Barbarian Math—Are Certain Feats ‘Required’ for the class?

[Thunderous Mojo]

It seems that many people feel Paladins and Barbarians derive significant value from the same three feats: Great Weapon Master, Polearm Master, and Sentinel.

Are these three feats ‘essential’ for Barbarian damage output?
If so, does this trinity feats have the same value for each Barbarian subclass?

The Rage ability itself requires a Bonus Action to activate, which means, (barring a Barbarian Pre-Combat Rage Activation), one use of PAM’s Bonus Action attack is not going to be available on the turn Rage is activated.

A Frenzy Barbarian, might want to use PAM’s Bonus Action attack so as to not have to activate Frenzy. Yet, a Path of the Storm Herald Barbarian has powers that use both their Bonus Actions and Reactions.

An Ancestor Barbarian, likewise, has it’s Reaction spoken for, as could a Beast-Tail Barbarian.

The Trinity of feats, that is commonly recommended that Barbarians should take, has notable action resource conflicts for many of the subclasses, it would seem.

Is this a case of group think assuming that if the feat combinations work for Paladins, then it works for Barbarians as well?

[Gignere]

It seems that many people feel Paladins and Barbarians derive significant value from the same three feats: Great Weapon Master, Polearm Master, and Sentinel.

Are these three feats ‘essential’ for Barbarian damage output?
If so, does this trinity feats have the same value for each Barbarian subclass?

The Rage ability itself requires a Bonus Action to activate, which means, (barring a Barbarian Pre-Combat Rage Activation), one use of PAM’s Bonus Action attack is not going to be available on the turn Rage is activated.

A Frenzy Barbarian, might want to use PAM’s Bonus Action attack so as to not have to activate Frenzy. Yet, a Path of the Storm Herald Barbarian has powers that use both their Bonus Actions and Reactions.

An Ancestor Barbarian, likewise, has it’s Reaction spoken for, as could a Beast-Tail Barbarian.

The Trinity of feats, that is commonly recommended that Barbarians should take, has notable action resource conflicts for many of the subclasses, it would seem.

Is this a case of group think assuming that if the feat combinations work for Paladins, then it works for Barbarians as well?

PAM may have some conflict with Barbarian action economy but Great Weapon Master doesn’t really. I think for Barbarians GWM is the more mandatory feat as they can get advantage on demand.

[Leon]

Nope. No feat is required for anything, given that they are optional rules by the book. And even when using them most of the feats can be useful for a character that it suits (except grappler) That you may occasionally have to make a choice between doing X with your BA over Y is a minor concern.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Nope. No feat is required for anything, given that they are optional rules by the book. And even when using them most of the feats can be useful for a character that it suits (except grappler) That you may occasionally have to make a choice between doing X with your BA over Y is a minor concern.

I’m a bit underwhelmed at the amount of ‘value added’ by this post.
(Stressing this is my personal opinion of the particular post in question)

Firstly, the prompt makes it clear we are talking about games that use feats…the most common sort of game that is talked about on this board.

Minus two Quatloos for style point violations.🃏

An ability like a Zealot’s Zealous Presence is fine. I was not bringing up abilities that occasionally conflict with the three feats above.

The abilities I was referencing were the abilities that were more “At Will” and thus are directly competing with the feats.

[Yakk]

Reckless Attack makes GWM very, very good for Barbarians.

Assuming a 65% hit rate, a 1d12+7 attack deals 9.1 damage per swing.

With reckless and GWM, it becomes 64% hit rate and 10% crit rate for 1d12+17 or 15.7 damage per swing.

Without GWM, it becomes 88% hit 10% crit for 12.5 damage per swing.

With GWM and no Reckless, it has 40% hit 5% crit and does 9.7 damage per swing.

Reckless adds 3.4 damage per swing; GWM adds another 3.2 on top of it. Meanwhile, most characters earn under 1 damage per swing from the feat.

Doubling the benefit of Reckless without increasing the cost is pretty large.

Note that +1 to your attack stat is worth about 1.3 damage per swing (from accuracy and per-tap damage). This is why GWM on a non-barbarian is only great on low-AC targets or when you have a source of advantage.

Other paths of boosting your damage output as a barbarian run into strength-requirements (elven accuracy doesn't work) and the bonus action problem (your first bonus action is tied up entering rage).

PAM is mostly about synergy with GWM. Turning that 1d4+7 off-hand attack to 1d4+17 makes it much beefier. It isn't bad without GWM, but with GWM+Reckless is it very good.

Sentinel is arguably a different path. The Barbarian is taking half damage (even if they are easy to hit); sentinel lets you make the foe go after you instead of ignoring you.

Is this "required"? I mean, spending your ASI on GWM doubles the benefit of one of your major class features without increasing the drawback.

And 1d4+17 offhand attack is +12.7 damage per round (including missing), which is larger than +6.4 from GWM on your two main attacks (it costs you a damage per swing from the smaller die).

PAM first might be an option actually, as PAM is generally a really strong feat. 1d4+7 without reckless etc is 6.3 damage per round flat out.

[LudicSavant]

Barbarian Math—Are Certain Feats ‘Required’ for the class?

The Beast Barbarian in a campaign I'm currently DMing doesn't have those feats, nor does the Ancestral Nightmare in the Eclectic Builds thread. And in both cases they derive some good benefits from not taking GWM.

So I'd say GWM/PAM/Sentinel is just a route you can take. Not required.

[Leon]

I’m a bit underwhelmed at the amount of ‘value added’ by this post.
(Stressing this is my personal opinion of the particular post in question)

Firstly, the prompt makes it clear we are talking about games that use feats…the most common sort of game that is talked about on this board.

Point still stands: NO FEAT IS REQUIRED TO PLAY ANY CLASS.

Any feat can be useful, many people on here get too hung up on the three mentioned and get bogged down by what the Minmax optimun might be. Having choices with what to do with your Bonus action is a good thing, despite some people apparently being incapable of making such choices on any given turn.

[diplomancer]

GWM works very well for Barbarians; but the one feat that is really required for Barbarians is Res (wis), though you can probably wait to level 8 to take it.

[LudicSavant]

Classes like Ancestral and Zealot get somewhat less value from GWM than, say, Bear, simply because of the value of their on-hit effects. It's still a good feat for them, just not as beneficial.

Beast can use their claws and grapple jumps and such.

Wolf Barbarians have a lot of their offensive value in granting Advantage to allies.

Some Barbarians lean quite a bit into grappling (especially the speed-boosting ones), and unless you're a Simic or something you can't beat people over the head with GWM while they're prone/grappled.

PAM competes for bonus actions and reactions. Again, useful feat, but not something I'd say every Barb should take, especially the ones with more bonus/reactions.

As for Sentinel, if I'm an Ancestral Guardian I might actually want allies to get targeted more than myself.

There are options. Reckless GWM is kinda just the most obvious strategy for getting some kind of functional output on a Barbarian, but that doesn't mean it's the only one. And its offensive benefit is offset by having a poor AC (or outright terrible when you're using Reckless too).

[strangebloke]

If you want to be a big and heavy damage dealer, its pretty hard to argue against those feats. They will give you more than most other feats or ASIs in that regard, not just by a little, but by a lot.

With that said, barbarians being "damage dealers" is something that comes down to taste. Ludic already mentioned the Ancestral Guardian, which is pretty much the most useful barbarian subclass imo. That's a class that doesn't really want to be taking massive to-hit penalties for extra damage, because the goal is not damage, its damage mitigation.

Beast Barbarians have decent damage without GWM. The claws are fine and you can get other feats. Get inspiring leader or skill expert. Even a normal TWF barbarian does pretty okay at most levels.

Finally, there's multiclassing. A druid/barbarian doesn't really need GWM or PAM much at all, neither does the barbarogue, but these are both very solid multiclasses that are greater than the sum of their parts.

In other words, no. GWM/PAM are the best damage boosting feats for the barbarian, but damage isn't everything.

[OldTrees1]

No. The devs have confirmed 5E is balanced around the assumption the PCs don't boost their primary stat or take feats. A Barbarian with 14 Str at 20th level and 0 combat feats (maybe they took skilled) is viable. Typical? No, but viable. No feat or ASI is literally required.

As for utility or ubiquity:
Those are 3 useful feats, although they are not conjoined. There are many cases where one of the feats is relevant and the other 2 are dead weight. Furthermore, there are plenty of Barbarians without any of the 3 feats (although GWM is very common for Barbarians due to the Greataxe trope)

So go make the Barbarian you want to make. Nothing is holding you back.

[Psyren]

It seems that many people feel Paladins and Barbarians derive significant value from the same three feats: Great Weapon Master, Polearm Master, and Sentinel.

Are these three feats ‘essential’ for Barbarian damage output?

In short - no. as Leon said, no feat is "essential," and DPR at an actual table depends on a lot of factors that theorycrafting on forums can't take into account.


In long - there are DPR calculators (LudicSavant posted in this thread and has a great one in their sig if you haven't used it yet) that you can use to truly weigh the difference between having these three vs. not having them. This is a starting point for theorycrafting their effectiveness in a whiteroom fashion, and then once you've completed that exercise you can start to layer in more complex factors like the nature of your specific campaign. For example:

Spoiler

Show

- Will they help your damage in a nondescript battle vs. simply pumping Strength - most likely yes, assuming your Strength was good (16+) to begin with.
- Will they help your damage when hitting accurately is an issue (higher-than-expected AC enemies, you have low Strength, or disadvantage is common) - possibly, and not as much as you might think.
- Will they give you a better combat result than a bunch of other random feats like Chef and Skilled - definitely. If you're sure you're going for feats (i.e. the first two aren't an issue) then these are a strong option.
- Will they be the right choice for your feats in every campaign? Not necessarily. For example, if your barbarian is in a campaign with a lot of mindscrew opponents like fey or mindflayers or vampires, I would probably get a much higher "damage output" by grabbing a feat like Resilient (Wis) - because your DPR output while feared or charmed or incapacitated all over the place is zero, and gets even worse if those effects cause you to waste Rage uses because then they are actually lowering your DPR on future rounds. This is especially true if I don't have allies who can help me with this weakness like a paladin's aura. Similarly, if opponents have higher-than-expected accuracy and damage output, then I might want the greater defense a shield can provide, because every round I spend on the ground making death saves will also be a zero DPR round.

Again, some of these factors can be tested in a DPR calculator, but some can't.

If so, does this trinity feats have the same value for each Barbarian subclass?

This one is a clear no for Beast; polearms can help them (assuming they go with the bite or tail) but they can perform quite well without them.

For the rest, polearms are generally useful (but see the caveats above.)

[RogueJK]

Classes like Ancestral and Zealot get somewhat less value from GWM than, say, Bear, simply because of the value of their on-hit effects. It's still a good feat for them, just not as beneficial.

A good route for an Ancestral Barbarian is to wait to activate GWM's -5/+10 until after you've landed your Ancestral Protectors hit, since that auto-applies to your first hit on your turn.

So land your debuff first with full attack bonus, then on your 2nd attack and potentially GWM BA attack you can try to stack on the +10 damage.

[Frogreaver]

It seems that many people feel Paladins and Barbarians derive significant value from the same three feats: Great Weapon Master, Polearm Master, and Sentinel.

Are these three feats ‘essential’ for Barbarian damage output?
If so, does this trinity feats have the same value for each Barbarian subclass?

The Rage ability itself requires a Bonus Action to activate, which means, (barring a Barbarian Pre-Combat Rage Activation), one use of PAMÂ’s Bonus Action attack is not going to be available on the turn Rage is activated.

A Frenzy Barbarian, might want to use PAMÂ’s Bonus Action attack so as to not have to activate Frenzy. Yet, a Path of the Storm Herald Barbarian has powers that use both their Bonus Actions and Reactions.

An Ancestor Barbarian, likewise, has itÂ’s Reaction spoken for, as could a Beast-Tail Barbarian.

The Trinity of feats, that is commonly recommended that Barbarians should take, has notable action resource conflicts for many of the subclasses, it would seem.

Is this a case of group think assuming that if the feat combinations work for Paladins, then it works for Barbarians as well?

No group think. The barbarian subclasses that rely on bonus actions and reactions are obviously less good with PAM in particular and GWM to a lesser extent. What you are observing is general talk about the barbarian class vs specific talk about a particular barbarians including subclass. Since most Barbarians greatly benefit from those feats and nearly all barbarians benefit some from those feats - even if a few particular barbarians donÂ’t really benefit from them - or very little.

[Chaos Jackal]

Required? Not per se.

Due to its features, barbarian gravitates towards the weakest type of character - namely, STR melee martial - while still needing other stats, having extremely limited options for anything other than melee STR combat, the worst scaling in the game, largely horrible subclasses and ultimately middling damage and defenses.

What does that translate into? Well, for the average barbarian, ASIs are always quite the investment. Because the class goes downhill after tier 1 and there's plenty of bases to cover, even for the things often assumed to be the barbarian's schtick, doing something like boosting Str or Dex or Con, or going for some other option meant to focus more on survivability, is plenty viable, simply because, with how limited the barbarian is, any help is welcome.

Being so ASI-starved also means that traditional feat combinations, whose caveats and tradeoffs can be largely ignored on something like a fighter, actually leave more pronounced weaknesses behind. Go too hard on the damage part and you'll end up being unexpectedly squishy, owing to limited rages and the class' otherwise limited defenses combined with a dangerous playstyle. On top of that, there's the added conflict of rage and PAM, which, while not the worst thing ever, is definitely something you could do without. GWM does synergize very well with Reckless alright, but see above about defenses; go too hard on Reckless and you will get your face beaten in if the game's on the less forgiving side.

Then there's a rather funny coincidence, which was highlighted by other posters above. The best barbarian subclasses are ironically far from requiring the aforementioned feats, at least in such bulk. The Zealot's damage rider means diminishing effects for GWM and when it comes to PAM you have an extra bonus action to consider later on, though at least that part is rather insignificant due to the 1/long rest restriction said bonus action has. Beast works with its own weapons and therefore doesn't synergize with weapon feats. And Ancestral Guardian is more defensively focused on top of having a dedicated reaction, so GWM is not as important to them while PAM and/or Sentinel require some consideration before picking due to contesting the aforementioned reaction (albeit here one of the two could arguably work as a complimentary effect to Spirit Shield).

So, required? Nah. If you do want to go balls to the wall with damage and are utilizing a middle-of-the-pack or worse subclass then yeah, it would be a good idea to select these feats. But there's subclasses and playstyles that don't rely on these and arguably those subclasses and playstyles are superior for reasons beyond giving you more flexibility with your ASIs, so you're far from condemned to PAM+GWM/Sentinel.

[Skrum]

It really depends on the rest of your party. If they'd pretty optimized, then I'd say yes, a barb is going to be strongly incentivized towards one of these feats to (semi) keep up. If the party is just people playing whatever, then a stock barb will do just fine without any particular feat*

*Though I think there's a strong chance over time that the barbs falls behind. At very low levels they'll do great, but by level 7-8 there's a good chance the druid and wizard players have figured out their class and know what works. A barb, an already limited class, is going to begin to struggle to remain relevant beyond soaking hits meant for the far more dangerous casters.

[Dork_Forge]

No feats are required for the Barbarian or any other class, whilst they're a way you can do things, it's typically more a forum echochamber to keep up with some unstated, always moving damage threshold.

In reality I've never seen a Barbarian without those feats feel like they aren't contributing, likewise I've never seen a Barbarian Reckless every turn for more than one session before they learn that is not a good idea.

I think if a feat is actually required to make a class fun to play/functional, both of which are highly subjective of course, then it speaks more to a catastrophic failure in design rather than anything else. I don't think that kind of design failure really exists in 5E classes.

You put math in the title, was there a certain threshold you were considering for Barbarian damage to be 'worthwhile?'

To directly address your last question in the OP, yes that tends to be group think IMO. They're both Str-based melee-obligated classes so people apply the same things to both, despite them having very different abilities and options.

[Willie the Duck]

Heh. Shouldn't have used the word 'essential' I guess. Pretty predictable (and in no way wrong, let's be clear) results.

Yakk has the right of the math with reckless-GWM synergy. They work really well together. The rest is in the details. As others have pointed out, 2wf (beast or otherwise) work fine. Other-bonus-actions make PAM less good. Also worth mentioning that any kind of pigeon-holing is going to be advisable or inadvisable as the magic item drops your DM puts out in the game world. Dual Wielder might be the optimal feat choice because you find a trident+2 and a morningstar+3 but have only seen a +1 maul and non-magical halberd in the past 4 levels.

Choose what is right for you. The game does work without feats. If there was a must-have for barbarians, I would say it is resilient:wis more than anything. GWM has obvious synergy with reckless attack, so consider it. Sentinel has obvious benefit for any front liner (with a squishy back line party, and whose DMs don't have the enemies stick to the front line without combat effects forcing it), so consider that. PAM is a great way to get another attack per round (with obvious limitations), so consider it is you want.

Personally, the game is forgiving enough that I feel free to pick ritual caster: druid or healer or whatever I think best fits the character.

[LudicSavant]

Yakk has the right of the math with reckless-GWM synergy.

I'll add that said math is for a Barbarian with no other features or circumstances affecting their damage output. No party buffs, no magic items, no being a Zealot, not even Brutal Criticals (which makes me wonder why he's using a Greataxe, but whatever).

If you're instead looking at, say, a Zealot with a Flametongue, the math becomes very different indeed (-5/+10 becomes a significantly worse deal in such circumstances, even with Reckless).

[KirbyDerby]

In high optimization games, GWM and PAM are both required on a barbarian, as well as any melee martial, as without them you don't deal enough damage to justify being a martial. Sentinel less so, as by the time you can pick it up (level 8), many enemies will be able to get around you or have reach weapons. Of course, most people don't play high optimization games, so they're less necessary, although you should still probably pick up at least one of either PAM or GWM.

I think if a feat is actually required to make a class fun to play/functional, both of which are highly subjective of course, then it speaks more to a catastrophic failure in design rather than anything else. I don't think that kind of design failure really exists in 5E classes.

Bad news, 5e is filled with design failures, and it doesn't just stop at the classes. Never assume that something in this edition is inherently balanced, because you will be proven wrong more often than not.

[LudicSavant]

In high optimization games, GWM and PAM are both required on a barbarian, as well as any melee martial, as without them you don't deal enough damage to justify being a martial. Sentinel less so, as by the time you can pick it up (level 8), many enemies will be able to get around you or have reach weapons. Of course, most people don't play high optimization games, so they're less necessary, although you should still probably pick up at least one of either PAM or GWM.

Required is quite an overgeneralization. Especially when you say it not just for Barbarians, but for any martial.

For a simple example, Revenant Blade is like a half-feat version of PAM that trades the Reaction attack for +1 AC and +1 to your martial's primary stat (either Strength or Dexterity).

[Dork_Forge]

Bad news, 5e is filled with design failures, and it doesn't just stop at the classes. Never assume that something in this edition is inherently balanced, because you will be proven wrong more often than not.

What class, in your opinion, requires feats?

I never said that 5E was perfectly balanced, or that there was zero design failures, I said that no class was so badly designed that it required feats to function.

Whilst I appreciate the advice, I've been playing and running the game extensively since 2015 and am more than familiar with it's failings, some of those failings however, are more about people's expectations rather than dysfunctional mechanics.

[KirbyDerby]

For a simple example, Revenant Blade is like a half-feat version of PAM that trades the Reaction attack for +1 AC and +1 to your martial's primary stat (either Strength or Dexterity).

Revenant Blade doesn't work with GWM, and requires you to be an elf, so no feat at level 1. It's fine for lower optimization games, but not high ones.

What class, in your opinion, requires feats?

I never said that 5E was perfectly balanced, or that there was zero design failures, I said that no class was so badly designed that it required feats to function.

Whilst I appreciate the advice, I've been playing and running the game extensively since 2015 and am more than familiar with it's failings, some of those failings however, are more about people's expectations rather than dysfunctional mechanics.

I may have exaggerated a bit. While no class NEEDS feats to function, many do need certain feats to be viable in high optimization games. All martials need a BA attack feat and a -5/+10 feat to deal good damage. Casters also have some important feats to pick up, but they're mainly for concentration protection, and aren't as immediately necessary (you'll still want to pick them up early though).

[Dork_Forge]

I may have exaggerated a bit. While no class NEEDS feats to function, many do need certain feats to be viable in high optimization games. All martials need a BA attack feat and a -5/+10 feat to deal good damage. Casters also have some important feats to pick up, but they're mainly for concentration protection, and aren't as immediately necessary (you'll still want to pick them up early though).

I run two Tier 3 games with regular Deadly + encounters, I don't find any of those claims accurate.

[KirbyDerby]

I run two Tier 3 games with regular Deadly + encounters, I don't find any of those claims accurate.

Can you elaborate? What are the parties like? How many encounters do you run per adventuring day?

[stoutstien]

Revenant Blade doesn't work with GWM, and requires you to be an elf, so no feat at level 1. It's fine for lower optimization games, but not high ones.



I may have exaggerated a bit. While no class NEEDS feats to function, many do need certain feats to be viable in high optimization games. All martials need a BA attack feat and a -5/+10 feat to deal good damage. Casters also have some important feats to pick up, but they're mainly for concentration protection, and aren't as immediately necessary (you'll still want to pick them up early though).

If you think that all weapon users need a bonus action attack via feats then you're not really playing in tier 3. You're basically still playing tier one just with bigger numbers. That goes double for optimized tables. Damage falls off faster than anything else.

[LudicSavant]

GWM and PAM are both required on a barbarian, as well as any melee martial

Revenant Blade doesn't work with GWM, and requires you to be an elf, so no feat at level 1. It's fine for lower optimization games, but not high ones.

- Strength-based martial builds are not so dominant in high-op as you suggest, let alone exclusively so. There are dex martial builds that can kill Deadly+ threats before they even take a turn (or before a Strength-based GWMer would even come up in initiative).

- This is 2022, and VHuman hasn't been king of the hill race-wise for some time. Races such as MPMM Shadar-Kai or Mark of Shadow are currently very strong.

- GWM will actually lower your DPR if you boost damage-per-hit high enough, or are fighting a tough enough enemy. Both of these are situations you may encounter in high-op. Yes, even if you have Advantage.

[strangebloke]

Revenant Blade doesn't work with GWM, and requires you to be an elf, so no feat at level 1. It's fine for lower optimization games, but not high ones.

As ludic was saying, you're overgeneralizing. This might be a true point for barbarians who are feat starved and have an accuracy boost as their only real DPR boosting mechanic, but as a generalization for every melee martial at every table its extremely wrong. PAM and GWM are the domain of specific strength-based accuracy-boosting martials who are hyper focused on melee and don't have a secondary damage source. What is a rogue/BM who focuses on using sentinel and various BM maneuvers to get 2 sneak attacks a round going to do with GWM or PAM? Nothing! Paladins have loads of other uses for their BAs, and can deal insane damage without GWM involved at all.

Adding to this, things like Flametongues exist in real play, and a basic S&B fighter looks a lot more sexy when dealing +2d6 damage per swing. Such a fighter dropping their flametongue to switch to GWM is a fool. Heck, if they have a flaming greataxe or whatever they might still not want to use GWM, because the AC threshold where GWM becomes worth it has narrowed considerably and the DM might be fond of high-ac monsters. Finding specifically a +2 glaive is not something you can count on at every table.

Moreover, its possible to be a melee martial without being a melee hyperspecialist. An S&B BM with a flametongue, ambush, commanding presence, trip attack, inspiring leader, and ritual caster:wizard isn't inherently weaker than a PAM/GWM fighter with precision attack.

[KirbyDerby]

I think we're talking about two different levels of optimization here. When I say high optimization, I mean high. Casters are taking dips to get good armor and defensive spells, and are choosing and using the best spells in the game. To keep up, martials need to be dealing as much damage as possible, as that is their primary role in a high OP party, which they usually accomplish by taking either PAM + GWM or XBE + SS. To that end, barbarians are pretty much the only viable melee martial build in these games, since their damage with Reckless Attack + Rage leads to great damage, while most of the other classes can't meaningfully outdamage a fighter with XBE + SS (yes, that includes paladins). The S&B fighter with a flame tongue will still be able to contribute, but won't be as effective. A fighter with a +2 hand crossbow will be dealing around the same damage, can fight at range and melee equally effectively, and gets a bigger boost to damage from gaining advantage. Rogues in melee aren't going to be doing so hot, given that they have poor survivability and lackluster damage mitigation (Uncanny Dodge consumes your reaction, which is the entire point of you being in melee).

[Dr.Samurai]

To that end, barbarians are pretty much the only viable melee martial build in these games, since their damage with Reckless Attack + Rage leads to great damage, while most of the other classes can't meaningfully outdamage a fighter with XBE + SS (yes, that includes paladins).

*sees fellow barbarian enthusiast, draws greatsword*