Can the Barblock be viable?

[strangebloke]

There was no "last turn" before the turn you activated the Rage on, that's the thing.

there's always a "last turn." If there's no turns outside combat (which creates loads of problems - how do you cast something that has a casting time of 'one round') then the last turn before the first turn of combat would be... the last turn of last combat, whether that was 30 seconds ago or 20 years ago.

And yes this is silly, but you're the one insisting that an ability somehow takes account of when combat started.

And yes, I also wouldn't run it this way. I don't think most would. But the rules are what they are and its worth mentioning.

[Psyren]

there's always a "last turn." If there's no turns outside combat (which creates loads of problems - how do you cast something that has a casting time of 'one round') then the last turn before the first turn of combat would be... the last turn of last combat, whether that was 30 seconds ago or 20 years ago.

And yes this is silly, but you're the one insisting that an ability somehow takes account of when combat started.

And yes, I also wouldn't run it this way. I don't think most would. But the rules are what they are and its worth mentioning.

If someone insisted on reading it that way, bold is exactly what I would counter with. That or kicking the ground IC every 6 seconds.

[RogueJK]

The two classes work together. Barbarian and Warlock do not. When you do Barbarian stuff you can't do Warlock stuff except perhaps Devil's Sight if you took it. When you do Warlock stuff you can't do Barbarian stuff. You are not Barbarian and Warlock; you are Barbarian or Warlock forever behind a single class of either.

Yes and no.

No, it's not the most synergistic of multiclass combinations. But it's far from fair to say that "Devil's Sight is the only Warlock thing a Barblock can use".

While spellcasting is generally the primary focus of a Warlock, and Barbarian Rage puts a huge cramp on that, that doesn't mean these two classes can't be used to shore up each other's weak areas and build in some useful synergy.


Nearly all Barbarians notoriously lack just about any utility outside of combat. They hit stuff in combat, then generally stand around anytime they're not in combat doing little to nothing until there's something heavy that needs to be lifted or perhaps occasionally making a middling Intimidation or Survival check. In addition, Barbarians also notoriously get lesser benefit out of staying in their primary class past Level 5-8ish, since their higher level abilities just aren't that exciting or impactful. So there's much less of an opportunity cost to being "behind a single-classed Barbarian" past that point.

If a Barbarian/Warlock seems a bit bipolar as you state, that actually works in the Barbarian's favor. They can be mostly a Barbarian in combat, and mostly a Warlock out of combat. (As opposed to a Barbarian in combat, and a bystander out of combat.) Barblocks can be built to be extremely utilitarian casters out of combat, using stuff like Book of Many Secrets for access to all utility rituals, plus utility cantrips, utility/exploration/travel spells, and utility invocations like Mask of Many Faces, Eyes of the Runekeeper, Eldritch Sight, etc.

In addition, Barblocks do have potential access to a few long duration, non-Concentration buffs that can be cast ahead of time and carried over into combat even when they plan to Rage, like Armor of Agathys, Freedom of Movement, False Life, Blink, Fire Shield, or Death Ward. Plus, a number of the Warlock's non-spell subclass abilities and Bladelock invocations can be used to beef up the Barbarian's already formidable combat prowess. Or you can burn Warlock spell slots on things like Eldritch Smite. And importantly, a Barbarian cannot Rage in every single combat throughout a 6-8 encounter day, which still leaves room for times when even normal Warlock spellcasting is potentially useful. Just like a Warlock cannot afford to cast multiple spells in every combat like a traditional spellcaster, which still leaves plenty of room for times when they need to make non-spell attacks.

If you wanted to, a Barblock could even be built to be a solid backup healer by going Celestial Warlock, getting access to a number of out of combat healing, resurrection, and status removal spells, plus in-combat BA quasi-Healing-Word that isn't a spell. Even dedicated healers are rarely found casting Restoration/Revivify/etc. during ongoing combat, instead sticking mostly to Healing Word and then doing other non-healer things. (Pardon me a minute while I go roll up a Zealot Barbarian 3/Celestial Bladelock X or Zealot Barbarian 6/Celestial Tomelock X...)

Plus Barbarian isn't a super MAD class, needing just a high STR, moderate CON, and 14 DEX, which leaves room for potentially adding in a moderate CHA without detracting too much from their usual stats. And utility caster Warlocks don't have to be built to be CHA-intensive. You can do just fine with only the bare minimum 13 needed to multiclass. Even with standard Point Buy, you can easily do STR 15+1/DEX 13+1/CON 13+1/INT 9/WIS 10/CHA 13.

Depending on which angle you want to approach the Barblock from, you can end up with a Barbarian with greatly enhanced out of combat utility and slightly enhanced combat prowess (especially in combats when they don't Rage), or a melee-focused Warlock that gets access to weapons and armor that non-Hexblades don't get plus a beefing up of their defensive capabilities and damage output at the cost of much of their already-limited spellcasting options in some combats.


So while it may not seem like the combo has any synergy at all at first glance, there are actually a fair number of options there that can play nice with each other and shore up areas of weakness or enhance current abilities. Certainly more than just one specific viable build.

Overall, I'd put Barblock towards the middle of the pack as far as useful and effective multiclass combos go, along the same lines of something like a Ranger/Cleric or Bard/Rogue, and ahead of a number of things like a Ranger/Bard, Warlock/Druid, Druid/Rogue, Artificer/Paladin, Monk/Wizard, etc. It's not going to be super optimized, but it's far from bad or totally anti-synergistic, and actually has some interesting and useful combos if you just look for them.

[Unoriginal]

And yes this is silly, but you're the one insisting that an ability somehow takes account of when combat started.

Personally, I always read it as "the last turn since you've started this Rage". Which would guarantee that the Rage lasts at least until the end of the turn after the turn in which the Rage starts.

I realize those are not the exact words (and it is a generous reading), however, so I have to acknowledge all the possible readings.

[Samayu]

I don't understand why it's such a hardship to wait and enter rage on the same turn that you intend to attack. I mean, I'm so angry I could kill someone... next round!

If you do rage on the turn prior to attacking, and precast a buff/defense before combat, hoping someone will attack you to keep you raging, I suggest using one that's not so visible. AoA is kinda designed to look intimidating, and those who know what it does will likely avoid attacking you unless they can afford losing the hit points.

Sure, barbarian doesn't work well with casters, but a warlock isn't much of a caster. Two spell slots? One of which you've already spent?

[strangebloke]

If someone insisted on reading it that way, bold is exactly what I would counter with. That or kicking the ground IC every 6 seconds.

If you're saying its a stupid rule I would agree, but that isn't the question.

[Psyren]

If you're saying its a stupid rule I would agree, but that isn't the question.

I acknowledge that your reading is one valid way to read it.

But given multiple valid readings, one of which is a constant annoyance that is easily circumvented by being equally annoying, I'll go with the reading that simply avoids either side of the DM screen being annoying.

[Sherlockpwns]

To throw this back to the OP.

It’s absolutely viable, but I think there are some mechanical mistakes the original plan has.

1) You can’t use fiend’s temp HP for AoA. AoA only works with the temp hp it makes. If you gain more it overrides it. Use depths instead. This gives you more damage mitigation and a bonus action attack.

2) Goliath also maximizes damage mitigation.

3) You probably want only one level of Barbarian for rage. 2 max. Instead focus on getting Warlock levels to maximize AoA asap.

4) As a result you want pact of blade. This will get you 2 attacks at char level 6.

5) You will probably never want to cast AoA in combat if you can reach an enemy. However it lasts an hour, so cast at the first sign of danger!

This is an absolute powerhouse character. Don’t listen to anyone who says otherwise. It IS weak to ranged and spell attacks, but that’s part of the fun of the character. Playing to specific strengths and weaknesses will be a blast; and when you are firing off level 3-5 AoA hits and taking almost no damage you’ll feel like a god.

For example when raging you get slammed for 40 damage, a blow that would cripple our outright kill a player. You use your reaction as a Goliath and roll an average 6+con, lets call it 10. Now you’ve taken 30 damage reduced by half. 15. Oh did I mention your buddy cast warding bond? 8 damage taken. Your level 4 AoA blasts them for 20. A 40 damage attack and you collectively took less damage than you dealt and can keep going. Against attacks doing 10 or less? Your tentacle can all but eliminate it.

Plus you don’t HAVE to do this every combat. Just when you against melee enemies. Otherwise you can play in other ways.

Play this character, it’ll be fun

[Kane0]

My initial thought was trying to answer the question 'if you can't cast spells or concentrate how are you going to use your spell slots' and came up with Eldritch Smite. But you're starting at level 4, so that's a non starter.

But! UA 29 (Warlock & Wizard) has a couple of Invocations that are almost the same in effect: Mace of Dispater, Claw of Acamar and Curse Bringer for Fiend, Great Old One and Hexblade patrons respectively. These don't appear to have level requirements but do need you to take Pact of the Blade, so you can start at Warlock 3/Barbarian 1. Hexblade Curse also works with Rage too, but you may prefer Fiend, it's nice to have the choice.

The biggest problem is that you are going to be notably behind on getting extra attack unless you get it from Warlock 5, then swap it when your Barbarian levels eventually catch up at level 10. But that's not a dealbreaker, and you have at least two levels of play before you pick barbarian subclass so you can get a feel for what might work best in the party.

[ChaseC311]

Hi all! OP here. I honestly wasn't expecting this many responses, it's a little daunting to say the least (That's a good thing in this scenario, I loved reading through everyone's thoughts and ideas). The more I read and think about it, the more I realize my initial idea might have been... Clunky (clunkier than what a Barblock usually is.). Belows a compilation of my thoughts

. Barbarian's Rage and AoA: A heavy topic of debate in this thread is whether or not rage would end turn 1 if I already use my action for Armor of Agathys. After reading through the responses I realized that yeah, Raging AND AoA turn one probably wouldn't be the best. I think I'll keep AoA in my spells list, but most likely will only use it if I can precast it or if Im running into a hoard of small enemies haha. AoA's one of my favorite spells in DnD so I might have been partially blinded by making it an integral part of my combat strategy

. Warlock Subclass: With AoA already in my repertoire, the Fiends THP on a kill is significantly less impactful due to thp not stacking. With that in mind, I'll most likely be switching to the fathomless warlock. Not only do it allow me to utilize my bonus actions every round, but the tentacles speed reduction on impact better helps me be the "immovable object" I had in mind when making the character. I have plans to take sentinel (if I don't roll abysmally for stats) and while their may be a bit of diminishing returns with the Sentinels Opportunity attach and the tentacle, they can still synergize nicely together in situations where the enemy slips past me but still suffers a movement speed reduction from the tentacle attacking during my turn. Like, "yes, I may have missed my opportunity attack, but you better hope you can make it to the backline in 5 seconds because I can make it to you in 6." Plus as one of you guys stated, I can flavor it as the Quori lashing out into the material plane!

. Pact Boon and Invocations: I've heard a lot of good arguments for the blade and tome boons for damage and out of combat utility respectively, but Im still debating whether or not I want to switch my boon from the Chain invocation. The familiar can help with scouting out areas ahead (potentially helping me determine when to precast AoA) and with the Gift of The Everliving ones invocation I can be a more reliable rock for my team. As someone who usually plays support, I die inside every time I expend a high level slot for healing only to roll bad on the dice, especially when my targets about to go down. That being said, my original goal for my second invocation (if I stuck with the chain) was Investment of The Chain Master. But with the Fathomless now taking up most of my bonus actions, I feel like it may be better to come up with a different invocation to pick. I was thinking perhaps Fiendish Vigor? With my ability to cast false life indefinitely it's a lot easier to precast, and therefore can act as a sort of consolation prize for when I'm caught with my pants down and didn't precast AoA properly. Alternatively I could go for devils sight for the dark vision.

. Additional notes: This thread is a godsend in helping me put together the character I imagine while still having fun playing him. Not only have various in game rules been explained to me, but the threads also allowed me to play in a way that would work better with my characters flavor. Truly, I am grateful ^-^

[Xetheral]

A Barblock can also make a fantastic switch hitter. With the Eldritch Blast cantrip, Agonizing Blast,
and Eldritch Spear invocations, and the Spell Sniper feat, you're a fantastic sniper. And if anyone manages to close into range with you, Surprise!, you have the durability (and eventually the melee prowess) of a barbarian.

There are two main ways to build a Barblock switch hitter: (1) Take a level of Barbarian, then two levels of Warlock, push for Barbarian 5 to get Extra Attack, then grab Warlock 3 and take Chain Pact (for an invisible flying spotter to help locate targets at long range) and/or Eagle Totem Barb 7 (another option for long-range target selection); or (2) take 1 level of Barbarian, then push for Hexblade/Bladepact 5 to get Thirsting Blade, then build to taste. Build 1 requires both Strength and Charisma, but works with any patron and is a terrific scout. Build 2 only needs Charisma and gets 2 melee attacks slightly faster, but has less long-term melee damage potential.

Note however, that the value of a sniper in 5e depends heavily on campaign style. If the party can often choose how, when, and where to engage their enemies, long-range firepower can be brutally effective. If instead encounter locations are planned by the DM and tend to feature indoor and/or close-range combats, then you may not get much chance to leverage your increased range.

[strangebloke]

I acknowledge that your reading is one valid way to read it.

But given multiple valid readings, one of which is a constant annoyance that is easily circumvented by being equally annoying, I'll go with the reading that simply avoids either side of the DM screen being annoying.

If you're arguing that turns don't exist outside of combat, which isn't something I think the rules support to begin with, you end up with lots of weird annoying edge cases in the rules.For example, the Daunting Roar ability of the Leonine makes creatures frightened until the end of your next turn. If you use this out of combat, and someone fails a save are they just stuck in a constant state of fear until combat starts? If you clip an ally with daunting roar at the end of combat and the 'next turn' is a week later, are they still frightened??

If your answer is 'no' then it really seems like this "no turns outside of combat" position isn't something you actually treat as part of the rules, its just an argument you trot out at specific times to win arguments about RAW with rules lawyers. The example of the Leonine is just one of dozens of weird things that get introduced if you go with a "no turns outside of combat" interpretation of the rules.

My approach is simpler: if RAW is dumb, I don't use RAW. For rage, you keep it unless incapacitated. Simple and fair. I don't assume others run with this, but I think its an improvement from the perspective of fun, flavor, and clarity. Most of my players don't even know that this restriction on rage is a thing

[Psyren]

If you're arguing that turns don't exist outside of combat, which isn't something I think the rules support to begin with, you end up with lots of weird annoying edge cases in the rules.For example, the Daunting Roar ability of the Leonine makes creatures frightened until the end of your next turn. If you use this out of combat, and someone fails a save are they just stuck in a constant state of fear until combat starts? If you clip an ally with daunting roar at the end of combat and the 'next turn' is a week later, are they still frightened??

If your answer is 'no' then it really seems like this "no turns outside of combat" position isn't something you actually treat as part of the rules, its just an argument you trot out at specific times to win arguments about RAW with rules lawyers. The example of the Leonine is just one of dozens of weird things that get introduced if you go with a "no turns outside of combat" interpretation of the rules.

My approach is simpler: if RAW is dumb, I don't use RAW. For rage, you keep it unless incapacitated. Simple and fair. I don't assume others run with this, but I think its an improvement from the perspective of fun, flavor, and clarity. Most of my players don't even know that this restriction on rage is a thing

I'm not saying "turns don't exist outside combat." My issue is specifically with the term "last turn." I'm saying there are multiple possible interpretations of that rules element depending on context; there is no one true answer. It's not as simple as saying "RAW is clearly and unambiguously X, and I, being wise and enlightened, simply choose not to use RAW."

"Last turn" can be {null} because first turn of combat.
"Last turn" can be "previous 6 seconds at all times, combat or no combat."
"Last turn" can be "final turn of the previous combat."

The rules don't specify which you should use. I go with interpretation #1 because if there is a first turn of combat, then by definition there cannot have been a turn in that combat before that one - that's what "first" means. (And if you're arguing that there is no such thing as a "first turn," then I'd love to know how Surprise works at your table.)

[Dr.Samurai]

Should it be interpreted as the turn you just took? Because the wording seems to suggest that Rage is checking for the condition after your turn has ended:

It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then.

Your turn ends, and Rage checks to see what happened on your last turn, which would be the turn that just ended, no?

[Unoriginal]

Should it be interpreted as the turn you just took? Because the wording seems to suggest that Rage is checking for the condition after your turn has ended:

It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then.

Your turn ends, and Rage checks to see what happened on your last turn, which would be the turn that just ended, no?

"Since your last turn" designate the turn before the turn that just ended.

"Last" here is to signify an event anterior to the event that is happening, and the end is still part of the event. For example, if Person A says "I haven't seen you since last summer" to Person B, it would only be accurate if A did not see B any time during the time period between [summer 1, including its end] and [end of summer 2]. If A makes that statement the day after the end of summer 2, then it is no longer accurate, as it means A did not see B since two summers ago.

[strangebloke]

I'm not saying "turns don't exist outside combat." My issue is specifically with the term "last turn." I'm saying there are multiple possible interpretations of that rules element depending on context; there is no one true answer. It's not as simple as saying "RAW is clearly and unambiguously X, and I, being wise and enlightened, simply choose not to use RAW."

"Last turn" can be {null} because first turn of combat.
"Last turn" can be "previous 6 seconds at all times, combat or no combat."
"Last turn" can be "final turn of the previous combat."

The rules don't specify which you should use. I go with interpretation #1 because if there is a first turn of combat, then by definition there cannot have been a turn in that combat before that one - that's what "first" means. (And if you're arguing that there is no such thing as a "first turn," then I'd love to know how Surprise works at your table.)

Why aren't you replying to the Leonine example? If "last turn" is {null} on the first turn of combat, then "next turn" is also {null} on the last turn of combat (or outside of combat) which means that the frightened condition given out by Daunting Roar would never end, since the end state is null and never occurs.

As for surprise, surprise references "the first turn of combat" and also says "when the encounter starts." Obviously there can be a first turn within the context of an encounter, but that doesn't imply that there are no turns before. If I say "the first minute of my commute that doesn't imply there weren't minutes before my commute.

[Psyren]

Why aren't you replying to the Leonine example? If "last turn" is {null} on the first turn of combat, then "next turn" is also {null} on the last turn of combat (or outside of combat) which means that the frightened condition given out by Daunting Roar would never end, since the end state is null and never occurs.

"The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world."

Once combat ends (or outside of combat entirely), turns cease to exist, and anything that is measured in rounds is measured in 6-second intervals instead. That includes the Leonin's roar. Going from combat->not-combat is not the same as going from not-combat->combat; for the former, you either activated the ability when turns existed, allowing for easy conversion from rounds to seconds once combat ended, or you did so when they didn't and therefore it was already being measured in seconds when you used it.

In short, turn before the first turn is {null}, while turn after the last turn is converted into 6 seconds. Time only elapses in one direction.

[Unoriginal]

Honestly I still think reading it as only counting since the Rage started makes the more sense.


On the thread's topic:


The Wild Magic Barbarian's 6th level ability let you use an action to give yourself an additional spell slot of lvl 1 to 3, once per long rest (other uses of the ability can boost other people). That's far from nothing for a Warlock.

I feel like there's some synergies here that are worth exploring.

[Pex]

Yes and no.

I'm not convinced because it leans towards my point you are a barbarian or a warlock not both, but I like your argument. Thank you.
For you being "a barbarian or a warlock", my words, is a feature. The versatility is enough for you than need of cohesion. Fair enough.

[Joe the Rat]

Two Three Four things

1) I know you've switched from fiend, but the AoA - gift crossover does fare well - AoA isn't going to last terribly long at 5(half damage) thp - That's your punishment pool, then your fiendness takes over on making your actual hp nigh-untouchable... though it's really more a buffer, since you don't have that much warlock to fuel it. Non-fiend is a good incentive to add more warlock for more AoA.

2) Agathys+Ancients+Reckless is potent for damage sponge purposes. It is incentivizing your enemies to come after you in every way possible, then still punishes them when they do.

3) Armor of Agathys lasts for an hour. It would not be unreasonable to precast if you are near potential combat. You get two castings per nap-and-cookie, so you can flex a bit if you don't need the slots for utility. That also saves any DM-specific issues with the "no fighting in the first round" rage issues. (FWIW, I'm good with it, but I also have an Astral Monk/Barbarian player who likes to "Go Super-Saiyan," And I am all about ridiculousness)

4) If you ever run out of Rages, Hex. Dosn't help your defense, but it covers the damage portion.

[strangebloke]

"The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world."

Once combat ends (or outside of combat entirely), turns cease to exist, and anything that is measured in rounds is measured in 6-second intervals instead. That includes the Leonin's roar. Going from combat->not-combat is not the same as going from not-combat->combat; for the former, you either activated the ability when turns existed, allowing for easy conversion from rounds to seconds once combat ended, or you did so when they didn't and therefore it was already being measured in seconds when you used it.

In short, turn before the first turn is {null}, while turn after the last turn is converted into 6 seconds. Time only elapses in one direction.

Fascinating stuff.

So to be clear

• when the text says 'since your last turn' and its the first turn of combat, this returns a null
• the fact that the statement "you haven't attacked or been damaged since {null}" makes no sense means that the clause self-invalidates
• but when the text says 'after your next turn' and its the final turn of combat (or not in combat at all) we can easily extrapolate that this should be converted to 'about six seconds from the end of combat'
• this is because time elapses only in one direction, making conversion from rounds to seconds possible, but not seconds to rounds (really not sure how we work with all those spells that have real-time durations then...)
• when JC is asked about this and says he'd rule the other way, this is clearly just him being a silly man

meanwhile, my reading:

• last turn is prior to combat, and if the barbarian hasn't attacked or been damage since then, they lose rage.
• JC agrees with this
• personally I don't like this rule and don't enforce it.

Honestly I still think reading it as only counting since the Rage started makes the more sense.

Agreed, from the perspective of how a barbarian should feel, at least IMO.

The Wild Magic Barbarian's 6th level ability let you use an action to give yourself an additional spell slot of lvl 1 to 3, once per long rest (other uses of the ability can boost other people). That's far from nothing for a Warlock.

I feel like there's some synergies here that are worth exploring.

Pretty sure you can use it on yourself multiple times, though the weirdness more comes from you replacing an 'expended spell slot' with a spell slot of a lower level.

Still, a very good option for this build.

Two Three Four things

1) I know you've switched from fiend, but the AoA - gift crossover does fare well - AoA isn't going to last terribly long at 5(half damage) thp - That's your punishment pool, then your fiendness takes over on making your actual hp nigh-untouchable... though it's really more a buffer, since you don't have that much warlock to fuel it. Non-fiend is a good incentive to add more warlock for more AoA.

2) Agathys+Ancients+Reckless is potent for damage sponge purposes. It is incentivizing your enemies to come after you in every way possible, then still punishes them when they do.

3) Armor of Agathys lasts for an hour. It would not be unreasonable to precast if you are near potential combat. You get two castings per nap-and-cookie, so you can flex a bit if you don't need the slots for utility. That also saves any DM-specific issues with the "no fighting in the first round" rage issues. (FWIW, I'm good with it, but I also have an Astral Monk/Barbarian player who likes to "Go Super-Saiyan," And I am all about ridiculousness)

4) If you ever run out of Rages, Hex. Dosn't help your defense, but it covers the damage portion.

All good points. I would also vote for goliath, since you can use the reaction to extend the life of your 1st or 2nd level AoA by a good deal.

[Psyren]

Fascinating stuff.

So to be clear

• when the text says 'since your last turn' and its the first turn of combat, this returns a null
• the fact that the statement "you haven't attacked or been damaged since {null}" makes no sense means that the clause self-invalidates
• but when the text says 'after your next turn' and its the final turn of combat (or not in combat at all) we can easily extrapolate that this should be converted to 'about six seconds from the end of combat'
• this is because time elapses only in one direction, making conversion from rounds to seconds possible, but not seconds to rounds (really not sure how we work with all those spells that have real-time durations then...)
• when JC is asked about this and says he'd rule the other way, this is clearly just him being a silly man

meanwhile, my reading:

• last turn is prior to combat, and if the barbarian hasn't attacked or been damage since then, they lose rage.
• JC agrees with this
• personally I don't like this rule and don't enforce it.

My reading: First round of combat is a gimme for all barbarians because there can't be a "last round" before the first round, first means first.

Your reading: Every table with a barbarian either needs to ignore the rules or have them kick the ground every 6 seconds in case a fight breaks out.

Fascinating indeed.

Armor of Agathys lasts for an hour. It would not be unreasonable to precast if you are near potential combat. You get two castings per nap-and-cookie, so you can flex a bit if you don't need the slots for utility.

That's valid, but in practice precasting is a crapshoot.

[RogueJK]

Pretty sure you can use it on yourself multiple times, though the weirdness more comes from you replacing an 'expended spell slot' with a spell slot of a lower level.

Which you can't do on a Warlock. They totally lack spell slots lower than their maximum.

So it'd only be 100% useable on a Wild Magic Barblock that took no more than 2 Warlock levels, and only partially useful on a Warlock 3-6, with you simply having to hope that you rolled at least a 2 (66% chance) for a Warlock 3-4, or a 3 (33% chance) for a Warlock 5-6, otherwise that use of the ability would be wasted. It'd be totally useless on a Warlock 7+, since they have zero spell slots of Levels 1-3.

And for a Barbarian, just 1 or 2 Warlock levels doesn't get you much of anything worthwhile. Most of the synergistic and useful abilities come from Warlock 3+, and especially 5+ and 7+, so Wild Magic's Bolstering Magic would be of lesser or no benefit for most Barblocks.

But Wild Magic Barblock certain fits the flavor of an nearly-uncontrollable magic-infused servant to a powerful puppetmaster. And something like a Genie Tomelock 3/Wild Magic Barbarian 6+ is potentially workable, especially for a Level 9 one-shot or similar. The issue is you're just not going to have all that many 1st-2nd level spells that you'll be using regularly, to get a lot of benefit out of frequently recharging your 2nd level slots. You're looking at 4 total spells known, so maybe the occasional pre-cast Armor of Agathys or Mirror Image buff just before combat, or perhaps an out of combat Spider Climb or Invisibility every now and then. So you'll spend most uses recharging other party casters. Not really worth building an entire character around unless it's strictly for flavor reasons.

With that in mind, I'll most likely be switching to the fathomless warlock.

I think the most useful Patrons for a Barblock are probably Undead, Fiend, Celestial, and Genie, in roughly that order. Then perhaps Hexblade, which at least gets you the non-spell Hexblade's Curse and specter pet, although many of other abilities are useless/redundant like the armor/weapon proficiencies and CHA to attack (since Reckless and Rage Damage both require STR attacks).

Fathomless is cool and gives the BA-starved Barbarian something to do with their BA, but you'll need to have a decent CHA to take full advantage of the BA tentacle, and most Barblocks won't be able to afford more than a 13-14 CHA after investing in STR/DEX/CON. So that'd be best for times when you roll for stats, and roll well.

And the other patrons (Archfey, Undying, GOO) are just weak overall, even on a straight Warlock, and provide minimal benefit to a Barblock in particular.


While I'm at it, I'd say the most useful Barbarian Paths for a Barblock are likely Bear Totem, Ancestral Guardians, and Zealot, in roughly that order too. (Unsurprisingly, the strongest Barbarian subclasses overall, even besides Barblocks.)

[Unoriginal]

Which you can't do on a Warlock. They totally lack spell slots lower than their maximum.

Warlocks don't naturally gain spell slots lower than their max, but I see nothing that forbids a Warlock from having them.

The DMG errata made clear that a Warlock can use a the Pear of Power to regain a third lvl spell slot even if they've expended a 4th level or higher spell slot:

While this pearl is on your person, you can use an action to speak its command word and regain one expended spell slot. If the expended slot was of 4th level or higher, the new slot is 3rd level.

So I think by the same reasoning, the Wild Barb lvl 6 can use their Bolstering Magic ability on themselves no matter how many Warlock levels they have.

[RogueJK]

The DMG errata made clear that a Warlock can use a the Pear of Power to regain a third lvl spell slot even if they've expended a 4th level or higher spell slot:

Interesting. In that light, I'd likely allow it, despite it being tough to track, especially on DnDBeyond.

Still, you'd need to ensure that you have enough regular uses of a Level 1-3 spell to make use of those frequently recharged slots.

[Unoriginal]

Still, you'd need to ensure that you have enough regular uses of a Level 1-3 spell to make use of those frequently recharged slots.

True, but as an added bonus, there is also a few Invocations that let you use "a warlock spell slot", no specific spell slot lvl asked.

So this Barblock could use them even with a lvl 1 spell slot.

The list of Invactions affected:

- Eldritch Smite
- Bewitching Whispers
- Dreadful Word
- Minions of Chaos
- Mire the Mind
- Sculptor of Flesh
- Sign of Ill Omen
- Thief of Five Fates

Sadly most of the spells granted by those Invocations are Concentration, but still, it's not nothing.

[RogueJK]

Same with Freedom of Movement from Trickster's Escape invocation.

Casting a Level 3/4/5 spell from as little as a 1st level slot is actually a pretty good deal.

Sadly most of the spells granted by those Invocations are Concentration, but still, it's not nothing.

Also too bad that most of those are Level 7+ Invocations. Barbarian 6/Warlock 7+ is a long time to wait for your gimmick to come online.

[JNAProductions]

Same with Freedom of Movement from Trickster's Escape invocation.

Casting a Level 3/4/5 spell from as little as a 1st level slot is actually a pretty good deal.



Also too bad that most of those are Level 7+ Invocations. Barbarian 6/Warlock 7+ is a long time to wait for your gimmick to come online.

I don’t think it would let you cast them for lower slots than their minimum.

[Dr.Samurai]

I really like the idea of Rebuke of the Talisman on a frontliner.

Barbarians are already the kings of Strength saving throws to avoid being knocked Prone on the frontline, but Grapples bypass that saving throw and are simply imposed on a successful hit for many monsters. The barbarian then has to either Shove the monster away or use an Action to escape (if monster is too big, as an example). Maybe the barbarian doesn't care and just attacks, but some Grapples impose Restrained as well, and bring you one step closer to Swallow or Brain Extraction. Also, once a monster has grabbed you, it can drag you around, either advancing the frontline towards your party members on the backline, pulling you out of a buffing aura, closer to a hazard, etc.

Cue Rebuke of the Talisman. A monster hits you, and before it's Grapple can take hold (hehe) you use your Reaction to deal it damage and knock it back 10ft. No attack roll, no saving throw, and it doesn't care if the monster is Huge, Gargantuan, or Megatitanogiganta. It just works and pushes most monsters, even the giant ones, out of reach of you, preventing the grab.

Just imagine the Tarrasque trying to Bite/Swallow the barbarian but every time it almost gets the barbarian in its mouth he activates his Cracker Jack Ring and the Tarrasque gets launched back 10ft.

This can be achieved with Warlock 3, so on the higher end of a dip, but you've got it in tier 2 assuming you stick around in barbarian for Extra Attack.

[RogueJK]

I don’t think it would let you cast them for lower slots than their minimum.

Edit: I think you're right. I'd say the general Spellcasting rules prohibit it:

"When a character casts a spell, he or she expends a slot of that spell’s level or higher"


So that recharged spell slot would work with Eldritch Smite, but wouldn't allow you to cast a Trickster's Escape 4th level Freedom of Movement via a Level 1-3 recharged slot.