Barbarian - what breaks if you give them third attack? [Archive]

Rukelnikov

2021-12-22, 05:04 AM

Maybe people will stick to barbarian?

The thing is, at lvl 11 most "martial" classes get something that reinforces the main aspects of the class

Fighters get the third attack (more damage), Paladins get IDS (more radiant damage), Rangers depends on subclass, but most give somee sort of extra damage ability, Rogue gets reliable talent cause skills are their focus.

Barbarians though, get Relentless Rage, because tanking punishment is their focus, so maybe instead of giving them Fighters main shtick give them something that makes them better at enduring damage (instead or in addition to brutal critical), Indomitable IMO would be a decent replacement for Brutal Critical, and synergizes with Relentless Rage, since if you fail your Con saving throw to remain at 1 hp, you can reroll it.

If this doesn't seem enough, or you'd rather have an ability not taken from other classes, maybe give them advantage on Con saves while raging, as part of Relentless Rage.

Maybe split Primal Champion? +2 Con (Current and Cap) @9, +2 Str (Current & Cap) @13, 20th level becomes +2/+2? That makes taking 13 levels at least somewhat interesting for the 22 Str Cap, you still have the mostly dead levels from 14 to 20, but... its a start?

Nothing 'breaks'.

Personally I'd rather see their rage damage scaling increased (2-4 is pretty weaksauce, they could've made it scale up to 6 at least) rather than an extra attack but it's fine.

Its weird, from a design standpoint, its much more elgant to just say bonus damage = proficiency. However, from a balancing standpoint, that would encourage even more Barbarian being a 5 or 6 levels class at most.

Amnestic

2021-12-22, 05:33 AM

Its weird, from a design standpoint, its much more elgant to just say bonus damage = proficiency. However, from a balancing standpoint, that would encourage even more Barbarian being a 5 or 6 levels class at most.

Yeah I'd give it the same scaling as prof bonus, but only scales with barb levels. It's only a minor buff - maxes out at +6 instead of +4 - but it's somethin', and gives them a slightly earlier boost too.

Gtdead

2021-12-22, 06:02 AM

Mastikator

2021-12-22, 07:24 AM

Dienekes

2021-12-22, 07:37 AM

So, unfortunately, the biggest differentiation of the pure martials in combat is how often they hit per turn. Rogues hit once. Barbarians hit twice. Fighters eventually hit three or four times. It's not exactly the most interesting differentiation in games I've ever seen, but that's 5e martials all over really.

Will this break the game? No, not really.

Personally though, I'd change Rage damage bonus into a damage die. d4 at 1st level, d6 at 9th, d8 at 16. Then expand their critical hit range at 11 and 17. This all along with Brutal Critical and Reckless Attack would make their critical hit damage frankly ridiculous which I think works a bit better for the Barbarian's supposed wild and rage filled fighting style. And instead of stepping on the Fighter's toes, it's just stepping on the Champion. And well... who cares about the Champion?

Valmark

2021-12-22, 07:46 AM

I would take away Brutal Critical, not Relentless Rage. RR is actually a good feature, whole BC is essentially a dead level- it wouldn't beeak anything to add a third attack, though fighter players might feel cheated. Increasing the rage damage would be good as well.

Seconding another poster, straight up lifting the damage feature from the Brute Fighter UA would work wonders I think.

Nothing. You will increase their damage output by 33-35%~. Barbarian already beats GWM Fighter in at will dpr thanks to reckless (yes, even at level 11+). With the third attack it seals the deal even with Action surge and subclass features accounted for.

Beating any power attacker without advantage or hit boosts isn't an achievement anyway.

You're both overestimating and underestimating the barbarian's damage.

Adding a third attack is a 50% boost (still nothing that breaks) and, while yes a third attack is going to make the barbarian pull ahead, a normal barbarian compared to a GWM fighter will be on the losing side of the DPR- with a +9 to hit, +5 in the stat and 17 AC for the target the barbarian is behind... What, 2 dpr (rounded) compared to the GWM fighter? With slight changes based on the exact weapon of the barbarian? I haven't picked an higher AC because it actually makes GWM a damage loss (or doesn't change anything) while a worst AC reduces the benefit of advantage.

Barbarians, before delving into subclasses, aren't really good in terms of damage. True that they are ahead at lower levels most of the time.

Perhaps predictably, comparing said barbarian to said GWM fighter at 20 AC (where Reckless gives the greatest benefit) the barbarian outdamages the fighter by around 2.

My issue though with considering Reckless an 'at-will damage increase' is that it's also a dpr increase for the enemy- most of the time I wouldn't and don't use it.

stoutstien

2021-12-22, 08:25 AM

Nothing. You will increase their damage output by 33-35%~. Barbarian already beats GWM Fighter in at will dpr thanks to reckless (yes, even at level 11+). With the third attack it seals the deal even with Action surge and subclass features accounted for.

Beating any power attacker without advantage or hit boosts isn't an achievement anyway.

Reckless isn't at will in that you are trading defense for offense so basically adding a hp cost just to *Almost* keep up with fighters. The lose of any bonus action when they turn in rage digs a hole that they don't get out of until round 3.

J-H

2021-12-22, 08:28 AM

If you get rid of Relentless Rage, high-level barbarians become much worse at tanking because they become a lot easier to kill...especially Zealot barbarians.
The 16th level Barbarian at my table would not make this trade.

This is a white room problem and not an actual problem at the table.

SpanielBear

2021-12-22, 08:47 AM

I think giving barbarian a 3rd attack slightly steps on the fighters toes, and if it comes at level 11 then it's stepping on their feet. Rather I'd just give them a 3rd attack at level 13 in addition to the ribbon feature Brutal Critical. I'd also like something small on level 9 in addition to brutal critical, like being able to do reckless attack outside of rage, or being able to add their rage bonus to strength checks and saving throws against fear.

I thought reckless attack was already available outside of rage? In my copy of the phb at least, it states:

RECKLESS ATTACK
Starting at 2nd level, you can throw aside ali concern for defense to attack with fierce desperation. When you make your first attack on your turn, you can decide to attack recklessly. Doing so gives you advantage on melee weapon attack rolls using Strength during this turn, but attack rolls against you have advantage until your next turn.

Nothing in there about rage. Was it an errata I missed?

Chaos Jackal

2021-12-22, 08:50 AM

No, you are correct. You can use Reckless Attack outside of Rage.
Granted, in many scenarios it's gonna be a bit suicidal, but the option is there.

This is a white room problem and not an actual problem at the table.
Given that someone is asking, I'd say that at least one person might be having a problem with it at the table.
Given that it's not the first time I've seen people dissatisfied with the barbarian's scaling, I'd say it's more than one person.
Yours is not the only table.

Gtdead

2021-12-22, 08:55 AM

You're both overestimating and underestimating the barbarian's damage.

Adding a third attack is a 50% boost (still nothing that breaks) and, while yes a third attack is going to make the barbarian pull ahead, a normal barbarian compared to a GWM fighter will be on the losing side of the DPR- with a +9 to hit, +5 in the stat and 17 AC for the target the barbarian is behind... What, 2 dpr (rounded) compared to the GWM fighter? With slight changes based on the exact weapon of the barbarian? I haven't picked an higher AC because it actually makes GWM a damage loss (or doesn't change anything) while a worst AC reduces the benefit of advantage.

Barbarians, before delving into subclasses, aren't really good in terms of damage. True that they are ahead at lower levels most of the time.

Perhaps predictably, comparing said barbarian to said GWM fighter at 20 AC (where Reckless gives the greatest benefit) the barbarian outdamages the fighter by around 2.

My issue though with considering Reckless an 'at-will damage increase' is that it's also a dpr increase for the enemy- most of the time I wouldn't and don't use it.

I don't think I'm doing either. If I overestimate something, is how often the Barbarian will want to use reckless, but generally speaking, a low AC character like Barb won't be affected too much by disadvantage, so just reckless away.

I'm calculating with GWM+PAM in mind, not just GWM. The reason I mentioned it in the first place is to not confuse this with an archery build and maximum possible Fighter dpr. Not much point in calculating for suboptimal builds or comparing apples to oranges.

Fighter 11 against 17 AC, +5 STR, GWM, PAM: ((5.5+5+10)*3+(2.5+5+10))*0.4 = 31.6
Barbarian 11, against 17 AC, +4 STR, GWM, PAM, Reckless: ((5.5+4+10)*2+(2.5+4+10))*(1-(1-0.35)^2) = 32.05

That's not even calculating criticals and Barb has better chances due to advantage. With the third attack, Barbarian's dpr would increase to 43.3 (a 35% increase), which is more than what the Fighter can get with both action surge and class features at level 11. Even if we assume that a BM will always hit with his Precise Strike, and that he gets 2 short rests per day with 6 daily encounters:

Battlemaster Fighter:

4 attackers per turn, for 3 rounds per encounter = 12 per encounter.
Action surge for 3 extra attacks once per 2 encounters, 1.5 extra attacks per encounter, total of 13.5.
Of those, 5 attacks will always hit and be non PAM attacks (precise strike and for simplicity's sake), all the others will use 0.4 chance. 3 of the attacks are PAM attacks.

Normal attacks deal 20.5 * 0.4 = 8.2 damage
PAM attacks deal 17.5 * 0.4 = 7 damage
Precise strikes deal 20.5 damage

(5.5 * 8.2 + 3 * 7 + 5 * 20.5)/3 = 56.2 average dpr.

Barbarian assuming 3 attacks + PAM:

4 attacks per turn, 3 rounds per encounter = 12 per encounter
Rage for 4 out of 6 encounters, so on average, 8 out of 12 attacks will be enraged, per encounter. 2 out of 8 will be enraged PAM attacks and 1 out of 4 normal PAM attacks.

Enraged normal Attacks deal 22.5*0.5775 = 13 damage
Enraged PAM attacks deal 19.5*0.5775 = 11.26
Normal attacks deal 19.5*0.5775 = 11.26
PAM attacks deal 16.5*0.5775 = 9.52

(6*13 + 2*11.26 + 3*11.26 + 9.52)/3 = 47.94 average dpr.

And while this may sound a big gap, doing the same for level 12 instead, where Barb finally gets +5 STR, brings Barb to 55.7 dpr, effectively closing the gap against the strongest Fighter subclass.

I couldn't be bothered with Brutal Critical. It will probably boost Barb numbers by 1 or 2, finally beating the Fighter.

For completeness sake, normal Barbarian output at level 12 is 41.3, 73% of the Battlemaster's output, assuming that the player made perfect use of precision strike. Barbarian is better defensively(at least when it needs to be), so I guess something is lost and something is gained.

PS. Barbarian using reckless will increase incoming damage up 30% to 40%. It's a fairly significant increase, but it's worth it for the comparison because it's not like the melee Fighter can easily survive against the same types of monsters. At these levels, a monster can easily have +9 to hit. A fighter with plate + defense style will be taking around 57% of enemy dpr output. The Barbarian with reckless will be taking 90% of it, but with rage, it will be 45%. If we average them out, Barbarian will be taking about 60% of incoming damage, which equals out thanks to his increased Hit Points.

On average, if Fighter can survive in melee, so can a perpetually reckless Barbarian. We can argue about spiking damage, type of damage (Attacks vs saves) and calculating defensive capabilities of subclasses, choosing the best for the occasion, but it's not worth it.

PS2. I made a mistake and forgot to account for Rage bonus action. CBA to do it all over again. Still, it's close. Should even out at level 15 ^_^. However this only matters if we assume that melee will always be in range to attack. If not, ceteris paribus, rage bonus action doesn't matter. So it's not always an attack lost. This eventuality should benefit Fighter though due to the extra attacks from action surge becoming more impactful relatively.

PS3. Frankly, Fighter can get more with a little help from his friends and the right kind of conditions. A blindfighting Fighter inside a Fog Cloud for example wins. But such is the nature of melee that I don't want to get into it too much. Cause then we can argue about Barbarian nulifying his defensive disadvantage by investing in Mobile and running into the cloud and other some such. Gets complicated really fast.

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 09:04 AM

People are saying it steps on a fighters toes, and while this is true for the bad fighter archtypes, the ones who know what they are doing (like the echo, eldritch, or rune knights) are still relevant even with stronger Barbarians.

Most basically, this is a problem with Barbarian existing as a separate class. It was originally a fighter kit, and it ought to have remained one. "Angry warrior" is not a concrete enough character archetype to deserve its own class, its just a minor theme on fighter.

Rukelnikov

2021-12-22, 09:08 AM

MoiMagnus

2021-12-22, 09:22 AM

What breaks if barbs pick up third attack?

The bones of our enemies!

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 09:23 AM

Most classes started as a sub of someone else, and Barbarians have been a stand alone class since 2e.
And one of the ones with the least justification. 5e just puts it in perspective, but it's been true since the barbarian handbook in 2e.

(They were originally a kit, and got expanded later).

In terms of class role, what does the Barbarian do that a fighter can't do? Nothing-they can get to the same place (physically tough, grappler, GWM striker) but they have no unique capabilities or particular ability to surpass them. Rage granting physical resistance is the closest to unique-and an oft' bypassed uniqueness, given how non-threatening physical attacks tend to be in all but a few instances.

The end result is that Barbarian and Fighter are basically superficially different, and occasionally one is better than the other at a particular level, or in a particular situation-but most of the time they are more or less interchangeable.

That's great when you're talking about archetypes, not so great when you're talking about classes.

Rukelnikov

2021-12-22, 09:33 AM

And one of the ones with the least justification. 5e just puts it in perspective, but it's been true since the barbarian handbook in 2e.

(They were originally a kit, and got expanded later).

I know, that's why I said "most classes started as a sub of someone else", IIRC rangers and paladins started that way too, that's why I don't think thats an argument that carries much weight

In terms of class role, what does the Barbarian do that a fighter can't do? Nothing-they can get to the same place (physically tough, grappler, GWM striker) but they have no unique capabilities or particular ability to surpass them. Rage granting physical resistance is the closest to unique-and an oft' bypassed uniqueness, given how non-threatening physical attacks tend to be in all but a few instances.

The end result is that Barbarian and Fighter are basically superficially different, and occasionally one is better than the other at a particular level, or in a particular situation-but most of the time they are more or less interchangeable.

That's great when you're talking about archetypes, not so great when you're talking about classes.

This is true for 5e, but If you consider how they were implemented in previous editions, Barbarian and Fighter can coexist while feeling different (3.5 and PF Barbarians didn't seem interchangable with Fighter)

I don't think its an archetypes problem, since we have even more similar ones, like Sorcerer and Wizards, which basically started for a difference in mechanics, not in fluff. The problem is that those classes flourished in the rules heaviest edition of dnd, the ammount of customization that system allowed had room for very different build branching from barb and fighter. 5e with its simpler approach has things like these two clases, or Wizard and Sorcerer feeling largely the same.

Thunderous Mojo

2021-12-22, 09:44 AM

There is a hoary adage: "Those that do know history, are doomed to repeat it"...
......therefore Rukelnikov and MrCharlie need to play a game of AD&D with the 1985 Unearthed Arcana book.🃏

That is the book the Barbarian class was 'officially' released.
(And Dragon had some alternate takes like the Barbarian Cleric)

Rukelnikov

2021-12-22, 09:49 AM

Saelethil

2021-12-22, 09:59 AM

I’m with everyone saying that a 3rd attack wouldn’t break anything, however, I think that increasing rage to follow PB progression is a good first step and Instead of giving them a 3rd attack I would rather just give the base Barbarian most of the Champion kit. Improved Critical, Remarkable Athlete, and Survivor all feel right for a Barb’s enduring, aggressive, physicality.
I know that’s stepping on the Champion a bit but it would actually give a little bit of flavor to it. Rather than being the generic Fighter it would represent someone who has trained with, and learned to use the techniques of, Barbarians.

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 10:10 AM

I know, that's why I said "most classes started as a sub of someone else", IIRC rangers and paladins started that way too, that's why I don't think thats an argument that carries much weight

This is true for 5e, but If you consider how they were implemented in previous editions, Barbarian and Fighter can coexist while feeling different (3.5 and PF Barbarians didn't seem interchangable with Fighter)

I don't think its an archetypes problem, since we have even more similar ones, like Sorcerer and Wizards, which basically started for a difference in mechanics, not in fluff. The problem is that those classes flourished in the rules heaviest edition of dnd, the ammount of customization that system allowed had room for very different build branching from barb and fighter. 5e with its simpler approach has things like these two clases, or Wizard and Sorcerer feeling largely the same.
Paladins and rangers have had complicated histories, sure. It's worth noting that they made the jump to and from a kit to a class several times over the years.

Honestly, I think 3.5 Barbarians are a great example of where the problem is, though. They trade fighter feats for an assortment of random powers, but they still play almost identically. To me it's shockingly obvious that they are fighters in a less fancy suit.

I can point to something about sorcerers or wizards that makes each class unique though-Sorcerers have sorcery points and metamagic, wizards have prepared spells and spellbooks. These do, in fact, change how the class plays in a fundamental way-Sorcerers are specialists, wizards are generalists, in terms of magic.

To me, the real test is what happens when you try to write Barbarian as a fighter archetype. You can easily make rage and unarmored defense into 3rd level archetype features, add feral instinct at 7th, relentless rage at 10, Persistent rage at 15, and indomitable might at 18th, and you've recreated the Barbarian, sans solely reckless attack, danger sense, and fast movement. Also brutal critical, if anyone cares.

(You can easily compress those features into unarmored defense and rage if you wish-"While not wearing armor you gain +10 movement speed and advantage on dexterity saving throws")

And you've, astonishingly, done it by changing the level you gain features by at most two, and most of that is the starting delay to rage and unarmored defense.

Barbarian almost is a fighter archetype already, you just get a sub archetype on top of it, and replaced extra attack in tier 3 and 4 with a terrible substitute.

Given how forgettable many of the barbarian archetypes are, and how limited they are in actually modifying barbarian and in overall usefulness...I think we aren't losing much by collapsing the classes together. Some of the most recent ones show promise, but I am very much not impressed with the Barbarian paths in general.

Valmark

2021-12-22, 10:20 AM

I don't think I'm doing either. If I overestimate something, is how often the Barbarian will want to use reckless, but generally speaking, a low AC character like Barb won't be affected too much by disadvantage, so just reckless away.

I'm calculating with GWM+PAM in mind, not just GWM. The reason I mentioned it in the first place is to not confuse this with an archery build and maximum possible Fighter dpr. Not much point in calculating for suboptimal builds or comparing apples to oranges.

Fighter 11 against 17 AC, +5 STR, GWM, PAM: ((5.5+5+10)*3+(2.5+5+10))*0.4 = 31.6
Barbarian 11, against 17 AC, +4 STR, GWM, PAM, Reckless: ((5.5+4+10)*2+(2.5+4+10))*(1-(1-0.35)^2) = 32.05

That's not even calculating criticals and Barb has better chances due to advantage. With the third attack, Barbarian's dpr would increase to 43.3 (a 35% increase), which is more than what the Fighter can get with both action surge and class features at level 11. Even if we assume that a BM will always hit with his Precise Strike, and that he gets 2 short rests per day with 6 daily encounters:

Battlemaster Fighter:

4 attackers per turn, for 3 rounds per encounter = 12 per encounter.
Action surge for 3 extra attacks once per 2 encounters, 1.5 extra attacks per encounter, total of 13.5.
Of those, 5 attacks will always hit and be non PAM attacks (precise strike and for simplicity's sake), all the others will use 0.4 chance. 3 of the attacks are PAM attacks.

Normal attacks deal 20.5 * 0.4 = 8.2 damage
PAM attacks deal 17.5 * 0.4 = 7 damage
Precise strikes deal 20.5 damage

(5.5 * 8.2 + 3 * 7 + 5 * 20.5)/3 = 56.2 average dpr.

Barbarian assuming 3 attacks + PAM:

4 attacks per turn, 3 rounds per encounter = 12 per encounter
Rage for 4 out of 6 encounters, so on average, 8 out of 12 attacks will be enraged, per encounter. 2 out of 8 will be enraged PAM attacks and 1 out of 4 normal PAM attacks.

Enraged normal Attacks deal 22.5*0.5775 = 13 damage
Enraged PAM attacks deal 19.5*0.5775 = 11.26
Normal attacks deal 19.5*0.5775 = 11.26
PAM attacks deal 16.5*0.5775 = 9.52

(6*13 + 2*11.26 + 3*11.26 + 9.52)/3 = 47.94 average dpr.

And while this may sound a big gap, doing the same for level 12 instead, where Barb finally gets +5 STR, brings Barb to 55.7 dpr, effectively closing the gap against the strongest Fighter subclass.

I couldn't be bothered with Brutal Critical. It will probably boost Barb numbers by 1 or 2, finally beating the Fighter.

For completeness sake, normal Barbarian output at level 12 is 41.3, 73% of the Battlemaster's output, assuming that the player made perfect use of precision strike. Barbarian is better defensively, so I guess something is lost and something is gained.

PS. Barbarian using reckless will increase incoming damage up 30% to 40%. It's a fairly significant increase, but it's worth it for the comparison because it's not like the melee Fighter can easily survive against the same types of monsters. At these levels, a monster can easily have +9 to hit. A fighter with plate + defense style will be taking around 57% of enemy dpr output. The Barbarian with reckless will be taking 90% of it, but with rage, it will be 45%. If we average them out, Barbarian will be taking about 60% of incoming damage, which equals out thanks to his increased Hit Points.

On average, if Fighter can survive in melee, so can a perpetually reckless Barbarian. We can argue about spiking damage, type of damage (Attacks vs saves) and calculating defensive capabilities of subclasses, choosing the best for the occasion, but it's not worth it.

PS2. I made a mistake and forgot to account for Rage bonus action. CBA to do it all over again. Still, it's close. Should even out at level 15 ^_^

Adding GWM+PAM (and PAM to fighter) is different from what you said before, which is what I replied to.

That said, assuming those fighter 11 and barbarian 11 got a free ASI somewhere (if we assume 16 starting stat they both have one too many feats or +2 strenght without something like VHuman) calculating everything the fighter's DPR should be 34, 60.8 with Action Surge, and the barbarian's should be 40.3 or 54.6 with the added attack (both consider reckless).

Already here we see that even including a specific race or something similar that does help the barbarian the fighter will still beat them on Action Surge while being behind when not devoting resources to it. Which... Makes sense. PAM and GWM are bigger damage boosts to a barbarian then a fighter, so if they couldn't beat them it'd be kind of weird when considering the loss of defense.

Not gonna comment on the extended period bit since it's way more then I'm willing to commit while also not being indicative since you're adding yet another ASI which the fighter can't make use of since they already took everything (actually with the new feats there might be more to add, but I won't go check because it's an hassle) and also giving out a subclass which has a bit too much depth to be used well in this case, and given the calculations before the barbarian should indeed get closer to action surging fighter while leaving non-AS fighter behind. I wouldn't expect it to be a relevant difference the attacks lost due to having to turn rage on.

tl;dr yes, given the right feats and race a barbarian sacrificing defence for offence can beat out a fighter in at-will damage before considering subclasses. Without those assumptions though the gap's noticeably closer and not necessarily in the barbarian's favor.

As far as the impact of Reckless on defense... Eh, with only +1 hp per level the difference in damage is very noticeable imo, especially if you consider that barbarians won't be halving all damage from attacks unless it's only physical damage. A perpetually Reckless barbarian definitely doesn't survive as well as a fighter in melee on average.

Dienekes

2021-12-22, 10:36 AM

Barbarian almost is a fighter archetype already, you just get a sub archetype on top of it, and replaced extra attack in tier 3 and 4 with a terrible substitute.

Given how forgettable many of the barbarian archetypes are, and how limited they are in actually modifying barbarian and in overall usefulness...I think we aren't losing much by collapsing the classes together. Some of the most recent ones show promise, but I am very much not impressed with the Barbarian paths in general.

I truly think this has less to do with Barbarians and Fighters in general and more to do with some decisions in class design in 5e.

I will point out, though, from my own play experience, I find your description of how Sorcerers and Wizards are different as being pretty much non-existent. Sorcerers in play aren't specialists. From what I've seen they don't focus down one style of spell or have a single specific strategy. They just pick the best arrangement of spells they have available to them. They are just worse at being the generalist caster than the Wizard is. Hell, certain Sorcerer archetypes even give them a smattering of healing so they can do more generalist stuff.

Anyway, it was decided by the powers that be that the mundane classes need to be dirt simple. So in the end, Barbarian, Fighter, and even Rogue their base class doesn't really have much in it. Barbarian has Rage and Reckless Attack and that is all they will be doing for most the game. Rogues have Sneak Attack and Cunning Action for combat, and Expertise for out of combat. Fighters get Action Surge, more attacks, and I guess technically Second Wind also counts as something they do.

And with that limitation of being as dirt simple as you can make them, there is only so much differentiation you can actually do. Especially when they're supposed to fill the same combat role.

Now in theory, if we remove the limitation that all mundanes must be dirt simple, I do think we actually can make the classes feel different. The difficult part is getting people to agree how that should happen and in what way they should be differentiated from each other.

Gtdead

2021-12-22, 10:50 AM

Adding GWM+PAM (and PAM to fighter) is different from what you said before, which is what I replied to.

I just assumed that my 35% statement would be enough information. It's an easy result to recreate. But it's fine, I get it.

Not gonna comment on the extended period bit since it's way more then I'm willing to commit while also not being indicative since you're adding yet another ASI which the fighter can't make -snip-

I calculated for both level 11 and 12 because out of the 10 levels which Barb will get to use a third attack, only one is at +4 STR, while the other 9 are at +5 (and +7 at lvl 20). Sure, the fighter can pick stuff like a familiar to give him advantage on one attack per turn, or Lucky to reroll attacks or something else that I haven't thought of. Or he can just branch out to support with things like IL, something that the Barbarian can't do because he has to finish the weapon dpr progression first in order to compete. The PAM->GWM->MAX STR progression is extremely common. Past that, we have a lot of variance, although from my observations, IL and Lucky seem the most popular although I've also seen Tough, Res:WIS, CON ASIs and probably others that I forget about.

As far as the impact of Reckless on defense... Eh, with only +1 hp per level the difference in damage is very noticeable imo, especially if you consider that barbarians won't be halving all damage from attacks unless it's only physical damage. A perpetually Reckless barbarian definitely doesn't survive as well as a fighter in melee on average.

Elemental riders aren't that common (although they get increasingly common past a certain point) and saving throws are irrelevant because nor the Fighter nor the Barbarian are especially good at avoiding them and reckless doesn't affect them (Edit: Forgot about Danger sense, Barbarian should be better at most common damage spells and effects). Additionally, the most popular Barbarian subclasses (at least among the optimizers) are Bear and Zealot, which both get something against Elemental Damage (resistance and rerolls).

The way I see it is this:
If you think that the most popular Barbarian builds need rage to survive reckless, then you should also think that the melee Fighter can't survive without help.
If you think that the Fighter is fine and doesn't need help, then you should also think that the Barbarian can get away with a lot of rageless reckless attacks.

Perhaps not 100% uptime, but considering that at this level, rage availability is already at 66% (or even more, considering that a lot of DMs do less but deadlier encounters per day), an 80% should be very easy to achieve, and not all fights actually require reckless spam. While I calculated potential dpr, I understand that the last rounds are just mopping up the encounter unless it's a particularly deadly one that can be swingy.

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 11:00 AM

I truly think this has less to do with Barbarians and Fighters in general and more to do with some decisions in class design in 5e.

I will point out, though, from my own play experience, I find your description of how Sorcerers and Wizards are different as being pretty much non-existent. Sorcerers in play aren't specialists. From what I've seen they don't focus down one style of spell or have a single specific strategy. They just pick the best arrangement of spells they have available to them. They are just worse at being the generalist caster than the Wizard is. Hell, certain Sorcerer archetypes even give them a smattering of healing so they can do more generalist stuff.

Anyway, it was decided by the powers that be that the mundane classes need to be dirt simple. So in the end, Barbarian, Fighter, and even Rogue their base class doesn't really have much in it. Barbarian has Rage and Reckless Attack and that is all they will be doing for most the game. Rogues have Sneak Attack and Cunning Action for combat, and Expertise for out of combat. Fighters get Action Surge, more attacks, and I guess technically Second Wind also counts as something they do.

And with that limitation of being as dirt simple as you can make them, there is only so much differentiation you can actually do. Especially when they're supposed to fill the same combat role.

Now in theory, if we remove the limitation that all mundanes must be dirt simple, I do think we actually can make the classes feel different. The difficult part is getting people to agree how that should happen and in what way they should be differentiated from each other.
While its true that wizard does lack many "identifying" features, the breadth of their spellcasters is still notable even this late into DnD. If anything, we have enough good spells of every level now that I can't pick them all on every sorcerer, even the Tasha's ones.

But metamagic and sorcery points do drastically change spellcasting, to the degree that sorcerer has at least a core feature that defines their class. Oh, and their way of learning spells is different.

I suppose you could make sorcerer into an archetype too, mind you, but it wouldn't be easy to fit into any current class chassis.

I also don't agree that 5e has a particularly bland design philosophy. That's limited to a few classes, most notably cleric and wizard. Neither class really has any features outside of spellcasting-clerics get channel, wizards get arcane recovery, and then it's all tied into their archetype. They make up for it by being the most versatile spellcasters in terms of base mechanics and spell list in the game. Arguably, Druid fits into cleric and Sorcerer into Wizard, but this is really a product of their base class being extraordinarily simple.

Artificers, Bards, Paladins, Rangers, Rogues, Monks...They all have a diverse ability set in the base class. Barbarians stand out from those, to me, in that their base features are extremely specific-they define an almost identical playstyle across all Barbarians, one shared with numerous other classes.

To put it another way-you can compress classes together if you set out to do it. What makes Barbarian into fighter different is that it's remarkably easy. No core feature needs to change-it just needs to be assigned to a level for the archetype. Often, it's the same level as the original feature, even.

Valmark

2021-12-22, 11:23 AM

I just assumed that my 35% statement would be enough information. It's an easy result to recreate. But it's fine, I get it.

I calculated for both level 11 and 12 because out of the 9 levels which Barb will get to use a third attack, only one is at +4 STR, while the other 8 are at +5. Sure, the fighter can pick stuff like a familiar to give him advantage on one attack per turn, or something else that I haven't thought of. Or he can just branch out to support with things like IL, something that the Barbarian can't do because he has to finish the weapon dpr progression first in order to compete.

Elemental riders aren't that common (although they get increasingly common past a certain point) and saving throws are irrelevant because nor the Fighter nor the Barbarian are especially good at avoiding them and reckless doesn't affect them (Edit: Forgot about Danger sense, Barbarian should be better at most common damage spells and effects). Additionally, the most popular Barbarian subclasses (at least among the optimizers) are Bear and Zealot, which both get something against Elemental Damage (resistance and rerolls).

The way I see it is this:
If you think that the most popular Barbarian builds need rage to survive reckless, then you should also think that the melee Fighter can't survive without help.
If you think that the Fighter is fine and doesn't need help, then you should also think that the Barbarian can get away with a lot of rageless reckless attacks.

Perhaps not 100% uptime, but considering that at this, level, rage availability is already at 66% (or even less, considering that a lot of DMs do less but deadlier encounters per day, an 80% should be very easy to achieve, and not all fights actually require reckless spam. While I calculated potential dpr, I understand that the last rounds are just mopping up the encounter unless it's a particularly deadly one that can be swingy.

Eh, I had assumed that specifying GWM fighter meant the barbarian didn't have it (nor PAM for either). Especially since I wasn't thinking with specific builds.

Yeah the feat comment is more because without specific races the barbarian's dpr progression doesn't end until level 16- with 16 str the example needed +4 str and two more feats to cap out.

Yeah I meant specifically regarding Reckless stuff (Zealot doesn't get rerolls attack wise anyway right?) since that's what we were talking about.

And there's a third option- fighter is fine, barbarian is fine-ish without Recklessing. Frequent Reckless will get them killed on average or at least be a noticeable drain on hp. Giving advantage to every attack is just that impactful.

Angelalex242

2021-12-22, 11:41 AM

If the idea is to resist damage rather than deal it, what about, "You have advantage on saves against anything that tries to damage you."

(Note that this does not apply to the many save or suck spells that deal 0 points of damage...but it does apply to save or suck spells that have rider damage.)

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 11:54 AM

Elemental riders aren't that common (although they get increasingly common past a certain point) and saving throws are irrelevant because nor the Fighter nor the Barbarian are especially good at avoiding them and reckless doesn't affect them (Edit: Forgot about Danger sense, Barbarian should be better at most common damage spells and effects). Additionally, the most popular Barbarian subclasses (at least among the optimizers) are Bear and Zealot, which both get something against Elemental Damage (resistance and rerolls).

The way I see it is this:
If you think that the most popular Barbarian builds need rage to survive reckless, then you should also think that the melee Fighter can't survive without help.
If you think that the Fighter is fine and doesn't need help, then you should also think that the Barbarian can get away with a lot of rageless reckless attacks.

Perhaps not 100% uptime, but considering that at this level, rage availability is already at 66% (or even more, considering that a lot of DMs do less but deadlier encounters per day), an 80% should be very easy to achieve, and not all fights actually require reckless spam. While I calculated potential dpr, I understand that the last rounds are just mopping up the encounter unless it's a particularly deadly one that can be swingy.
There are other downsides to taking hits, even if you halve the damage. To list a few examples from looking at CR 2 monsters...

Ankhegs grapple and deal acid damage.

Carrion Crawlers trigger save against paralysis.

Darkling Elders deal extra damage if they have advantage.

Duergar Kavalarchi trigger strider attacks when they hit.

Ettercaps trigger poison saves when they hit and deal poison damage.

Gelatinous cubes deal pure acid damage.

Ghast's trigger save against paralysis.

...The list goes on. I've also not included 6 enemies that deal elemental rider damage, like every dragon wyrmling, or Azers.

Maybe CR 2 is a particularly bad example, but from that list it seems that there is about a 50% chance that, if it hits you, a monster will

1. Grapple you. Maybe restrain you.
2. Deal elemental damage, either entirely or partially.
3. Poison you.
4. Trigger a save against some godawful condition.

And I'm not getting into what happens if you include spellcasters, given that they tend to deal elemental or rarer damage types when they choose to attack.

Some of these are reasonably esoteric enemies, but something as simple as a Ghast triggers paralysis saves-and even if a Barbarian has a decent chance of making any one of them, they will eventually get paralyzed. Which ends their rage within a round. Which gets them killed.

So while it might be true that low CR enemies are mostly raw damage, once you get into anything actually threatening reckless attack becomes a real gamble. It doesn't have to be big bad material or anything-just significant numbers of threatening minions, or a low-level ringleader style foe.

Doug Lampert

2021-12-22, 11:54 AM

I know, that's why I said "most classes started as a sub of someone else", IIRC rangers and paladins started that way too, that's why I don't think thats an argument that carries much weight

Paladins were introduced in the Greyhawk supplement to the original game, IIRC there were no subclasses, they were presented as their own class right along side the introduction of the Johnny come lately thief class.

PhantomSoul

2021-12-22, 12:15 PM

KorvinStarmast

2021-12-22, 12:34 PM

Paladins were introduced in the Greyhawk supplement to the original game, IIRC there were no subclasses, they were presented as their own class right along side the introduction of the Johnny come lately thief class. Nope. Paladin was introduced as a sub class of Fighting Man, but only "lawful fighters," just as Ranger had been in Strategic Review, and that carried over into the AD&D 1e PHB.
Says so in the Greyhawk supplement on page 4.
Thieves were indeed introduced as a new class. :smallsmile: I played quite a few of them.

Doug Lampert

2021-12-22, 12:38 PM

Nope. Paladin was introduced as a sub class of Fighting Man, but only "lawful fighters," just as Ranger had been in Strategic Review, and that carried over into the AD&D 1e PHB.
Says so in the Greyhawk supplement on page 4.
Thieves were indeed introduced as a new class. :smallsmile: I played quite a few of them.

I sit corrected. I guess that allowed all the fighters with a 17 charisma to swap over easily.

Gtdead

2021-12-22, 01:07 PM

Eh, I had assumed that specifying GWM fighter meant the barbarian didn't have it (nor PAM for either). Especially since I wasn't thinking with specific builds.

Yeah the feat comment is more because without specific races the barbarian's dpr progression doesn't end until level 16- with 16 str the example needed +4 str and two more feats to cap out.

Yeah I meant specifically regarding Reckless stuff (Zealot doesn't get rerolls attack wise anyway right?) since that's what we were talking about.

No zealot doesn't. Bear is the more reliable one when it comes to taking magical damage. Out of the 2500~ monsters released, about 800 can deal elemental damage, and of them 380 can only do it through riders on their attack rolls. Of them, 80 are CR10 and higher, and only 13 of them in MM. You are way more likely to take a Dragon's Breath than face these enemies IMO. However one should always be careful to not get flooded with masses of lower CR enemies with abnormally high damage. This is a situation where Fighter has the offensive advantage while Barb the defensive.

There are other downsides to taking hits, even if you halve the damage. To list a few examples from looking at CR 2 monsters...

-snip-

Maybe CR 2 is a particularly bad example, but from that list it seems that there is about a 50% chance that, if it hits you, a monster will

1. Grapple you. Maybe restrain you.
2. Deal elemental damage, either entirely or partially.
3. Poison you.
4. Trigger a save against some godawful condition.

And I'm not getting into what happens if you include spellcasters, given that they tend to deal elemental or rarer damage types when they choose to attack.

Some of these are reasonably esoteric enemies, but something as simple as a Ghast triggers paralysis saves-and even if a Barbarian has a decent chance of making any one of them, they will eventually get paralyzed. Which ends their rage within a round. Which gets them killed.

So while it might be true that low CR enemies are mostly raw damage, once you get into anything actually threatening reckless attack becomes a real gamble. It doesn't have to be big bad material or anything-just significant numbers of threatening minions, or a low-level ringleader style foe.

Yes, all these are very dangerous, but that's a melee problem in general because massed low CR creatures work like a superadvantage. It doesn't matter if you use reckless or not when the chance to get infected or grappled is already astronomical thanks to the sheer number of attempts. This isn't a situation where the melee should try to deal damage at all. This is a situation where you either reach for the narrowest path you can find and dodge or you bring a Paladin to auto beat the DC. It's not like advantage is going to matter much against the common AC ranges of these creatures anyway.

However, I was curious and I simulated against some Carrion Crawlers. Fighter was getting a 12% chance to get infected, while Barb using reckless was getting about 20%. These are just observations based on averages from a pool of 1000 attempts. Won't bother trying to reach these conclusions through maths.

While 20% is way worse than 12%, I really wouldn't risk it with my fighter unless I didn't have another option. Against massed enemies, paralysis is death.

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 01:29 PM

Yes, all these are very dangerous, but that's a melee problem in general because massed low CR creatures work like a superadvantage. It doesn't matter if you use reckless or not when the chance to get infected or grappled is already astronomical thanks to the sheer number of attempts. This isn't a situation where the melee should try to deal damage at all. This is a situation where you either reach for the narrowest path you can find and dodge or you bring a Paladin to auto beat the DC. It's not like advantage is going to matter much against the common AC ranges of these creatures anyway.

However, I was curious and I simulated against some Carrion Crawlers. Fighter was getting a 12% chance to get infected, while Barb using reckless was getting about 20%. These are just observations based on averages from a pool of 1000 attempts. Won't bother trying to reach these conclusions through maths.

While 20% is way worse than 12%, I really wouldn't risk it with my fighter unless I didn't have another option. Against massed enemies, paralysis is death.
I'd argue the foes don't need to be massed for this to be relevant. My take home is that as early as fighting CR 2 the assumption that enemies are going to try to beat you to death isn't really valid, and reckless attacking is a risky move because of all the terrible things that happen other than damage. An increase of 40% is pretty serious, and stays relevant against higher CR monsters that do increasingly heinous bull****. Even if it's a single monster rather than a horde it's a relevant point.

(I do agree that, tactics wise, the solution to hordes of enemies is to increase AC, impose disadvantage, and leave that **** to the wizard/ranged DPS squad if you have aggro. Most people forget dodge exists, but it's very effective if your AC is decently high.)

Also, something has to be said about the class basically being forced into melee where this is a concern, versus a fighter who can achieve similar damage numbers on a ranged character. We can gloss over it as a footnote, but it is one.

Jerrykhor

2021-12-22, 01:35 PM

The only thing that breaks is your enemies' face. Glad I'm not the only one that thinks Barbarians need a 3rd attack.

Most people think Fighter or Rogue when the word "Pure Martials" come to mind, but Barbarians play the most like one. They are essentially a one-dimensional melee Fighter.

Barbarians are really lacking in damage at higher levels. Their subclass also don't help in that, and generally i dont feel that their subclass has many good features. Even when good magic items, they end up feeling like big meat shield that is only good at soaking up damage, but contribute little else.

Even their capstone is kind of overrated by most people. You'd have a decent chance of getting a Belt of Giant Strength of some kind in most campaigns anyway.

Gtdead

2021-12-22, 02:05 PM

I'd argue the foes don't need to be massed for this to be relevant. My take home is that as early as fighting CR 2 the assumption that enemies are going to try to beat you to death isn't really valid, and reckless attacking is a risky move because of all the terrible things that happen other than damage. An increase of 40% is pretty serious, and stays relevant against higher CR monsters that do increasingly heinous bull****. Even if it's a single monster rather than a horde it's a relevant point.

Against non massed enemies, the situation works a bit differently due to action economy. The problem with 10 low CR monsters is that if the first manages to paralyze you, the next 9 will beat you senseless with advantage and auto crits, dramatically increasing their ouput. Low CR monsters already do more damage relative to higher CRs when comparing XP budgets. If the CR12 manages to paralyze you by spending his action, chances are that there won't be 10 more critters to nibble on you. Perhaps they may not even get to capitalize on this effect and you manage save on your next turn. Sure, you lost Rage, but that's inconsequential because the enemy just wasted his relatively high value action.

(I do agree that, tactics wise, the solution to hordes of enemies is to increase AC, impose disadvantage, and leave that **** to the wizard/ranged DPS squad if you have aggro. Most people forget dodge exists, but it's very effective if your AC is decently high.)

Yeah, AC 21 + Dodge makes it really hard for low CR enemies to get through. The previous numbers drop to 3-4% and Carrion Crawlers actually have a very respectable +8 to hit with their tentacles.

Also, something has to be said about the class basically being forced into melee where this is a concern, versus a fighter who can achieve similar damage numbers on a ranged character. We can gloss over it as a footnote, but it is one.

Agreed, I tried to ignore that part in order to keep the discussion relevant and not compare apples and oranges. It doesn't matter if Barbarian gets 4 attacks. Fighter's capability to be built as ranged is extremely valuable. If only Barb had CHA synergy ^_^

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 02:49 PM

Against non massed enemies, the situation works a bit differently due to action economy. The problem with 10 low CR monsters is that if the first manages to paralyze you, the next 9 will beat you senseless with advantage and auto crits, dramatically increasing their ouput. Low CR monsters already do more damage relative to higher CRs when comparing XP budgets. If the CR12 manages to paralyze you by spending his action, chances are that there won't be 10 more critters to nibble on you. Perhaps they may not even get to capitalize on this effect and you manage save on your next turn. Sure, you lost Rage, but that's inconsequential because the enemy just wasted his relatively high value action.

I mean, we keep using paralysis (and paralysis is bad), but if the enemy effect poisons you and does damage, or strips away max HP, or restrains you, it's almost immaterial how many enemies there are. Plus this is assuming that the enemy is using paralysis to try to kill you that round, when in truth paralyzing you lets them do stuff like push you into a pit or just shove you out of whatever corridor you are holding.

I also would not saying that negating you is "wasting" a high value action, depending on what else that action does. High CR foes are more likely to be able to do something bad to you through attacks without spending their full action, because multi-attack exists. If the vampire can hit you, grapple you, drag you to a giant pit, and drop you using only one attack, they're highly positive on action economy.

My point that the more effects the bypass the protections rage actually gives, the worse those protections are. Further, the risk for a martial is rarely being beaten to death by attacks, AC already mitigates a huge percentage of incoming damage and it's relatively easy to build it high, it's being rendered impotent and watching the rest of the party getting beaten to death. Reckless attack exaggerates that problem, and rage does not fix it.

This isn't to say that rage is bad or anything, just that a Barbarian does have to be careful in trusting it to mitigate the effects of reckless attack. I've learned that through sorrowful experience. If the enemy is playing the dps game with you of course you're winning, that's not what is scary about DnD monsters.

Psyren

2021-12-22, 04:16 PM

Its weird, from a design standpoint, its much more elgant to just say bonus damage = proficiency. However, from a balancing standpoint, that would encourage even more Barbarian being a 5 or 6 levels class at most.

That might sound more elegant on paper, but in practice you'd need extra inelegant text explaining why their bonus damage doesn't just keep scaling even if they multiclass out.

Making the numbers in the table line up with the proficiency table would be fine though.

PhantomSoul

2021-12-22, 04:20 PM

That might sound more elegant on paper, but in practice you'd need extra inelegant text explaining why their bonus damage doesn't just keep scaling even if they multiclass out.

Making the numbers in the table line up with the proficiency table would be fine though.

Hot take: it would be nice for that to be the norm anyway... (And a parenthetical saying "(including only Barbarian Levels)" is pretty simple and not too inelegant, but I'd assume it would just be that the Rage Damage Bonus part of the table would be updated unless it becomes a broader design change/improvement, particularly as WOTC starts throwing more proficiency scaling at us.)

stoutstien

2021-12-22, 04:42 PM

I moved a different direction for my barbarian changes. First thing is I replaced the static rage damage with a growing die so it works with critical hits. This damage also applies to successful grapples/shoves. It starts at a d4 and grows to a d8 and the same progression as the published damage.
Then at lv 9 I added a feature that allows them to rage for free after they land a critical hit. Still takes a bonus action but it helps stretch out resources and gives them a little better staying power in those encounters that are hard to justify raging for.

Leon

2021-12-22, 06:25 PM

The Enemy, slightly faster.

PhoenixPhyre

2021-12-22, 06:33 PM

That's great when you're talking about archetypes, not so great when you're talking about classes.

Classes are about archetypes. They're much less about mechanics.

Barbarians have Rage. If you tried to shove that into a fighter subclass, you'd end up either excising 90% of the interesting parts or making something super OP.

Barbarians epitomize the "super durable, unskilled warrior" archetype. It's an ancient one. And they portray it pretty darn well.

As for something they do that fighters don't--unarmored tanking. For another? They've got a much stronger nature/elemental aspect than fighters. Fighters have the heavy armor tank job (along with paladins).

Mastikator

2021-12-22, 07:08 PM

Then at lv 9 I added a feature that allows them to rage for free after they land a critical hit. Still takes a bonus action but it helps stretch out resources and gives them a little better staying power in those encounters that are hard to justify raging for.

What if they're already raging, can they get a rage back? I think using crits to regenerate rage could turn brutal crit from a ribbon feature into a full blown Cool Feature™ :smallcool:

stoutstien

2021-12-22, 07:25 PM

What if they're already raging, can they get a rage back? I think using crits to regenerate rage could turn brutal crit from a ribbon feature into a full blown Cool Feature™ :smallcool:

It's mid testing ATM. Current no but they can apply rage benefits to that attack if they active it. I might just shift it over to full rage recharge as long as I can prevent the bag of rats issue.

MrCharlie

2021-12-22, 08:24 PM

Classes are about archetypes. They're much less about mechanics.

Barbarians have Rage. If you tried to shove that into a fighter subclass, you'd end up either excising 90% of the interesting parts or making something super OP.

Barbarians epitomize the "super durable, unskilled warrior" archetype. It's an ancient one. And they portray it pretty darn well.

As for something they do that fighters don't--unarmored tanking. For another? They've got a much stronger nature/elemental aspect than fighters. Fighters have the heavy armor tank job (along with paladins).
A class is about melding archetype and mechanics. Otherwise DnD classes would be a list of features telling you what your character did, we wouldn't roll dice, and you'd theater of mind the rest with the help of a DM.

(Which is, in fact, a perfectly legitimate framework for an RPG, but not DnD)

In fact, classes are more about the mechanics than the archetype. The subclass, which we refer to as the archetype a lot, does that. Paladin is a divine warrior by the mechanics, but the archetype defines if it's a protector, guardian of nature, dark knight, or conquering demagogue. The core class establishes the broad strokes at best.

(Some classes do this more than others...Which is my point. Some classes are really archetypes in disguise.)

Fighter is the warrior in a magical world, often the everyman or the dumb muscle, sometimes the knight or dabbler in practical magics. Barbarian is a refinement of this-the dumb muscle up to 11, emotional and reckless, the Id to the ego. But nothing in fighter conflicts with that archetype, and while some fighters take the class in a different direction that's the level of diversity archetypes give.

And...I mean, is the result OP? I don't think that's proven. You're super specialized in one thing and it's not objectively better than the other good fighter archetypes. Further, I don't think you have to excise any aspect of the Barbarian to fit it onto fighter-I can easily chart a pathway to put everything interesting into a fighter archetype with basically no effort. Maybe you nerf something, but I don't think anything goes away.

Unarmored tanking isn't really an archetype. It's a mechanic.

Mastikator

2021-12-22, 08:30 PM

It's mid testing ATM. Current no but they can apply rage benefits to that attack if they active it. I might just shift it over to full rage recharge as long as I can prevent the bag of rats issue.

Had to google "bag of rats issue", lo and behold that's a monster with many heads that I didn't even know existed. Limit it to CR +1? Alternative, if a player attacks a rat to regenerate rage you whack him with a ruler? There must be an obvious reason why those solutions don't work. Either way your "get free rage from crit" definitely rejuvenated my belief that brutal critical can be salvaged

stoutstien

2021-12-23, 05:03 AM

Had to google "bag of rats issue", lo and behold that's a monster with many heads that I didn't even know existed. Limit it to CR +1? Alternative, if a player attacks a rat to regenerate rage you whack him with a ruler? There must be an obvious reason why those solutions don't work. Either way your "get free rage from crit" definitely rejuvenated my belief that brutal critical can be salvaged

It's mostly a design principle issue. I just don't like adding in or changing anything that is worse rule wise or more complicated than what I remove. The majority of time I think it would be fine but I don't want to introduce anything obviously abusable. The three potential solutions I have written down:

-the crit generated rage are separate and can only have X amount at any time.

-the crit generated with crit can only occur if you have no rages remanini

-reverse it. Rages generate when you receive critical hits.

Rukelnikov

2021-12-23, 05:19 AM

It's mostly a design principle issue. I just don't like adding in or changing anything that is worse rule wise or more complicated than what I remove. The majority of time I think it would be fine but I don't want to introduce anything obviously abusable. The three potential solutions I have written down:

-the crit generated rage are separate and can only have X amount at any time.

-the crit generated with crit can only occur if you have no rages remanini

-reverse it. Rages generate when you receive critical hits.

Maybe you could do it like "if you crit while raging you recover the use of this rage", so basically as long as you crit once per rage you can always rage

MrCharlie

2021-12-23, 07:45 AM

stoutstien

2021-12-23, 08:10 AM

Specify that the crit has to be against an enemy, and rely on the DM to rule that rats don't qualify as enemies, even if they are victims.

Probably the best bet.

So far the extra rages with criticals have been the thing the testers have found the most exciting. Close second is rage damage on shoves and grappling. A single die of damage isn't going to do much but it feels on brand.

Thunderous Mojo

2021-12-23, 10:56 AM

Classes are about archetypes. They're much less about mechanics.

Barbarians have Rage.

I read a grand statement about classes being about archetypes...and then immediately your argument is tied to the Rage Mechanic.

Barbarians epitomize the "super durable, unskilled warrior" archetype. It's an ancient one. And they portray it pretty darn well.

Except, the Barbarian class doesn't portray the above archetype.

Most Barbarian subclasses embody the Mystical Warrior motif:

Be it the god blessed Zealot, the Doctor Doolittle Totem Warrior, the Spirit Summoning Necromancy of the Ancestor Barb, the elemental magic of a Storm Herald, the shapechanging power of a Beast Barb, or the Wild Magic of a Wild Magic Barb.

Frenzy is the only Barbarian subclass that is the most straight forward warrior and alas tying the subclass to the Exhaustion mechanic hobbles the effectiveness of the motif in play.

I find the Rage mechanic to be a conceptual limitation of the Barbarian class that needs to either be eliminated or radically re-envisioned.

Tanarii

2021-12-23, 11:13 AM

Quite a lot, especially if your also allow the GWM feat. They are already the top damagers with that feat across an adventuring day.

PhoenixPhyre

2021-12-23, 11:56 AM

I read a grand statement about classes being about archetypes...and then immediately your argument is tied to the Rage Mechanic.

Except, the Barbarian class doesn't portray the above archetype.

Most Barbarian subclasses embody the Mystical Warrior motif:

Be it the god blessed Zealot, the Doctor Doolittle Totem Warrior, the Spirit Summoning Necromancy of the Ancestor Barb, the elemental magic of a Storm Herald, the shapechanging power of a Beast Barb, or the Wild Magic of a Wild Magic Barb.

Frenzy is the only Barbarian subclass that is the most straight forward warrior and alas tying the subclass to the Exhaustion mechanic hobbles the effectiveness of the motif in play.

I find the Rage mechanic to be a conceptual limitation of the Barbarian class that needs to either be eliminated or radically re-envisioned.

There are pure (external?) archetypes and game archetypes. And they sometimes overlap. "The big guy who fights without armor, driven by emotion or long training, wielding a big weapon" is a very strong archetype at both levels. And that's what barbarians have.

All barbarian subclasses tie into the primal, generally through emotion rather than through study. "Rage" isn't being angry (despite the name). It's a connection to the well of primal energy, channeled into the physical. It's a connection to concepts.

This idea reshapes how we see the relationship between fighters and barbarians. Fighters have their mundane-transcending[1] powers via skill and training; they're the martial counterpart to the wizard. Barbarians have their mundane-transcending powers via unconscious, unstudied connection to the world around them. To memories, to elements, to the archetypes embodied by beasts or by zealous faith, to emotions. They're the martial equivalent of the druid. That's a very strong thematic difference. One that collapsing would eradicate.

Personally, I see the classes like this (with progression toward more casting):

Studied: fighter, rogue > artificer > warlock[2] > wizard, bard
Inspired: ?? (zealot barbarian?) > paladin > warlock[2] > cleric, sorcerer[2]
Connected: barbarian > ranger > druid, sorcerer[2]

?? marks a conceptual gap in the model.

Studied get their power through their own efforts dominantly. Inspired are gifted power in return for faith/devotion/sacrifice and channel that other-planar power rather than having power in their own right. Connected are tied to this world, to the primal well of power that surrounds everything. To the spirits, fey, elements. The here and now, compared to the inspired's connection to the outer planes (or the power behind it). Different builds can shade in different direction, but the primary class fiction pushes them in that direction.

[1] No, fighters are not just average joes. They transcend the mundane by level 2 (Action Surge). The way they get there is via training and skill, but they've transcended the normal, as have all PCs.
[2] can fit into several, depending on specific concept.

Dienekes

2021-12-23, 12:00 PM

Bacon Elemental

2021-12-23, 01:18 PM

There are other downsides to taking hits, even if you halve the damage. To list a few examples from looking at CR 2 monsters...

Ankhegs grapple and deal acid damage.

Carrion Crawlers trigger save against paralysis.

Darkling Elders deal extra damage if they have advantage.

Duergar Kavalarchi trigger strider attacks when they hit.

Ettercaps trigger poison saves when they hit and deal poison damage.

Gelatinous cubes deal pure acid damage.

Ghast's trigger save against paralysis.

...The list goes on. I've also not included 6 enemies that deal elemental rider damage, like every dragon wyrmling, or Azers.

Maybe CR 2 is a particularly bad example, but from that list it seems that there is about a 50% chance that, if it hits you, a monster will

1. Grapple you. Maybe restrain you.
2. Deal elemental damage, either entirely or partially.
3. Poison you.
4. Trigger a save against some godawful condition.

And I'm not getting into what happens if you include spellcasters, given that they tend to deal elemental or rarer damage types when they choose to attack.

Some of these are reasonably esoteric enemies, but something as simple as a Ghast triggers paralysis saves-and even if a Barbarian has a decent chance of making any one of them, they will eventually get paralyzed. Which ends their rage within a round. Which gets them killed.

So while it might be true that low CR enemies are mostly raw damage, once you get into anything actually threatening reckless attack becomes a real gamble. It doesn't have to be big bad material or anything-just significant numbers of threatening minions, or a low-level ringleader style foe.

I guess anecdotes aren't all that helpful but... I've been playing D&D 5e for 5 years, low level campaigns, high level campaigns, zero-to-hero campaigns, and none of these enemies have ever come up. Not once!

I don't know if I'm some weird outlier, but "There's an obscure enemy in the MM that GMs dont use because they dont fit with the campaigns anyone actually runs" seems like a poor argument for "As soon as you're out of the baby levels you'll get save or sucked to death"

Valmark

2021-12-23, 01:43 PM

Thunderous Mojo

2021-12-23, 04:40 PM

All barbarian subclasses tie into the primal, generally through emotion rather than through study. "Rage" isn't being angry (despite the name). It's a connection to the well of primal energy, channeled into the physical. It's a connection to concepts..

That is a nice idea, but many classes can be 'emotion' themed....especially the Charisma casters. A Blade Bard can more better represent a Sufi-like sword dancer than the Barbarian subclasses, in my opinion.

More importantly, why lock the Barbarian out from their skills having been acquired through study and training?

I had a player skin rage as a meditative trance, on their Zealot Barbarian that was played as a cultured Temple Defender, a Sohei, of the embodied goddess of Magic.
I like your ideas P.P...but there are many varied ways to view the class.

It's frankly kind of odd that WotC has only focused on various magical archetypes since the PHB and certain subclasses that have mechanics that align directly on top of the barbarians (Rune Knight) weren't given to them. I think they just think that Berserker represents all mundane Barbarians, and are done with it. Sort of how originally all mundane Fighters were supposed to be encompassed with Champion and Battlemaster before they walked back on that concept a bit.

Yeah...I suspect the small group of 5e Designers, do not play Barbarians much...or feel their hands are tied via the existing structure of the class.

I like how 4e D&D handled the 'Primal' themed classes. The Seeker and the Warden classes, were interesting to me. Alas, the Warden in 5e is an Ancients Paladin.

PhoenixPhyre

2021-12-23, 04:52 PM

That is a nice idea, but many classes can be 'emotion' themed....especially the Charisma casters. A Blade Bard can more better represent a Sufi-like sword dancer than the Barbarian subclasses, in my opinion.

More importantly, why lock the Barbarian out from their skills having been acquired through study and training?

I had a player skin rage as a meditative trance, on their Zealot Barbarian that was played as a cultured Temple Defender, a Sohei, of the embodied goddess of Magic.
I like your ideas P.P...but there are many varied ways to view the class.

The fact that you can change the thematics doesn't change what the thematics are. "Refluffing" is houseruling, just like a change to mechanics. Theme and "fluff" are just as much rules as mechanics are. In fact, in my eyes they're even more important and harder to change reliably, because thematics affect how they interact with the setting, while mechanics are game-level. Mechanics reflect theme, not vice versa, because they're effect and cause, at least understood properly.

I'm looking at what the barbarian class, as presented, claims to be. What its presented class fiction is. Not what you could houserule it to be. By its own terms, the barbarian is centered around that connection to the primal via Rage (primarily), although it manifests in different ways. But Rage =/= anger. In fact, that disjunction is explicitly in the class description. Sure, anger is an easy way for those inclined down this path to channel their connection without thinking (hence why the Berserker is the "fundamental" archetype presented in the SRD); that's where the name comes from. But Rage is merely channeling primal energy through oneself. Control must be learned, but cannot be taught. That's the distinction--you can have an academy for fighters (and wizards). You can't have an academy for barbarians (or sorcerers). Or at least if you do, you can't turn someone without that fundamental property into one.

That's the big thematic difference; barbarians are (by their nature) to fighters as sorcerers are to wizards.

CTurbo

2021-12-23, 07:21 PM

Leon

2021-12-23, 08:58 PM

More things should scale off Prof Bonus in general

JLandan

2021-12-24, 01:59 PM

Yeah I'd give it the same scaling as prof bonus, but only scales with barb levels. It's only a minor buff - maxes out at +6 instead of +4 - but it's somethin', and gives them a slightly earlier boost too.

If it scaled by prof. bonus, a high level character could take a one level dip in Barbarian and gain the scaled up damage. Linking it to class levels would be wiser.

MrCharlie

2021-12-24, 03:39 PM

I guess anecdotes aren't all that helpful but... I've been playing D&D 5e for 5 years, low level campaigns, high level campaigns, zero-to-hero campaigns, and none of these enemies have ever come up. Not once!

I don't know if I'm some weird outlier, but "There's an obscure enemy in the MM that GMs dont use because they dont fit with the campaigns anyone actually runs" seems like a poor argument for "As soon as you're out of the baby levels you'll get save or sucked to death"
And in my experience, most groups don't have threatening combats. Enemies attacking the players with basic weapon attacks is about the worst way to fight player characters in the game. Most classes have excellent AC relative to monsters, good ways to mitigate attacks or damage from attacks that get through, and ways to revive allies from 0 or ways to recover from damage after combat.

I've been playing 5e since its release. I have almost never seen a character die to monsters that didn't impose a save, or have a powerful rider on their attacks. I've seen a lot of combats go poorly for DnD parties, and almost universally the trigger was a failed save or someone getting yoinked out of position by a grapple or some similar effect.

The one exception was a kobold death ball at level 1. I don't count it because...c'mon, its level 1.

This isn't to say you'd have needed to encounter one of these enemies in particular for it to be relevant, but...Most combats that don't either have something that triggers a save either directly or on hit are, honestly, not threatening in any way. You could resolve the typical goblin slaughter by asking everyone to describe how they massacre the goblins and expend abilities appropriately, then randomize some HP damage on people.

stoutstien

2021-12-24, 06:26 PM

Do Barbarian's need a 3rd attack? This is what I think.

I think ALL the martials except maybe the Rogue need 1 more attack. I can see a case for the Paladin not getting a 3rd attack because that class is stacked with features and really doesn't need anything else, but the Barbarian, Monk, and Ranger definitely need a 3rd attack IMO. If this is too close to stepping on the Fighter's toes, then give them a 5th attack.

The popular opinion is that martials end up being pretty far behind the casters at higher levels so may as well let them do more damage. It also helps separate them from the "gish" subclasses like Bladesinger, Valor Bard, and Bladelock which I like.

I also think the bonus Rage damage should be a bit more. I've seen tables just use Proficiency bonus which is a bit of a boost at mid-high levels, and I've also seen 1d4,2d4,3d4, and 4d4 bonuses.

I know the 5e Barb's main thing is to be as tanky as possible, but I actually like the Barbarian being the top dog DPR king of the martials. They don't have much more to offer the party in other pillars of the game whereas at the the Fighter can customize to match nearly everything outside of combat with the extra ASIs.

In a lot of ways the barbarian fills the exact opposite niche as the Monk even though there end goals are quite similar. They are self reliant damage dealers that keep pressure on priority targets and can safely eat (different types) damage and effects to lessen resource drains spikes. Nether are tanking in regards of controlling the flow of mitigation towards themselves because they actively dissuade that angle by putting out loads of signals to show it's mostly a waste of time. Some subclasses are exceptions like AG barbs.

Neither will wow you with damage spikes or even DPR but they usually are constantly with whittling away at the enemies in, hopefully, a favorable manner. They can dish it out with taking relatively little in return. As a DM I see more impact from a monk who can ration their ki or barbarian with a shield than the GWM/PAM or SS spammer.