Ancestral Guardian Barbarian Advice (Tank vs Bruiser)

[Genoin]

(Preface by saying this campaign will go to level 20, and stats were rolled.)

My Ancestral Guardian Barbarian is level 3. My general plan is to take Barbarian to 6, then go Fighter for at least the next 11 levels. Here are my current specs.

Level 3 Variant Human Barbarian
VH Feat: Polearm Master

Str 18
Dex 16
Con 18
Int 10
Wis 15
Cha 12

So, there are a couple of ways I can see the build going, and I will ideally want to make the decision before the next level up, the reason for which will become apparent in a moment.

The first way is a more traditional bruiser style barbarian, taking GWM at level 4, MC into Champion Fighter with GWF style, +2 STR at level 10, and +2 Con and Resilient (Wisdom) at levels 12 and 14. In this build I would go Barbarian 6 > Fighter 11 > Barbarian 3, getting brutal critical. The level 19 ASI would probably be Lucky.

The second is to lean more into the tank style, using a spear (works with PAM) and shield, and take Sentinel at level 4, MC into Battlemaster Fighter with Dueling style, +2 STR at level 10, and +2 Con and Resilient (Wisdom) at levels 12 and 14. In this build I would go Barbarian 6 > Fighter 12 > Barbarian 2, getting the extra ASI (because brutal critical is less good with a d6 vs d10). The level 18 ASI would probably be Lucky, and level 20 would maybe be +2 Dex for the bump to AC, Initiative, and Dex saves.

Obviously those could be tweaked a bit based on feedback, but I would love to hear what people think about the pros and cons of each build (beyond a simple more damage vs more survivability comparison) and how you would change any part of the build(s) that isn't already chosen (aka anything after level 3).

The rest of the party is a Chronurgy Wizard (from Wildemount), an Assassin Rogue, and a Life Cleric.

[Alucard89]

I would stay pure till 14 level. Reaction average 14 mitigation + 14 damage deal (force) for free is great. People underestimate it cause "its only 4d6" but it's free and it's 2 for 1 (mitigation and damage) on reaction. So I would go 14/6 (champion or Battlemaster).

Otherwise I would go 12/8

[Genoin]

I would stay pure till 14 level. Reaction average 14 mitigation + 14 damage deal (force) for free is great. People underestimate it cause "its only 4d6" but it's free and it's 2 for 1 (mitigation and damage) on reaction. So I would go 14/6 (champion or Battlemaster).

Otherwise I would go 12/8

I am actually thinking about going 16/4, because as it was pointed out to me somewhere else, Persistent Rage is really nice at those highest levels. But with Battlemaster especially, I feel like it's worth delaying the Avenging Ancestors in order to get the fighter features 8 levels sooner.

[Crucius]

The Ancestral Guardian as a subclass is more geared towards tanking, though you can of course play it as a bruiser highly effectively. By using hit and run tactics (using a polearm or the mobile feat) you can force the enemies that you have 'tagged' with your spirits to follow you (and hopefully take an opportunity attack from an ally) or attack an ally for suboptimal damage. If you are going with the GWM feat be aware that your first attack will have a rider (the ancestral spirits) therefore it is unwise to use the -5/+10 until after the first hit (lower hit chance and more likely to kill the target if you do hit, wasting a very powerful class feature).

For your tank build I notice that you have many reactions build in. So much so that, should you go this route, it may not be worth going to Barb 6 as you might end up never using one feature or the other, because you have only the one reaction you can use.

My advise is to go for the bruiser archetype, and use your 40 feet movement to tag and kite enemies with ancestral protectors, forcing them into tough spots through good positioning and coordination with your allies.

And remember kids, more damage gives you no benefit unless it kills 'em dead!

[Alucard89]

The Ancestral Guardian as a subclass is more geared towards tanking, though you can of course play it as a bruiser highly effectively. By using hit and run tactics (using a polearm or the mobile feat) you can force the enemies that you have 'tagged' with your spirits to follow you (and hopefully take an opportunity attack from an ally) or attack an ally for suboptimal damage. If you are going with the GWM feat be aware that your first attack will have a rider (the ancestral spirits) therefore it is unwise to use the -5/+10 until after the first hit (lower hit chance and more likely to kill the target if you do hit, wasting a very powerful class feature).

For your tank build I notice that you have many reactions build in. So much so that, should you go this route, it may not be worth going to Barb 6 as you might end up never using one feature or the other, because you have only the one reaction you can use.

My advise is to go for the bruiser archetype, and use your 40 feet movement to tag and kite enemies with ancestral protectors, forcing them into tough spots through good positioning and coordination with your allies.

And remember kids, more damage gives you no benefit unless it kills 'em dead!

Yup, these are good points. But mobile is not that useful if he would use reach weapon since most enemies have 5 feet range, but it wouldnt hurt.

However I would go for PAM + Sentinel combo first and kite enemies away from your team. Run in, hit, run back, enemy run into your range - PAM OA -> Sentinel stops him in place and so on. Then I would focus on STR increase unless your compaign has chance for strength magic items. If you can get strength magic items - then I would grab Mobile as your 3rd feat.

[Man_Over_Game]

I agree with Crucius. Tanking comes in two formats:

Durability.
Tauntability.

And the Ancestral Guardian is all-in on Tauntability.

It basically makes you the best target out of the entire team, which is why it offers zero bonuses to your defenses to compensate.

A buddy of mine actually did the math and a Wizard doing Wizard things in melee combat is about as tanky from the AG buffs as the AG himself from rage/armor.

So the best thing you can do is up your survivability, as that improves everyone else in the party.

You can actually improve your contribution dramatically with anything that lets you kite around your team, like throwing weapons, Disengage, whips, etc. For that reason, Mobile is a secret on Ancestral Guardians that few parties get to experience, as it allows the Barbarian to get Advantage on his attacks while evading the downsides of Reckless Attack.

There are some crazy builds you can make out of the AG. Multiclass into Drunken Master to strike and Disengage, or go into Rogue to land sneak attacks on dual-wield whips.

I made the mistake of building my AG as a front-line bruiser, and it ended up both boring and redundant. The AG features only work when the enemy isn't attacking you, so you have to make that as likely of a scenario as possible. Just like Sentinel, if the enemy was already planning on just standing there and hitting you, you aren't getting anything

[Specter]

If you do go tank, Sentinel is probably better than GWM.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I have great experience with the Ancestors Barbarian. Have one as a backgrounds PC right now. She's a wood elf mostly (DM is running a Zelda world, wood elves reskinned for Gerudo)

I have her rages reinterpreted as meditative focus where the spirits are imparting their skills on her, guiding her movements.

Uses Mobility only right now (level 6). Basically fights like phase one of the Thunder Blight from Breath. Zaps forward, hits then zips away and you can chase her if you want. Once she gets Sentinel it becomes tag a mob setting off the Spirits, zip across the battlefield to swipe at a second target, then once it moves react and stop it in its tracks.

[Amechra]

If you hadn't already picked up Polearm Expert as your 1st level feat, I would have suggested Shield Master. It synergizes very well with Danger Sense, and shoving people to the ground as a bonus action does nasty things in conjunction with Sentinel.

Which Battlemaster maneuvers are you planning on picking up? And could I tempt you to consider the Cavalier instead? Unwavering Mark kinda overlaps with Ancestral Protectors, but you can mark multiple people and it'll give you yet another way to punish people who mess with your party members. Sure, you have a bonus action attack already from Polearm Expert, but Unwavering Mark's attack doesn't rely on you taking the Attack action, letting you take other actions if you need to.

[Man_Over_Game]

If you hadn't already picked up Polearm Expert as your 1st level feat, I would have suggested Shield Master. It synergizes very well with Danger Sense, and shoving people to the ground as a bonus action does nasty things in conjunction with Sentinel.

I actually went that exact build, but found it very disappointing in real use. Shield Master doesn't synergize with the AG features, since AG requires the enemy to attack your allies, but Shield Master makes the enemy's most likely target you.

Shield Master works really well for grappling, but that also is contrary to your AG features.

Thinking about it, he will have some excellent synergy with PAM if he can get Sentinel. Sure, Sentinel is just another means of making the Barbarian the most likely target, but PAM can keep the hostile at bay.

So Barbarian can: Reckless Attack 10 ft away (taunts)->Move away->Enemy Approaches Barbarian for taunt->PAM OA->Enemy loses movement and wastes entire turn.

[Amechra]

I actually went that exact build, but found it very disappointing in real use. Shield Master doesn't synergize with the AG features, since AG requires the enemy to attack your allies, but Shield Master makes the enemy's most likely target you.

I'm thinking of it less as a direct synergy and more as a complimentary feature - you can hit one creature to set up your AG features, and then shove a different creature to the ground. It's another way to spread out your control.

I agree that PAM + Sentinel has better synergy in general, but come on. You've got advantage on Strength checks, why not use that?

[MrCharlie]

So I'll be a contrary voice here and say that kiting is anti-synergy with tanking, no matter how your features work. But first, a bit of a preface-I'm kinduve assuming you're one of the only frontline characters in the party. As you add more party members, everything I'm saying becomes less important, because A. I'm assuming you'll be outnumbered and B. I'm assuming you'll be the only character physically occupying space who can take a hit for free, both of which become less true as you add more tanky characters (and, as regards to being outnumbered, more AOE). If you have another martial character-Paladin, Fighter, another Barbarian-then your best bet is to go for a bruiser build and focus on singling out the biggest, baddest enemies to target, while bouncing in and out of combat. In other words, do precisely what crucius and man_game_over are suggesting.

However, as the solo tank, a lot of where a Tank shines is enclosed spaces where he can physically block enemy movement, and in cutting off movement in open spaces so that allies can make distance and use their range effectively. If you kite, you've completely ignored that ability-and while a Wizard may be technically tankier against the first enemy you attack, the second third and fourth won't give two damns about your abilities, particularly given you only have one reaction. Further, the idea of a wizard tanking is absurd unless they can make DC 10 concentration checks for free; any instance of damage triggers one. Also, if you kite, you open yourself to initiative screwary-where the party attempting to keep moving backwards risks separating party members from the rest of the group and put them outside of the range of your abilities-for instance, if there are line of sight blockers. And you also allow enemies to react fluidly to buffs-another advantage of having a single tank is that you can throw all the protective spells on that one person, then rely on them blocking doorways to ensure he's targeted.

But I absolutely agree with several of the other points raised here; in particular, you're going to need survivability. To get it, I recommend switching between a shield and spear and reach weapon as the situation warrants. As other people will point out, a spear means you can't stop enemies out of your reach with sentinel-but tough luck. You increase your AC and thus have more staying power against enemies with ranged attacks or reach, and against multiple enemies. Further, the sentinel thing only works if you hit-and reckless attack does not work off turn. In general, reckless attack will be a situational ability for you, used at the start of combat and generally used less as you suffer more damage and have to start relying on avoiding further hits, if you use it at all. When using a reach weapon you instead try to avoid ever letting the enemy actually reach the party, and doing enough damage that multiple enemies aren't a problem because they die.

The first tactic is very useful against swarming enemies-where you have a lot of weaker targets. If you know you will face that, then shield and spear. The second is good against a singular enemy-one big beasty.

The only actual level-up decision that would influence this is your fighting style. I'd normally suggest defensive because you can then completely ignore the decision in favor of always being better at both, but you won't wear armor with those stats, whew, that's some hot ****. Instead, I suggest taking dueling because great weapon style is such a mediocre damage increase in comparison to it, and when you are facing lots of small enemies static damage modifiers help ensure they die regardless of your luck-although actually one-shotting an enemy is a bit unlikely as time goes on regardless.

That leaves further feats. I like resilient WIS because A. it increases survivability and B. it helps ensure that the frontline isn't suddenly another part of the enemies frontline-and, oops, all of your features would work if someone charms you and has you beat on an ally, and you can even stop them from disengaging and waiting out the charm! Otherwise, increasing STR is a priority but so is increasing CON, then maybe even taking the Tough feat. Again, that stat array makes you a thicc boi (or gurl) and you can afford to delay the attribute increases a bit.

Edit: And if you interpret shield master as having an order of operations (I.E. attack first, then prone) it's a trap unless your first attack isn't an attack roll (I.E. you grapple). Don't take it. The first bullet is worse than PAM, the second just doesen't work on 95% of effects, and the third is okay but requires a reaction and you have three of those already.

[LudicSavant]

Laconic answer:

On AG, I like raising my chance to hit and my chance to not be hit.

Sentinel doesn't stack much with your existing ability to punish movement/attacks on allies.

GWM allows you to lower your AC and miss your ancestral mark.

Res(Wis) reduces your status as a Giant Enemy Crab.

[Man_Over_Game]

So I'll be a contrary voice here and say that kiting is anti-synergy with tanking, no matter how your features work.

But why?

This is exactly how the Swordmage did it in 5e, and it was probably the single best tank in the game, and it did so by running away.

I'm not saying it has to be true, but saying that it can't doesn't seem right.

For reference, the value of a front-line body-blocker is a a potential single attack in 5e. To me, it seems like it'd be easy to find something that contributed more to the party in that round.

[MrCharlie]

But why?

This is exactly how the Swordmage did it in 5e, and it was probably the single best tank in the game, and it did so by running away.

I'm not saying it has to be true, but saying that it can't doesn't seem right.

For reference, the value of a front-line body-blocker is a a potential single attack in 5e. To me, it seems like it'd be easy to find something that contributed more to the party in that round.

I never said you can't. I'm saying there is an inherent anti-synergy you are still overcoming there. Tanking is about mitigating damage to the party, usually by focusing it onto yourself. If you can mitigate damage to the party without actually being there to be attacked that's great, but you're doing that at the expense of the simplest way to accomplish this, namely positioning. When your class freely grants resistance so that taking the damage is more palatable, and you can easily build for AC on top of that to further reduce damage, I don't see why kiting is a huge positive.

I also have no idea what you're talking about by saying that body-blocking is worth a single attack. Occupying a physical space can vary from useless to amazing. If you're between enemies and allies that's at the least +2 AC to everyone, often including the one doing the blocking because melee enemies start blocking ranged enemies shots. At an extreme I've seen clever or intelligent positioning negate dozens of enemy turns when the foes were all melee or terrain blocked LOS.

On the flip side I've also seen enemies run straight on past the tank if they can't block the door. I've seen attempted doorway blocking turn into a traffic congestion benefiting the enemy. I've seen near TPKs because the Barbarian thought he was tanking when he was really locking the party in a death-trap. But I've also seen kiting builds backed into a corner with no way out find themselves unprepared for traditional tanking. I've even seen players attempt to kite-tank while leaving a vulnerably party member to die, because initiative went poorly and the enemy got clever with grappling. It depends so heavily on tactical positioning that it's really hard to make a definitive statement-but, on the whole, I've seen a lack of people using their occupied space in combat backfire far more than kite builds actually work. I've seen a kite build pull off it's power in all its glory about five times-and yes, it was glorious, but you so rarely actually have room to retreat that I am extremely skeptical of them.

My only conclusion is that I think that emphasizing the kiting when the party lacks a brick-wall means your ignoring a vital tactical option. I think it is far more likely that you will end up stuck in melee even if you try to kite because it made more sense to block a doorway, and thus that mobile is a wasted feat. I absolutely agree that the kiting build can be supremely effective-but it's miles and above better if there is already a tank and you're supporting them using reach and mobile then taking over if they are feeling the hurt. If you're not the only tank you can still have body-blocking while you also negate a single targets damage against the tank via dipping in and out of reach.

As for the swordmage-I am unfamiliar with them as they are homebrew/3rd party content, and I suspect most others will be to. However at a glance they have a variety of different builds, with one build in particular fitting what you described and being basically a more efficient EK mixed with a warlock and focus on reactions. I think calling it "the best tank" vastly overestimates how good reactions are, as while it appears good against a single big threat it both has to declare a protected target ahead of time and use a reaction to execute most of its abilities. Is also has several abilities that all want to use a bonus action, is somewhat (but decreasingly as you level) MAD, and finally has mediocre HP, resistances, and AC for a tank which it has to supplement with spells. It has a decent ability to avoidance tank, but only against singular creatures using booming blade (which ought to be required).

I don't hate the class, but it can't tank against multiple enemies very well at all, which is where I think your entire tanking philosophy falls apart in general. I don't think singular enemies which are balls of HP, AC, and attack damage are the main threat for a tank to really deal with, and view most such enemies are overhyped-and those that aren't have more threatening things to do than attack you to begin with.

[Man_Over_Game]

Sorry for the confusion, but the Swordmage was an official 4e class. I just wanted to show an example of tanking that didn't require the standard "stand here and take it" playstyle.

And while you're right about the +2 AC on blocking the enemies' ranged attacks the reverse is also true. There isn't a difference between allied or hostile enemies when determining half cover.

I'm not necessarily saying that you have to spend most of the time running away, but from my experience, the characters that run out of HP first are the front-liners, not your wizards and rogues. You're already more likely to die first just by being a Barbarian, and AG makes that an even bigger disparity.

The most efficient way of playing 5e is basically managing the party's HP in a way that everyone runs out of HP all at the same time, as characters are at 100% fighting power until they run out of HP. To do that, a Barbarian likely has to do everything he can to mitigate damage towards himself. If there comes a point where the Barbarian needs to absorb more damage instead of deflecting it onto his friends, he can easily do that whenever he'd need to. But it's not like you can afford to take the Dodge action like anyone else can and risk losing Rage.

[MrCharlie]

Sorry for the confusion, but the Swordmage was an official 4e class. I just wanted to show an example of tanking that didn't require the standard "stand here and take it" playstyle.

And while you're right about the +2 AC on blocking the enemies' ranged attacks the reverse is also true. There isn't a difference between allied or hostile enemies when determining half cover.

I'm not necessarily saying that you have to spend most of the time running away, but from my experience, the characters that run out of HP first are the front-liners, not your wizards and rogues. You're already more likely to die first just by being a Barbarian, and AG makes that an even bigger disparity.

The most efficient way of playing 5e is basically managing the party's HP in a way that everyone runs out of HP all at the same time, as characters are at 100% fighting power until they run out of HP. To do that, a Barbarian likely has to do everything he can to mitigate damage towards himself. If there comes a point where the Barbarian needs to absorb more damage instead of deflecting it onto his friends, he can easily do that whenever he'd need to. But it's not like you can afford to take the Dodge action like anyone else can and risk losing Rage.

No wonder I was so confused. There is a 5e swordmage homebrew and it's a bit outta left field, but seems true to the 4e version!

Anyway, the fact that the characters who run out of HP first are frontliners is absolutely true, but has to do with significant perception bias; the frontline is being attacked, so of course they have to deal with going down more.

And yeah, a Barbarian has issues with more all-or-nothing, but I do think a Barbarian can use the dodge action, particularly if he has sentinel and polearm master, as the chances that enemies will completely stop doing anything for a turn is slim. Also metagamey; enemies haven't read the players handbook. I just, in general, don't feel like deflecting damage to your friends is A. the tanks capital-J Job, or B. a reliable enough strategy in practice to invest even a single feat in. In the situations where you can do it, the baseline ancestral features accomplish it.

[Amechra]

And if you interpret shield master as having an order of operations (I.E. attack first, then prone) it's a trap unless your first attack isn't an attack roll (I.E. you grapple). Don't take it. The first bullet is worse than PAM, the second just doesen't work on 95% of effects, and the third is okay but requires a reaction and you have three of those already.

I'm not sure this tracks - even if your DM uses the most prescriptive version of the feat (where you have to make the shove after all of your attacks), I wouldn't call it a trap for a tank-y Barbarian. Don't look at it as a way of getting advantage on your own (non-OA) attacks. Look at it as a way to get an ally out of melee combat so that they can retreat without having to Disengage, or as a way to halve your target's speed and improve allied melee attacks (granted, that second bit probably wouldn't be very useful for the OP's party).

Also... what's the third reaction? I don't see another one besides "make an opportunity attack" or Spirit Shield.

[MrCharlie]

I'm not sure this tracks - even if your DM uses the most prescriptive version of the feat (where you have to make the shove after all of your attacks), I wouldn't call it a trap for a tank-y Barbarian. Don't look at it as a way of getting advantage on your own (non-OA) attacks. Look at it as a way to get an ally out of melee combat so that they can retreat without having to Disengage, or as a way to halve your target's speed and improve allied melee attacks (granted, that second bit probably wouldn't be very useful for the OP's party).

Also... what's the third reaction? I don't see another one besides "make an opportunity attack" or Spirit Shield.

Opp attack, spirit shield, and sentinel attack on enemy attacking an ally. Sentinel is a very useful feat in general for this build and I recommend keeping it.

The problem with that is that you can do the same thing but do a bonus action attack instead by simply pushing as your action.

[MrStabby]

You can actually improve your contribution dramatically with anything that lets you kite around your team, like throwing weapons, Disengage, whips, etc. For that reason, Mobile is a secret on Ancestral Guardians that few parties get to experience, as it allows the Barbarian to get Advantage on his attacks while evading the downsides of Reckless Attack.

Really? I don't think I have ever seen an ancestral guardian barbarian that didn't take Mobile. As in, literally every one I have ever seen in play has had it, often at 4th level.

[Corran]

Although I find the arguments over the value of a hit-and-run ancestral barbarian convincing, I think (but not 100% sure) I would prefer to play a bruiser barbarian in this group.

The wizard and (I am assuming) the rogue too, will try to fight from a distance (maybe with some hit and running mixed in from the rogue), leaving the cleric as the only committed frontline member. You could hit and run too, and make the cleric about as tough as you against one enemy, but that allows the enemies to:
1) Focus down the cleric, which will most likely eat half damage from one enemy (the one you debuffed), so like you, but will also eat full damage from everyone else. Which puts a lot of pressure both on the hp of the cleric but also on their concentration too. A dodging cleric that relies a lot on spirit guardians could make this work in some cases, but that leads us to #2.
2) Or, the run away from the cleric and hunt down everyone else. Which makes the cleric's strongest tool (ie spirit guardians) a lot less effective. Also, this can create extra danger for the wizard and the rogue.

While on the other hand, playing a bruiser seems to fit better. You are staying close to the cleric, taking hits instead of him (which means you can still put your debuff into good use, since you are using it to protect the cleric's hp and concentration from the toughest foe around). This allows the (life) cleric to spend more of their healing magic on you, rather than on them, which is good since they can heal bonus hp because of their domain, and because your hp are your primary defense contrary to the other pc's. It can certainly mean more (melee) enemies inside the spirit guardians (which will be more reliable with every extra hit coming your way), assuming the wizard and the rogue can keep themselves safe (ie on the move, or hiding, etc). And you end up doing more damage than you would with the hit and run approach, which plays well with the barbarian's mechanics anyway.

If I was to multiclass with this character (I'd probably do it at least after level 7, cause taking a big chunk of damage before your get to activate your rage sucks), I think I would be tempted by 2 rogue levels more than anything else. And that's because I would probably want dash as a bonus action, cause one thing your group seems to be really weak against, is ranged enemies. So I would consider taking 2 rogue levels (maybe even mobile as a feat at some point), to help me close the distance with them more easily (which would also allow the rogue to make use of their sneak attack against them; ie you engaging ranged enemies in melee is also good because it allows the rogue to use sneak attack against them, while before it might not be possible -if for example there was nowhere for the rogue to hide- or at least a certain thing).


If you end up playing the hit and run build and you end up multiclassing into fighter, I'd suggest battlemaster for commander's strike, cause it's great with a high level rogue in the party. Definitely trip attack too, so that you have something useful against flying opponents, cause flying opponents will give you big trouble if you cannot get someone to engage them so that the rogue can sneak attack them (but even if you do, I'd still pick trip as an alternative that may sometimes even work better than whatever other way your group may have for dealing with flying enemies).

[tormund]

There are some crazy builds you can make out of the AG. Multiclass into Drunken Master to strike and Disengage...

This seems like a fun build, but I can't figure out how to stat it. You could have pretty incredible damage with high Str, and be a great grappler, but your AC isn't great. Or, boost Dex and either Con or Wis and at level 6 you behave like a level 3 Drunken Master, with the addition of Ancestral Guardian's stickyness feature. Seems like the thing to do is just roll with the low AC, lay the hurt on with Reckless Attack + Flurry of Blows, and try not to end your turn where enemies can reach you. What am I missing?