Awakened frenzied barbarian bear

[shadowseve]

For rp reasons I’m being allowed to play an awakened brown bear. We took off the racial hit dice and are staying at level 6. I’m wanting to go frenzied barbarian if there is a good way to optimize it. So help would be appreciated. Bear puns are welcome cuz I can barely contain the excitement. 😂

[H_H_F_F]

What does your party look like? FBs are extremely deadly, and you'll need to figure out safety protocols in order to avoid accidentally massacring the entire party every time a trap hits you.

By the way, if you're looking for silly, why not bear warrior? You could be a brown bear transforming into a brown bear.

[shadowseve]

It’s a solo campaign with a ranger mpc following. It doesn’t have to be frenzied, but it def fits a bear and can add some fire to the campaign. I just want to make sure he can kick ass.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

It’s a solo campaign with a ranger mpc following.Is the ranger your humanoid animal companion? A humanimal companion, if you will.

[shadowseve]

A humanoid traveler that is helping him atm. So, a traveling humanoid cat like race that is a ranger. Basically a dm pc.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

A humanoid traveler that is helping him atm. So, a traveling humanoid cat like race that is a ranger. Basically a dm pc.Can he use wild empathy to calm you when you're frenzying?

Also, you should definitely go lion totem barbearian. Pounce is great when you have three natural attacks, with potential access to actual weapons (preferably telekinetic ones that dance around you, somewhat like Noctis, from FFXV).

Would you consider going lion totem barbearian 1/psychic warrior? Because they have a power that allows you to expand your size by up to 2 categories.

[shadowseve]

Maybe wild empathy with lots of marbles as a backup. lol 😂 with lion totem do I have to take the whole thing or just the level 1 replacement. I had thought about pounce, leap attack etc.

As far as psychic warrior, rp wise that wouldn’t suit him. He’s comical, not the smartest bear, with a quick temper. He has a soft heart for women though. Especially the ranger he’s traveling with.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Maybe wild empathy with lots of marbles as a backup. lol 😂 with lion totem do I have to take the whole thing or just the level 1 replacement. I had thought about pounce, leap attack etc.Here's what the spirit totem ACF says in Complete Champion:


Spiritual Totem
Choose a spiritual totem: bear, eagle, fox, lion, or wolf. Once you do so, you are forever bound to that animal spirit. Your connection grants you special abilities based on the totem you have chosen (or that has chosen you, as some see it). The DM can add more totems to the above list as desired, using those presented here as guidelines.
Level: 1st.
Replaces: This benefit replaces the fast movement class feature.
Benefit: You gain one of the abilities described below, depending on the chosen totem. Each of these effects is a supernatural ability.

[snip]

Lion Totem: Regal and intimidating, the powerful lion is a symbol of nobility among the races of the wild. By selecting him as your spiritual totem, you gain the pounce ability (MM 313).

Totem Manifestation
As the bond between you and your totem grows closer, the spirit of your chosen animal reveals itself more strongly.
Level: 7th.
Replaces: This benefit replaces the damage reduction class feature, including all damage reduction increases gained at higher levels of the barbarian class.
Benefit: When you select this ability, your connection to your spiritual totem intensifies. If you have not yet chosen a spiritual totem, you must do so now, but you gain only those abilities described here, not those for the spiritual totem alternative class feature. Each of these effects is a supernatural ability.

[snip]

Lion Totem: If you select the lion as your spiritual totem, he rewards you with the ability to loose a powerful and intimidating roar. When you roar, every creature within a 30-foot radius must succeed on a Will save (DC 10 + 1/2 your barbarian level + your Str modifier) or be shaken for a number of rounds equal to your barbarian level. This ability can be used once per day, and you gain an additional use per day at each level at which your damage reduction would increase (10th, 13th, 16th, and 19th levels).But who takes more than a few levels before hitting a PrC or multiclassing out?

[shadowseve]

He doesn’t have to be the most optimized in the world. I’m wanting to stick with the barbarian theme since rage def fits that animal.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Consider letting the ranger use you as her steed. You can't reach her to attack while she's on your back, and it would let her stay close to wild empathy you into calming down whenever you frenzy. There are downsides, of course, especially if you're raging out of control and she can't calm you down. Nothing like riding a frothing, raging beast to get the blood pumping.

Is she ranged or melee, by the way? Because they each have downsides, considering you're a melee brute, so she'll be in melee as well, but ranged would allow her to attack creatures from a distance after you've killed everything in reach.

[shadowseve]

She’s been riding Me as a Mount so far. Great idea on having her stay on me. She’s ranged btw. I think the dm, being, a newer dm would allow wild empathy to work.

[Chronos]

Remember, he might not be the smartest bear, but he is smarter than the average bear.

And as for the puns, I can't think of any, but hey, Wotja gonna do?

[Darg]

What does your party look like? FBs are extremely deadly, and you'll need to figure out safety protocols in order to avoid accidentally massacring the entire party every time a trap hits you.

You only enter a frenzy in combat (counting rounds and rolled initiative). So no random trap out of combat hitting the FB and massacring the party out of no where.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

"Awakened bear barbarian" has been a thing on these boards repeatedly for a very long time. Maybe do some Google searches on www.giantitp.com? Also, make sure to search for "barbearian."

[liquidformat]

Ok let's first talk about controlling yourself during a frenzied rage.

For starters Endurance + Steadfast Determination let's you replace your wis mod with your con mod for will saves, also don't auto fail fort saves on a nat 1. Its an all around great combo and very worth while on Barbarians.

Righteous Wrath lets you scare evil creatures and makes you immune to the downsides of the frenzied berserker prc, only down side is it is an exalted feat so you have to be a holy bear. This is a great choice even better if you want to mix fear/intimidation into your build.

Some other random fun stuff that might be cool for your bear. You can be a bear of many animal forms; Lion Totem Barbarian + Wolf Barbarian + Wolf Berserker Feat + Knock Down Feat nets you pounce +8 to trip and you can free trip anyone you deal 10+ damage to. If you want to embrace intimidate; Intimidating Rage feat + Never Outnumbered + Imperious Command is a very nasty combination especially if you add in Righteous Wrath, Champion of Gwynharwyf, and frightful presence feat from Drag.

[H_H_F_F]

You only enter a frenzy in combat (counting rounds and rolled initiative). So no random trap out of combat hitting the FB and massacring the party out of no where.

I assume you're relying on the "during combat" line in frenzy, and not trying to make some general statement that anything that refers to rounds or actions cannot happen until initiative is rolled. Well:

A. Complex traps roll initiative. Even if you're right, that's all it'd take.

B. The ability doesn't just say "if she takes damage", it explicitly calls out traps. Specific trumps general. The whole "in addition" line is an exception to the general rules for frenzy. Therefore, I think failing a will save against damage will start combat, just like, say, a contingency spell being activated.

[Darg]

I assume you're relying on the "during combat" line in frenzy, and not trying to make some general statement that anything that refers to rounds or actions cannot happen until initiative is rolled. Well:

A. Complex traps roll initiative. Even if you're right, that's all it'd take.

B. The ability doesn't just say "if she takes damage", it explicitly calls out traps. Specific trumps general. The whole "in addition" line is an exception to the general rules for frenzy. Therefore, I think failing a will save against damage will start combat, just like, say, a contingency spell being activated.

Combat is when you roll initiative and count rounds. Only doing one or the other is not combat.

A prior rule can limit the scale of a successive rule. "Can enter a frenzy in combat. Automatically enters frenzy when taking damage." is functionally the same as, "In combat, automatically enter frenzy after taking damage."

A contingency spell doesn't start combat. Context starts combat. If you contingency a cure spell on a saying a keyword, when saying it out of combat it wouldn't start combat.

Sure, an extremely complex trap could require rounds and initiative, but core style traps don't need both at the same time as far as I'm aware.

[H_H_F_F]

I agree that context starts combat, that's precisely my point. You have an insane tome bomb that goes of the rails when he takes an arrow. That's all the context you need, and the question of whether it's an invisible/hidden assassin or a trap that shot the arrow is a meaningless distinction.

A goblin darkstalker with greater invisibility hides in the shadow. Shoots an arrow at the berserker, and then melds into the stone wall. The berserker can't tell where the arrow is coming from, and has recognized no oponnent in sight, but initiative is ticking and he has to roll a will save or become frenzied and hulk out on her own allies. That's unquestionably RAW, I think.

Now, the moment you concede that context starts combat, to me you just have to concede that whether the arrow with no known source suddenly bulging out of the Berserker's chest was shot by an invisible goblin in the wall or by a hidden mechanical apparatus in the wall is a meaningless distinction to what she does next. "You guys are walking down the corridor, when suddenly, you feel a sharp pain, and see an arrow stuck in your chest. Make a will save." Same exact context, in-world.

[Darg]

I agree that context starts combat, that's precisely my point. You have an insane tome bomb that goes of the rails when he takes an arrow. That's all the context you need, and the question of whether it's an invisible/hidden assassin or a trap that shot the arrow is a meaningless distinction.

A goblin darkstalker with greater invisibility hides in the shadow. Shoots an arrow at the berserker, and then melds into the stone wall. The berserker can't tell where the arrow is coming from, and has recognized no oponnent in sight, but initiative is ticking and he has to roll a will save or become frenzied and hulk out on her own allies. That's unquestionably RAW, I think.

Now, the moment you concede that context starts combat, to me you just have to concede that whether the arrow with no known source suddenly bulging out of the Berserker's chest was shot by an invisible goblin in the wall or by a hidden mechanical apparatus in the wall is a meaningless distinction to what she does next. "You guys are walking down the corridor, when suddenly, you feel a sharp pain, and see an arrow stuck in your chest. Make a will save." Same exact context, in-world.

The rules for switching focus onto allies is pretty broad. If a goblin shoots an arrow, the berserker knows that something shot an arrow. Just because the creature or source is invisible to the berserker it doesn't mean they think it no longer exists. They'll attempt to find the creature or trap and thrash it. Frenzy still allows wisdom based checks so it's not like they become brain dead.

Also, you skipped steps in that in that final scenario. The party rolls initiative, everyone with turns before the berserker goes first, and then the berserker can make spot checks to be aware that the invisible attacker (DC 20) is within 30 ft. Meaning, they go hunting until they believe the attacker is no longer there. And it's not like the general direction an arrow was shot isn't easily determined just like how a creature would know what direction an invisible creature attacked them with a sword from.

[H_H_F_F]

The rules for switching focus onto allies is pretty broad. If a goblin shoots an arrow, the berserker knows that something shot an arrow. Just because the creature or source is invisible to the berserker it doesn't mean they think it no longer exists. They'll attempt to find the creature or trap and thrash it. Frenzy still allows wisdom based checks so it's not like they become brain dead.

Also, you skipped steps in that in that final scenario. The party rolls initiative, everyone with turns before the berserker goes first, and then the berserker can make spot checks to be aware that the invisible attacker (DC 20) is within 30 ft. Meaning, they go hunting until they believe the attacker is no longer there. And it's not like the general direction an arrow was shot isn't easily determined just like how a creature would know what direction an invisible creature attacked them with a sword from.


The direction is easily determined - but if you concur that there are scenarios in which an invisible attacker they couldn't find would make them go hulk smash, then I don't see the (contextual) argument that a trap they can't find wouldn't cause the same thing - given that in-world, the character has no way go distinguish between these two scenarios, and experiences them the exact same way.

[Darg]

The direction is easily determined - but if you concur that there are scenarios in which an invisible attacker they couldn't find would make them go hulk smash, then I don't see the (contextual) argument that a trap they can't find wouldn't cause the same thing - given that in-world, the character has no way go distinguish between these two scenarios, and experiences them the exact same way.

The difference is how they are handled. You don't start using combat rules just to cure a wound. In the same way you don't need to start combat to resolve and deal with a standard trap. The mind set between the need for combat rules and noncombat rules is completely different. A berserker isn't going to frenzy just because he gave himself a papercut or a kid bumped into him and bruised his shin. It's just ridiculous to think that is implied by the ability itself.

Random standard trap? No combat. Random invisible attacker? Roll initiative. If frenzy was meant to be activated from any damage no matter what, they wouldn't have made it reliant on initiative by making it only being able to activate on their first turn. I mean, the berserker can literally just keep delaying if they want to and it won't ever activate until their first action.

[H_H_F_F]

The difference is how they are handled. You don't start using combat rules just to cure a wound. In the same way you don't need to start combat to resolve and deal with a standard trap. The mind set between the need for combat rules and noncombat rules is completely different. A berserker isn't going to frenzy just because he gave himself a papercut or a kid bumped into him and bruised his shin. It's just ridiculous to think that is implied by the ability itself.

Random standard trap? No combat. Random invisible attacker? Roll initiative. If frenzy was meant to be activated from any damage no matter what, they wouldn't have made it reliant on initiative by making it only being able to activate on their first turn. I mean, the berserker can literally just keep delaying if they want to and it won't ever activate until their first action.

I think the dependency on their turn is pretty standard, for a rage-like ability. You need a feat to rage outside of your initiative.

Now, I think your logic here is a bit circular. "Starting combat is contextual, and the context which makes this not start a combat is that it isn't combat". You know what I mean?

I don't need to think that a paper cut will cause a frenzy to think that "five arrows hit you from the darkness down the corridor ahead" is the same context, regardless of the mechanism behind it being a goblin, a mindless construct, or a trap. I agree with you that any reasonable interpretation of "out of enemies" would include first running towards the danger or the like - but if no one (or nothing) can be found, the berserker's attention is turned towards everyone else. If the cause if injury is destroyed, the berserker's attention goes towards everyone else.

The writers explicitly mentioning traps is just icing on the cake, but it really strengthens my perception that this isn't just emergent RAW, it's clearly RAI.

If five traps hit you, and the noise alerts a monster in the next room, that begins sneaking towards the party (it'll arrive in one turn's time), you'd clearly roll initiative. In that case, would you say the Berserker is still not in danger of berserking? Because if you say he would berserk in that case, it just seems like forcing the RAW into an insensible position, while my reading can lead you down a RAW, RAI and Common Sense common-ground, in my opinion.

[Chronos]

If you weren't in combat when you entered frenzy, you are now. One way or the other.

[Darg]

If five traps hit you, and the noise alerts a monster in the next room, that begins sneaking towards the party (it'll arrive in one turn's time), you'd clearly roll initiative. In that case, would you say the Berserker is still not in danger of berserking? Because if you say he would berserk in that case, it just seems like forcing the RAW into an insensible position, while my reading can lead you down a RAW, RAI and Common Sense common-ground, in my opinion.

Why would the party role initiative before the monster reaches/surprises the party? At best as the DM you'd start counting rounds, but there isn't a reason to role initiative yet because the party hasn't engaged. The example used in the DMG is that two parties on opposite sides of a door are aware of each other, but you don't roll initiative until the door is opened.

My interpretation is just as RAW, RAI, and common sense as yours and it also doesn't end up mechanically stupid. An FB falling down a pit trap and takes falling damage from the trap. Would you really have the FB waste an extremely short daily resources because you think that any damage at any time would send them into a frenzy?


I don't need to think that a paper cut will cause a frenzy to think that "five arrows hit you from the darkness down the corridor ahead" is the same context, regardless of the mechanism behind it being a goblin, a mindless construct, or a trap.

No, no they are not. The first two are creatures capable of combat while a trap is not capable of combat. I don't think any one would say that a trap fights you. If the threat doesn't lead to combat, then why in the world would you role initiative to slow down the game? If arrows hit you from a creature, as a DM I would have them roll initiative because combat started.


The writers explicitly mentioning traps is just icing on the cake, but it really strengthens my perception that this isn't just emergent RAW, it's clearly RAI.

It requires ignoring the very first sentence of the ability. RAW and RAI, it's quite clearly meant to only activate in combat.

[H_H_F_F]

Okay, I feel like we're not going to agree on this, and that we mean very different things when we say "context".

To me, it's senseless to claim that the exact same input you give your players/characters will have different results depending on what further input you plan on giving them in the future - "Huh, I'm not angry at all. No worries, friends, it must be a trap. If it was a goblin, I'd be freaking furious right now".

RAW does lead to these readings sometimes, and I don't think that's the case here - but as I said, I think we're walking in circles by now.

[Darg]

Okay, I feel like we're not going to agree on this, and that we mean very different things when we say "context".

To me, it's senseless to claim that the exact same input you give your players/characters will have different results depending on what further input you plan on giving them in the future - "Huh, I'm not angry at all. No worries, friends, it must be a trap. If it was a goblin, I'd be freaking furious right now".

RAW does lead to these readings sometimes, and I don't think that's the case here - but as I said, I think we're walking in circles by now.

It's a game. Having clear mechanical lines between different scales or states of play is basically a standard you'll find everywhere. We're speaking around each other because it seems you don't think there is a clear line. The DMG disagrees with that, but it's ok to play the way you want.