Con Barbarian Discussion

[Frogreaver]

What is a Con Barbarian? It's a Barbarian that focuses on Con over Str.
Isn't Str the better option? That's the conventional wisdom. I think there's some very compelling reasons to consider focusing Con over Str.

I'll start with the reason I first chose to. I was the only melee character in a party full of casters and ranged characters.
What did I learn from this experience? That Con Barbarians work great and that there are other good reasons to play a Con Barbarian (I list them below).


Grappling. While Str improves your chance to grapple, Con improves your ability to stand toe to toe with whatever you just grappled. It also feels better to use an attack to grapple when you haven't invested your ASI resources into increasing damage
Roleplay. Knowing you have rage damage reduction, decent AC and extremely high hp buffer opens up the option of playing a character that feels impervious to danger because of his toughness and you have the mechanics to really back that up. This can really change your decision making and your risk analysis for when to risk 'fun actions' rather than optimal actions. It can be quite freeing.
Str Boosting Magic Items. Seriously, there are alot of different ones of these. So there's a decent chance you come across some and unlike an amulet of constitution, fewer characters can really make use of them.
Reckless attack. You can reckless attack more often when you have higher survivability. In practice this can help bring your damage output closer in alignment with a Str Barbarian who may be reckless attacking a bit less due to the lower survivability. *If you so chose.


Then there are some minor considerations around playing a Con Barbarian.


Ranged Combat. While you aren't actually better than a Str based Barbarian when using a bow, because your dex and str are close you don't feel like you are losing nearly as much when you need to resort to using a bow.
Con Save bonus. Failed Con saves can have some nasty effects and deal very high damage.
Hit Dice Improvement. Often overlooked, but higher Con also improves your hit dice which helps with your adventuring day survivability.
Unarmored Defense. Your unarmored defense becomes as good as armor and possibly better. Not needing armor equipped offers a variety of benefits for many scenarios.


Thoughts?

[Witty Username]

[LIST]
Grappling. While Str improves your chance to grapple, Con improves your ability to stand toe to toe with whatever you just grappled. It also feels better to use an attack to grapple when you haven't invested your ASI resources into increasing damage
Roleplay. Knowing you have rage damage reduction, decent AC and extremely high hp buffer opens up the option of playing a character that feels impervious to danger because of his toughness and you have the mechanics to really back that up. This can really change your decision making and your risk analysis for when to risk 'fun actions' rather than optimal actions. It can be quite freeing.


I feel like these two points are better handled by a Ranger with a similar build. Expertise in Athletics gives a much better grapple, defensive fighting style and half-plate beats out the barbarians AC, and Absorb elements and goodberry will bolster your survivability in similar ways to rage.

It also has a side benefit of giving a spread of good Dex and decent Con saves, which will be good against a number of damage dealing effects.

[Frogreaver]

I feel like these two points are better handled by a Ranger with a similar build. Expertise in Athletics gives a much better grapple,

Feat for that is available to anyone and also boosts con by +1.


defensive fighting style and half-plate beats out the barbarians AC, and Absorb elements and goodberry will bolster your survivability in similar ways to rage.

None of that is close to rage in terms of survivability.


It also has a side benefit of giving a spread of good Dex and decent Con saves, which will be good against a number of damage dealing effects.

Barbarians get advantage on most dex saves via Danger Sense. Also, general consensus is Con saves are much more important than dex saves. There's a reason no one takes resilient: dex.

[Witty Username]

None of that is close to rage in terms of survivability.

Rage, only protects from non-magical BSP damage, falls off if you can't make an attack or take damage, uses a bonus action and is limited in uses per long rest. Absorb elements only lasts 1 round but protects from generally higher damage effects, and uses a reaction, and keys off of spell slots so you have more potential uses. It depends what you regularly encounter but Absorb elements is very comparable to rage in terms of defensive benefits.


Feat for that is available to anyone and also boosts con by +1.



Barbarians get advantage on most dex saves via Danger Sense. Also, general consensus is Con saves are much more important than dex saves. There's a reason no one takes resilient: dex.
These points refute eachother as Ranger can take resilient Con for similar gains.

[Frogreaver]

Rage, only protects from non-magical BSP damage, falls off if you can't make an attack or take damage, uses a bonus action and is limited in uses per long rest.

Yes, there's always limitations. Speaking of limitations I see you ignored all the ones for the ranger abilities. (Like needing a free hand to cast absorb elements - which you won't have while grappling and attacking. Like having extremely limited number of spell slots most of the game and already wanting to split them between goodberries and absorb elements and who knows what else).


Absorb elements only lasts 1 round but protects from generally higher damage effects, and uses a reaction, and keys off of spell slots so you have more potential uses. It depends what you regularly encounter but Absorb elements is very comparable to rage in terms of defensive benefits.

Like, you must be joking right?


These points refute eachother as Ranger can take resilient Con for similar gains.

Then you don't get resilient wisdom later...

[Witty Username]

Here let me use an example:
Take a Young Red Dragon.
Both the barbarian and ranger have applicable defenses to this fight, at different times. the barbarian has rage that can protect from the claw attacks and the bite( Mostly) but even the full multiattack has an average damage of 46, the breath weapon has an average damage of 56. Absorb elements will block damage from the breath weapon. This means that the 1 round of Absorb elements is getting more value than 1 round of rage.
Rage will win out after the 3rd round of combat, since it can block multiple rounds of multiattack. There is concern of the dragon rolling a recharge on its breath weapon before combat ends, which will throw a wrench into this though. And the dragon can prioritize secondary targets to reduce the effectiveness of rage. The play around option for ranger involves not using their breath weapon, which the rest of the party probably appreciates.
Complications:
This obviously doesn't apply if you don't encounter elemental damage. If you fight enemies that regularly use mundane damage then obviously barbarian will be better. That being said, enemies like fire elemental exist which ignore the defensive benefits of rage entirely.
Bear totem Barbarians get both, so they need not apply to any of this.

I am not saying that Absorb elements is better, just that it serves a similar purpose and has benefits over rage depending on the particular case.

[Frogreaver]

Here let me use an example:
Take a Young Red Dragon.
Both the barbarian and ranger have applicable defenses to this fight, at different times. the barbarian has rage that can protect from the claw attacks and the bite( Mostly) but even the full multiattack has an average damage of 46, the breath weapon has an average damage of 56. Absorb elements will block damage from the breath weapon. This means that the 1 round of Absorb elements is getting more value than 1 round of rage.
Rage will win out after the 3rd round of combat, since it can block multiple rounds of multiattack. There is concern of the dragon rolling a recharge on its breath weapon before combat ends, which will throw a wrench into this though. And the dragon can prioritize secondary targets to reduce the effectiveness of rage. The play around option for ranger involves not using their breath weapon, which the rest of the party probably appreciates.
Complications:
This obviously doesn't apply if you don't encounter elemental damage. If you fight enemies that regularly use mundane damage then obviously barbarian will be better. That being said, enemies like fire elemental exist which ignore the defensive benefits of rage entirely.
Bear totem Barbarians get both, so they need not apply to any of this.

Yes, now how many enemies have high damage elemental attacks like a breath attack? Not that many. And how many have non-magical BPS attacks? Nearly all.


I am not saying that Absorb elements is better, just that it serves a similar purpose and has benefits over rage depending on the particular case.

This quote is a much weaker claim compared to the relevant part of your first post (below). See the difference?


Absorb elements and goodberry will bolster your survivability in similar ways to rage.

[Witty Username]

How does "Bolster your survivability in similar ways" imply better than?

As for elemental damage, I suppose it depends, my playgroup tends to like things like demons, dragons, wizards and such. and stuff tends to start having magical damage fairly consistently after awhile. So that may bias me a bit.

[Frogreaver]

How does "Bolster your survivability in similar ways" imply better than?

As for elemental damage, I suppose it depends, my playgroup tends to like things like demons, dragons, wizards and such. and stuff tends to start having magical damage fairly consistently after awhile. So that may bias me a bit.

Makes sense. I think my group does a pretty good mix. In your game I would probably do the Bear Totem Barbarian.

[Contrast]

Barbarians get advantage on most dex saves via Danger Sense. Also, general consensus is Con saves are much more important than dex saves. There's a reason no one takes resilient: dex.

People take Res Con for maintaining concentration on spells, not because of any wider assessment of the risk of Con saves. If I was playing a straight fighter and was given the opportunity to swap my con save prof for dex save prof, I'd take that deal.


As to your more general point - a lot depends how much your DM plays on the Combat As Sport or Combat As War metric. Will they go out of their way to target the character you're trying to make difficult to kill? Or if you make yourself difficult to kill will the enemies simply be less likely to try to kill you and go focus on all the other squishier party members?

Speaking personally I played a small sized Ancestral Guardians barbarian and simply found that my damage output was so anemic that even with the downsides of attacking other people the DM simply had no incentive to attack me over them - further boosting my defences was the last thing I wanted.

Whenever I have played a barbarian my issue has never been one that an extra 10-20HP would have solved.

[JNAProductions]

Rage resists ALL bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage.

It doesn’t care if it’s magic.

[Amechra]

I find it fascinating that in this, the thread discussing whether or not Barbarians should pump up Strength or Constitution first, the first comment was about Rangers.

That said, I'm not necessarily sure I buy most of your reasoning, Frogreaver, other than maybe the bit about stat-improving magic items (because, hey, if you know that your DM is going to give you Gauntlets of Ogre Power, raising Strength is a sucker's bet).

I dunno, I just don't find the idea that picking up 4 extra HP at 4th level is a noticeable increase in durability all that convincing.

[Frogreaver]

I find it fascinating that in this, the thread discussing whether or not Barbarians should pump up Strength or Constitution first, the first comment was about Rangers.

I thought the same.


That said, I'm not necessarily sure I buy most of your reasoning, Frogreaver, other than maybe the bit about stat-improving magic items (because, hey, if you know that your DM is going to give you Gauntlets of Ogre Power, raising Strength is a sucker's bet).


Even if you don’t know it’s going to be dropped 100% it’s still a gamble you are probably pretty safe to take.


I dunno, I just don't find the idea that picking up 4 extra HP at 4th level is a noticeable increase in durability all that convincing.

I’d start by saying, +1 attack and +1 damage isn’t a noticeable increase in combat damage either.

So IMO the bar we are trying to clear isn’t really all that high. Also, as previously mentioned, it’s not just +4 hp. Its +1 con saves (important save). Its +4 healing from hit dice. That hp may also have damage resistance behind it making it go a lot further - more like 8 hp or 16 ho due to hit dice healing.

[Amechra]

I’d start by saying, +1 attack and +1 damage isn’t a noticeable increase in combat damage either.

I would disagree with that — thanks to how bounded accuracy works, bonuses to hit are a multiplicative boost to damage output. On top of that, you're applying that bonus hit/damage to every attack you make. Over the course of a fight, that +1 to hit/damage is going to apply 2-3 times per round.

Imagine the following scenario (numbers chosen for niceness, mostly):

You have two 5th level, greatsword-wielding Barbarians. One of them, Connie, has Strength 16 and Constitution 18, while the other, Steve, has Strength 18 and Constitution 16. They both have AC 16.

They each get into a one-on-one fight with a Veteran (AC 17). Connie has a 50% chance to hit the Veteran, and deals 10 damage per hit — she deals 10 damage per round, and will take the Veteran out in 6 turns. Meanwhile, Steve has a 55% chance to hit, and deals 11 damage per hit — this comes out to 12.1 damage per round, enough to take out the Veteran in 5 turns.

The Veteran has a +5 to hit, and so has a 50% chance to hit either of them. As a result, the Veteran can be expected to deal 10.25 damage per round. If the Barbarians won initiative, this means that the Veteran dealt 41 damage to Steve and 51.25 damage to Connie — Steve's increased damage effectively gave him twice the number of HP that Connie's boosted Constitution did, simply because he took less damage from his opponent.

[Frogreaver]

I would disagree with that — thanks to how bounded accuracy works, bonuses to hit are a multiplicative boost to damage output. On top of that, you're applying that bonus hit/damage to every attack you make. Over the course of a fight, that +1 to hit/damage is going to apply 2-3 times per round.

Imagine the following scenario (numbers chosen for niceness, mostly):

You have two 5th level, greatsword-wielding Barbarians. One of them, Connie, has Strength 16 and Constitution 18, while the other, Steve, has Strength 18 and Constitution 16. They both have AC 16.

They each get into a one-on-one fight with a Veteran (AC 17). Connie has a 50% chance to hit the Veteran, and deals 10 damage per hit — she deals 10 damage per round, and will take the Veteran out in 6 turns. Meanwhile, Steve has a 55% chance to hit, and deals 11 damage per hit — this comes out to 12.1 damage per round, enough to take out the Veteran in 5 turns.

The Veteran has a +5 to hit, and so has a 50% chance to hit either of them. As a result, the Veteran can be expected to deal 10.25 damage per round. If the Barbarians won initiative, this means that the Veteran dealt 41 damage to Steve and 51.25 damage to Connie — Steve's increased damage effectively gave him twice the number of HP that Connie's boosted Constitution did, simply because he took less damage from his opponent.

A few thoughts.

1 on 1 fights aren't really how D&D is played. If we look at party dynamics the barbarian with +1 strength bonus only increases the parties overall damage by a tiny percent over the barbarian with a +1 con bonus. When that gets factored, you find enemies don't really die 20% faster because the barbarian raised his damage by 20% (estimate for +1 str bonus). Instead it's more like the +1 str bonus raised the parties damage by 5% or so. Meaning the enemies are dying 5% faster instead of 20% faster.

Now consider an alternate tactic with a party. Grapple the enemy and let everyone attack it with ranged attacks while you take the dodge action. Party damage is decreased by around 25% while enemy damage is decreased by 50%.

IMO. The extra hp tends to be at least as valuable if not more valuable in the party + grapple scenario than the extra strength.

*Note your math is off a bit as well. You left off rage damage bonus. Also, D&D damage values aren't discrete chunks but variable ranges which means fractional rounds are acceptable. With Rage the average rounds to 0 becomes 55/12 = 4.583 for the Con Barb. 55/14.3 = 3.84 for the Str Barb. You save only 0.737 rounds * DPR of enemy = 7.6 additional Damage taken (in the 1 on 1 scenario) or 3.8 hp lost if raging (actually less because of the round down function)

[strangebloke]

"roleplay" is the only valid thing you list here, but that can also be used to justify pumping intelligence.

To get into everything else: Barbarians are one of the strongest class in the game at mitigating HP damage, which is compensated for by their (strong) offensive abilities requiring risky play. You have loads of HP and good AC and resistance to most damage until high level, but you also are dependent on things like reckless attack to boost your damage and stay competitive on that front. So ultimately offense and defense are the same thing, because reckless allow you to trade excess defense for offense. You are aware of this, and mention the ability to exchange this increased survivability for more offense.

The issue is, well. Very simply and mathematically, strength gives you more.

The 18 Con barb will have 4 more HP at level 4 relative to a 16 Con Barbarian. Their totals are going to be 49 and 45 total, or about a 10% difference. That's marginal. Basically one hit per encounter or 2 over the course of a day.

Conversely, consider the damage. A 50% hit rate with 16 STR turns into 55% hit rate with 18 STR, which is a 10% increase by itself. 1d6+3+2=8.5 turns into 1d6+4+2=9.5, which is a 12% increase. Together, these yield a 23% damage increase. GWM/PAM builds benefit from this kind of analysis even more. Higher strength means you need to use reckless less to keep up in damage, which boosts your total survivability. Or you can use reckless all the time regardless to deal EVEN MORE damage and kill your enemy early, avoiding damage in that way.

Moreover, effects that increase HP are generally much easier to come by than features that increase attack/damage directly. Compare aid, which gives +5 HP to the whole party for 8 hours, to magic weapon, which gives +1 to attack/damage to one person for a single hour at the cost of concentration. Or think about Inspiring Leader, or Healer, or any number of other HP gain abilities. They're generally very cheap relative to damage/attack boosts. Sure, there are a few more instances of STR-boosting items than CON-boosting items, but that's only a small part of the whole.

Unarmored AC isn't a useful ability except for flavor or niche builds (where having higher CON doesn't matter anyway). Getting to the point where its better than armor requires massive stat allocations that do very little for your character's holistic strength. Sure, having 18 AC while naked because you have 20 CON and 16 DEX feels good and people should try it out, but do this is going to lead to you starting with low strength or dumping WIS or something similar, which is going to have crippling side effects.

TL;DR, investing in CON over STR is fine because barbarians are less stat-dependent on the whole compared with fighters and paladins, but investing in STR pretty clearly gives you more mileage overall.

[Dr.Samurai]

I appreciate the point regarding the extra healing on Hit Dice with increased Constitution, because it's not something that comes to mind immediately when I think about it. Could be because our DM awards all Hit Dice back on a Long Rest, so everyone is generally topped off each night. But it is a good point.

That said, it seems to me that so much of what a barbarian does revolves around Strength attacks and Athletics checks that boosting your Strength before Constitution seems the way to go.

I agree with Frogreaver that you can play a Con-first Barbarian. It's not like you're going to miss on every attack or anything, especially with Reckless Attack. But I am not really convinced by most of the points outlined in the OP. I do think the minor considerations are probably stronger than the first list of good reasons, but it reads more as a list of benefits from improving Con more than a reason to prioritize it over Strength.

[Frogreaver]

I appreciate the point regarding the extra healing on Hit Dice with increased Constitution, because it's not something that comes to mind immediately when I think about it. Could be because our DM awards all Hit Dice back on a Long Rest, so everyone is generally topped off each night. But it is a good point.

Thanks


That said, it seems to me that so much of what a barbarian does revolves around Strength attacks and Athletics checks that boosting your Strength before Constitution seems the way to go.

I think both are comparable.


I agree with Frogreaver that you can play a Con-first Barbarian. It's not like you're going to miss on every attack or anything, especially with Reckless Attack. But I am not really convinced by most of the points outlined in the OP. I do think the minor considerations are probably stronger than the first list of good reasons, but it reads more as a list of benefits from improving Con more than a reason to prioritize it over Strength.

You agree that that the Con Barb is viable. You even agree there's some solid points. At the end of the day my position that the Con Barb and the Str Barb are roughly equivalent and your position that the Str Barb is just slightly stronger are pretty close.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think if you have a 16 Strength and want to boost Constitution before Strength, it will work. You have Reckless Attack for more accuracy and Advantage on Strength checks and saving throws.

I personally would prioritize Strength because I want to do everything I can to make sure my attacks land, and my grabs/shoves hit. I also want to resist all the effects that move me away from my target or get me grabbed/restrained instead, etc.

[Contrast]

1 on 1 fights aren't really how D&D is played. If we look at party dynamics the barbarian with +1 strength bonus only increases the parties overall damage by a tiny percent over the barbarian with a +1 con bonus. When that gets factored, you find enemies don't really die 20% faster because the barbarian raised his damage by 20% (estimate for +1 str bonus). Instead it's more like the +1 str bonus raised the parties damage by 5% or so. Meaning the enemies are dying 5% faster instead of 20% faster.

Now consider an alternate tactic with a party. Grapple the enemy and let everyone attack it with ranged attacks while you take the dodge action. Party damage is decreased by around 25% while enemy damage is decreased by 50%.

I feel like you're committing the exact thing you're trying to address in Amechra's example.

Party damage isn't decreased by 50% because enemies usually don't attack the party 1 at a time. By grappling you're giving up a hand so no GWM so our potential damage output is down very dramatically compared to not grappling and if we assume the party are facing equal numbers we're doing nothing to interfere with the other 3 people so by that metric incoming damage is down more like 12.5%, not 50%...and thats assuming someone wouldn't have been attacking us in the first place regardless. Obviously this is all white room theory crafting and I don't know if its really helping us get anywhere productive though.

At the end of the day it feels like your experience is that you were able to successfully focus enemy attention on your barbarian so you found more toughness desirable. My experience of playing a barbarian is that the problem is convincing enemies to target you at all - you want more damage rather than more defence so that the enemy feel compelled to try and stop you (and if they don't, hey, you're doing damage, that's fine too). I suspect these differences have very little to do with build choices and a lot to do with table variance/ettiquette.

Basically the point I'm trying to make here is that Reckless Attack is arguably the 'better' tanking skill than Rage because Rage discourages enemies from attacking you whereas Reckless Attack makes you more threatening and more vulnerable which is a double whammy of things that will boost your target priority in the enemies eyes. Being more defensive makes you a less attractive target (which means you're making your allies more attractive targets).

[Frogreaver]

At the end of the day it feels like your experience is that you were able to successfully focus enemy attention on your barbarian so you found more toughness desirable. My experience of playing a barbarian is that the problem is convincing enemies to target you at all - you want more damage rather than more defence so that the enemy feel compelled to try and stop you (and if they don't, hey, you're doing damage, that's fine too). I suspect these differences have very little to do with build choices and a lot to do with table variance/ettiquette.

Basically the point I'm trying to make here is that Reckless Attack is arguably the 'better' tanking skill than Rage because Rage discourages enemies from attacking you whereas Reckless Attack makes you more threatening and more vulnerable which is a double whammy of things that will boost your target priority in the enemies eyes. Being more defensive makes you a less attractive target (which means you're making your allies more attractive targets).

I'm responding to this part first as it's what I feel is the more important.

If you want to take hits you want multiple methods to incentivize them.
1. Have the team move such that for some enemies you are the only thing they can attack next turn
2. Grapple
3. Threaten with OA's
4. Reckless Attack to lower your defenses and increase your offense
5. Insult them

As long as the DM is playing enemies to form as opposed to every enemy being an all knowing tactician you will incentivize plenty to attack you. I think this approach is how the typical game is ran. Some enemies are dumb. Some are smart. Most are somewhat inbetween. So I don't believe it has much to do with table variance/etiquitte. I think it has more to do with looking at white room numbers for a single character and comparing that character individually to version 2.0 of itself instead of thinking of the party as a unit and looking at party capabilities.


I feel like you're committing the exact thing you're trying to address in Amechra's example.

Party damage isn't decreased by 50% because enemies usually don't attack the party 1 at a time.

In the specific case of the party vs 1 enemy - a barbarian grappling and dodging reduces party damage by about 50% (maybe even more if rage is being used).

Obviously different scenarios with different numbers of enemies will play differently. But 1 enemy encounters aren't an uncommon thing. 1v1 scenarios are exceedingly rare - which was Amechra's example.


By grappling you're giving up a hand so no GWM so our potential damage output is down very dramatically compared to not grappling

Bringing GWM into this means the question is really about whether it's better to do damage or grapple. IMO that really depends on the exact scenario.


and if we assume the party are facing equal numbers we're doing nothing to interfere with the other 3 people so by that metric incoming damage is down more like 12.5%, not 50%...and thats assuming someone wouldn't have been attacking us in the first place regardless. Obviously this is all white room theory crafting and I don't know if its really helping us get anywhere productive though.

If you want to get somewhere, just acknowledge that grappling and dodging is sometimes better than attacking. Once we've crossed that bridge the rest gets pretty easy.

[tokek]

I feel like this is a half-decent idea but that it works best if you are rolling for stats and get some slightly above average rolls

The reason for which is that if you can get both your Dex and Con pretty good then your AC will start to outstrip likely armor options and then you have both better AC and better HP as benefits of the build. You also save gold that would have gone on armor upgrades.

With standard array or points buy you don't get an AC better than you can buy from the blacksmith until later in the game, later than I would really be concerned with if I'm honest.

The slight issue I have with this? A Rune Knight probably does the Con-first grappler build at least as well and they have other clear positive benefits from pushing their Con (the Rune power DC is based on Con modifier). They also get heavy armor so you can dump Dex if needed.

[Tanarii]

Barbarians should always focus on Con over Str. Or at least as much as.

[stoutstien]

I'm partial to the dex>con>str set up for barbarian. 14 is plenty for grapple/shove if that's your goal seeing how you'd probably grab experience somewhere.

[Frogreaver]

I'm partial to the dex>con>str set up for barbarian. 14 is plenty for grapple/shove if that's your goal seeing how you'd probably grab experience somewhere.

Yea. I think a good case can be made for dex as well. Similar to con but boosts imitative, stealth and ranged combat.

Initiative can be very important for a barbarian to get rage up before too many attacks come at him.

ranged combat is something conventional barbarians really suffer at.

[stoutstien]

Yea. I think a good case can be made for dex as well. Similar to con but boosts imitative, stealth and ranged combat.

Initiative can be very important for a barbarian to get rage up before too many attacks come at him.

ranged combat is something conventional barbarians really suffer at.

I think barbarian in general suffer from getting hung up trying to be conventional and the not so subtle shove a few of the features have don't help the situation.

[Bosh]

The main issue with a Con barb is the only barbarian class feature that specifically needs Con (the unarmored AC) works best if you also have high Dex and too many barbarian class features make you want to prioritize Str over Dex to make it worthwhile to have both high Con AND Dex for most builds.

What I'd do with a high Con barbarian is multiclass into rogue. A single level dip in Barbarian gives a high Con rogue a huge amount of additional survivability. Rogue with a dip in Barb is a lot of fun if you've ever wanted to play the "incredibly brave swashbuckler who laughs in the face of danger!" archetype but never had the AC or HPs as a rogue to pull that off.

Three can grabbing ancestral guardians can also work well with rogue, you can reflavor the ancestral guardian's tanking ability as insulting everyone and making them want to target you.

[Witty Username]

I find it fascinating that in this, the thread discussing whether or not Barbarians should pump up Strength or Constitution first, the first comment was about Rangers.

I will give that is likely because my brain is in needs to be retuned. At some point a while back I had been in the tank for a bit doing a homebrew project and the brain had a moment where it went "hey dude, have you ever noticed that the Barbarian and Ranger are pretty similar. They are both naturish themed martial characters, similar armor set ups, and if you use the same weapon types then you even have the play stuff of needing to work not having a proper fighting style." It has been an issue ever since, I am hoping it will resolve itself after I get a couple weeks not needing to do session planning.

[BerzerkerUnit]

Rage, only protects from non-magical BSP damage, falls off if you can't make an attack or take damage, uses a bonus action and is limited in uses per long rest. Absorb elements only lasts 1 round but protects from generally higher damage effects, and uses a reaction, and keys off of spell slots so you have more potential uses. It depends what you regularly encounter but Absorb elements is very comparable to rage in terms of defensive benefits.



These points refute eachother as Ranger can take resilient Con for similar gains.

If it hasn’t been mentioned, to my knowledge there’s nothing in the rage description indicating it doesn’t reduce magical BSP or is in anyway bypassed.

[strangebloke]

I'm partial to the dex>con>str set up for barbarian. 14 is plenty for grapple/shove if that's your goal seeing how you'd probably grab experience somewhere.

I don't really follow, personally. You need to invest a lot to make unarmored AC better than armor, and I can't really see that its ever worth it, even with all the nice side effects that Dex has. And yeah, your damage as a barbarian is always keyed off strength. If you're really tough but not very high damage, it kind of just feels like the enemies will target everyone else who's more threatening and fragile.

Overall though I don't see barbarians as that stat dependent. Typically I put 16 in STR and 14 in DEX/CON/WIS and then forget about stats to go after feats.That's enough to get you 16/17 AC without a shield, or 18/19 with a shield, you'll get 9 hp a level on average, and with reckless (when you need it) its not like you won't be able to hit high AC.


If it hasn’t been mentioned, to my knowledge there’s nothing in the rage description indicating it doesn’t reduce magical BSP or is in anyway bypassed.

It's been mentioned and yeah.

Now, resistance to BSP does drop off to an extent as the game goes on because enemies proportionally deal less BSP and deal more... radiant or thunder or whatever, but this effect only really starts making itself known relatively late in T2 when most campaigns are about to end, and even then danger sense and high hp are able to mitigate a lot of the worst of it. Then too depending on your race and the type of campaign, it might not even be that bad. An Infernal Constitution Tieflings come to mind, as do Dwarfs and Goliaths.

Either way though you already have some of the highest HP in the game and one of the strongest defensive features, I don't really follow the logic that says "getting more HP is the most important thing." If you want to shore up defenses I would argue lucky or resilient Wisdom is a lot better for a barbarian.

[Frogreaver]

The main issue with a Con barb is the only barbarian class feature that specifically needs Con (the unarmored AC) works best if you also have high Dex and too many barbarian class features make you want to prioritize Str over Dex to make it worthwhile to have both high Con AND Dex for most builds.

What I'd do with a high Con barbarian is multiclass into rogue. A single level dip in Barbarian gives a high Con rogue a huge amount of additional survivability. Rogue with a dip in Barb is a lot of fun if you've ever wanted to play the "incredibly brave swashbuckler who laughs in the face of danger!" archetype but never had the AC or HPs as a rogue to pull that off.

Three can grabbing ancestral guardians can also work well with rogue, you can reflavor the ancestral guardian's tanking ability as insulting everyone and making them want to target you.

Rage damage reduction technically needs hp to work.

And I also 2nd the notion about Barbarian Rogues. There’s a variety of level splits they are very effective at.

[stoutstien]

I don't really follow, personally. You need to invest a lot to make unarmored AC better than armor, and I can't really see that its ever worth it, even with all the nice side effects that Dex has. And yeah, your damage as a barbarian is always keyed off strength. If you're really tough but not very high damage, it kind of just feels like the enemies will target everyone else who's more threatening and fragile.

Overall though I don't see barbarians as that stat dependent. Typically I put 16 in STR and 14 in DEX/CON/WIS and then forget about stats to go after feats.That's enough to get you 16/17 AC without a shield, or 18/19 with a shield, you'll get 9 hp a level on average, and with reckless (when you need it) its not like you won't be able to hit high AC.



It's been mentioned and yeah.

Now, resistance to BSP does drop off to an extent as the game goes on because enemies proportionally deal less BSP and deal more... radiant or thunder or whatever, but this effect only really starts making itself known relatively late in T2 when most campaigns are about to end, and even then danger sense and high hp are able to mitigate a lot of the worst of it. Then too depending on your race and the type of campaign, it might not even be that bad. An Infernal Constitution Tieflings come to mind, as do Dwarfs and Goliaths.

Either way though you already have some of the highest HP in the game and one of the strongest defensive features, I don't really follow the logic that says "getting more HP is the most important thing." If you want to shore up defenses I would argue lucky or resilient Wisdom is a lot better for a barbarian.

Ironically dex-based barbarians end up doing as much, if not more, damage while receiving less in return compared to their strength-based counterparts. Not The barbarians are very good at damage to begin with so it's usually a poor focus point. Barbarians are next to paladins of being the most position-oriented classes. They didn't have a big impact but that impact is limited to something that's barely beyond the length of their arms. Being Dex focus doesn't change this but it open up more opportunities to fully utilize the parts of barbarian that aren't just miniscules amount of damage and if that damage important you still can utilize that part of it even with a 14 in strength. Having run 2 campaign utilizing only single classes barbarians it was startling to see just efficient disregarding the need to focus on str was.

**unless you're playing a ranged ancestral guardian which is probably the most optimal way of playing a barbarian **

[Tanarii]

The main issue with a Con barb is the only barbarian class feature that specifically needs Con (the unarmored AC) works best if you also have high Dex and too many barbarian class features make you want to prioritize Str over Dex to make it worthwhile to have both high Con AND Dex for most builds.The feature that works best with Con is extra hit points. Rage and BPS resistance also boost those extra hit points. The extra AC from Con is just gravy, and is there to make up for the fact that you're not pumping Dex (and may not even go as high as a 14 to start).

Barbarians don't need a lot of Strength, because of Reckless attack. What they do need is lots of hit points.

Generally speaking the order for Barbarians ASIs should be GWM (if available) > Con > Str. But once you've got GWM, Con 18, Str 16, it might be worth Str 18 before Con 20.

[Dr.Samurai]

I think people are overstating the impact of dex and con as much as they believe conventional wisdom overstates the impact of str.

The barbarian isn't going to die because they have a 16 con instead of an 18 con. And str can govern ranged attacks at the same time it governs melee and all the str-based barbarian features.

Certainly you can play these types of barbarians, but they're not strictly better than going str first.

[stoutstien]

I think people are overstating the impact of dex and con as much as they believe conventional wisdom overstates the impact of str.

The barbarian isn't going to die because they have a 16 con instead of an 18 con. And str can govern ranged attacks at the same time it governs melee and all the str-based barbarian features.

Certainly you can play these types of barbarians, but they're not strictly better than going str first.

I don't think anyone said better. More just observation in alternative concept that might not be as apparent because of the way the class is presented but are also just as valid. Barbarians have more features that interact with higher con or dex than strength oddly. The str ones are just online sooner so they stat in focus. All two of them.

[Frogreaver]

I think people are overstating the impact of dex and con as much as they believe conventional wisdom overstates the impact of str.

The barbarian isn't going to die because they have a 16 con instead of an 18 con. And str can govern ranged attacks at the same time it governs melee and all the str-based barbarian features.

Certainly you can play these types of barbarians, but they're not strictly better than going str first.

It’s not just about death. It’s about how your tactics and your allies tactics are able to change based around you having a less risky amount of hp for any given situation.

The same with you going from disadvantage on stealth to no disadvantage on stealth. That can change tactical and strategical considerations.

Str ranged attacks are incredibly short ranged due to thrown weapons. There’s also some issues with thrown weapons and extra attack by raw. Dex bows are a much better option for ranged combat.

I think they are all roughly equal options.

[Dr.Samurai]

I don't think anyone said better. More just observation in alternative concept that might not be as apparent because of the way the class is presented but are also just as valid. Barbarians have more features that interact with higher con or dex than strength oddly. The str ones are just online sooner so they stat in focus. All two of them.
Would you mind making the list to make your point more clearly? I'm skeptical.


It’s not just about death. It’s about how your tactics and your allies tactics are able to change based around you having a less risky amount of hp for any given situation.
Yes, the question is to what degree does a +2 Con change your tactics? And could you have used the same tactics without that +2 Con? I think the answer is yes.

I also think the disregard for Strength is based on a sort of engineering mindset. "Under these precise conditions, I can get by with a 14 or 16 Strength". Those conditions being you are Raging and using Reckless Attack.

Except you only start off with 2 rages per day, and sometimes you have Disadvantage imposed on your attack roll, so Reckless only evens the odds, as opposed to granting actual Advantage. So sometimes you won't be able to Rage because you're out of uses, and so you might not want to use Reckless Attack because you're not resisting damage. And sometimes you're using Reckless Attack just to counter Disadvantage. And here's our barbarian, gaming the system with a +4 to attack.

[Frogreaver]

Yes, the question is to what degree does a +2 Con change your tactics? And could you have used the same tactics without that +2 Con? I think the answer is yes.

Most of the time but not always. It should also be noted that +2 Con is the first step down the path to +4 Con. I think the tactical differences and considerations by level 8 and +4 str vs +4 con start to be more highlighted by that juncture.


I also think the disregard for Strength is based on a sort of engineering mindset. "Under these precise conditions, I can get by with a 14 or 16 Strength". Those conditions being you are Raging and using Reckless Attack.

Not really. It's not so much about what I can get by with. For me it's more about how the choice and the mindset behind that choice affects playstyle. If I invest in Strength I want my main contribution to be damage. That's why I'm doing that. I'm going to grab a greatsword and be swinging it every turn for good damage. That's not all I can do, but I've certainly geared my playstyle toward that being the optimal action more times than not. If I've boosted Con, I'm thinking much more about how to make myself the punching bag because I know my damage contribution while not terrible, isn't nearly as good as other Barbarians, but I know I can take hits better than them. Can I take the strength Barbarian and play him with a punching bag playstyle. Yes! But he's not going to be as good at being the punching bag which is what that playstyle is all about.


Except you only start off with 2 rages per day, and sometimes you have Disadvantage imposed on your attack roll, so Reckless only evens the odds, as opposed to granting actual Advantage. So sometimes you won't be able to Rage because you're out of uses, and so you might not want to use Reckless Attack because you're not resisting damage. And sometimes you're using Reckless Attack just to counter Disadvantage. And here's our barbarian, gaming the system with a +4 to attack.

I'm not sure your point here. The points cited affect both Barbarians. More hp means you have a bit more hp to gamble on reckless attacking. So all else being equal you will be able to do it a bit more.

[Tanarii]

I also think the disregard for Strength is based on a sort of engineering mindset. "Under these precise conditions, I can get by with a 14 or 16 Strength". Those conditions being you are Raging and using Reckless Attack.
The first of those conditions is typically half your combats in a day, and the second is always. So yeah, Str 16 isn't an issue. Con 18 is far more important. Or 16 if gad forbid you didn't start with it.

[Frogreaver]

The first of those conditions is typically half your combats in a day, and the second is always. So yeah, Str 16 isn't an issue. Con 18 is far more important. Or 16 if gad forbid you didn't start with it.

I don't agree with this either. They are very comparable.

[Teaguethebean]

Rage, only protects from non-magical BSP damage,

Untrue. Rage never specifies non magical.

[Witty Username]

Untrue. Rage never specifies non magical.

It's been brought up, I have been made well aware that midnight forum posts are a poor decision. And you are right to be irked by the flub.

[Dr.Samurai]

Most of the time but not always. It should also be noted that +2 Con is the first step down the path to +4 Con. I think the tactical differences and considerations by level 8 and +4 str vs +4 con start to be more highlighted by that juncture.
It's difficult to understand this without seeing or reading examples. Because I play a barbarian right now, and I'm pretty aggressive and straightforward. I maxed my Strength, then took a feat. We rolled for stats so my Con is sitting at 18, but you're talking about having a Con of 20 before even a Str of 18 so I think the point still stands.

I can't imagine, that had I rolled a 16 Constitution, I'd be fretting over charging into combat, grappling enemies, getting surrounded, using Reckless Attack, etc. The entire reason I play a barbarian is to do exactly those things, whether I have the 16 Con, 18 Con or 20 Con. So this is a difficult point for me to understand that you are making.

Not really. It's not so much about what I can get by with. For me it's more about how the choice and the mindset behind that choice affects playstyle. If I invest in Strength I want my main contribution to be damage. That's why I'm doing that. I'm going to grab a greatsword and be swinging it every turn for good damage. That's not all I can do, but I've certainly geared my playstyle toward that being the optimal action more times than not.
But Strength also governs how accurate you are with your attacks, and also how consistently you win your Athletics checks. And it doesn't prevent you from being a punching bag as you describe below. You can still do that, but you'll also be better at Shoving/Knocking Prone/Grappling/Jumping/Breaking Free/Hitting.

If you're an Ancestral Guardian you need to hit to impose your Disadvantage on enemies. If you're a Battlerager or Berserker, you're big feature is an extra attack. Zealots deal more damage, but only if they hit. These barbarians benefit from a higher Strength, but it doesn't mean they can't be tanky.

Can I take the strength Barbarian and play him with a punching bag playstyle. Yes! But he's not going to be as good at being the punching bag which is what that playstyle is all about.
How do we demonstrate this though?

I'm not sure your point here. The points cited affect both Barbarians. More hp means you have a bit more hp to gamble on reckless attacking. So all else being equal you will be able to do it a bit more.
You said previously in your game you were running around with Str 14, Dex 14, and Con 16. And you boosted Con to 20.

So at low levels you're at +4 to hit. When you can't Rage, you might not want to Reckless attack (I don't think +1 HP is going to make the difference here), but instead of attacking with a +5 attack, you're attacking with +4. At level 5, you're at +5, but the Strength barbarian is at +7. At level 8, you're still at +5, and the Strength barbarian is at +8.

If you are Reckless Attacking, then sure, +4 or +5 might be okay because you have Advantage. But when you can't Rage or you're just countering Disadvantage, then a +4 or +5 is not great, especially into tier 2, whereas the Strength barbarian has a normal attack score. Next level prof goes up by 1 so you're at +6 to-hit, and the Str barbarian is at +9. And you're at +6 until level 12. You've got less than 50% chance to hit a lot of monsters at these levels, especially if you're fighting monsters at CR 13 and 14. And then do you grab feats or pump Dexterity? Your Unarmored AC is 17.

It's not a question of "what are you getting for this reduction in accuracy", it's "how good are you with this reduction in accuracy". The example you gave in this thread was grabbing an enemy and then dodging for the rest of your turn. Is that the intent with this barbarian? To not roll attack rolls?

[Witty Username]

I feel like Con increases don't make up for reckless attack reducing defenses particularly well, monsters deal progressively more damage as CR goes up, my quick impression is that it would outpace the extra health from Con, that being said even an extra round of attacks is better than nothing so this is more a concern with the amount of value than value being had rather than if the approach has value.
Also, This probably means waiting awhile for GWM as normally reckless is used to mitigate the -5 attack, which doesn't work as well if your attack bonus isn't being increased.
I guess it is a question if you are more concerned about surviving the monster's attacks or the monster living yours. Con you will get more rounds in, Str and GWM your opponent will get in less.

[Frogreaver]

I feel like Con increases don't make up for reckless attack reducing defenses particularly well, monsters deal progressively more damage as CR goes up, my quick impression is that it would outpace the extra health from Con, that being said even an extra round of attacks is better than nothing so this is more a concern with the amount of value than value being had rather than if the approach has value.

That's a fair concern. It may not make up for it completely. But it is a factor in considering whether it helps close the damage gap. It really depends on how many extra rounds of reckless attack the hp and healing from hit dice actually provides you. That's likely to be fairly variable but we could probably get a decent idea by looking at an example encounter or 2.


Also, This probably means waiting awhile for GWM as normally reckless is used to mitigate the -5 attack, which doesn't work as well if your attack bonus isn't being increased.

That's a major difference in mindset that's going to really drive playstyle. Let's say you get GWM at level 12. I would boost Str at level 12. But how will that affect playstyles? You really won't be grappling very often. Instead you'll be reckless attacking with GWM. Because if you planned on spending a significant number of ronuds grappling then GWM isn't a very good choice. On the other hand, my barbarian is still doing the grapple, punching bag thing and attacking with his 1 handed weapons. He closed the str gap and that also means the damage gap for attacking with a one handed weapon while grappling.


I guess it is a question if you are more concerned about surviving the monster's attacks or the monster living yours. Con you will get more rounds in, Str and GWM your opponent will get in less.

I'm more concerned with the monsters dying to the party's attacks. The first question that must be asked is whether focusing on my direct damage or grappling/tanking is going to best help accomplish this? The 2nd question is, if it's grappling and tanking, what's more important to for this - more damage or more survivability?

The answers here are never going to be totally clear cut. My take is that both methods are roughly equal in achieving the goal of having monsters die to the party's attacks. My take on the 2nd question is that survivability is more important. IMO, Having a higher individual damage output from str isn't going to significantly change enemy targeting behavior. The str bonus increase to athletics will help with grappling so that's an important consideration, but grappling isn't the only reason you are being targeted. There's also positioning, targeting, reckless attacking, OA threat, verbal taunts, etc. Having the higher hp buffer mitigates the risks associated with forcing hits onto yourself, which allows you to do utilize these options more often. You can criticize the magnitude of this effect, but I don't think you can criticize the existence of the effect.



The example you gave in this thread was grabbing an enemy and then dodging for the rest of your turn. Is that the intent with this barbarian? To not roll attack rolls?

I know you read the comment that example was in response to. So you know that's not true.

For everyone else: That was a specific counter example based on a very specific claim. The claim it was countering was the claim that more damage via increasing str instead of con generally leads to taking less damage than the extra hp provided (due to killing enemies faster). It did that by showing a fairly simple example scenario where the claim I was countering was obviously false.

[Tanarii]

I feel like Con increases don't make up for reckless attack reducing defenses particularly well, monsters deal progressively more damage as CR goes up, my quick impression is that it would outpace the extra health from Con, that being said even an extra round of attacks is better than nothing so this is more a concern with the amount of value than value being had rather than if the approach has value.That's why Con is so important for a Barbarian. You're always going to Reckless Attack anyway unless you absolutely can't afford it. It's far more valuaBle than a mere +1 to hit and damage. So you need more Con to counter that.


Also, This probably means waiting awhile for GWM as normally reckless is used to mitigate the -5 attack, which doesn't work as well if your attack bonus isn't being increased.Reckless attack makes GWM an automatic choice and gives you the hit bonus you need to counter the hit penalty. And you need more Con to balance Reckless attack. Which you're always going to be using unless you absolutely can't afford to.


I guess it is a question if you are more concerned about surviving the monster's attacks or the monster living yours. Con you will get more rounds in, Str and GWM your opponent will get in less.Barbs don't need as much strength because RA gives them the accuracy they need to increase damage, including with GWM. But they need more Con because of RA.

TLDR:
Reckless Attack + 2 Con > +2 Str
Reckless Attack + GWM + 2 Con > GWM +2 Str

[Frogreaver]

That's why Con is so important for a Barbarian. You're always going to Reckless Attack anyway unless you absolutely can't afford it. It's far more valuaBle than a mere +1 to hit and damage. So you need more Con to counter that.

Reckless attack makes GWM an automatic choice and gives you the hit bonus you need to counter the hit penalty. And you need more Con to balance Reckless attack. Which you're always going to be using unless you absolutely can't afford to.

Barbs don't need as much strength because RA gives them the accuracy they need to increase damage, including with GWM. But they need more Con because of RA.

TLDR:
Reckless Attack + 2 Con > +2 Str
Reckless Attack + GWM + 2 Con > GWM +2 Str

Actually, Reckless Attack + 2 Str + 2 Con > Reckless Attack + GWM + 2 Con

[Tanarii]

Actually, Reckless Attack + 2 Str + 2 Con > Reckless Attack + GWM + 2 Con
No. Not even close. If feats and GWM are available, a Barbarian should always take it over one of their Str ASIs. Always.

[Frogreaver]

No. Not even close. If feats and GWM are available, a Barbarian should always take it over one of their Str ASIs. Always.

At the very least it depends on what AC's you are fighting, how often you can reckless attack, whether you are ever going to grapple and attack with a 1 handed weapon, etc.

[Tanarii]

At the very least it depends on what AC's you are fighting,Nope, because Reckless attack means you can use it against ludicrously high ACs.


how often you can reckless attack,Pretty much always or you're Doing It Wrong(TM)


whether you are ever going to grapple and attack with a 1 handed weapon, etc.Yes to the first one. :smallamused:

What kind of Barbarian uses a one handed weapon? :smallconfused: :smallsmile: But yes if for some reason you're using one, and you're doing it in spite of GWM being an available option that just completely dominates any other choice ... sure in that particular case Str is better than GWM for a Barbarian. But that's such a trap option it's not really worth considering.

[Lavaeolus]

Would you mind making the list to make your point more clearly? I'm skeptical.

Not to speak for stoutstein, but to my reckoning.

Playing off Strength: Parts of Rage (extra damage on Strength attacks + advantage on Strength checks/saves) and Reckless Attack. There's also Indomitable Might and Primal Champion -- but these come on at levels 18 and 20, so very late in the game and perhaps never at all.

I would honorarily note Brutal Critical here as well: while this works with any melee weapon, it synergises better with certain Strength-based high-damage-die ones.

Playing off Dexterity or Constitution: Unarmored Defense, Danger Sense, Feral Instinct, Relentless Rage, and Primal Champion (again).

Now, I'd want to stress that your typical Strength-first Barbarian still benefits from most of those. You'll probably have a decent starting Dex/Con score, so advantage on initiative and Dex saves is groovy regardless. But the Dexterity Barbarian alluded to will back up their high HP with high AC, usually go first, and rarely fail a Dex save.

My own opinion is that it's generally viable enough, and maybe a fun fit for certain races like Goblins or Stout Halfling -- but ultimately you're trading damage for some extra defense that is, honestly, a little overkill. Your average Barbarian can probably afford to take a hit, or fail a Dex save or two.

[Frogreaver]

Nope, because Reckless attack means you can use it against ludicrously high ACs.

I just ran a comparison at level 5. GWM vs +2 Str with level 4 ASI.

The +2 Str Barbarian was better against AC's 18,19,20. This was with accounting for the crit then bonus action portion of GWM (most analysis ignores that but it's important).


Pretty much always or you're Doing It Wrong(TM)

I've not found that to be true.


What kind of Barbarian uses a one handed weapon?

One that has grappled an enemy because he no longer has 2 hands to use a great weapon.


But yes if for some reason you're using one, and you're doing it in spite of GWM being an available option that just completely dominates any other choice ... sure in that particular case Str is better than GWM for a Barbarian. But that's such a trap option it's not really worth considering.

Grappling with a Barbarian is a trap option?

[stoutstien]

I actually think the GWM/PaM path is a trap for barbarians if the encounters are challenging enough to make those types of choices matter. It turns them into a resource sink with limited damage potential in return. It can be effective but it takes a good eye to be prudent with the usage of both the +/- and reckless features.

[strangebloke]

Ironically dex-based barbarians end up doing as much, if not more, damage while receiving less in return compared to their strength-based counterparts. Not The barbarians are very good at damage to begin with so it's usually a poor focus point. Barbarians are next to paladins of being the most position-oriented classes. They didn't have a big impact but that impact is limited to something that's barely beyond the length of their arms. Being Dex focus doesn't change this but it open up more opportunities to fully utilize the parts of barbarian that aren't just miniscules amount of damage and if that damage important you still can utilize that part of it even with a 14 in strength. Having run 2 campaign utilizing only single classes barbarians it was startling to see just efficient disregarding the need to focus on str was.

**unless you're playing a ranged ancestral guardian which is probably the most optimal way of playing a barbarian **

How are Dex-based barbarians dealing as much or more damage? Outside of the specific scenario where you're forced to pull out a longbow I don't see it.

Also, "the parts of barbarian that aren't damage are...." what exactly? Danger sense?


The first of those conditions is typically half your combats in a day, and the second is always. So yeah, Str 16 isn't an issue. Con 18 is far more important. Or 16 if gad forbid you didn't start with it.

I just really don't agree with this. Means of boosting HP are really common and cheap. Inspiring leader, Aid, etc. +1 HP per level just isn't the biggest priority in the world, there are many ways to achieve a similar effect and IMX barbarians going down to HP damage is a pretty rare occurrence anyway, particularly outside of t3.

And of course, dropping to zero isn't even that bad a thing much of the time. You take 23 damage when you're at 1 hp, get up from a healing word next turn, and its basically like you healed for 22. If my barbarian was in such a position, with 3-4 hp after just going down last turn? I'd reckless again! Why not? If the big monster wastes an attack on me we're killing them on the action economy.

Hell, I'm playing a zealot, so really why not take risks?


At the very least it depends on what AC's you are fighting, how often you can reckless attack, whether you are ever going to grapple and attack with a 1 handed weapon, etc.

These situations are not very common and this was proved years ago. I was unmarried and lacking kids when this math was done, and my daughter's old enough to play now. Reckless attack in combination with GWM is Barbarian's best feature. You don't have to use it, but if we're having a conversation about damage optimization (which you are) you have to acknowledge that in 99% of cases reckless + GWM is optimal.

[Frogreaver]

These situations are not very common and this was proved years ago.

Which situations? Grappling? Vs 17+ AC's? Not reckless attacking? Having disadvantage?


You don't have to use it, but if we're having a conversation about damage optimization (which you are) you have to acknowledge that in 99% of cases reckless + GWM is optimal.

Do you mean Optimal for damage? Not while grappling as it can't even be used. Not against 17+ AC's. Not while you have disadvantage. Not when it's inadvisable to reckless attack. Etc.

There's a whole slew of circumstances where the choice of GWM isn't optimal for Damage.

[Dr.Samurai]

The first of those conditions is typically half your combats in a day, and the second is always.
Right, so in the other half of your combats you're not reducing damage by half and you don't have Advantage on Strength checks. So you're grappling or resisting effects with a +4 or +5 bonus.

And you're still Reckless Attacking according to you. So now you're at 15 AC granting Advantage on attacks with no resistance to damage.

Tank goodness you have the +1 Con for a few extra hit points...

So yeah, Str 16 isn't an issue. Con 18 is far more important. Or 16 if gad forbid you didn't start with it.
Strength 16 does fare better than 14 for sure. Con 18 is nice, but, as I've said before, I don't think it's required to succeed. You can absolutely fulfill your role as a barbarian with a 16 Constitution.

I'm more concerned with the monsters dying to the party's attacks. The first question that must be asked is whether focusing on my direct damage or grappling/tanking is going to best help accomplish this? The 2nd question is, if it's grappling and tanking, what's more important to for this - more damage or more survivability?
You are part of the party, so your attacks matter too. And constitution doesn't directly improve grappling, strength does. So even if Grappling is your preferred method of engagement, strength helps you do it better. And then what do you do against Huge+ enemies or Incorporeal enemies that can't be grappled?

I know you read the comment that example was in response to. So you know that's not true.
...ok :smallconfused:

You wrote "just agree that sometimes grapple+dodge is better than attacking and then the rest is easy". I'm paraphrasing there but I took that to mean that this is one of the tactics you're referring to and not just a hypothetical to be abandoned on the spot. But I guess this misunderstanding justifies ignoring the entire rest of my post. I imagine I won't see sample tactics any time soon :smallamused:.

Barbs don't need as much strength because RA gives them the accuracy they need to increase damage, including with GWM. But they need more Con because of RA.
At some point, Reckless Attack stops insuring you against low rolls and starts seeking rolls at 10 or higher. Especially if your party faces some Hard encounters every now and then.

Playing off Strength: Parts of Rage (extra damage on Strength attacks + advantage on Strength checks/saves) and Reckless Attack. There's also Indomitable Might and Primal Champion -- but these come on at levels 18 and 20, so very late in the game and perhaps never at all.

I would honorarily note Brutal Critical here as well: while this works with any melee weapon, it synergises better with certain Strength-based high-damage-die ones.
Thank you for providing your thoughts on this Lavaeolus, and I think I see where part of my issue lies with this.

The con/dex boosts improve passive abilities that the Barbarian has, and so dismissing Str as "good enough" at 14 or 16 seems to dismiss the active things that barbarians are meant to do. Relying on Reckless Attack to make up the difference means you never plan on being Frightened, or Poisoned, or Blinded, or Restrained, etc. It's saying "I don't plan on being in any Hard encounters, where I may be facing tougher opponents with higher ACs and the ability to impose worse conditions".

Let's assume 2 level 8 barbarians, one has 20 Strength, 14 Dex, 16 Con, and the other has 16 Strength, 14 Dex, and 20 Con. It's a hard encounter against a Froghemoth, Grung Wildling, and 2 Grung Elite Warriors.

Against the Grung Elite Warriors, the advantage is slightly in the favor of the Con barbarian; but the Con DC vs the poison is 12 so it's only slightly. The warriors' AC is 13 so this shouldn't be an issue for either barbarian to hit with Reckless Attack (+8 Str Barb, +6 Con Barb).

Against the Grung Wildling, it's a little different. AC is 16, so the Str Barb hits on an 8 naturally, whereas the Con Barb needs a 10. That's assuming the barbarians get into range to hit with melee attacks. The wildling can cast Spike Growth and Plant Growth. If the area is under the effects of Plant Growth, every foot of movement requires 4ft of movement. For our 40ft speed barbarians, they can move 2 squares and then run out of movement. If they Dash, they can move 4 squares before they run out of movement. Given the grung elite warriors have shortbow attacks and the froghemoth has a 20ft tentacle reach, you want to get to your enemies as quickly as possible. The Str Barb has a 10ft standing long jump, or 2 squares. The Con Barb only has an 8ft standing long jump, or only 1 square (no benefit). So the Str Barb, by leaping over 1 square, expends 25ft of movement for each 2 squares in the Plant Growth effect they move in. The Con Barb expends the full 40ft of movement for each 2 squares they move through. When they have each moved 4 squares, the Str Barb still has 30ft of movement left. This is not enough to jump into another square of Plant Growth, but it could be enough to jump out of its effect if they are near the border of the spell's magic.

Against the Froghemoth, both barbarians have to contend with getting pulled to the froghemoth with Tongue and then getting swallowed with Bite. The Tentacle grapple effect is DC 16, so the Con Barb needs a 10 with Advantage, and the Str Barb needs an 8 with Advantage. Against Tongue, the Con Barb needs a 12 with Advantage, while the Str Barb needs a 10 with Advantage.

The Swallow effect of the Bite attack is automatic, so both barbarians would wind up in the Froghemoth's stomach once they get bit. Inside, they are Blinded, Restrained, and taking acid damage each turn. The Con Barb can take the acid damage longer (1 turn longer). But to escape you must deal 20 points of damage in 1 turn. Reckless Attack is negating your Disadvantage, so you're just rolling straight attack rolls. Con Barb needs an 8, not bad. But their average damage with a d8 weapon is just under 20, so chances are you're not triggering the escape. And when you do, the Froghemoth has a 50% chance of making their saving throw and just keeping you in their stomach. The Str Barb's average damage with a d8 weapon is over 20 damage. The Str Barb can roll a 3 on his damage dice and still trigger the escape, whereas the Con Barb has to roll a 5 or higher to trigger it. Even if the Con Barb switches to a two-handed grip (assuming no shield), they still have to roll a 5 on the d10 damage die. So the Str Barb will trigger the Escape more often, and likely be free sooner. Good thing the Con Barb has more HP.

With a Con Barb we're saying "Yeah, we're in plant growth. It's fine, we'll just move only 2 squares at a time and tank the ranged attacks because we have more hit points. Yeah, we're in this creature's stomach, it's fine. We'll just tank the acid because we have more hit points and just keep attacking until we deal the 20 damage." And this effect is worse as you face higher DCs for restraining conditions and higher monster ACs.

[Frogreaver]

You are part of the party, so your attacks matter too.


The very first question I asked in that very post was whether your grappling or your attacks helped monsters die to the parties attack better. This makes a few times you've made a point as if I hadn't explicitly considered it within the very post you are responding to.

So I feel you aren't actually paying attention to my posts and instead just replying without really listening. Because of that, I'm done responding to you on this topic.

[Dr.Samurai]

The very first question I asked in that very post was whether grappling or your attacks helped party damage more. This makes a few times you've made a point as if I hadn't explicitly considered it within the very post you are responding to.

So I feel you aren't actually paying attention to my posts and instead just replying without really listening. Because of that, I'm done responding to you on this topic.
That's not the first question you ask in that post, and the bit I quoted was your answer to that question already.

You literally said:


I'm more concerned with the monsters dying to the party's attacks. The first question that must be asked is whether focusing on my direct damage or grappling/tanking is going to best help accomplish this? The 2nd question is, if it's grappling and tanking, what's more important to for this - more damage or more survivability?

You answered the question already. Should you focus on direct damage or grappling/tanking? You said "I'm more concerned with the monsters dying to the party's attacks". I went on to say that Strength improves your grapple, and what happens when you can't grapple because the monster is too big or incorporeal?

Anyways, good luck with your con barbarian and the super awesome secret tactics it unlocked at your table that we'll never be privy to :smallamused:.

[strangebloke]

Which situations? Grappling? Vs 17+ AC's? Not reckless attacking? Having disadvantage?

Yes these are rare situations. Grappling is a niche strat, 17 AC is rare in t2 and almost unheard of in t1. Reckless attack is worth using most of the time, and disadvantage isn't something you should plan on having.

If you have an advantage, the only way that 17 AC is too high to use GWM with is if you have a +4 modifier... which shouldn't happen outside of T1 at all, where 17 AC is very rare. Animated Armor and Knights come to mind and I'm sure there are a few others but they're rare. GWM also gives you a conditional bonus attack that is pretty easy to activate on most turns. Even if you only get this half of the time (subjectively I get it way more often) increasing DPR by 25% by itself, making it better than an ASI.

GWM is busted as a feat and is almost always better than an ASI for purposes of damage dealing. The math's been done.

[Tanarii]

GWM is busted as a feat and is almost always better than an ASI for purposes of damage dealing. The math's been done.
Yup. And it shows the AC 17 or lower is right if raging, and wrong if not (AC 18 or lower), with +6 to hit (Str 16 and level 5) and advantage from reckless attack and a great axe. Well worth it for an estimated 25% DPR increase across an adventuring day, which is what GWM on a barbarian is estimated to work out to IIRC.

----------

Now I'll grant that it's just my opinion that if you're going to be recklessly attacking all the time that some Con to mitigate is a good idea. If a Barbarian player wants to be all offense, who am I as a encouraging DM not to scrape their remains off floor? :smallamused:

It's just I believe that the more efficient mix of offense and defense is offense is RA + Con ASI over not-RA + Str ASI. That said, the math hasn't been done on that.

[Frogreaver]

Yes these are rare situations. Grappling is a niche strat, 17 AC is rare in t2 and almost unheard of in t1. Reckless attack is worth using most of the time, and disadvantage isn't something you should plan on having.

If you have an advantage, the only way that 17 AC is too high to use GWM with is if you have a +4 modifier... which shouldn't happen outside of T1 at all, where 17 AC is very rare. Animated Armor and Knights come to mind and I'm sure there are a few others but they're rare. GWM also gives you a conditional bonus attack that is pretty easy to activate on most turns. Even if you only get this half of the time (subjectively I get it way more often) increasing DPR by 25% by itself, making it better than an ASI.

GWM is busted as a feat and is almost always better than an ASI for purposes of damage dealing. The math's been done.

If the math's been done then you would know GWM with 16 str, greatsword, rage and reckless attack does less damage than no GWM with 18 str, greatsword, rage and reckless attack at level 5 vs 17 AC. You disputed that, which shows you either haven't done the math or don't accurately remember it.

[stoutstien]

How are Dex-based barbarians dealing as much or more damage? Outside of the specific scenario where you're forced to pull out a longbow I don't see it.

Also, "the parts of barbarian that aren't damage are...." what exactly? Danger sense?



I just really don't agree with this. Means of boosting HP are really common and cheap. Inspiring leader, Aid, etc. +1 HP per level just isn't the biggest priority in the world, there are many ways to achieve a similar effect and IMX barbarians going down to HP damage is a pretty rare occurrence anyway, particularly outside of t3.

And of course, dropping to zero isn't even that bad a thing much of the time. You take 23 damage when you're at 1 hp, get up from a healing word next turn, and its basically like you healed for 22. If my barbarian was in such a position, with 3-4 hp after just going down last turn? I'd reckless again! Why not? If the big monster wastes an attack on me we're killing them on the action economy.

Hell, I'm playing a zealot, so really why not take risks?



These situations are not very common and this was proved years ago. I was unmarried and lacking kids when this math was done, and my daughter's old enough to play now. Reckless attack in combination with GWM is Barbarian's best feature. You don't have to use it, but if we're having a conversation about damage optimization (which you are) you have to acknowledge that in 99% of cases reckless + GWM is optimal.
Being the one who gets to draw the lines is a whole game in and of it self.
Initiative and having potential surprise are huge for barbs.it doesn't just mean having extra "turns" . It means more time with rage up with incoming attacks. It means getting close to their primary target and reducing options. If you are lucky enough to draw the enemies ire as a barb the difference between going 2nd or last in a round can mean everything.
Going sooner is important for most PCs but unlike a lot of classes the barbarian has to actively engage most of its took kit. A barbarian who goes first can wreck an enemy's plan, soak up AOs, and get into a key position before they can do anything.
Going back to my AG with a bow the difference between each slot back they land in the turn order is an other potential enemy with it's choices cut in half. I'd go as far as say alert is a higher priority than GWM even for str users but that's not a hill I'm willing to die on.

As for the zealot that is exactly the resource sink I was talking about. They do ok damage as long as the party is willing to pour spell slots and actions into them but Optimized damage is worthless if it draining the party dry. Most tables don't play at a level any of this is relevant but if failure is on the table swinging for the fences is a short lived strategy.

[strangebloke]

If the math's been done then you would know GWM with 16 str, greatsword, rage and reckless attack does less damage than no GWM with 18 str, greatsword, rage and reckless attack at level 5 vs 17 AC. You disputed that, which shows you either haven't done the math or don't accurately remember it.

We're talking past each other a bit, and my point was actually that using GWM's power attack feature is worthwhile if you have advantage and can hit on a 12 or lower. It's technically a bit more complicated than that because of rage and bonus damage, but it works as a heuristic.

But also, what you've said above Is Wrong.

If you're comparing GWM to an ASI, you have to account for both halves of GWM. The second half is really really good too, especially on a barbarian. The 'cleave' feature grants a BA attack on a crit, which at level 5 will happen ~19% of the time. The expected damage or a GWM barb in this extremely specific situation is thus

[2+3+10+2d6]*0.44*2 (basic attacks) +
[2+3+10+2d6]*0.44*0.19 (BA crit attack) +
[2d6]*0.1*2.19 (chance of critting on all attacks)
=
~22.25

meanwhile, the ASI Barbarian gets

[2+4+2d6]*0.80*2 (basic attacks) +
[2d6]*0.1*2 (chance of critting on all attacks)
=
~21.94

The 'Power Attack' function of GWM means that GWM performs really well against high HP, low AC foes. Reckless attack changes that "low" to mean "all but the very highest." Then the 'Cleave' function of GWM means that GWM also does really well against super high AC targets (because increased benefit on crit) and does well against low hp targets (because it also procs when you drop an enemy to zero.)

It's a catalina wine mixer of a feat.

Now of course in the above scenario the difference in marginal, but you have to go to 18 to make your case here, not 17, at which point the "how often are you fighting that AC at level 5" question becomes even more pointed. Also, I'm not considering the test case where the barbarian kills an opponent and gets a BA that way, which is a big factor as well.

there are arguments for boosting strength over GWM, but they're not based in damage.

[Frogreaver]

We're talking past each other a bit, and my point was actually that using GWM's power attack feature is worthwhile if you have advantage and can hit on a 12 or lower. It's technically a bit more complicated than that because of rage and bonus damage, but it works as a heuristic.

But also, what you've said above Is Wrong.

If you're comparing GWM to an ASI, you have to account for both halves of GWM. The second half is really really good too, especially on a barbarian. The 'cleave' feature grants a BA attack on a crit, which at level 5 will happen ~19% of the time. The expected damage or a GWM barb in this extremely specific situation is thus

[2+3+10+2d6]*0.44*2 (basic attacks) +
[2+3+10+2d6]*0.44*0.19 (BA crit attack) +
[2d6]*0.1*2.19 (chance of critting on all attacks)
=
~22.25

meanwhile, the ASI Barbarian gets

[2+4+2d6]*0.80*2 (basic attacks) +
[2d6]*0.1*2 (chance of critting on all attacks)
=
~21.94

Yes, I account for both halves. That's essentially how I calculate as well. Our values have a small difference that is likely due to your rounding (my numbers are not rounded at all until the final DPR).

I get 22.1 for the +2 Str
I get 22.5 for the GWM

But, that's all before factoring in DPR loss due to overkill damage - which depends on how often you get a killing blow and your damage per attack. Should we work through an example of this effect?

EDIT: Though, I think at some point though talking about that close of DPR as better or worse is likely missing the forest for the trees. Even if +2 Str is slightly better at 17 AC, it's not by a significant enough margin that it really matters whether you went GWM or +2 Str. I think the real difference really seems to be high often do you grapple and how often do you reckless.

[strangebloke]

But, that's all before factoring in DPR loss due to overkill damage - which depends on how often you get a killing blow and your damage per attack. Should we work through an example of this effect?


Killing blows almost always favor GWM builds because they get their BA attack. There's edge cases you can come up with, where its an army of goblins who have 18 AC and exactly 10 hp, but they're not relevant. Most low level high AC monsters also have high HP. The Knight has over 50 IIRC.


Being the one who gets to draw the lines is a whole game in and of it self.
Initiative and having potential surprise are huge for barbs.it doesn't just mean having extra "turns" . It means more time with rage up with incoming attacks. It means getting close to their primary target and reducing options. If you are lucky enough to draw the enemies ire as a barb the difference between going 2nd or last in a round can mean everything.
Going sooner is important for most PCs but unlike a lot of classes the barbarian has to actively engage most of its took kit. A barbarian who goes first can wreck an enemy's plan, soak up AOs, and get into a key position before they can do anything.
Going back to my AG with a bow the difference between each slot back they land in the turn order is an other potential enemy with it's choices cut in half. I'd go as far as say alert is a higher priority than GWM even for str users but that's not a hill I'm willing to die on.

The thing to me here is, 16 Dex vs 14 is going to make difference in initiative or surprise 5% of the time, whereas 16 str vs. 14 str is going to be as much as a 20% difference in damage output and PAM or GWM is going to be even more significant. There's also a situation where the enemy is out of range at the start and thus by winning initiative you only get position, while losing the first round of attacks.

I do really value stealth and initiative, I just think investing in Dex is a bad way to do it. Spell support like PWT or feats like alert or skill expert:stealth do the job way more effectively.

Same goes for CON too really. +1 HP per level is nice and all but there are easier ways to raise HP maximum.

I do agree about the AG sniper though. Hilariously effective, even if you don't run away from the enemy and far worse if you do.


As for the zealot that is exactly the resource sink I was talking about. They do ok damage as long as the party is willing to pour spell slots and actions into them but Optimized damage is worthless if it draining the party dry. Most tables don't play at a level any of this is relevant but if failure is on the table swinging for the fences is a short lived strategy.

I run really attrition-heavy games, and the barbarians rarely go down anyway.

Even if they do, dropping to zero or even fighting recklessly while at low hp is not truly reckless, because you have less to lose. Only takes 1 point of magical healing to undo a 30 damage hit from a dragon after all.

And playing aggressively is ultimately very effective damage mitigation because you kill the enemy faster.

[Bosh]

Rage damage reduction technically needs hp to work.

And I also 2nd the notion about Barbarian Rogues. There’s a variety of level splits they are very effective at.

For the first point, having a boatload of HPs and damage reduction can over result in overkill in which your barbarian consistently ends fights with lots of HPs.

For the second point, barbarians are really front-loaded which makes them very good for a lot of multiclass combinations. The first few levels of rogue also go great for even strength-based barbarians.



Ironically dex-based barbarians end up doing as much, if not more, damage...
**unless you're playing a ranged ancestral guardian which is probably the most optimal way of playing a barbarian **

Bwuh? How?

Ranged ancestral guardian is a good consistent source of debuffs and works well with a rogue multiclass but unless your do a lot of combat focused around a single big smashy monster I don't see it being especially optimal.


The feature that works best with Con is extra hit points. Rage and BPS resistance also boost those extra hit points. The extra AC from Con is just gravy, and is there to make up for the fact that you're not pumping Dex (and may not even go as high as a 14 to start).

Barbarians don't need a lot of Strength, because of Reckless attack. What they do need is lots of hit points.

Generally speaking the order for Barbarians ASIs should be GWM (if available) > Con > Str. But once you've got GWM, Con 18, Str 16, it might be worth Str 18 before Con 20.

Depends on the sorts of fights you're getting in and how the enemy acts. In a lot of fights I've seen barbarians end up having HPs to spare while the rest of the party is beat to ****. Of course ancestral guardian helps with this but if you consistently ending fights with the most HP in the party then you've probably focused too much on Con.


I don't think anyone said better. More just observation in alternative concept that might not be as apparent because of the way the class is presented but are also just as valid. Barbarians have more features that interact with higher con or dex than strength oddly. The str ones are just online sooner so they stat in focus. All two of them.

What features that interact with con or dex are you talking about? The main one is unarmored AC, which REALLY works better with a barbarian/rogue than a straight barbarian. There is some subclass stuff that works off con but most of it is fairly weak (storm herald etc.) and nothing specific I can think of that works off dex except AC.


There's a whole slew of circumstances where the choice of GWM isn't optimal for Damage.

GWM isn't optimal in all situations but it's a very good fit with barbarians overall since they can have advantage whenever they want.


Yes these are rare situations. Grappling is a niche strat,

Grappling can be VERY VERY good in certain situations (one of them being physically forcing a nasty gritter to attack the barbarian instead of the wizard) and **** in others. That means that it's a bad idea to make a grappling specific build, but it's good to have someone in your party who can grapple. The good thing about barbarians is that they're fine at grappling without using any resources except for "has proficiency in athletics." Barbarian/rogues are also stupidly good at grappling.

For the original point about con focused barbarians, I want to repeat how well that works with barb/rogues. The fearless swashbuckler is one of my favorite character archetypes and a barbarian/rogue with a boatload of constitution fulfills that archetype better than anything else in 5e for me. Just like playing a guy with a rapier and a fancy shirt who Just Will Not Die.

Also so many different ways to build a barbarian/rogue: https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/no06ms/a_treasury_of_barbarianrogue_multiclass_builds/

[strangebloke]

Grappling can be VERY VERY good in certain situations (one of them being physically forcing a nasty gritter to attack the barbarian instead of the wizard) and **** in others. That means that it's a bad idea to make a grappling specific build, but it's good to have someone in your party who can grapple. The good thing about barbarians is that they're fine at grappling without using any resources except for "has proficiency in athletics." Barbarian/rogues are also stupidly good at grappling.

For the original point about con focused barbarians, I want to repeat how well that works with barb/rogues. The fearless swashbuckler is one of my favorite character archetypes and a barbarian/rogue with a boatload of constitution fulfills that archetype better than anything else in 5e for me. Just like playing a guy with a rapier and a fancy shirt who Just Will Not Die.

Also so many different ways to build a barbarian/rogue: https://www.reddit.com/r/3d6/comments/no06ms/a_treasury_of_barbarianrogue_multiclass_builds/

Barbarogue is just absolutely the funnest pure martial build, other than maybe a battlemaster. You can just do everything.

[Tanarii]

Depends on the sorts of fights you're getting in and how the enemy acts. In a lot of fights I've seen barbarians end up having HPs to spare while the rest of the party is beat to ****. Of course ancestral guardian helps with this but if you consistently ending fights with the most HP in the party then you've probably focused too much on Con.

Unless the enemy got past the Barbarian and in among the squishies, or it's a long ranged duel and the Barb is effectively sidelined, that's a weird situation to be seeing. Barbarians encourage enemies to attack them because of Reckless Attack. Them being open is something the enemy should be able to observe in-universe and want to take advantage of.

One of the reasons Barbarians are great Tanks, provided they put in Con, they have one of the few "aggro management" abilities in the game.

[JellyPooga]

Barbarogue is just absolutely the funnest pure martial build, other than maybe a battlemaster. You can just do everything.

Ancestral Guardian Barbarian 3/Hunter Ranger 7/Scout Rogue 7

Salient Choices/Feats: Sentinel, Mobile, Multiattack Defence, Expertise (Athletics)

- If they approach, you can just leave (Skirmisher).
- If they try to leave, you can stop them, even if they Disangage (Sentinel).
- If they attack/hit you, you can reduce damage by 1/2 or 3/4 (Uncanny Dodge, Rage) and you have +4 AC against any further attacks (MA Defence).
- If you've attacked them and they attack someone else, they get disadvantage and halved damage (Ancestral Protectors) and even if you haven't attacked them since your last turn you get to Sneak Attack them (Sentinel) anyway.
- You have double proficiency (Expertise) and advantage (Rage) on Grapples and Shoves.
- You have additional speed (Mobile) and Cunning Action; you basically ignore difficult terrain and are always where you need to be, even if your dragging a grapple victim with you.

Most of the above functions from lvl.4 (if V.Human) or lvl.5 (if any other Race). Enough of it works at lvl.3 to feel like an absolute boss anyway!

[Witty Username]

I am not sure I agree about aggro management being rare. Interception and Protection fighting styles discourage attacking allies, and several spells provide effects in that line of thinking like compelled duel, arguably Spirit Guardians and bane. Concentration is a funny thing, it draws aggro, so if can be used to draw fire in if you are a caster that is into that sort of thing.

[Teaguethebean]

I don't understand why for some reason we all just except that a con boost is better than a strength boost while reckless attacking. How is a handful of hitpoint better than hitting more and dealing even more damage. Barbarians are made to not have to worry about defense we have rage, and danger sense for that. Never in my life have I seen someone pump con to any potent effect. Even when players go down often. The barbarian usually is just ignored if they do 2d8+8 damage a turn at lv5.

Edit: also at lv5 you con boost is only +5 to hp. While GWM or a strength boost give you potential bonuses every turn.

[stoutstien]

I don't understand why for some reason we all just except that a con boost is better than a strength boost while reckless attacking. How is a handful of hitpoint better than hitting more and dealing even more damage. Barbarians are made to not have to worry about defense we have rage, and danger sense for that. Never in my life have I seen someone pump con to any potent effect. Even when players go down often. The barbarian usually is just ignored if they do 2d8+8 damage a turn at lv5.

Edit: also at lv5 you con boost is only +5 to hp. While GWM or a strength boost give you potential bonuses every turn.

If the barbarian was getting ignored just swinging a weapon why would adding 15-30% more damage on top of it change the enemies' target priorities?

[Dr.Samurai]

While I find the idea that front-liners must do something special or above and beyond what they normally do to "draw aggro" to be mostly an online talking point, if the barbarian wants to draw more aggro or keep monsters from moving past them, they can Grapple, Shove Prone, Hit with Ancestral Protectors, or Deal More Damage.

All of these things will be better served by Strength or a Feat before they are by Constitution.

[JNAProductions]

While I find the idea that front-liners must do something special or above and beyond what they normally do to "draw aggro" to be mostly an online talking point, if the barbarian wants to draw more aggro or keep monsters from moving past them, they can Grapple, Shove Prone, Hit with Ancestral Protectors, or Deal More Damage.

All of these things will be better served by Strength or a Feat before they are by Constitution.

And none of which you can do if you're dying.

[strangebloke]

And none of which you can do if you're dying.

how often is 1 hp/level going to make the difference there though?

Most of the time that's one enemy attack worth of HP, often not enough to keep you alive for another round when you'd normally go down, and subjectively in my own experience the barbarian doesn't go down that often even if they're trying to tank for the party.

Boosting damage by 20% or more, conversely, is pretty frequently going to deny the enemy their turn by way of killing them sooner.

And as I keep saying, I think there are other, better ways of raising HP max. Like, think of it this way. If you play a Levistus Tiefling and cast AoA at 3rd level once per day with the racial feature, that's similar to a +2 CON on a level 10 character in terms of mitigating HP damage. Aid and Inspiring Leader are also ridiculously efficient.

[Bosh]

I am not sure I agree about aggro management being rare. Interception and Protection fighting styles discourage attacking allies, and several spells provide effects in that line of thinking like compelled duel, arguably Spirit Guardians and bane. Concentration is a funny thing, it draws aggro, so if can be used to draw fire in if you are a caster that is into that sort of thing.

Grappling (in certain kinds of fights) is also often an excellent way of physically keeping critters away from the squishies.

[Dr.Samurai]

And none of which you can do if you're dying.
how often is 1 hp/level going to make the difference there though?
This is the trap of making these types of claims without specific examples or demonstrations to support them. The conversation will inevitably turn to "if you don't boost Con, you die".

We all know its not true, but that's what the argument will come down to if we continue with vagueries.

Indeed, we are talking about 1hp/level at levels 4-7, and then 2hp/level at level 8+. Maybe we go back to a difference of 1hp/level at level 12.

If the Strength Barbarian can't survive with 1hp/level fewer than the Constitution Barbarian, it makes me wonder how the d10 Hit Die Fighter can survive the front line with 2hp/level fewer than the Con Barb, and then eventually 3hp/level. And without the Damage Resistance that Rage offers :smalleek:. The fighter is dead when they take their first step out the door!!

[Teaguethebean]

If the barbarian was getting ignored just swinging a weapon why would adding 15-30% more damage on top of it change the enemies' target priorities?

Dealing damage makes you a worthwhile target. GWM+reckless makes people want to hit you when you wack for 22 damage a swing. Dealing 9.5 with sword and shield just doesn't prove to be equally appealing to target.

[Frogreaver]

how often is 1 hp/level going to make the difference there though?

Most of the time that's one enemy attack worth of HP, often not enough to keep you alive for another round when you'd normally go down, and subjectively in my own experience the barbarian doesn't go down that often even if they're trying to tank for the party.

Perhaps a different perspective on this point will help.

Most encounters you as the Barbarian don't drop. Most encounters your allies don't drop either. You could have placed your first ASI's in Intelligence instead of Str or Con and there would be no change in most encounter outcomes. The same for most adventuring days as you and your party would still end the adventuring day fine, with plenty of resources, even if your first ASI's were placed in Int instead of Str or Con. The only time +Str or +Con actually ends up mattering is in those rare encounters or adventuring days where you are pushed to your limits (either by design or by bad die rolls). So IMO, regardless of how rare that is, that's precisely what we should be talking about. How do they compare in that space?


Boosting damage by 20% or more, conversely, is pretty frequently going to deny the enemy their turn by way of killing them sooner.

Party damage is what matters when killing enemies. +1 Str Mod on a single character does not equate to 20% more party damage. It's probably closer to a 5% party damage increase for a 5 man party (possibly a little higher depending on the party).


And as I keep saying, I think there are other, better ways of raising HP max. Like, think of it this way. If you play a Levistus Tiefling and cast AoA at 3rd level once per day with the racial feature, that's similar to a +2 CON on a level 10 character in terms of mitigating HP damage. Aid and Inspiring Leader are also ridiculously efficient.

I think it's important to acknowledge that AoA isn't the same as hp. There are some very important differences. Primarily that AoA goes away after an hour and doesn't allow healing of any kind to restore you back to that maximum. Then there's also the normal pitfalls around precasting buffs leading up to a combat.

But more importantly, all those abilities can be used in conjunction with high Con - or another possibility - a cast of aid is saved (or can target a different ally) by not needing to target you with it.


Dealing damage makes you a worthwhile target. GWM+reckless makes people want to hit you when you wack for 22 damage a swing. Dealing 9.5 with sword and shield just doesn't prove to be equally appealing to target.

IMO. Any points that disregard accuracy differences when talking about -5/+10 feats should be ignored. Also, I don't think a shield has been suggested here. It's been either use the hand for grappling which then requires a 2 handed weapon or swap to a greatsword.

[Witty Username]

By 8th level, the 2 boosts in con will be 16 hp, given that a Barbarian will have 101 total HP on average.
Because I don't have books in front of me, let's take a look at that young red dragon, that is about 3 multi attacks of hp.
Meanwhile, the Str Barbarian will have 85 hp on average, which is about 3 multi attacks worth of HP more snuggly, likely a claw attack or so different.
AC is also a bit of a factor since the Con Barbarian will need to reckless to hit more often, which means taking more damage or rather damage more often.

This will be more hp as levels increase, but monsters deal bigger damage numbers as CR increases. I will need someone with a book in front of them to take over from here.

[Frogreaver]

By 8th level, the 2 boosts in con will be 16 hp, given that a Barbarian will have 101 total HP on average.
Because I don't have books in front of me, let's take a look at that young red dragon, that is about 3 multi attacks of hp.
Meanwhile, the Str Barbarian will have 85 hp on average, which is about 3 multi attacks worth of HP more snuggly, likely a claw attack or so different.
AC is also a bit of a factor since the Con Barbarian will need to reckless to hit more often, which means taking more damage or rather damage more often.

This will be more hp as levels increase, but monsters deal bigger damage numbers as CR increases. I will need someone with a book in front of them to take over from here.

I'm assuming you are meaning the CR 10 Young Red Dragon.

Bite: 10 hit, 2d10+6 piercing + 1d6 fire
Claw x2: 10 hit, 2d6+6 slashing
Breath DC 17 Dex save, 16d6 fire damage (save for half)

Barbarian Summary (level 8)

Case#1 (fails breath save)
49% Chance to fail the breath save, does so and takes 56 damage.

The Str Barbarian is at 29 hp.
The Con Barbarian is at 45 hp.

IMO, Without going further, I think that highlights alot of the potential difference in play.

*Note the Con Barbarian also will heal 16 more hp with hit dice at the next short rest if needed.

[Witty Username]

I think you will find both will likely be down when round 2 ends based on the average damages without rage anyway. Accuracy is a factor, which favors not using reckless attack in this case, since a miss is another round. Which favors the barbarian with the higher attack bonus.

[strangebloke]

Dealing damage makes you a worthwhile target. GWM+reckless makes people want to hit you when you wack for 22 damage a swing. Dealing 9.5 with sword and shield just doesn't prove to be equally appealing to target.


Reckless makes enemies want to target you because "you're wide open." Obviously this comes down to how DMs RP their monsters, but I think a wyvern seeing an exposed, unarmoreed beefcake and trying to get them first seems reasonable and I've seen a few DMs saying they rp their monsters this way.
The default tool for controlling space, the OA, is much more threatening on a Barbarian who can deal 22 damage on a swing when compared with one who can only deal 12. Once again it comes down to RP, but I don't think this is unreasonable.
You're a higher priority because taking you out reduces the party's total damage by a greater fraction.



Perhaps a different perspective on this point will help.

Most encounters you as the Barbarian don't drop. Most encounters your allies don't drop either. You could have placed your first ASI's in Intelligence instead of Str or Con and there would be no change in most encounter outcomes. The same for most adventuring days as you and your party would still end the adventuring day fine, with plenty of resources, even if your first ASI's were placed in Int instead of Str or Con. The only time +Str or +Con actually ends up mattering is in those rare encounters or adventuring days where you are pushed to your limits (either by design or by bad die rolls). So IMO, regardless of how rare that is, that's precisely what we should be talking about. How do they compare in that space?

Reckless allows Barbarians to trade defense for offense. +2 CON usually increases HP by around 10%. +2 STR increases a normal greatsworder barbarian's damage by around 23% (more if a GWM or sword build). Ergo, +2 STR gives you more total resources. Higher damage means less need for reckless which boosts HP because you get hit less.


I think it's important to acknowledge that AoA isn't the same as hp. There are some very important differences. Primarily that AoA goes away after an hour and doesn't allow healing of any kind to restore you back to that maximum. Then there's also the normal pitfalls around precasting buffs leading up to a combat.

But more importantly, all those abilities can be used in conjunction with high Con - or another possibility - a cast of aid is saved (or can target a different ally) by not needing to target you with it.

HP only matters if it keeps you from dropping to zero, and there's no reason to invest so many resources into inflating your HP to an arbitrarily high degree. Obviously, the best approach is investing in whatever gives you the most HP for the least investment, and ignoring means of increasing HP that are less efficient.

Inspiring leader has the same cost as +2 CON. +2 CON gives 1 HP/Level. Inspiring Leader gives 1 THP per level (plus CHA) per party member per short rest. On balance it gives the party something like 15 times as much HP.

Aid, cast at 3rd level, gives as much HP as +2 CON on a 10th level character... to three party members. This spell is accessible to druids and rangers and clerics, all of whom are typically in the position of having more spell slots than they can run through in a typical day (since all their best spells are concentration and they usually want to be attacking/cantriping in combat anyway.) It's one of the most efficient healing spells in the game period, and is trivial to pre-cast because it lasts a whopping eight hours.

Barbarians don't get extra ASIs. They only have 2 before level 10. There is no reason to invest in +1 HP/level when they already have more HP than anyone and there are way easier ways of boosting durability.


IMO. Any points that disregard accuracy differences when talking about -5/+10 feats should be ignored. Also, I don't think a shield has been suggested here. It's been either use the hand for grappling which then requires a 2 handed weapon or swap to a greatsword.
And yet, your quibbling with their methods aside, you know they're right in principle. GWM doesn't double damage, but in almost every case it boosts damage by a lot. You know this. If you put a level 5 Vhuman Barbarian with +2 STR and GWM against an average AC opponent typical at that level (say 14 AC) they'll do (2d6+4+2+10)*.70=16.1. A level 5 Vhuman barbarian with +2 CON and Tough, for contrast, would deal 10.4.

It's not double, but its definitely enough of a difference (over 50% more) that the DM might reasonably decide to make his monsters RP differently.

And if you're already sword and board, isn't your defense already great? 19 AC and 10 hp per level wasn't enough somehow? Why are you maniacs investing ALL your resources into defense? There's no greater return for greater investment here, and if the goal is to tank for the party, you'd be far better served investing in actual tanking features, like tavern brawler, skill expert:athletics, and sentinel.

The point about fighters bears true. If a barbarian can't function without 12 HP per level on top of resisting most BSP damage, how on earth does literally any fighter survive in melee? How do casters even survive the heat of the sun? They only have 16 AC, most of them, have no resistances and are happy to have 6 hp per level.


By 8th level, the 2 boosts in con will be 16 hp, given that a Barbarian will have 101 total HP on average.
Because I don't have books in front of me, let's take a look at that young red dragon, that is about 3 multi attacks of hp.
Meanwhile, the Str Barbarian will have 85 hp on average, which is about 3 multi attacks worth of HP more snuggly, likely a claw attack or so different.
AC is also a bit of a factor since the Con Barbarian will need to reckless to hit more often, which means taking more damage or rather damage more often.

This will be more hp as levels increase, but monsters deal bigger damage numbers as CR increases. I will need someone with a book in front of them to take over from here.

HP scales faster than monster offense, generally, but this really just makes HP gain less important.

[Frogreaver]

I think you will find both will likely be down when round 2 ends based on the average damages without rage anyway. Accuracy is a factor, which favors not using reckless attack in this case, since a miss is another round. Which favors the barbarian with the higher attack bonus.

This is not an encounter I'd be reckless attacking at all. I'd be grappling the dragon with my con barbarian and daring it to try and finish me off before my allies finished it off or at least got a control spell to land on it. 45 hp with 17 AC and damage resistance to most of it's attack damage. The Dragon's DPR vs the Barbarian in this scenario is about 16.45 (attempted to factor in round down on damage resistance, crits not included for ease). 45hp / 16.45 DPR = 2.74 Rounds till downed. 29hp / 16.45 DPR = 1.76 Rounds till downed. The Con Barbarian essentially lasts a whole round more of attacks in this case.

More importantly assuming the Str Barbarian doesn't grapple so that he can keep up his damage, why doesn't the dragon just ignore him and go for his caster and archer allies?

[Witty Username]

Doesn't the strength barbarian have a better bonus for grappling though? Young dragon has a +6 bonus so not bad (as I recall the proposed build was 14 str so, same. Edit:nope that was the other thread, so +7 from 16 Str), but the +9 from investing in Strength is going to be nice for that. Advantage on the grapple from rage is neat but not a guarantee.

My thought on lockdown was, Admittedly, under the assumption of someone more specialized being in the party. For example, my party would likely have cast a web spell in the first round, either to restrain the dragon in a ground battle, or ground it in an air battle. Either way, my play group assumptions are cropping up.

[Frogreaver]

Doesn't the strength barbarian have a better bonus for grappling though? Young dragon has a +6 bonus so not bad (as I recall the proposed build was 14 str so, same), but the +9 from investing in Strength is going to be nice for that. Advantage on the grapple from rage is neat but not a guarantee

Yes (well +8 instead of +9 at level 8). But after the failed breath save he has 29 hp and will last less than 2 rounds in melee with the dragon.


My thought on lockdown was, Admittedly, under the assumption of someone more specialized being in the party. For example, my party would likely have cast a web spell in the first round, either to restrain the dragon in a ground battle, or ground it in an air battle. Either way, my play group assumptions are cropping up.

So a few thoughts on that. I'll assume web because it's a fairly common choice we can presume most Wizards would have prepared.


Web only has a 50% or so chance of connecting.
Web can be ended via the dragon breath. Personally, I'd allow it to Breath back across it's space (it's immune to fire and has a fairly long neck - but certainly DM judgement call)
Web can be broken via a Strength Check action. Has about a 60% chance of doing so. Not necessarily the best offensive manuever on it's part but flying creatures generally can flee without too much trouble.


I would still be grappling the dragon. The grapple+web combo would provide the following benefits:


The dragon can't break free of both on the same turn. Meaning the one not broken free of can hold him the next turn. Web would get another chance to restrain again. The Barbarian would get another chance to grapple again. Essentially the Dragon is stuck with absolutely no chance of taking the air again.
The restrained condition gives the dragon disadvantage on the Barbarian. This lowers his DPR to 11.5. This increases the rounds till I drop with 45 hp post breath attack to 3.9. The Str Barbarian in comparison would live 2.5 rounds if the dragon had disadvantage.
Restrained gives me advantage without reckless attacking.

[Teaguethebean]

The restrained condition gives the dragon disadvantage on the Barbarian. This lowers his DPR to 11.5. This increases the rounds till I drop with 45 hp post breath attack to 3.9. The Str Barbarian in comparison would live 2.5 rounds if the dragon had disadvantage.
[/LIST]

So you would last longer when fighting a single big monster. That is all that has been proven. In a big fight that is 100% going to down the barbarian it would be better to be a turtle as opposed to a damage machine. I suppose you may be correct. But you are achieving very little in fights that aren't about grappling one massive foe. Additionally what if the dragon/general monster was huge size. Then your whole goal is moot. Also can I see the math, are we assuming our con barbarian has a shield, if so he cannot be attacking unless the dm is generous.

[Frogreaver]

So you would last longer when fighting a single big monster. That is all that has been proven. In a big fight that is 100% going to down the barbarian it would be better to be a turtle as opposed to a damage machine. I suppose you may be correct.

Sounds like I've made it to the 50 yard line. This discussion started off saying Str was always better, that the extra hp was nearly always pointless. 1 common, iconic enemy later and that perception is starting to shift.


But you are achieving very little in fights that aren't about grappling one massive foe. Additionally what if the dragon/general monster was huge size. Then your whole goal is moot.

It's so much harder to discuss a mock M vs N fight because there's alot more decision points that need to be considered.


Also can I see the math, are we assuming our con barbarian has a shield, if so he cannot be attacking unless the dm is generous.

I have no problem with providing math, but it's already been clearly posted about no shield. Both the Str and Con Barbarian taking the same DPR from the Dragon attacks should have clued you in if nothing else had.

10 attack vs 17 AC = 70% chance for Barbarian to be hit. With Disadvadvantage from web that becomes 49%.

Bite does 2d10+6 piercing and 1d6 fire. Damage taken on a Bit hit = 17/2 = 8.5 (round down) -> 8. 1d6 fire = 3.5. Total 11.5 on bite attack
Claw does 2d6+6 slashing. Damage taken on Claw hit = 13/2 = 6.5 (round down) -> 6.

A full round of attacks includes 2 claws and 1 bite. Factoring in accuracy that brings us to
0.7*(11.5+6+6)
0.49*(11.5+6+6) - advantage
0.91*(11.5+6+6) - disadvantage
*As previously noted, crits were not factored in for ease

Breath does 16d6 fire = 56

HP after breath = 29 vs 45

[Dr.Samurai]

The point about fighters bears true. If a barbarian can't function without 12 HP per level on top of resisting most BSP damage, how on earth does literally any fighter survive in melee? How do casters even survive the heat of the sun?
This made me laugh out loud :smallbiggrin:.


Sounds like I've made it to the 50 yard line. This discussion started off saying Str was always better, that the extra hp was nearly always pointless. 1 common, iconic enemy later and that perception is starting to shift.
I disagree. I think everyone participating in this discussion understands how hit points work and that more hit points means more damage taken before dying.

The question is what is the impact of those extra hit points/extra turn.

In the example given, we have a party of level 8 adventurers stumbling upon a young red dragon with no prep and presumably no Initiative. The red dragon beats everyone and swoops in and uses their Breath Weapon. That breath weapon, by the way, would nearly kill a wizard and leave a cleric at around 11hp. So the party not taking a hard encounter seriously is going to result in a bad ending whether or not the barbarian maxed Con or Str.

A Fire Shield set to Chill on the tank would go a long way here. The instinct is to say "Well that benefits the Con barb even more because they have more hit points" but that's not entirely the point. You only have to last as long as it takes to kill the red dragon. Resistance to Fire damage, not unreasonable here, lets each barbarian last another round. A Chill shield will half the damage of the Breath Weapon, and each time the red dragon strikes the barbarian they take 2d8 cold damage.

So turn 1, Red Dragon somehow wins initiative and uses Breath Weapon. Barbarian fails saving throw and takes 28 fire damage.

Turn 1, Str Barbarian has 55% chance to hit, but Reckless Attack improves that, and deals 1d12+7 on an attack. That's 27 damage for two attacks. Rogue deals 1d6+5d6+5 with Sneak Attack, since Barbarian is adjacent to the dragon, that's another 26 damage. Wizard does Vitriolic Sphere, DC 16. Dragon likely fails, takes 25 Acid damage. The cleric may be concentrating on Bless, which helps everyone all around and may mean the barbarians make their saving throw (1d20+2+1d4+Advantage vs DC 17). Cleric may have cast Aid as well, with higher level slots.

Anyways, whatever the cleric does on their turn, let's skip to round 2.

Dragon full attacks the barbarian. Barbarian survives (both of them) but dragon takes 27 cold damage. Dragon has taken 117 damage (Vitriolic Sphere dealt another 5d4) and is down to 61hp. Maybe it tries to move to another location and provokes an OA, or maybe it stays put. Party can certainly kill it this round or next round.

And that's assuming the wizard didn't go for control like Slow or something else. Even a Command spell has a better than even chance of shutting down 1 dragon turn if the cleric wants to go that route.

Now anyone can tear through what I just posted but the point remains that it's not clear if the barbarian needs all of those hit points to survive the encounter. The barbarian isn't alone and isn't the sole party member responsible for success. Clerics provide buffs and healing, wizards provide buffs and control. If the dragon is only making one attack because of Slow, the barbarian doesn't need max Con. If the dragon loses a turn to Command, or attacks with Disadvantage because of Web, or etc etc the barbarian doesn't need to max Con.

Meanwhile, the Str barbarian has better than even chances of hitting, before Reckless Attack, and is contributing the same damage as everyone else. The Con barb needs Reckless Attack to have a decent chance of hitting, and if the Con barb is missing on their attacks they're not helping to take out the remainder 61hp (actually more if they were grappling first turn or missing attacks, or dealing 19 damage as opposed to 27). If the Con barb doesn't have to use those extra hit points, then what impact are they having on this encounter vs the lower Str?

[strangebloke]

What I'm really taking away here is that people probably think that moon druid barbarian multiclass characters completely break the game wide open.

[Frogreaver]

What I'm really taking away here is that people probably think that moon druid barbarian multiclass characters completely break the game wide open.

I don’t. But that isn’t really what this thread is about. It’s a comparison between str and con barbarians. Moon Druids have nothing to do with that.

[strangebloke]

I don’t. But that isn’t really what this thread is about. It’s a comparison between str and con barbarians. Moon Druids have nothing to do with that.

If you're going to argue that the Barbarian's primary role is surviving an arbitrarily high amount of HP damage, it logically follows that builds that are massively more effective at this are much better.

In reality, This isn't the case. The Zealot Moon Druid who's in my level 10 party kicks ass and is basically immune to HP damage, but she's been KO-ed or removed from a fight multiple times because lol banish doesn't care how much HP you have. Neither does suggestion or a mindflayer's blast.

HP is going to be relevant sometimes as a defensive trait, but not always, and hyper-investing in it as a barbarian (who's already great at mitigating HP damage and has a ton of it) seems like a mistake. For contrast, strength is always relevant for a barbarian.

[Frogreaver]

If you're going to argue that the Barbarian's primary role is surviving an arbitrarily high amount of HP damage, it logically follows that builds that are massively more effective at this are much better.


Which has nothing to do with this discussion…

Whether a moon Druid is better than a barbarian has no impact on the comparison between a con and str barbarian. It’s an irrelevant question to this discussion. A red herring if you will.

[Teaguethebean]

Which has nothing to do with this discussion…

Whether a moon Druid is better than a barbarian has no impact on the comparison between a con and str barbarian. It’s an irrelevant question to this discussion. A red herring if you will.

I disagree in this regard. It is certainly worth noting. If we believe that con barbarians are better than strength then the next logical step is that straight barbarian is practically useless in comparison to a moon druid barbarian multiclass.

[Frogreaver]

I disagree in this regard. It is certainly worth noting. If we believe that con barbarians are better than strength then the next logical step is that straight barbarian is practically useless in comparison to a moon druid barbarian multiclass.

1. The argument is that con barbarians are equal to str ones, not better.

2. While the moon Druid comparison is interesting if true, it’s still irrelevant to a discussion about barbarian builds and how they compare to each other.

[Tanarii]

I disagree in this regard. It is certainly worth noting. If we believe that con barbarians are better than strength then the next logical step is that straight barbarian is practically useless in comparison to a moon druid barbarian multiclass.
I mean, a Barbarian in a no multiclass no feats game is practically useless in comparison to a Tier 1 or low Tier 2 Moon Druid. All classes are. They're very OP in the level range 2-6. ish.

[Dr.Samurai]

HP is going to be relevant sometimes as a defensive trait, but not always, and hyper-investing in it as a barbarian (who's already great at mitigating HP damage and has a ton of it) seems like a mistake. For contrast, strength is always relevant for a barbarian.
This is the gist.

For me, you can do either and still make it work. But Strength is going to be relevant much more often than the extra HP your Constitution is granting, unless the only reason the encounter was won is because you had that extra 16hp. That may happen, but it is unlikely.

[strangebloke]

This is the gist.

For me, you can do either and still make it work. But Strength is going to be relevant much more often than the extra HP your Constitution is granting, unless the only reason the encounter was won is because you had that extra 16hp. That may happen, but it is unlikely.

I'd further add, that I'd rather have 16 CON and Lucky, than just 18 CON, basically every day of the week.

[Teaguethebean]

I'd further add, that I'd rather have 16 CON and Lucky, than just 18 CON, basically every day of the week.

Another good point. If we want to be unkillable why not also grab resilient wisdom.

[Frogreaver]

Another good point. If we want to be unkillable why not also grab resilient wisdom.

Fully agree with grabbing resilient wisdom. The only question is on when.

[strangebloke]

Another good point. If we want to be unkillable why not also grab resilient wisdom.

Lucky covers your bases a lot better than resilient wisdom. Resilient gives you a +2/3/4 mod, all of which are less than a reroll unless the DC is very high. For reference, if the DC is 17 and you have +2 WIS, you'd still rather have lucky than resilient. And Lucky covers ALL your saves.

Resilient is also a half-feat of course, which makes it better depending on your stats.

But my point is that investing more and more into HP damage mitigation is a bad idea when you're weak to so many other forms of threats.

[Witty Username]

Yes (well +8 instead of +9 at level 8). But after the failed breath save he has 29 hp and will last less than 2 rounds in melee with the dragon.


Wouldn't you need 18 Str for plus 8? Either way, I think I was remembering unarmored barbarian thread with the 16 dex/con for AC, which wasn't actually in this thread. So math off by 1-2 points anyway.

My math was more like 3 with miss chance and rage.

As for web, that is more the first spell that came to mind, and a breath directed at the web is a definite win for the party. And I got closer to 60-70% on my quick math.

[Frogreaver]

Wouldn't you need 18 Str for plus 8? Either way, I think I was remembering unarmored barbarian thread with the 16 dex/con for AC, which wasn't actually in this thread. So math off by 1-2 points anyway.

My math was more like 3 with miss chance and rage.

16 str, 14 dex, 16 con for starting stats. Raise Con +4 or Raise Str +4 by level 8. Proficiency at level 8 is +3. Mod is +5 for Str Barb, +3 for Con Barb.


As for web, that is more the first spell that came to mind, and a breath directed at the web is a definite win for the party. And I got closer to 60-70% on my quick math.

Why you changing the scenario. I never said directed at. I said included in. It can still be directed at the nearby players while including the web.

I also have no idea what your 60-70% is referencing.

[Witty Username]

Oh, the 60-70% is likelihood of dragon failing the dex save against web, I don't recall the dex save of a dragon off hand, but it was either 14 - 16, so +3 being conservative. Wizard is likely to have an 18 int so save of 16, so 12 or less the dragon has about a 60% chance of failure.
Overall, me being distracted by math, but I like making sure my quick math is correct.

[Frogreaver]

Oh, the 60-70% is likelihood of dragon failing the dex save against web, I don't recall the dex save of a dragon off hand, but it was either 14 - 16, so +3 being conservative. Wizard is likely to have an 18 int so save of 16, so 12 or less the dragon has about a 60% chance of failure.
Overall, me being distracted by math, but I like making sure my quick math is correct.

A Young Red Dragon has a +4 Dex save (actually has 10 Dex). A wizard by level 8 is most likely IMO to have 18 Int (feats tend to be valuable for them). That means the save DC is 8+3+4 = 15. *Proficiency bonus is still +3 at level 8. The Dragon has a 50% chance to save vs this wizard's web.

[Witty Username]

A Young Red Dragon has a +4 Dex save (actually has 10 Dex). A wizard by level 8 is most likely IMO to have 18 Int (feats tend to be valuable for them). That means the save DC is 8+3+4 = 15. *Proficiency bonus is still +3 at level 8. The Dragon has a 50% chance to save vs this wizard's web.

Hm, I may need to double check prof bonuses on some of the PC help I was giving.

That does mean that a Barbarian raising con definitely doesn't have +8 str(athletics).
Edit: Oh, the str barb, I misread your entire thing.

[Frogreaver]

Hm, I may need to double check prof bonuses on some of the PC help I was giving.

That does mean that a Barbarian raising con definitely doesn't have +8 str(athletics).

Correct, he has +6 (and advantage from rage). The str one has +8.

[Witty Username]

Yep, yep. I definetely misread your thing.

Edit: I anyone cares, my party just got to 9th level but I misremembered they level they got to as 8th, but I knew they got to +4 Proficiency bonus. Hence why my numbers were off.

[Xetheral]

Note that it is possible to combine GWM and grappling (one round at a time) by taking Tavern Brawler and finding a sufficiently large blunt object that your DM rules counts as an improvised Maul. It's not a particularly good idea, but it at least lets one combine the two strategies.

[Bosh]

Doesn't the strength barbarian have a better bonus for grappling though? Young dragon has a +6 bonus so not bad (as I recall the proposed build was 14 str so, same. Edit:nope that was the other thread, so +7 from 16 Str), but the +9 from investing in Strength is going to be nice for that. Advantage on the grapple from rage is neat but not a guarantee.

My thought on lockdown was, Admittedly, under the assumption of someone more specialized being in the party. For example, my party would likely have cast a web spell in the first round, either to restrain the dragon in a ground battle, or ground it in an air battle. Either way, my play group assumptions are cropping up.

In this specific situation (one big target that can be grappled, party members who can stay out of reach of the target and damage it from range as long as I can maintain my grapple) I'd rather have con than strength just so that I can eat the damage for as long as possible. For a more normal fight with multiple targets I'd rather have more strength so that I can kill some targets and reduce incoming damage.

[Frogreaver]

In this specific situation (one big target that can be grappled, party members who can stay out of reach of the target and damage it from range as long as I can maintain my grapple) I'd rather have con than strength just so that I can eat the damage for as long as possible. For a more normal fight with multiple targets I'd rather have more strength so that I can kill some targets and reduce incoming damage.

I follow that sentiment. I’d just say that even with multiple enemies. It gets pretty dynamic. Say the wizard webs 3 of the 4 enemies and they lack ranged attacks. Is it better to grapple the one so that it can’t try to force concentration checks on the wizard?

Or let’s say he webs 2 of 4 enemies. Is the barbarian better off grapple tanking one and letting the party deal with the other? That’s going to be a pretty close call.

I think against large numbers of enemies the str barbarian might be a bit better. Though a lot there depends on how effective you can utilize positioning and taunting to get enemies attacking you. If that works out well then con again could be better.

[Bosh]

I follow that sentiment. I’d just say that even with multiple enemies. It gets pretty dynamic. Say the wizard webs 3 of the 4 enemies and they lack ranged attacks. Is it better to grapple the one so that it can’t try to force concentration checks on the wizard?

Or let’s say he webs 2 of 4 enemies. Is the barbarian better off grapple tanking one and letting the party deal with the other? That’s going to be a pretty close call.

I think against large numbers of enemies the str barbarian might be a bit better. Though a lot there depends on how effective you can utilize positioning and taunting to get enemies attacking you. If that works out well then con again could be better.

A lot of this is pretty situational. In general if there are four enemies and only one isn't immobilized you can probably lock that guy down pretty well without grapple with stuff like the threat of opportunity attacks if he doesn't take the disengage action if you have a couple melee guys since he's not going to be as tough as big smashy fight against one solo boss monster.

A lot of this can also REALLY depend on DM. A lot just don't engage in "gank the mage" tactics much at all while other really focus on breaking concentration.

I've been engaging in some of these grappling tactics with my barbarogue who's significantly more squishy than a strength straight barb let alone a con straight barb but having been keeping alive with my goliath stone endurance ability and some emergency lay on hands. However bonus action dash is just incredibly useful since I can get at the guy who needs to be grappled very fast and then drag them very far away from the squishies. Having expertise on top of the advantage on athletics is nice as well.

[Frogreaver]

A lot of this is pretty situational. In general if there are four enemies and only one isn't immobilized you can probably lock that guy down pretty well without grapple with stuff like the threat of opportunity attacks if he doesn't take the disengage action if you have a couple melee guys since he's not going to be as tough as big smashy fight against one solo boss monster.

Yea, it's very situational. My point is that the Str Barb and Con Barb excel at different scenarios and that which set of scenarios comes up the most is going to be very campaign dependent and mostly impossible to know ahead of time. Which is why I deem the two roughly equals instead of one better than the other.

I will say that the more melee characters you have in your party, the more you probably want the Str Barb.
If you have no melee characters in your party you probably want the Con Barb.


A lot of this can also REALLY depend on DM. A lot just don't engage in "gank the mage" tactics much at all while other really focus on breaking concentration.

Yea, personally I assume a healthy mix. Some enemies do that and some don't. There's pros and cons for the con barb in both scenarios though. Same for the Str.

One other thing I've found is that using unarmored defense seems to affect tactical decision making of tactical enemies differently than they would react to an armored melee character. While this won't always be the case, it can be a nice boon to tanking capabilities (them targeting you is a win).


I've been engaging in some of these grappling tactics with my barbarogue who's significantly more squishy than a strength straight barb let alone a con straight barb but having been keeping alive with my goliath stone endurance ability and some emergency lay on hands. However bonus action dash is just incredibly useful since I can get at the guy who needs to be grappled very fast and then drag them very far away from the squishies. Having expertise on top of the advantage on athletics is nice as well.

Yea. Barb Rogues are awesome. Though at some point with uncanny dodge, evasion and the mobility to properly position yourself with cunning action you probably end up more tanky than the full barb till level 20.