How do the barbarian subclasses rank?

[Klorox]

I tried looking under the barbarian guides here, but the newest one was updated last two years ago.

Also, how does the champion fighter compare?

Thanks guys. I’m looking for a simple yet decently powerful tank.

[x3n0n]

I tried looking under the barbarian guides here, but the newest one was updated last two years ago.

Also, how does the champion fighter compare?

Thanks guys. I’m looking for a simple yet decently powerful tank.

IMO:
If by tank, you mean "can take various kinds of punishment," Totem (Bear).
If you mean "can reduce damage taken by others", Ancestral Guardians.
If you want to deal lots of damage and be easy to resurrect if you actually die, Zealot.
Beast may be on this list somewhere as well.

If you want a tanky single-class Fighter without a lot of complexity, Cavalier is probably the pick.
Any of them are ok at tanking via controlling space with Sentinel.
The easiest Fighter to keep alive is probably Eldritch Knight; Shield is really good.

[Zhorn]

Want a tank, go Path of Totem Warrior (bear in particular)
Want a damage dealer, go Path of Zealot
Want a versatile "change to fit the situation" build, go Path of the Beast

[CheddarChampion]

IMO: The easiest Fighter to keep alive is probably Eldritch Knight; Shield is really good.

+Absorb Elements when you're hit with fireball or a dragon's breath.

[KorvinStarmast]

I tried looking under the barbarian guides here, but the newest one was updated last two years ago.

Also, how does the champion fighter compare?

Thanks guys. I’m looking for a simple yet decently powerful tank.
I would suggest:

vHuman, Fighter, Cavalier, Heavy Armor Master feat at level 1.
While the Damage reduction doesn't scale, it's handy for the first few levels, the +1 to STR is nice, and we found that when multiple attacks hit later, it is still nice to see the damage drop by 3 each ...

Or, go with Bear Totem if you want to be a tank, but make sure to go sword and board. Not getting hit is far better than getting hit and (1) taking half damage and (1) possibly having to save versus a spider's or a snake's or a grell's poison also. :smalltongue:

[Arkhios]

If you want to be a general PITA (https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/PITA) I wouldn't ignore Battlerager. Grapple specialist capable of dealing more damage while at it, and having easily replenishable Temporary Hit Points, is potentially very sticky as a tank, although best with solo monsters.

[LudicSavant]

I tried looking under the barbarian guides here, but the newest one was updated last two years ago.

Also, how does the champion fighter compare?

Thanks guys. I’m looking for a simple yet decently powerful tank.

Champion Fighters aren't so great, as Fighters go.

That said, on the Fighter comparison front, you might find this (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24906895&postcount=7) relevant:


I don't think Fighters are just worse Barbarians. In fact, I wouldn't even necessarily count on Barbarians being harder to kill than tank Fighter builds. No really.

*A Barbarian tends to have a lower AC, and takes considerably more damage whenever they Recklessly Attack, because it makes enemies both hit and crit more often.

How big a difference in damage does that make? Well that depends on the monsters you're fighting, but the answer tends to be "a lot!"

Here's a couple examples, one with a swarm mook (Bandit), another with a big bruiser (Fire Giant). For scale, I'll use a basic plate+shield+Defense Champion.

Bandit vs Reckless AC 19 Barbarian: 2.845 DPR (~271% of the damage a basic Champion takes)
Bandit vs AC 21 Champion: 1.05 DPR

Fire Giant vs Reckless AC 19 Barbarian: 53.235 DPR (~162% of the damage a basic Champion takes)
Fire Giant vs AC 21 Champion: 32.9 DPR

And Champions are rather squishy for Fighters. Other subclasses have substantial defensive features, like an Eldritch Knight using Blind-Fighting inside of Darkness or casting Shield. Rune Knights get really powerful reactions and useful control abilities. Samurai get buckets of temp HP and what is basically a free Resilient: Wisdom. Battle Masters have crippling debuffs. Echo Knights can use "proxy tanking" tactics. Purple Dragon Knights can, uhm, let's not think about Purple Dragon Knights.

*A Barbarian has +1 hp/level from HD size.

*A Barbarian is more MAD (needs Strength and Dexterity), and thus often has a worse statline.

*A Fighter will have +3d10+3 hp/level from Second Wind (in a 2 short rest day).

*A Barbarian doesn't have enough rages to use it in every fight of a standard adventuring day. And their rages are interruptible by a variety of tactics (kiting, hiding, turn denial, etc), meaning that 4 rages might not last 4 encounters.

*Barbarians need to eat a bonus action to rage, which is a right pain in the rear for Strength-based characters who might want to use GWM or PAM.

*When a Barbarian is raging, they are only Resistant to BPS (unless they're a Bear-barian). Every other tactic is just as effective. Target them with elemental damage, or saving throws, or control, or just attack their allies if they're not too sticky. There's no award for being attacked last when you're a tank.

*A Fighter will have 2 extra ASIs, which can provide substantial defensive benefits in their own right.

*Fighters have greater burst damage potential, which is a defense in its own right (the longer a high-threat enemy lives, the more everyone gets hurt).

*Due to their higher number of attacks, Fighters tend to scale better with per-hit damage buffs (like Holy Weapon) and magic weapons.

As for how the Barbarian subclasses rank, Bear Totem's decent, but I'm not convinced they're the best tank, and here's why:

- Zealot and Ancestral have more "battlefield presence" than the Bear. That is to say, they're harder to simply ignore. There's no award for being attacked last when you're a tank.

- When you're not getting targeted with elemental damage, it's almost like you have no subclass. And quite a few of the enemies who have the ability to deal good elemental damage have the ability to deal with you in other ways (like control, disables, kiting, or just targeting someone else). And when you are getting hit by direct elemental damage, is that happening often enough to mitigate more damage to the party than, say, a Zealot getting to reroll saving throws + kill people faster?

You can take Sentinel to try to make yourself stickier, but remember that those reaction attacks won't benefit from Reckless (it only affects your on-turn attacks). Grappling can work too but S&B and GWM both take two hands, so it can be a bit awkward in practice unless you're a Loxodon or Simic. And you can only grapple enemies if they're small enough.

[Segev]

Ludic, I think you need to spend a little more time on your discussion of the Bear-Totem Barbarian, because you seem to be contradicting yourself. One the one hand, you say that the Bear-Totem is "like you don't have a subclass" if you're not being hit by non-BPS damage types, and on the other, you say that lots of things can do non-BPS damage types, so non-Bear-Totem Barbarians' resistance is negligible. At least, that seems to be what you're implying. (As usual, if I am misunderstanding your point, please correct me and clarify.)

It seems to me that your claim that barbarians aren't as tough as fighters relies on them not being Bear Totem, but then turns around to dismiss Bear Totem because it doesn't actually increase their toughness.

While I certainly see where a Zealot can be a better tank (especially with the extra damage and the ability to get back up if a party has a cleric from level 5 onwards), it seems to me that you're overly dismissive of the Bear Totem.

I will also point out that nothing prevents a barbarian from wearing Medium armor that gives them up to 17 AC. With a shield, 19. I...assume your Champion Fighter is using the Armored Fighting Style to get Full Plate + Shield + 1 AC?

While they have a class feature that encourages them to pump Constitution for something other than hp (AC, in this case), they don't have to, and their higher hit die and (especially if a Bear Totem) greater resilience against almost all types of damage can make the need to have high Constitution less important. A +2 stat mod in Dex and Con would be reasonable for an armored Barbarian. A Barbarian CAN invest more heavily in each for higher AC without needing armor. A 20 Dex Barbarian is going to have surprisingly good saves against AoEs, too, increasing his tank value in an unexpected way. A 20 Con Barbarian will have not only the higher AC, but 3 or so more hp per level than the "bare minimum" 14 Con Barbarian. And remember: if Bear Totem, that's almost doubled about 2/3 of the time.

Now, your point about there being no prize for being the last one hit as a tank - that is, if you can't make yourself relevant to beat up because all you are is an invulnerable but immobile and harmless pebble - is a very good one. The Bear Totem Barbarian actually needs more careful build work to make it threatening enough that it cannot be simply ignored, compared to even a Champion Fighter (whose 10% chance to crit can be taken advantage of with a solid weapon choice, if nothing else...though this ironically pushes away from using a shield, meaning AC 19 is more likely than 21).

Bear Totem perhaps needs feats more than other subclasses to really do its job well.

[sophontteks]

Barbarians are exceptional grapplers while raging, and I think every barb should utilize that

Best tank is totem, but bear is a trap. Go eagle, bear, eagle.

You need the speed to ignore the movement restrictions when you grapple. Barbarians don't need more resistance to tank. They already ignore the most common damage types.

On top of that bear is boring as all heck.

[MrCharlie]

Ludic, I think you need to spend a little more time on your discussion of the Bear-Totem Barbarian, because you seem to be contradicting yourself. One the one hand, you say that the Bear-Totem is "like you don't have a subclass" if you're not being hit by non-BPS damage types, and on the other, you say that lots of things can do non-BPS damage types, so non-Bear-Totem Barbarians' resistance is negligible. At least, that seems to be what you're implying. (As usual, if I am misunderstanding your point, please correct me and clarify.)

It seems to me that your claim that barbarians aren't as tough as fighters relies on them not being Bear Totem, but then turns around to dismiss Bear Totem because it doesn't actually increase their toughness.

While I certainly see where a Zealot can be a better tank (especially with the extra damage and the ability to get back up if a party has a cleric from level 5 onwards), it seems to me that you're overly dismissive of the Bear Totem.

I will also point out that nothing prevents a barbarian from wearing Medium armor that gives them up to 17 AC. With a shield, 19. I...assume your Champion Fighter is using the Armored Fighting Style to get Full Plate + Shield + 1 AC?

While they have a class feature that encourages them to pump Constitution for something other than hp (AC, in this case), they don't have to, and their higher hit die and (especially if a Bear Totem) greater resilience against almost all types of damage can make the need to have high Constitution less important. A +2 stat mod in Dex and Con would be reasonable for an armored Barbarian. A Barbarian CAN invest more heavily in each for higher AC without needing armor. A 20 Dex Barbarian is going to have surprisingly good saves against AoEs, too, increasing his tank value in an unexpected way. A 20 Con Barbarian will have not only the higher AC, but 3 or so more hp per level than the "bare minimum" 14 Con Barbarian. And remember: if Bear Totem, that's almost doubled about 2/3 of the time.

Now, your point about there being no prize for being the last one hit as a tank - that is, if you can't make yourself relevant to beat up because all you are is an invulnerable but immobile and harmless pebble - is a very good one. The Bear Totem Barbarian actually needs more careful build work to make it threatening enough that it cannot be simply ignored, compared to even a Champion Fighter (whose 10% chance to crit can be taken advantage of with a solid weapon choice, if nothing else...though this ironically pushes away from using a shield, meaning AC 19 is more likely than 21).

Bear Totem perhaps needs feats more than other subclasses to really do its job well.
The bear totem's real benefit and problem is you want, at a minimum-

Polearm Master-due to lack of bonus actions.

Sentinel-To hold ground.

Resilient WIS-because you're a character in dnd 5e without a saving throw bonus. Also because you're a melee character in DnD 5e.

Great Weapon Master-Because Barbarian.

That's four feats, none of which are +1 STR, which means you either delay STR (and even accept an 18) or find a magic item. But with all four, you're an extremely effective tank, unkillable and damage dealing. It's just a hefty cost.

[sophontteks]

The only thing a barbarian needs to do to hold an enemy is a free hand. Leave all the feat-heavy stuff to a fighter. You don't need sentinel to be a perceived threat. Honestly I don't think barbarians are beating out fighters at being...fighters. It's not their style.

Just yell really loud, shove past the fodder, and grab the leader, or whatever priority target there is, by their little neck. Eagle barbarians can safely ignore reaction attacks. Once you have that priority target, you can drag them around each round at 40 feet. Throw them down a pit. Drag them through hazards. With advantage and expertise the grapples will never fail to land. When you are dragging the leader of whatever group your fighting through burning embers, or holding him over a cliff, then enemy will respond.

This barbarian is making themselves an extremely high perceived threat, and is forcing the enemy to react to them. They can't be kited out with that 80 feet a round mobility either.

Giving reaction attacks disadvantage also makes the enemies blow their reactions on you with a very low chance of the attack doing anything. This allows your teammates to move around freely, as the enemy only gets one reaction per round.

Here's a guide for more info how to be an effective grappler:
https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-grapplers-manual-2-0-grappling-in-5th-edition.468737/

[LudicSavant]

Ludic, I think you need to spend a little more time on your discussion of the Bear-Totem Barbarian, because you seem to be contradicting yourself. One the one hand, you say that the Bear-Totem is "like you don't have a subclass" if you're not being hit by non-BPS damage types, and on the other, you say that lots of things can do non-BPS damage types, so non-Bear-Totem Barbarians' resistance is negligible. At least, that seems to be what you're implying. (As usual, if I am misunderstanding your point, please correct me and clarify.)

Sure, I'll correct and clarify.

I take it you're referring to these lines:
*When a Barbarian is raging, they are only Resistant to BPS (unless they're a Bear-barian). Every other tactic is just as effective. Target them with elemental damage, or saving throws, or control, or just attack their allies if they're not too sticky. There's no award for being attacked last when you're a tank.


And quite a few of the enemies who have the ability to deal good elemental damage have the ability to deal with you in other ways (like control, disables, kiting, or just targeting someone else).

There's no contradiction between these lines. Being a Bear-barian only removes the underlined line, not the rest of the bolded sentence.

I also never argued that Resistance was negligible. I said it doesn't apply in some fights. That's not the same thing.


I will also point out that nothing prevents a barbarian from wearing Medium armor that gives them up to 17 AC. With a shield, 19. I...assume your Champion Fighter is using the Armored Fighting Style to get Full Plate + Shield + 1 AC?

:smallconfused: My post is already giving the Barbarian 19 AC, and already lists which Fighting Style the Champion is using.


It seems to me that your claim that barbarians aren't as tough as fighters relies on them not being Bear Totem
It doesn't rely on that, though.

A Fighter like an Eldritch Knight or Rune Knight can out-survive a Bear Totem Barbarian in many situations (though not all situations), because of the principles set down in my post.

Hence, my claim being that I wouldn't necessarily count on a Barbarian being tougher to kill than a tank Fighter build (note that I don't consider Champions a tank Fighter build, I basically was using them to establish a simple lowball baseline before mentioning that other Fighters are better than them).

[Segev]

The bear totem's real benefit and problem is you want, at a minimum-

Polearm Master-due to lack of bonus actions.

Sentinel-To hold ground.

Resilient WIS-because you're a character in dnd 5e without a saving throw bonus. Also because you're a melee character in DnD 5e.

Great Weapon Master-Because Barbarian.

That's four feats, none of which are +1 STR, which means you either delay STR (and even accept an 18) or find a magic item. But with all four, you're an extremely effective tank, unkillable and damage dealing. It's just a hefty cost.

While that is a very effective suite, I think only Sentinel actually comes close to being necessary, and even that you could live without if you follow sophontteks's advice about grappling.

One oft-overlooked thing about barbarians is that they actually can get more benefit out of un-supported dual wielding. Rage damage bonus applies to the off-hand attack. Admittedly, that means light weapons, which is more than a bit of a nerf to your damage, so you probably want the feat to support it. Or crossbow expert and a light crossbow with a one-handed weapon, though that is a more MAD build unless you're a full-on Dexadin.

That's fiddling about, though. The main thing is that you don't HAVE to have a feat to exploit your bonus action. It's nice, but not essential. You don't HAVE to have Great Weapon Master, either, and if you did take that, it's because you deemed it more helpful than +2 Strength.

Resilient:Wisdom is something worth considering, but again is not crucial. Just a vulnerability, like any weak save. (I don't see people saying they need Resilient: Intelligence or Investigation Proficiency because of vulnerability to illusions, for example.)


Sure, I'll correct and clarify.

I take it you're referring to these lines:



There's no contradiction between these lines. Being a Bear-barian only removes the underlined line, not the rest of the bolded sentence.

I also never argued that Resistance was negligible. I said it doesn't apply in some fights. That's not the same thing.Okay, it seemed to me you were dismissing it as negligible; my mistake.


:smallconfused: My post is already giving the Barbarian 19 AC, and already lists which Fighting Style the Champion is using. My point about armor is more that, to get to that 19 AC, the barbarian need not be all that MAD; he can ignore Unarmored Defense if he wants to. What Unarmored Defense does is give him options for if he doesn't want armor, or wants to emphasize Dex or Con more than "normal." It permits him to be a Dexadin, or to be MAD, and to get slightly more benefit out of it in the latter case.



Hence, my claim being that I wouldn't necessarily count on a Barbarian being tougher to kill than a tank Fighter build (note that I don't consider Champions a tank Fighter build, I basically was using them to establish a simple lowball baseline before mentioning that other Fighters are better than them).I do agree with this point: fighters can be just as tough or tougher to kill than barbarians, though it's build-dependent in both cases which will be toughest.


Note that I didn't say that Fighters are categorically tougher than Barbarians, because that's not what I think. The original context of that quote was in response to someone saying Fighters are just worse Barbarians, which... really isn't the case.That's fair. I mostly responded as I did because I got the impression that your argument was veering away from this point and into claiming bear barbarians were actively bad because their feature was negligible. If that's not what you meant, I still am glad to have brought it up, because I assume that if I was getting that impression, so were others, and you clarifying what you meant is helpful.

Thanks!

[LudicSavant]

My point about armor is more that, to get to that 19 AC, the barbarian need not be all that MAD; he can ignore Unarmored Defense if he wants to. What Unarmored Defense does is give him options for if he doesn't want armor, or wants to emphasize Dex or Con more than "normal." It permits him to be a Dexadin, or to be MAD, and to get slightly more benefit out of it in the latter case.

A Barbarian that ignores Unarmored Defense (but still wants to use Reckless Attack and Rage damage bonuses) is still a bit more MAD than a Fighter, because they still need 14 Dex to wear the medium armor.


That's fair. I mostly responded as I did because I got the impression that your argument was veering away from this point and into claiming bear barbarians were actively bad because their feature was negligible. If that's not what you meant, I still am glad to have brought it up, because I assume that if I was getting that impression, so were others, and you clarifying what you meant is helpful.

I see.

What I meant is that the effective HP gain from Bear-barian is limited to the number of elemental attacks that directly damage you, and that this may not necessarily exceed the survivability gains from other Barbarian subclasses. For example, a Zealot will reduce damage to both themselves and the party by reducing the number of turns that an enemy lives (relative to Bear) and by rerolling saving throws (which helps to some degree with elemental damage, as well as other things). And an Ancestral Guardian has damage reduction and switch-tanking.


Thanks!

NP!

[Segev]

What I meant is that the effective HP gain from Bear-barian is limited to the number of elemental attacks that directly damage you, and that this may not necessarily exceed the survivability gains from other Barbarian subclasses. For example, a Zealot will reduce damage to both themselves and the party by reducing the number of turns that an enemy lives (relative to Bear) and by rerolling saving throws (which helps to some degree with elemental damage, as well as other things). And an Ancestral Guardian has damage reduction and switch-tanking.

Yeah, Zealot is, frankly, an amazing subclass. Even its supposed ribbons can be central aspects to it, depending on the game and party. (Though the "no material components for restoring you to life" thing came up exactly once in my Tomb of Annihilation game, because the Zealot, despite tanking super-effectively, almost never got knocked to 0 hp, and NEVER made 3 death saves before being popped back up. It took a wraith knocking her to 0 hp while she was polymorphed into a frog, and thus had no class features and a lousy Con, and the wraith's "I kill you if you hit 0" ability, to actually kill her. I did house rule that her ribbon feature made the death curse ineffective by having her soul stick around as a Chwinga, so she COULD be brought back, but I'd ruled that would happen long, long before it came up.)

[MrCharlie]

A pure grapple build is probably done better right now by either rune knight fighter or battlemaster fighter (because of course it is, it's battlemaster) due to their class features synergizing well with it and being able to do more grappling in a round. Barbarian can absolutely grapple but if they go for an AC build they are in a weird position of lacking follow up (due to having a shield and a mediocre damage bonus unarmed), although a Barbarian with the new grappler style through feats or a brief multiclass may be best. Maybe that's the build that actually makes most use of a Totem Warriors strengths right now...It's sad, but I think that is almost strictly better than a battlerager.

As a striker Zealot wins. As a tank Ancestral Guardian and Totem Warrior compete-I feel that Ancestral Guardian isn't gaining much over simply taking sentinel though, and sentinel is a more absolute area denial measure. Beast may compete as a striker in low magic campaigns, and I just don't know what to think about wild magic except to like it as a concept, but I feel like it's hard to build around the wild magic results (although I really like the restoring spell slots to allies thing, of all features).

I think most people can agree that Berserker and Storm Herald are somewhere around mediocre.

[stoutstien]

A pure grapple build is probably done better right now by either rune knight fighter or battlemaster fighter (because of course it is, it's battlemaster) due to their class features synergizing well with it and being able to do more grappling in a round. Barbarian can absolutely grapple but if they go for an AC build they are in a weird position of lacking follow up (due to having a shield and a mediocre damage bonus unarmed), although a Barbarian with the new grappler style through feats or a brief multiclass may be best. Maybe that's the build that actually makes most use of a Totem Warriors strengths right now...It's sad, but I think that is almost strictly better than a battlerager.

As a striker Zealot wins. As a tank Ancestral Guardian and Totem Warrior compete-I feel that Ancestral Guardian isn't gaining much over simply taking sentinel though, and sentinel is a more absolute area denial measure. Beast may compete as a striker in low magic campaigns, and I just don't know what to think about wild magic except to like it as a concept, but I feel like it's hard to build around the wild magic results (although I really like the restoring spell slots to allies thing, of all features).

I think most people can agree that Berserker and Storm Herald are somewhere around mediocre.

AG can tank at range and reduce damage on top of handing out resistance to damage. Sentinel is actually a pretty mediocre effect with stacking it with PaM. It's not that great of an area denial because you only have one reaction and the retaliation attack occurs after they already attacked an ally so it's punishment rather than prevention.

Totem(wolf) is a better tank than bear because being an action free advantage generator is a bigger issue to deal with than dieing a little more slowly.

Beast barbarian works well as a striker. The ability to shove or grapple and still get 2 attacks off is nice. They are the subclass of I do X and the Y rather than X or Y. They also can leverage the new slasher feat with good effect.

Berserker are pretty meh but fear/charm immunity and suppression can be gold in certain campaigns

Storm isn't as bad as it looks on paper but once again they really need to mesh with a campaign to see the full effect.

You missed battle rager. It's better in play than on paper as both a good tank and striker.

The wild magic barb is good as a support option which was what SH was going for but just didn't click.

[Segev]

I think part of the bear totem barbarian's issue is that it suffers from early-edition myopia. "Wow," the writers thought, "look at how hard they are to hurt!" and they didn't think it needed more than that. Later subclasses address this by actually giving more than just soakability. Perhaps the Bear Totem needs to a) decide what role it is trying to fill and b) get a secondary feature to augment that role. If, for instance, it's supposed to be the tank, maybe it also counts as one size category larger while raging, and extends its reach by 5 feet. This makes it more of a presence on the battlefield (kind-of literally).

Or maybe it deals bonus damage or gets a reaction or bonus action attack against any creature that attacked something other than the bear barbarian in the last round.

[MrCharlie]

AG can tank at range and reduce damage on top of handing out resistance to damage. Sentinel is actually a pretty mediocre effect with stacking it with PaM. It's not that great of an area denial because you only have one reaction and the retaliation attack occurs after they already attacked an ally so it's punishment rather than prevention.

Totem(wolf) is a better tank than bear because being an action free advantage generator is a bigger issue to deal with than dieing a little more slowly.

Beast barbarian works well as a striker. The ability to shove or grapple and still get 2 attacks off is nice. They are the subclass of I do X and the Y rather than X or Y. They also can leverage the new slasher feat with good effect.

Berserker are pretty meh but fear/charm immunity and suppression can be gold in certain campaigns

Storm isn't as bad as it looks on paper but once again they really need to mesh with a campaign to see the full effect.

You missed battle rager. It's better in play than on paper as both a good tank and striker.

The wild magic barb is good as a support option which was what SH was going for but just didn't click.
Sentinel does not tank against a lot of enemies, but it very effectively shuts down one or two. The retaliation attack is mostly a bonus to be used to help get more DPS when another tank is in range, not the primary mechanism by which you are tanking. That's simply locking down enemies movement.

And literally every point you made applies to AG, except damage is actually getting through to other party members, even if it's a reduced rate. You only get to tag one enemy a round and the reaction damage reduction, while good, can only be done once as a reaction. Each of these is also a half-measure, reducing damage or giving one enemy disadvantage. It works against at most 2 enemies and does not completely prevent them from attacking those allies-and does nothing to prevent something like a grapple check of spell cast, while sentinel can actually do that by limiting the enemies ability to get in range.

It's tomatoe tomatoe, basically. Each of them has perks as to why their tanking is better or worse. But calling sentinel mediocre means your scales aren't calibrated right.

I'm perfectly fine with saying you can pick wolf totem and be as effective at tanking, just in a different way. Less "I don't take damage in any way" and more "My allies benefit offensively from my tanking".

Beast seems to be the striker barbarian, but I want to see it in practice before I evaluate the actual impact. I also think Zealot may have it beat in practice. Beast may have some clever rules abuse where you can go druid and get extra attacks with the bears claws, but otherwise I think it's just "okay" damage, not great damage.

I agree with berserker. Mindless rage and (to a much lesser extend) retaliation are its best abilities.

I've actually seen storm work a bit before, and it can make a decent low-level striker with free bonus action damage support. It's not great though, and I'd limit it to a flavorful campaign choice.

I consider battlerager to be mostly obsolete with the unarmed fighting style. The main thing battlerager did-damage+grapple at the same time-is now fully accomplished with a feat. A battlerager can probably also use the feat and be effective with it, but you give up other archetype features.

[LudicSavant]

Sentinel does not tank against a lot of enemies, but it very effectively shuts down one or two. The retaliation attack is mostly a bonus to be used to help get more DPS when another tank is in range, not the primary mechanism by which you are tanking. That's simply locking down enemies movement.

And literally every point you made applies to AG, except damage is actually getting through to other party members, even if it's a reduced rate.

The damage getting through to other party members isn't a downside here, because attacking party members is actually worse for Team Monster than attacking a Barbarian (or Bear-barian) would be (since they have resistance to all damage *and* disadvantage to be hit *and* a damage reduction reaction).

It's also more likely to work than Sentinel. With Sentinel, you only get one swing, and that swing can't benefit from Reckless, and you're an ASI behind. Miss, and they walk away.

[Unoriginal]

Totem Barbarian isn't really a tank. Bear Totem are harder to hurt than a typical Barbarian, but they have no feature that protects teammates, block a hit or make enemies prioritize them over their teammates (aside from Reckless Attack).

[Arkhios]

Totem Barbarian isn't really a tank. Bear Totem are harder to hurt than a typical Barbarian, but they have no feature that protects teammates, block a hit or make enemies prioritize them over their teammates (aside from Reckless Attack).

Can't argue with that. If anything, Bear Totem Warrior will eventually frighten enemies away due to his/her apparent invulnerability, rather than provoke everyone to attack him/her.

Bear Totem Warrior is without a doubt fierce warrior, but he is only capable of protecting him-/herself. No one else. A tank's role is to protect everyone else, by being someone the masses want to try and bring down. Someone who can't be hurt, is likely just going to get avoided, until they are the last man standing.

[Segev]

Can't argue with that. If anything, Bear Totem Warrior will eventually frighten enemies away due to his/her apparent invulnerability, rather than provoke everyone to attack him/her.

Bear Totem Warrior is without a doubt fierce warrior, but he is only capable of protecting him-/herself. No one else. A tank's role is to protect everyone else, by being someone the masses want to try and bring down. Someone who can't be hurt, is likely just going to get avoided, until they are the last man standing.

Maybe it needs to actually be able to frighten enemies. Some sort of bonus action to inflict the Frightened condition?

[Arkhios]

Maybe it needs to actually be able to frighten enemies. Some sort of bonus action to inflict the Frightened condition?

I would say it's more the incentive to make it worth the effort to focus on you. Reckless Attack is obviously one, but in a way, Bear Totem Rage negates the benefits and creates a stalemate.

In that sense, I honestly do think that the Cavalier Fighter is the best tank in 5th edition, because Cavalier's Unwavering Mark is perhaps the best ability for a tank to have: Make it more difficult to hit others than yourself - limited only by the amount of attacks you can make in a round, and if they attack others still, make them suffer for it.

Fear may be a tool to accomplish this, but fear alone is not enough.

[MrCharlie]

The damage getting through to other party members isn't a downside here, because attacking party members is actually worse for Team Monster than attacking a Barbarian (or Bear-barian) would be (since they have resistance to all damage *and* disadvantage to be hit *and* a damage reduction reaction).

It's also more likely to work than Sentinel. With Sentinel, you only get one swing, and that swing can't benefit from Reckless, and you're an ASI behind. Miss, and they walk away.
This is assuming that winning is dependent on your total damage being higher than their total damage.

Sometimes, winning is dependent on keeping some super squishy party member alive. I've seen characters whom would die with resistance, disadvantage, and a damage reduction reaction, and whom can only be kept alive by keeping them well clear of enemies.

...Although at that point they are probably doomed, so point. Any party that has members so vulnerable that you need more than ancestral guardian to keep them alive won't have those members soon. Hence, you're absolutely right that ancestral guardians is probably better mitigation, outside specific circumstances, and my tangent about damage leak is a poor argument.

(We can safely ignore range on ancestral guardians, because I'm assuming you can get in melee for sentinel, among other such irrelevant concerns like resistance being granted by other means on allies-they aren't under our control).

I agree that sentinel isn't a guarantee and you're down an ASI, but ancestral guardian lacks the totem warriors subclass features-and if you've mimicked tankyness with a feat, that's a fine trade. I suppose the question generally is if the Barbarian is ever in danger of dying such that bear totem is worth it to begin with, but even if bear totem isn't then, as others have pointed out, wolf totem still grants benefits that reward tanking.

Tanking isn't always just about actually doing it, sometimes it's a question of why you are doing it. Keeping an enemy with you in melee might grant allies bonuses that are worth it even if the party is tough enough that you don't actually need to tank damage for them for them to survive. A party buffing striker/tank is potentially as valuable as a pure tank...

But we've gotten away from the original debate, which is which is a better tank. After hearing the arguments, I'll agree that ancestral clearly tanks better. I don't think ancestral is overall superior, and I'd argue that the features of totem warrior grant them enough other bonuses to be firmly equal with ancestral, but ancestral certainly tanks better.

[KorvinStarmast]

Bear Totem Warrior is without a doubt fierce warrior, but he is only capable of protecting him-/herself. No one else. The party I DM for has a bear totem warrior. He took Sentinel feat.

I have seen four other parties with bear totem. The players enjoyed the heck out of them.

I have another party I DM for, and the Barbarian player asked to review all Barbarian sub classes before he went forward, after he got to level 5. He ended up choosing ... bear totem.

Not sure where at people like sophontteks arrive at "boring as heck" - at our tables, they are very popular.

Do you forget to speak with animals? Do you not, at higher levels, commune with nature? We had a Barb 10 Druid 4 who got a lot of mileage out of that spell.
Bear Barb: stop with the negative waves, Moriarty ... :smallyuk: *Eat a little cheese, drink a little wine, catch a few rays*
Fun fact: Bear Barbarian versus blue dragon breath. Half damage if he's raging, and then half that again when he saves: he's got advantage, eh?

[Kane0]

Ancestral Barbarian: average damage, good tankiness, strong flavor
Battlerager: pretty average allround
Beast: good damage output, average tankiness, strong flavor
Berserker: costly damage output, average tankiness, mild flavor
Storm: good damage output, average tankiness, strong flavor
Totem: variable damage output and tankiness, average-to-strong flavor
Wild magic: good damage output, average tankiness, average-to-strong flavor
Zealot: above average damage output, good tankiness, mild-to-average flavor

[Arkhios]

The party I DM for has a bear totem warrior. He took Sentinel feat.

I have seen four other parties with bear totem. The players enjoyed the heck out of them.

I have another party I DM for, and the Barbarian player asked to review all Barbarian sub classes before he went forward, after he got to level 5. He ended up choosing ... bear totem.

Not sure where at people like sophontteks arrive at "boring as heck" - at our tables, they are very popular.

Do you forget to speak with animals? Do you not, at higher levels, commune with nature? We had a Barb 10 Druid 4 who got a lot of mileage out of that spell.
Bear Barb: stop with the negative waves, Moriarty ... :smallyuk: *Eat a little cheese, drink a little wine, catch a few rays*
Fun fact: Bear Barbarian versus blue dragon breath. Half damage if he's raging, and then half that again when he saves: he's got advantage, eh?

I wasn't trying to dispute whether you can make a (Bear) Totem Warrior work as a tank or not. I was looking at the subclass from a white-room-perspective.

If feats are allowed, then yes, for example Sentinel makes just about any class a viable "tank", assuming they have other abilities to support the "role".