highest two stats.

Barbarians want their stats to go Str > Con > Dex > Everything Else, so their unarmored AC is based off their second and third highest stats. If you try to go Dex-focused, you're ignoring all of your "be good at fighting" features.

---

I get that "the toughest" is the fantasy they're selling, but that's... yeah. The whole berserker archetype is someone who can take a hit to the chin and then hit back like a truck, not an ineffectual punching bag.

A while back, I was looking at a way of making a "complex Barbarian". Something like the Variant class mechanics, but replaced core mechanics to make something a bit more adaptive and thoughtful while still maintaining balance with the original mechanic and still working with the subclasses.

The idea I had was almost identical to yours:

Rage is now a Short Rest resource.

Rage no longer grants damage resistance. Instead, losing HP from a damage type that your Rage would have resisted now grants you Temporary HP equal to the real HP you lost. If you made a melee weapon attack while you had these Temporary HP, you'd spend it all as bonus damage on your attack.
Additionally, if you are Raging at the end of your turn, you lose HP equal to your Rage bonus and gain that much in Temporary Hitpoints.
Lastly, if you are at 50% of your maximum HP or less, you regenerate an amount of HP equal to your Barbarian level.


So you either take a bunch of damage from multiple sources, or you take damage once and deal it back. You're much squishier than normal, but the health regen covers for that. The Short Rest recharging on Rage now allows you a reason to cancel Rage early and resume it as-needed, which opens up a lot of options for spellcasting and ranged builds (since you're no longer obligated to maintain Rage combat at all times), and it also allows the Barbarian to utilize it more out of combat (which addresses one of the previous concerns you mentioned).

It makes the Barbarian a lot riskier and a lot more complex, but it still offers plenty of different playstyles while validating the normal "Meathead hurt you now!" barbarian tropes.

I'm not 100% sure how the balance works on all of the moving parts, but it seems fine for now.

[LudicSavant]

I'm not talking about power-level here.

When I sit down to play a Barbarian, I want to play a character who uses their overwhelming brute strength to solve their problems. Being a seething cauldron of wrath backed up with a wall of muscles is my jam.

And yet... Barbarians don't feel strong. If you grab a non-raging Barbarian and slap them next to any other character with the same Strength, they're equal. Heck, a Champion Fighter or Bard could have a better bonus to doing Strength-based things than our Barbarian with a lower actual strength score. That just feels wrong, and that's before we get to how a Fighter can technically hit Strength 20 before a Barbarian can due to getting more ASIs. Sure, Barbarians get Indomitable Might and Primal Champion... at the end of Tier 4. Tier 4. And if I want to do something simple like "carry more stuff than it looks like I should", I have to play a Totem Warrior.

But what about Rage, I might hear you ask? As long as you're raging, you have Advantage on most things that require Strength, so shouldn't that be enough? I say no. For a lot of your career, Rage feels too precious to use it for anything other than combat, because it's your big combat buff and a lot of your combat-related subclass features are tied to it. If I have 2-3 Rages per long rest and there's an expectation of 6-8 encounters in that timespan? I'm not going to waste one of them to get Advantage on a single check or saving throw - that would be absurdly wasteful.

And they don't feel strong, even while raging. Sure, I have a good chance to shove people around or grapple them... but I can still only shove them 5ft, and I'm still slowed down when dragging people around. I want to be able to send people flying like a Battlemaster Fighter or a Swords Bard can. I want to be able to fireman-carry someone like they barely weigh anyone, then use them as a bludgeoning weapon. Heck, I can't even meaningfully lift more than I normally can while enraged, unless the DM takes pity on me and lets me make a Strength check (they certainly don't have to - I'm away from my books, but it's not on the list of examples for Strength checks on the SRD).

On a related note, I wish the Unarmored AC for Barbarians was 13+Con instead of 10+Dex+Con. Seriously, I think it's the only form of AC calculation that relies on two secondary stats, and essentially forces you to play a dumb meat-head stereotype if you're at all interested in rocking the shirtless badass look. Heck, the "optimal" way to play a Barbarian is for them to wear the heaviest armor they can and use a polearm like some kind of bargain-bin Fighter or Paladin. That legitimately frustrates me - the optimal way to play a Barbarian class should be "rip off your shirt and beat everyone to death with whatever's at hand".

...

Anyway, I'm rambling. So I'll stop.

I agree with basically everything here. I feel like the Barbarian has a lot of room for improvement.

[Segev]

I agree with the OP that Barbarians don't get a lot to make them feel physically strong. I disagree that they don't get anything.

And the reason is that classes just don't do that. Let's ask, first, how you "feel physically strong" in 5e: There is, obviously damage dealt in melee; there is lift/carry capacity; there is jumping distance/height; and there is contested strength against other creatures.

Barbarians actually do as well as anybody at the raw melee damage-dealing. Zealots get extra damage once per round on their first hit, and even without that the rage damage bonus is not insignificant.

In contested strength, they also do quite well thanks to advantage on all strength checks while raging. Sadly, but good for game balance, they "merely" get proficiency with strength saves rather than also getting advantage on them while raging.

Athletics is a skill they can choose to be proficient in, and it's used to give Proficiency to most contested Strength checks (e.g. shove or grapple).

Now, I know it's disappointing that a rogue can actually out-do a barbarian in the contested Strength (Athletics) area. Sort-of. A rogue can take Expertise in Athletics, doubling his proficiency bonus. But he has a much harder time getting Advantage on Strength checks, which are somewhere between a +3 and a +5-worth of shift on average, which means the Barbarian mostly still comes out ahead.

There's also a way for half-orc, half-elf, and human barbarians to get Expertise on Athletics: the Prodigy feat.

If you want "I am strong" feelings from your damage and contested strength checks, I would recommend a half-orc barbarian with the Prodigy feat. Half-orcs get an extra die of damage on crits, have +2 to strength, and are eligible for that feat. Barbarians get advantage on strength checks and a bonus to strength-based melee damage while raging.

Now, then, there's carry capacity. Barbarians offer one of the few class-based ways to do anything with that at all: Bear Totem at 6th level will double carrying capacity (and lift/drag), and will also grant perma-advantage on strength checks related to such things.

But if you want to make that as monstrous as you can, you need to play a firbolg or a goliath. Both of these races have Powerful Build, which doubles carry/lift/drag capacity. Combine that with Bear Totem at 6th level Barbarian and you quadruple it. Goliaths also get racial proficiency with Athletics and a +2 racial bonus to Strength. (Firbolgs only get +1 to Strength.)

Barbarian doesn't do much for jumping; you're still just using raw strength to calculate it. In theory, Athletics checks can let you jump further, but that's entirely DM-dependent in terms of what a given roll actually does. So if your DM can give you some answers there, you can say your advantage on strength checks while raging and your Athletics proficiency from class does qualify, here.

Admittedly, Rogue(Thief) and Monk give their own jumping bonuses straight-out, while Barbarian buries its in an ill-defined rule that makes its generic rage-induced Advantage on strength checks help out.


So, no, you can't play a Barbarian that is the best at all aspects of strength. You'll have to ask yourself what you really think makes for "feeling strong." Barbarian can help with most of them, but your choice of race and feats may also matter. Barbarian is more equipped to help with damage (both dealing and soaking it) than anything else.

[LudicSavant]

Even a Bear Totem Human Barbarian with 20 Str only carries 600 pounds (or drag 1200). For perspective, a horse'll weigh 1000-2000 pounds (depending on breed and such). It's not much as far as high fantasy strongmen go.

[stoutstien]

I agree with the OP that Barbarians don't get a lot to make them feel physically strong. I disagree that they don't get anything.

And the reason is that classes just don't do that. Let's ask, first, how you "feel physically strong" in 5e: There is, obviously damage dealt in melee; there is lift/carry capacity; there is jumping distance/height; and there is contested strength against other creatures.

Barbarians actually do as well as anybody at the raw melee damage-dealing. Zealots get extra damage once per round on their first hit, and even without that the rage damage bonus is not insignificant.

In contested strength, they also do quite well thanks to advantage on all strength checks while raging. Sadly, but good for game balance, they "merely" get proficiency with strength saves rather than also getting advantage on them while raging.

Athletics is a skill they can choose to be proficient in, and it's used to give Proficiency to most contested Strength checks (e.g. shove or grapple).

Now, I know it's disappointing that a rogue can actually out-do a barbarian in the contested Strength (Athletics) area. Sort-of. A rogue can take Expertise in Athletics, doubling his proficiency bonus. But he has a much harder time getting Advantage on Strength checks, which are somewhere between a +3 and a +5-worth of shift on average, which means the Barbarian mostly still comes out ahead.

There's also a way for half-orc, half-elf, and human barbarians to get Expertise on Athletics: the Prodigy feat.

If you want "I am strong" feelings from your damage and contested strength checks, I would recommend a half-orc barbarian with the Prodigy feat. Half-orcs get an extra die of damage on crits, have +2 to strength, and are eligible for that feat. Barbarians get advantage on strength checks and a bonus to strength-based melee damage while raging.

Now, then, there's carry capacity. Barbarians offer one of the few class-based ways to do anything with that at all: Bear Totem at 6th level will double carrying capacity (and lift/drag), and will also grant perma-advantage on strength checks related to such things.

But if you want to make that as monstrous as you can, you need to play a firbolg or a goliath. Both of these races have Powerful Build, which doubles carry/lift/drag capacity. Combine that with Bear Totem at 6th level Barbarian and you quadruple it. Goliaths also get racial proficiency with Athletics and a +2 racial bonus to Strength. (Firbolgs only get +1 to Strength.)

Barbarian doesn't do much for jumping; you're still just using raw strength to calculate it. In theory, Athletics checks can let you jump further, but that's entirely DM-dependent in terms of what a given roll actually does. So if your DM can give you some answers there, you can say your advantage on strength checks while raging and your Athletics proficiency from class does qualify, here.

Admittedly, Rogue(Thief) and Monk give their own jumping bonuses straight-out, while Barbarian buries its in an ill-defined rule that makes its generic rage-induced Advantage on strength checks help out.


So, no, you can't play a Barbarian that is the best at all aspects of strength. You'll have to ask yourself what you really think makes for "feeling strong." Barbarian can help with most of them, but your choice of race and feats may also matter. Barbarian is more equipped to help with damage (both dealing and soaking it) than anything else.

barbarians do mediocre damage. https://anydice.com/program/1abf7
for reference the zealot has advantage and rage up vs a champion fighter doing nothing but attacking. not a high bar to reach but even the 2hd zealot is struggling. adding in feats helps a little but that's a separate issue and actually works in the fighter's favor once extra attack(3) comes on line.

in the role of damage mitigation the barbarian isn't even the top 5. built for it they can get in the top 10 at least.

so not only bad at what they are bad at, they aren't good at what they are suppose to be good at.

corrected my boneheadmath

[LudicSavant]

I agree with the OP that Barbarians don't get a lot to make them feel physically strong. I disagree that they don't get anything. They don't get literally nothing but what they get is not nearly enough to feel like a mythic strongman.


Barbarians actually do as well as anybody at the raw melee damage-dealing.
Barbarians actually do only okay damage in melee, like Stoutstein says. They don't have a whole lot of damage scaling beyond level 5.


Now, then, there's carry capacity. Barbarians offer one of the few class-based ways to do anything with that at all: Bear Totem at 6th level will double carrying capacity (and lift/drag), and will also grant perma-advantage on strength checks related to such things. Carrying capacity is actually a great example of how Barbarians feel weak. If you have 20 Strength and the Bear Totem ability, you can lift/drag/push 1200 pounds. Which is worse than real life strongmen, let alone high fantasy strongmen. And normal Barbarians only get 600 pounds.

[MaxWilson]

barbarians do mediocre damage. https://anydice.com/program/1abf2

There is a serious, serious flaw in that anydice program, as you can tell from the fact that the Champion 3 does 14 HP of damage on average and basically never misses!

Instead of critting on a 1 or greater

CRITROLL: 19-20

it should crit only on a 19 or greater

CRITROLL: 19

Once you fix that bug you can see that the Zealot is averaging about 3x as much damage as the Champion at levels 3 and 5, and slightly over 2x at level 13. (Not surprising, since the Champion is just using a longsword with Dueling, and doesn't have Reckless advantage.)


Barbarians actually do only okay damage in melee, like Stoutstein says. They don't have a whole lot of damage scaling beyond level 5.

Carrying capacity is actually a great example of how Barbarians feel weak. If you have 20 Strength and the Bear Totem ability, you can lift/drag/push 1200 pounds. Which is worse than real life strongmen, let alone high fantasy strongmen. And normal Barbarians only get 600 pounds.

I basically agree, but please do note the bug in stoutsien's original program. Low-level Barbarian is about 3x stronger than stoutsien's original numbers make it seem.

I totally agree about carrying capacity BTW.

[Dienekes]

If you don't mind me minorly hijacking this thread for a moment. I'm spending my time of isolation working on differentiating the martial classes so they each play more distinctly.

I was wondering if OP or anyone who really likes Barbarians could throw in a bit about what they think the Barbarians desired gameplay pattern should be.

My personal thoughts were that Barbarians should be generally one of the more simplistic classes (at least as a base). But the goal is to make them feel powerful. They're the guys who rush into combat and swing massive weapons. If anyone should have the ability to deal massive damage off of a single hit, it shouldn't be the Rogue it should be the Barbarian.

I don't see them as more accurate with their weapons than other martials (which Reckless attack kinda makes them). And definitely not the greatest tanking class in the game, that should belong to the guys who actually wear armor.

Instead, I kinda see them as playing more "wild" than the standard barbarian currently is. Having their mechanics motivate the player to perform high risk/high reward style of gameplay and being a bit more luck focused. More than any class they should love getting those criticals because it means they get to DESTROY something.

Is this what the barbarian fans think of when they choose the class?

[MaxWilson]

If you don't mind me minorly hijacking this thread for a moment. I'm spending my time of isolation working on differentiating the martial classes so they each play more distinctly.

I was wondering if OP or anyone who really likes Barbarians could throw in a bit about what they think the Barbarians desired gameplay pattern should be...SNIP

Is this what the barbarian fans think of when they choose the class?

For me, if you're going to have a Barbarian that isn't just a tough Fighter, it's theme should be based on scorn for decadent civilized folks. To some degree or another, you want scorn for armor, scorn for magic, scorn for magic items, scorn for civilized opponents. If Barbarians were somewhat immune to hostile magic, could not or would not benefit from friendly magic or magic items, and had a unique way of fighting that tended to negate heavily-armored opponents' advantages, that would feel like a pretty appropriate Barbarian to me.

Heh. Maybe the Barbarian as I've envisioned it should be a Kensei with a better Still Mind (as a reaction, not an action) and vastly altered fluff.

[LudicSavant]

I basically agree, but please do note the bug in stoutsien's original program. Low-level Barbarian is about 3x stronger than stoutsien's original numbers make it seem.

I totally agree about carrying capacity BTW.

Good catch there. Though I hadn't actually come to my conclusion by looking at that AnyDice program (I've done my own comparisons in the past).

[Zetakya]

If you don't mind me minorly hijacking this thread for a moment. I'm spending my time of isolation working on differentiating the martial classes so they each play more distinctly.

I was wondering if OP or anyone who really likes Barbarians could throw in a bit about what they think the Barbarians desired gameplay pattern should be.

My personal thoughts were that Barbarians should be generally one of the more simplistic classes (at least as a base). But the goal is to make them feel powerful. They're the guys who rush into combat and swing massive weapons. If anyone should have the ability to deal massive damage off of a single hit, it shouldn't be the Rogue it should be the Barbarian.

I don't see them as more accurate with their weapons than other martials (which Reckless attack kinda makes them). And definitely not the greatest tanking class in the game, that should belong to the guys who actually where armor.

Instead, I kinda see them as playing more "wild" than the standard barbarian currently is. Having their mechanics motivate the player to perform high risk/high reward style of gameplay and being a bit more luck focused. More than any class they should love getting those criticals because it means they get to DESTROY something.

Is this what the barbarian fans think of when they choose the class?

The Paradox with Barbarian is that when you think of a Barbarian, you (or at least, I) think of a reckless combatant who will throw their might into the fight. Barbarians... doesn't really play like that.

Rage should be a short rest mechanic, to encourage using it, and there should be some means of regaining uses of rage (possibly dependent upon subclass) to outright encourage players to throw caution to the winds and use their Rage.

A long rest mechanic is too encouraging of caution and self-control.

[stoutstien]

There is a serious, serious flaw in that anydice program, as you can tell from the fact that the Champion 3 does 14 HP of damage on average and basically never misses!

Instead of critting on a 1 or greater

CRITROLL: 19-20

it should crit only on a 19 or greater

CRITROLL: 19

Once you fix that bug you can see that the Zealot is averaging about 3x as much damage as the Champion at levels 3 and 5, and slightly over 2x at level 13. (Not surprising, since the Champion is just using a longsword with Dueling, and doesn't have Reckless advantage.)



I basically agree, but please do note the bug in stoutsien's original program. Low-level Barbarian is about 3x stronger than stoutsien's original numbers make it seem.

I totally agree about carrying capacity BTW.

good catch. what i get by not proofreading. Copying and pasting Excel doesn't always work.
even then I don't think there damage is high enough to be considered good even if rage was endless and reckless never got them killed. maybe it's because i run longer days so those rages get spread too thin.

[LudicSavant]

good catch. what i get by not proofreading. Copying and pasting Excel doesn't always work.
even then I don't think there damage is high enough to be considered good even if rage was endless and reckless never got them killed. maybe it's because i run longer days so those rages get spread too thin.

Just popping some builds into my calculator (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?582779-Comprehensive-DPR-Calculator-(v2-0)), I'm getting:

L17 Raging GWM Greatsword Barb vs AC 19
Round 1 (no bonus action possible cuz you start raging): ~23 DPR / 37 Advantage
Round 2+: ~24 DPR / 40 Advantage

Same, but with the Zealot subclass
Round 1 (no bonus action possible cuz you start raging): ~33 DPR / 47 Advantage
Round 2+: ~34 DPR / 51 Advantage

L17 GWM Greatsword Champion
Normal: ~36 DPR / 62 Advantage
Action Surge: ~70 DPR / 118 Advantage

Edit:
I should note that the fact that a Reckless Raging Zealot can do a little more than a Champion doing absolutely nothing doesn't mean that the Zealot's doing damage that keeps up with the best of them, because a Champion that cannot figure out a way to get Advantage, per-hit damage buffs, or the like is not "the best of them." It's more like the Fighter build floor than the ceiling.

[stoutstien]

Just popping some builds into my calculator (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?582779-Comprehensive-DPR-Calculator-(v2-0)), I'm getting:

L17 Raging GWM Greatsword Barb vs AC 19
Round 1 (no bonus action possible cuz you start raging): ~23 DPR / 37 Advantage
Round 2+: ~24 DPR / 40 Advantage

Same, but with the Zealot subclass
Round 1 (no bonus action possible cuz you start raging): ~33 DPR / 47 Advantage
Round 2+: ~34 DPR / 51 Advantage

L17 GWM Greatsword Champion
Normal: ~36 DPR / 62 Advantage
Action Surge: ~70 DPR / 118 Advantage

Edit:
I should note that the fact that a Reckless Raging Zealot can do more than a Champion doing absolutely nothing doesn't mean that the Zealot's doing damage that keeps up with the best of them, because a Champion that cannot get Advantage, per-hit damage buffs, or magic weapons is not "the best of them." It's more like the Fighter build floor than the ceiling.

So it's college for me all over again. My math is wrong but I get good results.

If we slapped my Homebrew barbarian that get +str in replacement of rage damage how much does it push them up by your count?

[MaxWilson]

I should note that the fact that a Reckless Raging Zealot can do a little more than a Champion doing absolutely nothing doesn't mean that the Zealot's doing damage that keeps up with the best of them, because a Champion that cannot figure out a way to get Advantage, per-hit damage buffs, or the like is not "the best of them." It's more like the Fighter build floor than the ceiling.

Agreed--but to be fair, the Barbarian also benefits more than the Fighter does from adding PAM to both builds.

[Chaosmancer]

Monks want their stats to go Dex > Wis > Con > Everything Else, so their AC is based off of their highest two stats.

Barbarians want their stats to go Str > Con > Dex > Everything Else, so their unarmored AC is based off their second and third highest stats. If you try to go Dex-focused, you're ignoring all of your "be good at fighting" features.

---

I get that "the toughest" is the fantasy they're selling, but that's... yeah. The whole berserker archetype is someone who can take a hit to the chin and then hit back like a truck, not an ineffectual punching bag.

Fair enough.

Honestly, I kind of ignore Unarmored Defense for the Barbarian anyways. I know it is supposed to be thematic, but medium armor is generally better unless you have a really high dex and con, (You need a 16 and 20 to beat half-plate).

I might adopt the 13+Con version though, it kind of leads to the same place with less effort. And I like the imagery better.



If you don't mind me minorly hijacking this thread for a moment. I'm spending my time of isolation working on differentiating the martial classes so they each play more distinctly.

I was wondering if OP or anyone who really likes Barbarians could throw in a bit about what they think the Barbarians desired gameplay pattern should be.

My personal thoughts were that Barbarians should be generally one of the more simplistic classes (at least as a base). But the goal is to make them feel powerful. They're the guys who rush into combat and swing massive weapons. If anyone should have the ability to deal massive damage off of a single hit, it shouldn't be the Rogue it should be the Barbarian.

I don't see them as more accurate with their weapons than other martials (which Reckless attack kinda makes them). And definitely not the greatest tanking class in the game, that should belong to the guys who actually where armor.

Instead, I kinda see them as playing more "wild" than the standard barbarian currently is. Having their mechanics motivate the player to perform high risk/high reward style of gameplay and being a bit more luck focused. More than any class they should love getting those criticals because it means they get to DESTROY something.

Is this what the barbarian fans think of when they choose the class?


Hmm.

I agree with Rage being short rest. A lot of people I play with think it is anyways, and correcting them is always sad.

Also, I'd take careful note of why Reckless makes them more accurate, because it makes them easier to hit. The idea is that you get the hit because you are literally throwing yourself at the enemy with no concern for whether or not you'll get hurt. I am not a martial arts expert, but I think all of them will tell you that is a sure fire way to land a hit on an opponent. Even if it is never recommended.

I don't think I want to encourage single big hits. Barbarians can actually do either style fairly effectively. In fact, I'd almost want to find a way to encourage them to take up dual-wielding. I really regret that Barbarians don't get that fighting style, because Rage damage makes it highly enticing to get more attacks.

And, I disagree with the tank idea. Barbarians are very often shown as taking far more hits than everyone else. And that is part of the fantasy. The Barbarian should be able to take far more than anyone else, that is the concept that most draws me to the class. They are the wall of meat that never falls.

[Segev]

The trouble with "throwing caution to the wind" and "always using rage" is that, as-is, rage is pure upside. Unless you're a Frenzied Berserker (which isn't a very good class for this very reason), there's no penalty other than using up the resource.

All you'd need to do to make them use rage at every opportunity would be to let them have it whenever they want, as-is. To make it something they would think about using, to make it something other than simply "you have bonus damage and all the other perks all the time," you'd need to make it have more of a downside than "you can't cast spells or Concentrate." All that does is make it so multiclass barbarians don't do it ALL the time. Just most of the time in battle.

It IS troubling how sharply their damage falls off compared to a Champion Fighter. What is it that's giving the champion so much more oomph? He doesn't get bonus damage inherently. Is the extra 5% crit chance that big a shift?

[Zetakya]

And, I disagree with the tank idea. Barbarians are very often shown as taking far more hits than everyone else. And that is part of the fantasy. The Barbarian should be able to take far more than anyone else, that is the concept that most draws me to the class. They are the wall of meat that never falls.

I've said this in a few threads recently, so I feel a bit like I'm repeating myself, but: "Tanking" as a concept doesn't just factor in personal durability, but also Control; A tank is someone that's hard to kill, but also hard to evade.

Barbarians aren't "tanks" per se, because while they are hard to kill, they aren't hard to evade. Instead of partnering Durability and Control, a Barbarian is partnering Durability and Lethality. That's a different package entirely.

[Chaosmancer]

The trouble with "throwing caution to the wind" and "always using rage" is that, as-is, rage is pure upside. Unless you're a Frenzied Berserker (which isn't a very good class for this very reason), there's no penalty other than using up the resource.

All you'd need to do to make them use rage at every opportunity would be to let them have it whenever they want, as-is. To make it something they would think about using, to make it something other than simply "you have bonus damage and all the other perks all the time," you'd need to make it have more of a downside than "you can't cast spells or Concentrate." All that does is make it so multiclass barbarians don't do it ALL the time. Just most of the time in battle.

It IS troubling how sharply their damage falls off compared to a Champion Fighter. What is it that's giving the champion so much more oomph? He doesn't get bonus damage inherently. Is the extra 5% crit chance that big a shift?

My guess? 3rd attack plus fighting style. Then action surge for 6 attacks while we are only getting 2.

[Chaosmancer]

I've said this in a few threads recently, so I feel a bit like I'm repeating myself, but: "Tanking" as a concept doesn't just factor in personal durability, but also Control; A tank is someone that's hard to kill, but also hard to evade.

Barbarians aren't "tanks" per se, because while they are hard to kill, they aren't hard to evade. Instead of partnering Durability and Control, a Barbarian is partnering Durability and Lethality. That's a different package entirely.

Agree, but since the person I was responding to said they should save "tankiest" class for people who wear armor. I believe they were looking solely at durability and not control.

[Dienekes]

I've said this in a few threads recently, so I feel a bit like I'm repeating myself, but: "Tanking" as a concept doesn't just factor in personal durability, but also Control; A tank is someone that's hard to kill, but also hard to evade.

Barbarians aren't "tanks" per se, because while they are hard to kill, they aren't hard to evade. Instead of partnering Durability and Control, a Barbarian is partnering Durability and Lethality. That's a different package entirely.

Oh he is right what I meant, though my statement may be a bit overemphasized. I do see the Barbarian as being an effective durable character. One of the most durable characters in the game in fact. But of the three "tank focused" classes of Paladin, Fighter, and Barbarian. I viewed the Barbarian as the least durable but most deadly. In a durability rank that roughly goes Paladin > Fighter > Barbarian, with subclasses able to bump a class up or down a peg.

But seeing people disagree is helpful, and I can know better what to shoot for. Thanks for everyone who has commented thus far.

[Segev]

There's an interesting synergy between the Barbarian's level 9 Brutal Critical and the Greataxe vs. the different synergy between Great Weapon Fighting and the greatsword. I suspect that the Fighter gets the better end of it simply because his benefit applies to a lot more rolls, but Brutal Critical adds a d12 if you use a greataxe, while it would only add a d6 if you used a greatsword. Meanwhile, Great Weapon Fighting with a greataxe triggers far less often because the greatsword rolls two dice that are both smaller and thus come up 1 or 2 more often. It's weird, but a 3-level Champion dip would probably help the Barbarian a lot in this regard.



But I fear we might be drifting off-topic; the original point was to discuss strength. Physical strength.

I don't think another class does lifting better. Opposed strength is going to be something rogues can stand up to them in if built for strength (which would be weird). But as has been pointed out, it's hard for a Barbarian PC to even lift a horse. Which a "really strong" character might theoretically be expected to do in the genre fiction.

Is there anything we can think of to do that? (Besides playing specifically a goliath bear totem barbarian level 6+.)

[LudicSavant]

It IS troubling how sharply their damage falls off compared to a Champion Fighter. What is it that's giving the champion so much more oomph? He doesn't get bonus damage inherently. Is the extra 5% crit chance that big a shift?

The reason the GWM Champion's damage spikes the way it does with Advantage is because
1) Advantage is extra useful for people using -5/+10.
2) -5/+10 is more useful the more attacks you have.
3) GWF fighting style benefits critical hits.
4) With Advantage and Superior Critical, their chance of critting goes to 27.75% on any given attack.
5) Their chance of critting at least once in this scenario (and therefore getting a bonus action attack from GWM) is ~62% (or ~86% with Action Surge), meaning that they usually get 4 attacks.



I don't think another class does lifting better. Opposed strength is going to be something rogues can stand up to them in if built for strength (which would be weird). But as has been pointed out, it's hard for a Barbarian PC to even lift a horse. Which a "really strong" character might theoretically be expected to do in the genre fiction.


Genre fiction? Try real life.
https://images.boredomfiles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/people-lifting-heavy-stuff-1-768x432.jpg

If we instead want genre fiction, look at characters like Thorkell the Tall (he does things like punch cavalry so hard it lifts the horse and rider up into the air, throw logs so big it can sink viking ships, or throw a javelin at an army as he comes over the horizon. And not only does he throw it that far, he does so with perfect accuracy and impales multiple men).

https://i.imgur.com/JkvHzpm.jpg

[Jerrykhor]

I can see where the OP is coming from, but I think he's neglecting the mechanics that make Barbarian unique and stronger than other martials. They are the only class that has D12 hit die, that alone makes that special. A fighter may have higher AC, but due to bounded accuracy, 2 crits might easily drop the fighter, but not the raging barbarian. Could they stand to be stronger? Sure, but they are already better than Fighters until Level 11. They are literally stronger (Rage/Reckless), tougher (Rage's resistance, D12 hit die), and faster (Danger Sense, Fast movement) than Fighters.

Maybe the OP just wants the mechanics to reflect the fantasy of a fantasy man mountain who can wreck stuff with unparalleled brute strength. I too have that opinion on certain classes (mainly Sorcerers, on the fact that they somehow still need V/S/M for casting spells when they are born with magic.)

If there's anything to change about Barbarians, I have a few ideas:

- Getting Powerful Build at level 4.
- Strength cap increase to 22, replace Brutal Critical. Increase to 24 at level 13.
- Ability to wield a Two Handed weapon in one hand.
- Rage bonus damage = proficiency bonus

[Pleh]

I am not a martial arts expert, but I think all of them will tell you that is a sure fire way to land a hit on an opponent. Even if it is never recommended.

I've only a modest amount of karate, but I know there are generally two schools of thought: striking style and wrestling style (I'm playing fast and loose with terminology). Both have strikes and holds, but they act through different basic goals.

I studied a wrestling style (goju, if anyone is familiar), where the idea is to get to some position of control, where you can either throw the enemy or line them up for a really powerful strike.

Striking style uses the idea that you want to be the first to strike and hit so hard you either win or immediately gain the upper hand (even though karate teaches to never make the first strike, this is talking about being the first to land a blow). Pretty sure they just about never recommend foregoing all defensive techniques, because in a fight, you probably don't know if your first attack was effective until it's too late to decide to block the counter. In karate, almost every movement uses both hands, so as one hand acts, the other simultaneously wheels back to ready position to follow up. So after striking, you should be in prime position to immediately move to block if necessary (and it would seem like one fluid movement).

The main reason I can think to never attack recklessly is that real combat moves faster than you can think and leaving yourself vulnerable can mean losing faster than your brain can process.

Of course, none of this accounts for having mythological rage empowering your attacks.

[Kane0]

Some ideas:

- Spread out the benefits of Indomitable Might and Primal Champion to come into play at earlier levels
- Bundle Indomitable might with increased shove distance
- Grant Powerful Build at some point, possibly link in some jump distance benefits
- Some sort of ability to burn Hit Die to increase STR/CON checks/saves
- Treat two-handed things as one-handed (while raging?)
- The ability to split a single use of Rage into individual rounds (with some sort of limit or drawback)

In order to make room for these you might need to alter or strip out brutal critical, persistent rage, feral instinct, fast movement, danger sense, etc.

[Ninevehn]

I've said this in a few threads recently, so I feel a bit like I'm repeating myself, but: "Tanking" as a concept doesn't just factor in personal durability, but also Control; A tank is someone that's hard to kill, but also hard to evade.

Barbarians aren't "tanks" per se, because while they are hard to kill, they aren't hard to evade. Instead of partnering Durability and Control, a Barbarian is partnering Durability and Lethality. That's a different package entirely.

Tanks are literally big chunks of armor with a really lethal weapon attached. The mix of durability and lethality is what makes a tank a tank. Control mechanics are a late addition to the archetype.

In 5E, most melee types are pretty easy to evade, even with Feats enabled (except for Conquest Paladins, who own this niche). DnD is a team game, and the casters should be handling most of the control work, they're way better at it. Be the tank, let your infantry screen and funnel the opponent.

[Segev]

Barbarians do have increased mobility. I know feats are optional, but Sentimel is great on any front line rank for controlling who’s allowed to go where.

[kazaryu]

I'm not talking about power-level here.

When I sit down to play a Barbarian, I want to play a character who uses their overwhelming brute strength to solve their problems. Being a seething cauldron of wrath backed up with a wall of muscles is my jam.

And yet... Barbarians don't feel strong. If you grab a non-raging Barbarian and slap them next to any other character with the same Strength, they're equal. Heck, a Champion Fighter or Bard could have a better bonus to doing Strength-based things than our Barbarian with a lower actual strength score. That just feels wrong, and that's before we get to how a Fighter can technically hit Strength 20 before a Barbarian can due to getting more ASIs. Sure, Barbarians get Indomitable Might and Primal Champion... at the end of Tier 4. Tier 4. And if I want to do something simple like "carry more stuff than it looks like I should", I have to play a Totem Warrior.

But what about Rage, I might hear you ask? As long as you're raging, you have Advantage on most things that require Strength, so shouldn't that be enough? I say no. For a lot of your career, Rage feels too precious to use it for anything other than combat, because it's your big combat buff and a lot of your combat-related subclass features are tied to it. If I have 2-3 Rages per long rest and there's an expectation of 6-8 encounters in that timespan? I'm not going to waste one of them to get Advantage on a single check or saving throw - that would be absurdly wasteful.

And they don't feel strong, even while raging. Sure, I have a good chance to shove people around or grapple them... but I can still only shove them 5ft, and I'm still slowed down when dragging people around. I want to be able to send people flying like a Battlemaster Fighter or a Swords Bard can. I want to be able to fireman-carry someone like they barely weigh anyone, then use them as a bludgeoning weapon. Heck, I can't even meaningfully lift more than I normally can while enraged, unless the DM takes pity on me and lets me make a Strength check (they certainly don't have to - I'm away from my books, but it's not on the list of examples for Strength checks on the SRD).

On a related note, I wish the Unarmored AC for Barbarians was 13+Con instead of 10+Dex+Con. Seriously, I think it's the only form of AC calculation that relies on two secondary stats, and essentially forces you to play a dumb meat-head stereotype if you're at all interested in rocking the shirtless badass look. Heck, the "optimal" way to play a Barbarian is for them to wear the heaviest armor they can and use a polearm like some kind of bargain-bin Fighter or Paladin. That legitimately frustrates me - the optimal way to play a Barbarian class should be "rip off your shirt and beat everyone to death with whatever's at hand".

...

Anyway, I'm rambling. So I'll stop.

was gonna jump in and say that i didn't feel this way when i played a barbarian....but then i realized that i didn't play a pure barbarian. i played a barb/rogue multiclass. which very much *did* meet that 'strongman' archetype. (totem warrior/thief btw). so yeah...if im using a multclass to get half the cool stuff (as an example, i could effectively move at normal speed while grappling because of cunning action.) that i want from a 'strongman' then something isn't right about the feel.

i wonder how broken it would be to shift the adv on str checks to just...regular barbarian, and instead do something like 'while raging gain a bonus to str checks equal to your rage damage'. or maybe vice versa. either way that'd at least push their bonus to str checks higher than most characters can achieve.

couple that with someones suggestion like 'the lowest you can roll in a str ability check is equal to your barbarian level.' that'd definitely make barbarians the gods of strongarming. at high levels you start getting to where the lowest they can get when making a str check is like...32? up to 37 at lvl 20? but then they're stepping a bit on the rogues toes...i mean, yes, the rogues reliable talent is different as it applies to all proficient checks, instead of just str ability checks, but its similar enough it might cause problems. so idk.

[Kane0]

On top of all that, barbarians don't even get to say they throw things harder than other classes. You'd think the capital S strong guy wouldn't have much trouble tossing a warhammer or table at you across a room, or at the very least have some way of getting some extra range or adding his rage damage to the axes he's tossing at you.

Mind you I wouldn't like to see thrown weapons addressed only for barbarians, but still.

[Morty]

Should barbarians be stronger than other classes in this sense? Strength is just one attribute, one that is available to all classes, and being incredibly strong (on a real-world scale or mythical scale) doesn't require also being really angry about it.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Barbarians are the tactical Str based fighters of 5e. Yes, that goes against their stereotype, but they are much more of a thinking class than the fighter (or paladin).

They are the closest thing to a leader as we will get from a martial

You need to play the barbarian to their strengths.

When to rage, when to be reckless, when to get away from your target and go harrass another one... And so much more.

The best totem barbarian is Wolf. Allies get advantage on attacks! Make a grapple barbarian (Tavern Brawler) or make a small race climb onto bigger creature.

If you want to do damage, you will gain mad respect. Even without feats you can lay down the hurt.

Zealot Barbarians feel more like Strikers but, you still need to be smart about using your rage.

You have some great utility features. 5e seems to assume you will have a low dexterity score, which a 14 is usually the highest you will need but I've seen lower, so gaining Danger Sense is awesome! One of the abilities that puts you out front and keeps you safe. Grab dungeon delver on a barbarian and you can pretty much just walk through traps to "find them" and not worry about much. At level 15 you laugh at traps, especially with dungeon delver! Depending on the trap you will take 1/2 to 1/4 damage! Even better if you're a bear totem as you will be resistant to more damage types.

The Barbarian is so much more than what most people think they are.

[Sam113097]

Should barbarians be stronger than other classes in this sense? Strength is just one attribute, one that is available to all classes, and being incredibly strong (on a real-world scale or mythical scale) doesn't require also being really angry about it.

That's a solid point.

As some have pointed out, the prototypical DnD barbarian is Conan, who, while incredibly strong, was also described as being lithe and dextrous. I wish there was an option to choose whether a Barbarian uses Str or Dex in Unarmored Defense and Rage Bonuses to give Barbarian players more options.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

That's a solid point.

As some have pointed out, the prototypical DnD barbarian is Conan, who, while incredibly strong, was also described as being lithe and dextrous. I wish there was an option to choose whether a Barbarian uses Str or Dex in Unarmored Defense and Rage Bonuses to give Barbarian players more options.

I think D&D does a terrible job at replicating literature and movie characters because in those media they are specifically meant to be Mary sues in some way and D&D attempts to make sure characters aren't.

I think a Monk like feature (martial arts) that worked opposite would be awesome.

[Morty]

That's a solid point.

As some have pointed out, the prototypical DnD barbarian is Conan, who, while incredibly strong, was also described as being lithe and dextrous. I wish there was an option to choose whether a Barbarian uses Str or Dex in Unarmored Defense and Rage Bonuses to give Barbarian players more options.

D&D barbarians may have been Conan-inspired at some point, but at least as of 3E it's no longer the case. Now it's a super-strong aggressive berserker warrior, with various supernatural or near-supernatural shamanic/totemic-themed abilities tossed in. Conan is very hard to fit into D&D's class structure, but if one had to try, he'd be some kind of fighter/rogue multiclass.

[MaxWilson]

Barbarians are the tactical Str based fighters of 5e. Yes, that goes against their stereotype, but they are much more of a thinking class than the fighter (or paladin).

They are the closest thing to a leader as we will get from a martial

You need to play the barbarian to their strengths.

When to rage, when to be reckless, when to get away from your target and go harrass another one... And so much more.

Fighters can also be played very tactically (when to shove, when to grapple, when to Dodge instead of attacking, when to throw nets, when to risk an opportunity attack, when to Action Surge, whether to close to melee range, who to attack, who to draw attacks from, whether to shove prone + attack at advantage or just do a normal attack sequence, whether to end turn with ranged weapons or melee weapons in hand, etc.). However, Fighters have an easier time being tactical because Rage requires you to attack every round or risk losing it (unless you take damage). Barbarians have more built-in pressure not to be tactical and always aggressively press the attack.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Fighters can also be played very tactically (when to shove, when to grapple, when to Dodge instead of attacking, when to throw nets, when to risk an opportunity attack, when to Action Surge, whether to close to melee range, who to attack, who to draw attacks from, whether to shove prone + attack at advantage or just do a normal attack sequence, whether to end turn with ranged weapons or melee weapons in hand, etc.). However, Fighters have an easier time being tactical because Rage requires you to attack every round or risk losing it (unless you take damage). Barbarians have more built-in pressure not to be tactical and always aggressively press the attack.

Everything a fighter does, a barbarian does just as well or better in terms of tactics. The only thing fighters have is action surge and I've yet to see anything other than it used for attacking (off action surge turns they use more tactical options).

Fighters do get eldritch Knight which can get some great tactical options! But Eldritch Knight also gears itself more toward evocation (I love you can pick out of school spells). Battlemaster has some meh tactical choices and one amazing one.

Barbarians are the better designed class for tactics. I blame action surge and too many late game extra attacks. Fighters were designed to be a striker in 5e and while they can be tactical, they don't get a lot in terms of supporting those tactics. Especially in the base class.

Barbarians can be defenders, leaders, strikers, or some what of a controller and is supported by their class features. What more is you can build a barbarian that is very effective at more than one area! Fighters... They get to choose their specific path and hardly have any deviation.

[stoutstien]

Everything a fighter does, a barbarian does just as well or better in terms of tactics. The only thing fighters have is action surge and I've yet to see anything other than it used for attacking (off action surge turns they use more tactical options).

Fighters do get eldritch Knight which can get some great tactical options! But Eldritch Knight also gears itself more toward evocation (I love you can pick out of school spells). Battlemaster has some meh tactical choices and one amazing one.

Barbarians are the better designed class for tactics. I blame action surge and too many late game extra attacks. Fighters were designed to be a striker in 5e and while they can be tactical, they don't get a lot in terms of supporting those tactics. Especially in the base class.

Barbarians can be defenders, leaders, strikers, or some what of a controller and is supported by their class features. What more is you can build a barbarian that is very effective at more than one area! Fighters... They get to choose their specific path and hardly have any deviation.

the only thing the Barbarian does better than the fighter is have more effective hit points with the condition that you don't face a lot of saving throws or other ways that can strip away rage and we exclude the cavalier and EK.

[LudicSavant]

As some have pointed out, the prototypical DnD barbarian is Conan

Nobody in this thread pointed that out. The first mention of Conan here is from you.

That said, if D&D did a good job of representing Conan, that'd be neat. But they don't really do that either. It's why pretty much every time someone brings up a "how do I build Conan" thread, someone will start talking about Rogues.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

the only thing the Barbarian does better than the fighter is have more effective hit points with the condition that you don't face a lot of saving throws or other ways that can strip away rage and we exclude the cavalier and EK.

Please show me a fighter that can give allies advantage as well as the barbarian.

Show me a fighter that, as a bonus action, multiple times a day, gets to have advantage on strength checks. While still having their pick of subclasses to be a leader, defender, or striker.

Show me a fighter that is more accurate in melee. Not happening at will. The battlemaster will run out real fast and need to rest.

Any feat the fighter takes that enhances their tactics using strength, say Tavern Brawler or Shield Master, is better in a barbarian's hands.

The fighter is great at single focus direct damage... The barbarian is no slouch either.

The barbarian gets to do multiple things and do them all well, while the fighter can do one thing well and some other things a little bit.

The barbarian is the better designed class all around.

[MaxWilson]

Please show me a fighter that can give allies advantage as well as the barbarian.

Any fighter with Athletics proficiency.

[Morty]

That said, if D&D did a good job of representing Conan, that'd be neat. But they don't really do that either. It's why pretty much every time someone brings up a "how do I build Conan" thread, someone will start talking about Rogues.

You could maybe swing it with a fighter with good Dexterity and proficiency in stealth. Conan could move very quietly, but didn't have all the other baggage of the rogue class - he fought enemies head-on, rather than fiddle with sneak attacks. But that's still not a barbarian, of course.

[KorvinStarmast]

I ended up changing Rage damage to scale more evenly.
1st to 4th -> +2
5th to 8th -> +3
9th to 12th -> +4
13th to 16th -> +5
17 up -> +6
Me too. Only played with one barb above 8th, though.

[stoutstien]

Please show me a fighter that can give allies advantage as well as the barbarian.
shove, BM maneuvers, AA, EK spells, spare feat options. advantage is really easy to generate.


Show me a fighter that, as a bonus action, multiple times a day, gets to have advantage on strength checks. While still having their pick of subclasses to be a leader, defender, or striker.if you are talking about rage i don't think most players have them to spare just for a check. champion get 1/2 to any check they can't add prof to, EK can use spells to have the same effect for longer and all fighters can reach max str sooner.


Show me a fighter that is more accurate in melee. Not happening at will. The battlemaster will run out real fast and need to rest.
once again, advantage is easy to get and reckless has a pretty sharp cost to keep going constantly.


Any feat the fighter takes that enhances their tactics using strength, say Tavern Brawler or Shield Master, is better in a barbarian's hands.
to bad the fighter can get them sooner while bumping STR and don't have conflicting BA(rage) during the most important round.


The fighter is great at single focus direct damage... The barbarian is no slouch either.
never said they weren't okay at damage. they have a higher floor and a lower ceiling.


The barbarian gets to do multiple things and do them all well, while the fighter can do one thing well and some other things a little bit.
not really. they have 2 toggle switches. reckless attack means more damage dealt and more damage taken and rage is deal more damage while taking less damage. while fighters can freely choose how to use action surge and trading 1 attack for grapple/shove is less painful.


The barbarian is the better designed class all around.
disagree here. IMO they are the most disappointing class in 5e.

[samcifer]

My issues with the barbarian as a class are that while they feel (thematically, at least) that they should be the highest damage-dealers, that relies primarily on critting by making themselves the prime target of enemy attacks by granting advantage. The REAL main mechanics they have are being able to soak the most damage, drawing fire away from other pcs and succeeding at physical skill tests and saves.

I find their damage rather underwhelming unless you multi-class into paladin or another class that can add additional damage. The inability to cast or concentrate on spells while raging takes away a lot from them by giving them a handicap no other class really has.

[stoutstien]

I should add that there are a few ways barbarians can be used to good effect.

Captain America the anger issue edition-
totem barbarian picking wolf,eagle, bear and wielding a shield and a throwing weapon or empty handed. Grab shield master at lv 4 then pump str/con. Resilient wisdom may be needed depending on table but not before proficiency makes a difference.
The basic concept is you don't really care about damage. Between grapple/shove and wolf totem you provide support and control.
This works really well with parties that have 2 or more big melee/melee spell attackers that don't have good ways of generating advantage.
Save reckless for cancelling disadvantage primarily due to shoving you rarely needed it otherwise.

The spirit sprinter-
Ancestral guardian with throwing or ranged weapons. This guy can comfortably be Dex focused. While raging you find the biggest threat and you hit and move away. Use spirit shield to protect concentration even more. While not raging you are a mobile Archer/ hand axe tosser and scout.
Bonus fun, be a goblin.

[Segev]

What if, when Barbarians took damage, they tracked it for each round, and could bolster their own attack damage with it? Call it their "Fury Pool" or something. When they roll damage that adds Rage damage, they add a d12. If the number is equal to or less than the amount of damage in their Fury Pool, they add it as the same damage type their attack normally would deal. If it rolls more than the amount in their Fury Pool, it's the amount in their Fury Pool. The Fury Pool reduces by the amount rolled.

It empties at the end of each of the Barbarian's turns.

Debating whether this works better as just a flat addition to the Barbarian base class, as a subclass feature, or is overpowered. The resistance to damage they have would work against it, but with "only" a d12 per attack, they might not use up the whole Fury Pool every round anyway, and mitigating damage is important to their paradigm.

[LudicSavant]

Some folks are talking about raising the Str cap or giving some more little bonuses to Strength checks. That won't really fix the feel.

- You still won't be able to lift, because the math for lifting is garbage in 5e. You could have 30 Strength and still not have very good lift/push/drag feats (in fact, you wouldn't even come close to being able to lift, push, or drag the amount of material that a Wizard can move with a cantrip like Shape Water or Mold Earth). You could have 40, or 50, and you still wouldn't be able to push that block of ice. It's ridiculous. This isn't an issue of how much Strength you have, it's an issue of how your ability to lift, push, or drag scales with Strength in the first place.

- You still won't feel like your attacks are powerful in the way that genre fiction characters of this sort do. When the viking Thorkell the Tall gets an attack blocked, the person goes flying into the air and then becomes injured by the fall. When Thorkell the Tall throws a javelin, it doesn't just do a little extra damage, it has a range like a longbow sharpshooter, and can impale multiple men and pin them to a wall. A javelin with a Battlemaster's Pushing Attack feels more powerful than anything the Barbarian's throws do.

- If we instead want to talk about feeling like Conan, the guy has skills that would make a Rogue jealous and great all-around mental abilities. And still feels stronger than the 5e Barbarian does.

[stoutstien]

Some folks are talking about raising the Str cap or giving some more little bonuses to Strength checks. That won't really fix the feel.

- You still won't be able to lift, because the math for lifting is garbage in 5e. You could have 30 Strength and still not have very good lift/push/drag feats.

- You still won't feel like your attacks are powerful in the way that genre fiction characters of this sort do. When the viking Thorkell the Tall gets an attack blocked, the person goes flying into the air and then becomes injured by the fall. When Thorkell the Tall throws a javelin, it doesn't just do a little extra damage, it has a range like a longbow sharpshooter, and can impale multiple men and pin them to a wall. A javelin with a Battlemaster's Pushing Attack feels more powerful than anything the Barbarian's throws do.

agreed. barbarians could use some attack riders much sooner than tier 4 totem and ways to interact with the world on the level as bill form the adventurers of baron Munchausen or Hercules.

[Segev]

Some folks are talking about raising the Str cap or giving some more little bonuses to Strength checks. That won't really fix the feel.

- You still won't be able to lift, because the math for lifting is garbage in 5e. You could have 30 Strength and still not have very good lift/push/drag feats.

- You still won't feel like your attacks are powerful in the way that genre fiction characters of this sort do. When the viking Thorkell the Tall gets an attack blocked, the person goes flying into the air and then becomes injured by the fall. When Thorkell the Tall throws a javelin, it doesn't just do a little extra damage, it has a range like a longbow sharpshooter, and can impale multiple men and pin them to a wall. A javelin with a Battlemaster's Pushing Attack feels more powerful than anything the Barbarian's throws do.

- If we instead want to talk about feeling like Conan, the guy has skills and mental abilities that would make a Rogue jealous.

"Mental abilities?" :smallconfused: Such as...?


I agree that the way to approach "feeling powerful" in 5e is often with special abilities that do the things you need to be able to do to feel powerful, rather than "bigger numbers" that might eventually let you do it without special abilities.

So now the question is: is the Barbarian Fantasy really one of being the strongman? Or is that more a generic "fighting-man" fantasy, that all of Barbarians, Fighters, Paladins, and Rangers should partake of? (If it's that many, it probably should either be a Fighting Style - a shared submechanic they all get - or just a base rule change.)

As either a base rule change or a special rule for Barbarians only, one might allow for a Feat of Strength which, as a bonus action, allows a character to roll a Strength (Athletics) check and add any amount over 10 they roll directly to their Strength for purposes of calculating lift/carry/drag limits and jumping distances until the start of their next turn.

As a base rule change, this would make Raging Barbarians have Advantage to it, while Champion Fighters untrained in Athletics could add half their Proficiency Bonus. It would also make Rogues with Athletics Expertise weirdly able to bulk out better than some fighter-types, though, which may be undesirable.

As a Barbarian-only thing, it synergizes well with the Bear Totem's level 6 feature, and with their Rage-induced Strength Advantage, and makes them exclusively good at jumping compared to others.

As a Fighting Style...well, it's not a fighting style. So it'd be in a weird place, but would let any "fighter-like" class with access to fighting styles potentially get it, as long as you decided they could have it.

...then again, I'm wrong in saying all those calsses share it. Barbarians don't get a fighting style; they get rage instead. It seems to occupy the same position in their class features. So no, defintiely not a good Fighting Style.

Would it be as easy as giving Barbarians Expertise in Athletics? Maybe as a level 4 feature, they either gain proficiency in Athletics, or, if they already have it, get to double their proficiency bonus to it. With the usual caveat of not stacking with other proficiency-doubling things (i.e. Expertise).


Alternatively, name specific things you want the Barbarian to do that make him feel like a Strongman. Design a subclass ("War Hulk?") that developes these features.

To do that, we need a list of feats, though. What are some ideas?

[LudicSavant]

@Segev/Stoutstein Note I added a little bit to my last post while you guys were replying. Mostly pointing out the sheer severity of how badly push/lift/drag scales with Strength. You could have 50 Strength and still fail to push a block of ice made by Shape Water.


"Mental abilities?" :smallconfused: Such as...?

He's shown as being extraordinarily observant (with great feats of sight, hearing, and smell. Lots of "blind warrior" scenes, as well as stuff like detecting poisons, feeling the hoofbeats of a distant cavalry, catching an assassin's dagger when he's asleep, etc. Also presented kinda like he has a spidey sense (https://i.imgur.com/jX1tuxS.png)), very intelligent ("many a sheltered scholar would have been astonished at the Cimmerian's linguistic abilities" etc etc. Runs a country and catches people trying to cleverly cheat on taxes and such. All sorts of situations where he is shown to be quite clever), and charismatic too (https://i.imgur.com/ktAFghF.png). He's basically good at every mental stat. Basically the opposite of the meathead Barbarian.

He also is shown to have a prodigious ability to counter magical influences and the like with the strength of his will and spirit. For example: https://i.imgur.com/TunaP8t.png, or https://i.imgur.com/v4RPFzA.jpg.

[Willie the Duck]

Carrying capacity is actually a great example of how Barbarians feel weak. If you have 20 Strength and the Bear Totem ability, you can lift/drag/push 1200 pounds. Which is worse than real life strongmen, let alone high fantasy strongmen. And normal Barbarians only get 600 pounds.

I think D&D does a terrible job at replicating literature and movie characters because in those media they are specifically meant to be Mary sues in some way and D&D attempts to make sure characters aren't.
I think a Monk like feature (martial arts) that worked opposite would be awesome.

But I fear we might be drifting off-topic; the original point was to discuss strength. Physical strength.
I don't think another class does lifting better. Opposed strength is going to be something rogues can stand up to them in if built for strength (which would be weird). But as has been pointed out, it's hard for a Barbarian PC to even lift a horse. Which a "really strong" character might theoretically be expected to do in the genre fiction.
Is there anything we can think of to do that? (Besides playing specifically a goliath bear totem barbarian level 6+.)


I think these are circling around the crux of it. Regardless of whether a barbarian dishes out a lot of damage, or actually accomplishes their damage mitigation role, or any of the rest, they don't feel like the "uses their overwhelming brute strength to solve their problems" character that the OP mentions. 5e has an odd* relationship with attributes that interferes with this. The game's overall interaction-with-the-environment rules also contribute to this, and I think part of this might have to do with the game not wanting to firmly land on how cinematic nonmagical action really is.
*admittedly, only one of many amongst the various D&Ds, considering that strength in pre-supplement oD&D and the basic/classic line didn't even increase how much you could carry

A good example of Strength feeling like, well, strength is AD&D (IMO, of course). In it, a strength 9 fighter who dons a pair of gauntlets of ogre power, etc. goes from having a trivial chance of lifting castle portcullises or bending prison bars to 40+% (and higher for various forms of stuck doors). Regardless of actual encumbrance numbers (and each edition measures what we're actually talking about a little different, whether the max weight is a bench press or lift off ground or reasonably carry around), and that those specific abilities are pretty dungeon-specific, it certainly feels strongman-ish.

On the other hand, 3e, despite leaning farther into interaction-with-the-environment rules, I never felt like my barbarian or the like was particularly awesome in those matters. Perhaps because of the open ended power scale (one where you had a real chance of getting a Strength score into the 20s or 30s or higher), it was never clear how high was high, as it were (various Hulking Hurler builds I saw floating around in maybe 2005, for instance, had Strengths approaching 60 and basically did for-all-purposes-infinite damage, so where exactly is the bar for 'strong?').

I think in 5e, it would be helpful if there were more systems in place for what to do with strength, other than get it to +5 hit and damage, and perhaps expertise and advantage in athletics.

[stoutstien]

What if there was a system like invocations that allowed barbarians to augment their abilities?

I wouldn't see anything with barbarians getting a knock back on melee weapons strikes seeing how repelling blast hasn't broken anything.

add 200 ft to throwing weapon

Grappling no longer reduces speed

Grapple one size larger

At will jump spell

Add damage on shove/grapple. Have to keep it small but would be super flavorful.

Bypass DR on objects

Add str mod to shove distance

[LudicSavant]

"Mental abilities?" :smallconfused: Such as...? In addition to my previous answer, here's someone with a whole rant about it: Conan the Intelligent Tactical Polyglot Barbarian (https://theoneworldblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/09/conan-the-intelligent-tactical-polyglot-barbarian/)

[Boci]

What if there was a system like invocations that allowed barbarians to augment their abilities?

I wouldn't see anything with barbarians getting a knock back on melee weapons strikes seeing how repelling blast hasn't broken anything.

add 200 ft to throwing weapon

Grappling no longer reduces speed

Grapple one size larger

At will jump spell

Add damage on shove/grapple. Have to keep it small but would be super flavorful.

Bypass DR on objects

Add str mod to shove distance

The rage powers from Pathfinder's barbarian could be a good source on inspiration for these powers.

[KorvinStarmast]

add 200 ft to throwing weapon Add 40 to short range and add 120 to long range - bounded accuracy, remember?

Grapple one size larger Heck yeah.

At will jump spell
At will first level spell?
No. But how about just double all jump distances (vertical and horizontal) for an unarmored barbarian?

Add str mod to shove distance
Yes, and to add to that, a bonus action knock back/shove (not prone) of 5 or 10 feet on a successful attack, beginning at first or second level.

[LudicSavant]

What if there was a system like invocations that allowed barbarians to augment their abilities?

I wouldn't see anything with barbarians getting a knock back on melee weapons strikes seeing how repelling blast hasn't broken anything.

add 200 ft to throwing weapon

Grappling no longer reduces speed

Grapple one size larger

At will jump spell

Add damage on shove/grapple. Have to keep it small but would be super flavorful.

Bypass DR on objects

Add str mod to shove distance

Yeah. Make Barbarian attacks the new Repelling Blast. :smalltongue:

[stoutstien]

Add 40 to short range and add 120 to long range - bounded accuracy, remember?
what does bounded accuracy have to do with throwing a weapon further? most of the time it would be a non issue but it would give the feel of being super strong. they won't be able to apply rage damage or anything still so it just flexibility.


At will first level spell?
No. But how about just double all jump distances (vertical and horizontal) for an unarmored barbarian?

warlocks have jump at will and it hasn't broken anything. i could see limiting it to long jumps only.



Yeah. Make Barbarian attacks the new Repelling Blast. :smalltongue:
should have been that was from the get go. once i get back from walking the dogs im going to flesh this out.

[firelistener]

Haven't seen much mention of Danger Sense in this thread. I played a barbarian for a longer campaign, and I found it easy to be the "strong guy" and super tanky. Danger Sense gives advantage on dex saves, which means most traps in dungeons and a ton of damaging spells (like fireball). This translated to always taking point in dungeons because I could trip traps and come out just fine. In addition, damage output doesn't need to be super high. The barbarian is all about rushing enemies and getting in their face so they try to hit you. For most enemies, your AC is fine because of how bounded accuracy works in 5e. For stronger foes that can reliably hit you or gangs of enemies that surround you, you just pop into Rage which is trivial to sustain for a whole fight. IMO, a barbarian doesn't even need to Rage to actively contribute really well in battle.

[Chaosmancer]

If there's anything to change about Barbarians, I have a few ideas:

- Getting Powerful Build at level 4.

I kind of like this, I can't think of a barbarian who this wouldn't be a good fit for.


Some folks are talking about raising the Str cap or giving some more little bonuses to Strength checks. That won't really fix the feel.

- You still won't be able to lift, because the math for lifting is garbage in 5e. You could have 30 Strength and still not have very good lift/push/drag feats (in fact, you wouldn't even come close to being able to lift, push, or drag the amount of material that a Wizard can move with a cantrip like Shape Water or Mold Earth). You could have 40, or 50, and you still wouldn't be able to push that block of ice. It's ridiculous. This isn't an issue of how much Strength you have, it's an issue of how your ability to lift, push, or drag scales with Strength in the first place.

- You still won't feel like your attacks are powerful in the way that genre fiction characters of this sort do. When the viking Thorkell the Tall gets an attack blocked, the person goes flying into the air and then becomes injured by the fall. When Thorkell the Tall throws a javelin, it doesn't just do a little extra damage, it has a range like a longbow sharpshooter, and can impale multiple men and pin them to a wall. A javelin with a Battlemaster's Pushing Attack feels more powerful than anything the Barbarian's throws do.

- If we instead want to talk about feeling like Conan, the guy has skills that would make a Rogue jealous and great all-around mental abilities. And still feels stronger than the 5e Barbarian does.


I understand your position, but I am hesitant to actually make Barbarians better in combat, because despite people saying they've seen Fighters or Paladins pump out more damage, I've never seen Barbarians slouch in the damage department.

The weakest barbarian I've ever seen, was one I built to play defensively. He was a Kinght (background) Ancestral spirits and Shield Master (human)

But, I think you might have hit upon a more real problem here. I think the shoving and lifting rules need to be adjusted to better show off the type of strength we are wanting.

So, let us work backwards. A medium sized barbarian, with strength 24, let us say he has powerful build to count as Large (because I like that idea). That makes him stronger than a Stone Giant, but counting the same size as a Troll or Ogre.

Could he lift a car over his head and throw it? Should he be able to lift more, or less?

From there we can get a multiplier that is "close enough" and start working back the math for this stuff.


Haven't seen much mention of Danger Sense in this thread. I played a barbarian for a longer campaign, and I found it easy to be the "strong guy" and super tanky. Danger Sense gives advantage on dex saves, which means most traps in dungeons and a ton of damaging spells (like fireball). This translated to always taking point in dungeons because I could trip traps and come out just fine. In addition, damage output doesn't need to be super high. The barbarian is all about rushing enemies and getting in their face so they try to hit you. For most enemies, your AC is fine because of how bounded accuracy works in 5e. For stronger foes that can reliably hit you or gangs of enemies that surround you, you just pop into Rage which is trivial to sustain for a whole fight. IMO, a barbarian doesn't even need to Rage to actively contribute really well in battle.

Oh yeah, Danger Sense is amazing. My Knight Barbarian build took full advantage of it with Shield Master, often taking no damage from dex saves. It really is a bit of an unsung hero.

[Segev]

Hm. At least one post (possibly more) on the notion that 5e's lift/carry rules are too limiting in general.

Does this mean that they maybe should be quadratic or exponential rather than their current linear value? Right now, basic strength-based lift/carry is 15x Strength score in lbs. Size-changes, Powerful Build, etc. can alter this, but that's the basic rule.

Strength 2 unseen servants can thus carry 30 lbs., which seems reasonable. A Strength 3 PC (has anyone seen one actually played?) could carry 45 lbs. This also means the Strength 3 Tiny owl can carry 45 lbs., and arguably thus lift a gnome.

So perhaps things are too high on the low end and too low on the high end?

(Please do correct me if I'm wrong; I am having trouble finding the "how much can you carry while flying?" rules at the moment.)

Let's say you want a strength 3 cat to be able to carry 3 lbs. and drag 6. (I might actually be underestimating, here.) How much do we want an "average" human to carry? By current rules, they can lift/carry 150 lbs. (10 Strength x15 lbs/1 strength)

How much do we want a 24 Strength Barbarian or 29 Strength Storm Giant to be carrying? (The giant, admittedly, benefits from being Gargantuan for an x8 carry capacity.)

[Amechra]

One possibility I'm considering is converting the rage damage bonus to +d4/+d6/+d8 instead of +2/+3/+4 - I've actually played in a game where we did that before, and it felt really nice without overshadowing anyone else damage-wise.

It could be cool if Barbarians dealt some damage when they shove or grapple people. Maybe tie that in to Reckless Attack and Rage - you get to deal your Strength bonus in bludgeoning damage if you're reckless attacking, and your rage damage if you're raging. It'd be a reminder that grappling and shoving exist, and would nudge people towards the control-related aspects of being a tank.

---

As for things people have brought up...

1) A thousand times yes to giving them Powerful Build - maybe give it a different name so that races that already have Powerful Build can stack?

2) I'm not a big fan of giving the Barbarian invocations. I dunno, I just don't feel like that hits the right mechanics I personally would want for a Barbarian.

3) I don't think we need to remove things that the Barbarian already has, and I don't agree with the idea that you have to focus on particular aspect of "be strong". Seriously, unless you're giving them stuff like "you can lift objects of any size regardless of their weight", low-grade super strength just isn't that extreme.

4) Short rest Rages would really help matters. Honestly, I think having Rage as a discrete buff isn't the best way to handle it - I'd almost prefer something like a Battlemaster Fighter, Monk, or Swords Bard, where you have a pool of "rages" that you spend fluidly to do stuff.

[MaxWilson]

Hm. At least one post (possibly more) on the notion that 5e's lift/carry rules are too limiting in general.

Does this mean that they maybe should be quadratic or exponential rather than their current linear value?

Yes. My instincts say it should be weakly exponential in Str and also cubic in linear size. (Yes, I know that for real-world creatures, it's not cubic--but it's a D&D trope for giants to behave like scaled-up normal humans.) I haven't found a formula that makes me really happy though.

I agree with those pushing for short rest rages. That would help the flavor of the class quite a bit. Say 1 Rage per rest at levels 1-6, 2 per rest at 7-13, 3 per rest at 14-19, then unlimited. At level 9 you also get one extra rage per long rest.

With long rest rages it's a bit silly that a warbearian (e.g. Barb 1/Fiend Bladelock 6) gets to act more spontaneous and reckless than the equivalent full barb (Barb 7).

[Kane0]

Hm. At least one post (possibly more) on the notion that 5e's lift/carry rules are too limiting in general.

Does this mean that they maybe should be quadratic or exponential rather than their current linear value? Right now, basic strength-based lift/carry is 15x Strength score in lbs. Size-changes, Powerful Build, etc. can alter this, but that's the basic rule.

Strength 2 unseen servants can thus carry 30 lbs., which seems reasonable. A Strength 3 PC (has anyone seen one actually played?) could carry 45 lbs. This also means the Strength 3 Tiny owl can carry 45 lbs., and arguably thus lift a gnome.

So perhaps things are too high on the low end and too low on the high end?

(Please do correct me if I'm wrong; I am having trouble finding the "how much can you carry while flying?" rules at the moment.)

Let's say you want a strength 3 cat to be able to carry 3 lbs. and drag 6. (I might actually be underestimating, here.) How much do we want an "average" human to carry? By current rules, they can lift/carry 150 lbs. (10 Strength x15 lbs/1 strength)

How much do we want a 24 Strength Barbarian or 29 Strength Storm Giant to be carrying? (The giant, admittedly, benefits from being Gargantuan for an x8 carry capacity.)


Yes. My instincts say it should be weakly exponential in Str and also cubic in linear size. (Yes, I know that for real-world creatures, it's not cubic--but it's a D&D trope for giants to behave like scaled-up normal humans.) I haven't found a formula that makes me really happy though.

My interest is piqued. New thread?

[MaxWilson]

My interest is piqued. New thread?

Sure. I don't have a good formula but I'm happy to discuss the issue some more.

[Segev]

I'm not keen on short rest rages. My experience is, admittedly, skewed by how little actual dungeon-crawling has happened compared to "exploration days" that tend to have 0-1 encounters, with 2 encounters in the same day being rare, but in my experience, my barbarian player is rarely concerned about spending her first rage, and her second only gets stingy if they have a second encounter before a short rest (which is rare).

They've moved from chapter 2 to chapter 3 of Tomb of Annihilation, however, so perhaps their encounter rate will go up.

I do, as I said before, find it concerning that a raging barbarian might fall behind a "doing nothing special" Fighter as levels progress. Raging should put them above the fighter, while not raging can reasonably leave them "below" the fighter by a bit, but otherwise....other than flavor, would there be a reason not to just give them unlimited rages?

[Chaosmancer]

Hm. At least one post (possibly more) on the notion that 5e's lift/carry rules are too limiting in general.

Does this mean that they maybe should be quadratic or exponential rather than their current linear value? Right now, basic strength-based lift/carry is 15x Strength score in lbs. Size-changes, Powerful Build, etc. can alter this, but that's the basic rule.

Strength 2 unseen servants can thus carry 30 lbs., which seems reasonable. A Strength 3 PC (has anyone seen one actually played?) could carry 45 lbs. This also means the Strength 3 Tiny owl can carry 45 lbs., and arguably thus lift a gnome.

So perhaps things are too high on the low end and too low on the high end?

(Please do correct me if I'm wrong; I am having trouble finding the "how much can you carry while flying?" rules at the moment.)

Let's say you want a strength 3 cat to be able to carry 3 lbs. and drag 6. (I might actually be underestimating, here.) How much do we want an "average" human to carry? By current rules, they can lift/carry 150 lbs. (10 Strength x15 lbs/1 strength)

How much do we want a 24 Strength Barbarian or 29 Strength Storm Giant to be carrying? (The giant, admittedly, benefits from being Gargantuan for an x8 carry capacity.)


Tiny halves the weight, so a tiny owl can only carry 22.5 lbs. (tiny being a misnomer, since this is a normal sized owl.)

So, that makes some sense.

Storm Giants are only Huge, so that is actually a x4 modifier. So they can lift 1,740 lbs. The average car is 2,870 lbs, so they can't even lift a car.

Tarrasque is our upper limit, 30 and gargantuan. 3,600 lbs. The smallest elephant (the african forest elephant) weighs 6,000 punds. So a Tarrasque can lift it, but can only drag it. What we think of for elephant (the african bush elephant) weighs 13,000 lbs and the Tarrasque can't come close.


So, I think the low end could be a little high, but the high end is definitely too low.


Also worth noting "An animal pulling a cart or ect can move 5 times it's base carrying capacity"

So, with this, a draft horse (lg 18 str) can move a wagon weighing 2,700 lbs. Which seems close.

[Segev]

As a brainstorming idea, what happens if we make Constitution a part of lift/carry, by adding its modifier to Strength before we go?

First thought: low Con means lower carry, which seems reasonable, but it's still linear, and that means we're not doing much for the high end. The terrasque has, what, a 20 con? +5 bonus, times 8 is +40, x15 is only another 600 lbs. So it doesn't do what we want.

Making it geometric doesn't work for two reasons: 1) it expands too fast, I think, and 2) negative con mods now make you carry less than 0, which is silly.


Similarly, just adding Athletics proficiency mod is a linear effect. Multiplying by it probably gets silly. If the terrasque (30 Str, gargantuan) had Athletics proficiency (+6, because he's CR ridiculous), that'd put him up at 21,600 lbs. That...actually is probably getting more reasonable.

The Storm Giant (CR 13, so proficiency bonus +5), assuming Athletics proficiency, would have 8,700 lbs. lift. Could lift a that 2,870-lb. car, now, fairly easily. But could barely lift the smallest of elephants, and wouldn't be able to lift (but could drag!) an African Bush Elephant.


This, however, is assuming Athletics proficiency. Do we want to have to assume that?

...actually, at least for the Storm Giant, multiplying by Con mod would give the same results. But we still have issues with con mods of 0, even if we made negative con mods divisors and positive con mods multipliers. And patching THAT makes this a bit more complex a formula than I really feel comfortable advocating.


Could just assume proficiency multiplies in with or without Athletics, but that...doesn't make sense for itty bitty critters, since they still are getting x2 from a +2 proficiency that everyone has.



A different approach: add your strength (or con?) modifier to the x15.

Let's just try it with strength, first. The Terrasque would be multiplying by x25 instead of x15, which would make his lift go from 3,600 lbs. to 6,000 lbs. ...that's not enough. Not if we want him casually picking up elephants of Huge size. (Heck, Rocs - at 29 strength and gargantuan - can't pick up elephants by this metric, either, and that's the iconic image of them. For reference, base rules make tahem ble to lift 3,480 lbs.)


Okay, a really simple one: Strength squared (modified further by your size). Terrasque: 30x30x8 = 7,200 lbs. Nnnnope. Still too small. (Meanwhile, a 3 Str Tiny owl would lift 3x3/2 = 4.5 lbs, which...might work out, actually.)



Maybe make Size the exponent? Tiny = 1/2, Large = 2, Huge = 3, Gargantuan = 4?

Terrasque becomes 41 billion lbs. I think that's a little excessive. But... hm. That would let the Terrasque lift and carry the Three Gorges Dam in China (20.8 billion lbs.), but not the Great Wall of China (116 billion lbs.).

The Storm Giant would be able to lift 82.3 million lbs. A 747 only weighs 970,000 lbs. An aircraft carrier weigh22.44 million lbs, so they could trivially pick up a 747 but could only drag an aircraft carrier.

Considering that they could stand on an aircraft carrier with room to spare, I think this is ... a bit excessive, still, but we might be getting close to the ballpark.


This is tricky.

[KorvinStarmast]

warlocks have jump at will and it hasn't broken anything. i could see limiting it to long jumps only. Warlocks have to Spend An Invocation for that. It has a cost.

[stoutstien]

Warlocks have to Spend An Invocation for that. It has a cost.

which was what i was looking at. giving the barb a list of ways to augment how their rage manifests. so they could gain extra jumping or they could gain the ability to apply rage damage to grapple/shove/disarm attempts.

[Boci]

which was what i was looking at. giving the barb a list of ways to augment how their rage manifests. so they could gain extra jumping or they could gain the ability to apply rage damage to grapple/shove/disarm attempts.

Yes, but you're giving them to the barbarian for free, on top of what it always gets. I think KorvinStarmast is saying that even if the barbarian is lacking, giving them abilities on par with warlock invocations for free might be a bit much.

[stoutstien]

Yes, but you're giving them to the barbarian for free, on top of what it always gets. I think KorvinStarmast is saying that even if the barbarian is lacking, giving them abilities on par with warlock invocations for free might be a bit much.

the barb IS lacking. one could comfortably increase their flexibility with knock-back melee attacks, added range with thrown weapons, a small bump in mobility, augment shove/grapple with more distance on shove and/or adding a small damage rider, and give them a 10-15% in damage and they still wouldn't come close to being out of line.

[Boci]

the barb IS lacking.

Yes, that wasn't being debated. Merely that using a warlock invocation as a balance point for the free stuff you give the barbarian might be a bit much. KorvinStarmast said jump was too good and that you should instead consider "But how about just double all jump distances (vertical and horizontal) for an unarmored barbarian", not that the barbarian was fine as written.

[Dienekes]

Yes, but you're giving them to the barbarian for free, on top of what it always gets. I think KorvinStarmast is saying that even if the barbarian is lacking, giving them abilities on par with warlock invocations for free might be a bit much.

While I get it, I’m not 100% sure I agree. But it can’t be every invocation. Giving some invocation that directly increases the Barbs base combat effectiveness I’d be very wary of. But I can’t really see any balance issues that come from giving them a smattering of utility options, especially ones that take up part of their action economy.

There’s the possibility of going over board, I admit, but limiting the number to something like 8 useful utility options spread over 20 levels. And honestly I kinda think all the martial classes should have at least that.

[stoutstien]

Yes, that wasn't being debated. Merely that using a warlock invocation as a balance point for the free stuff you give the barbarian might be a bit much. KorvinStarmast said jump was too good and that you should instead consider "But how about just double all jump distances (vertical and horizontal) for an unarmored barbarian", not that the barbarian was fine as written.

i was just modeling the new subsystem after warlock invocation as a starting point not just copying them over. most likely replacing brutal critical because it very under whelming. could even make it an option for those who do like it.

first pick lv 5-instread of fast movement you can instead:
increase size you can attempt to grapple by one
increase thrown weapon range and damage (add rage?)
melee attack knock back FT=str mod. starts lower than other classes but grows
increase jumping. triple seems the standard amount

9ths level options:
anything from lv 5 you didn't choose
brutal critical-add crit dice with max damage
weakling strike. reduce movement speed with attacks.
bypass DR on objects, buildings, and so on.
13th


17th

far as ive got so far.

[Satori01]

Nobody in this thread pointed that out. The first mention of Conan here is from you.

That said, if D&D did a good job of representing Conan, that'd be neat.

Using this quote as a springboard, but Conan in D&D terms just has crazy stats!

Conan starts at 1st level with 18 in Str, Con, and Dex. Conan likely has scores of 12-14 in the rest of the scores.

A barbarian at the table with those stats, is going to feel rather epic.

Now that said, of all the classes it is the only class that I have seen voluntarily retired twice, each in separate campaigns.

After 9th level, there is not that much different from what came before.

In effect, Barbarian is a tactical class at early levels, that does better with a shield for synergy with the Shield Master feat, but fails to deliver further tactical elements latter in the base class progression.

I also think the class should have 3 skill points. The 1e class had Non Weapon Proficiencies, before NWP even existed.

As for Conan being a polyglot, all of REH protagonists were as well. Solomon Kane was, this is more of a story conceit so dialogue...(such as it is in REH stories), can occur.

[Trask]

Not to derail this thread, but Conan is pretty solidly a Berserker Barbarian with really good starting ability scores. One needn't even multiclass to get the feel of the character, Barbarians can be plenty sneaky with a good dex and proficiency in stealth, and while Conan was definitely sneaky, he wasnt the sneakiest guy in Hyboria. Dedicated thieves like Taurus were sneakier than him.

In the stories he goes into a "battle madness" and in the words of REH "...he was no defensive fighter, he always carried war to his enemies." Perfect for reckless attack. Hes always been very strong, but his primary power is actually his ungodly endurance. He can take a ridiculous amount of punishment and still be standing, to the point where strips of his flesh hang off of him and hes soaked head to toe in blood after grappling with some eldritch horror. And yet he can still fight after that if he needs to. He has near unlimited stamina that the reduced damage taken from rage represents very well.

You could make the case for a splash of thief rogue in there, I think that would be fine, but the Berserker Barbarian is all you really need to capture the character (also convince your DM to let you drop the exhaustion :P)

[Monster Manuel]

Honestly, I think having Rage as a discrete buff isn't the best way to handle it - I'd almost prefer something like a Battlemaster Fighter, Monk, or Swords Bard, where you have a pool of "rages" that you spend fluidly to do stuff.

You know, that would be a fun way to introduce that "invocation" like mechanic. If you got X rages per short rest, but had other abilities you could spend a "rage" on to fuel, that would be a fun mechanic. Say, a 10th level Barb gets 3 rages per short rest, but you could spend one of those rages to deal massive damage to a struture, or lift some silly amount of weight, or other feats of strength and barbarity. That sounds like fun.

One other thing that gets overlooked a lot is that Reckless Attack is one of their best tanking abilities, in secret. Someone acting as a tank is only effective if they are drawing attacks away from their weaker companions, and while the Barb has nothing that COMPELS an opponent to attack them, granting advantage to your opponent does INCENTIVIZE them to attack you. Relatively lower AC and Reckless Attack makes you a more appealing target so, unintuitively, these are features that make them better tanks, not necessarily weaknesses.