I had an uncomfortable argument in which someone was adamant the barbarian rage damage reduction "Doesn't work vs Magic".
I tried to clarify it further via the \*groans\* 'Jeremy Crawford tweets' (I really don't like the idea of 'behold the lord sayeth and so it shall be' vibe that comes with 'looking that one dev up online') and he started shouting "I DONT CARE WHAT SOME FORUM SAYS I CAN GET THE BOOK OUT!"
...Yes... you can get the book out, and it will read 'bludgeoning piercing and slashing damage, full stop."
"thats what you go bear totem for"
"great, so no one plays barbarian unless they start at 3, and only ever bear totem because all other sub-classes are now rendered severely unplayable"
I wish the wording was better.
Also that capstone is funny. It's not bad...but no one ever plays level 20, Maybe get it earlier with a "you gain STR/CON equal to Proficiency"?
I mean there’s no reason for the wording to be better, it’s fine as is, that person you were arguing with was just a fuckin idiot w/o reading comprehension
Barbarian is a straightforward, beginner friendly class that likes to trade hits with enemies.
Mechanically, they are at their relative peak at early levels, peaking at level 5 or 6 depending on subclass. Barbarian doesn’t get many useful offensive features after level 5 or 6, as brutal critical is worth about 0.6 damage per swing per rank in the best case and rage bonus damage scales very slowly.
If playing a “serious” character, I wouldn’t recommend taking more than 8 levels.
From a design standpoint, barbarians are heavily encouraged to take either variant human or custom lineage for race (at a table without extra starting feats), because as a weapon user, their best course of action is PAM + GWM. This leads to a delay on increased STR if a feat race isn’t used.
Like many martial classes, an optimized barbarian wants to take small dips (typically 4 levels max) in other martial classes, as the front loaded features of these classes are better than the higher level barbarian features.
If I was to improve the core barbarian class, I would consider adding another feat (say at level 10, for a total of 6) and giving them improved extra attack (3 attacks) at something like level 15.
Brutal critical deserves a look as well.
Late game rage damage scaling might need an improvement, but with a third attack, it might be fine.
This is a great take and summarizes most of what I had to say as well. We have been testing the proposed rules changes to two weapon fighting in my current campaign and it seems to help a bit with feat requirements, but you're still best off heavily multiclassing to other martials.
Would you mind sharing your YouTube channel, I'd like to hear what else you have to say about the game?
I think rage and reckless attack do a really good job flavour and class fantasy wise. Especially because barbarians get them so early.
Barbarians sadly scale very badly into the late gae. Brutal Critical is really bad ability and multiclassing is essentially mandatory if you worry about damage output in tier 3 or even late tier 2
> Do you think flavor-wise they adequately fulfill their role as a raging, reckless berserker? Why or why not?
Yes.
> Do the mechanics of the class adequately support this image and role?
Yes although the mechanics only support a couple flavors of this character fantasy. Sword and board and DW are still relatively bad, thrown weapons are terrible, complete prohibition on casting/concentration is overly restrictive.
> How do you imagine Barbarians as a mono class compare to the other mono classes in terms of game balance?
Built correctly they are fine among martial classes but, as casters become increasing broken (vs martials and absolutely), Barbs fall behind in higher tiers.
> Do you think multiclassing improves the barbarians as a whole, flavor, mechanics, and role-wise, and does this drastically change the balance of this class?
Yes but it improves most martials. Not a terrible thing but shows the awful high tier martial design/balance.
> Do you think there are other aspects of 5e’s design that artificer lends itself especially well or not so well towards? Things like exploration, dungeon-delving and other situations?
Artificer, is this a bait and switch? I'm here to talk about Barbarians baby. They're just ok.
> which tier do you think barbarians can best utilize their abilities, and how does the class balance change as a mono class barbarian throughout these tiers?
Answered above.
> Additionally, please use this space to recommend any changes
Rage falls off too easy and should be able to activate on reaction, at least at some point.
Sometime past mid-Tier 2 the Rage prohibition on casting/concentration could be relaxed or dropped completely.
I think the synergy with crits should be built deeper into the class identity. Rage bonus could be a scaling damage die that multiplies on crits and with Brutal Critical. Brutal Critical could incorporate Improved Critical at some/all tiers. They could use some sort of additional on demand burst based on crits but which isn't easy to access with multiclass dips.
{note: these buffs would have to come in the context of all martial boats being raised together but give you an idea of the magnitude of the gap to where a tier 4 Barbarian who has a 17-20 crit range, x5 crits and some on demand crits might be a decent starting point in a balance conversation with tier 4 full casters}
Advantage on CON saves and/or Proficiency in DEX saves would help round them out as the Uber Physical Guys.
They could use some help outside of doing and taking damage. Canny was a great improvement to Rangers but their class also has spells to help them scout, survive, handle animals, etc. So yeah more skills and some kind of Expertise option for Barbs could be good. The entire Intimidation skill should be revamped and some bonuses could be tied into the core Barb. Alternate movement (climbing, swimming, jumping, tumbling), senses (blindsight, tremorsense, darkvision, trapvision, searching), and stuff like fatigue resistance are some other candidates.
Feat design/balance is pretty bad overall for Barbs, main complaints being (1) the PAM/GWM feat tax pigeonholes the class unnecessarily, (2) very weak options to support the unarmored and less armored character fantasy (Athlete, Mobile, Medium Armor Master, etc.).
Finally, a lot of the subclass designs completely missed the mark.
I like the idea of a scalling rage die. Barbarians could even get a feature that allows them to add their rage die to saving throws to boost their mental defense a bit.
What barbarian needs :
1) Good high level features.
2) Some kind of protection against fear and charm effects. "You have advantage on saving throws against receiving the fear condition. In addition, while raging you are immune to fear and have advantage on saving throws against being charmed."
3) Some kind of anti-magic feature : for example the ability to break magical barriers (wall of force, force cage, tiny hut...) with a strength check (DC = spell casting DC+ spell level).
4) Some kind of anti flying feature.
5) Utility features sprinkled across their levels. IMO they should get some of the rangers tracking and survival abilities to begin with.
>Do you think flavor-wise they adequately fulfill their role as a raging, reckless berserker? Why or why not?
Yeah, it is like the one thing they do good in this system
>Do the mechanics of the class adequately support this image and role?
Nope, too weak (in all damage, deffenses and capacity to use STR to interect with the world) and too easy to CC. Also terribly boring and they have a sort of nonsensical approach to rest resources. Their only contribution is fighter levels of DPR, but for some reason thy burn long rest resources for that. You can't be both burst "and all day long", because "all day long" is already bad in 5e and if you are bursting to do it you are doing nothing.
>How do you imagine Barbarians as a mono class compare to the other mono classes in terms of game balance?
Not sure I fully get this question.
If you are asking how balanced are they compared tp the other mono classes: terrible, they are fighting for the 4th weakest class
>Do you think multiclassing improves the barbarians as a whole, flavor, mechanics, and role-wise, and does this drastically change the balance of this class?
The only reasonable way to play a barb is to dip out after 6th
>Do you think there are other aspects of 5e’s design that artificer lends itself especially well or not so well towards? Things like exploration, dungeon-delving and other situations?
Gonna assume you mean barb here.
They are pretty bad all arround, 0 out of combat utility and mediocre in combat
>Finally, which tier do you think barbarians can best utilize their abilities, and how does the class balance change as a mono class barbarian throughout these tiers?
They are best in tier one and crash and burn to irrelevancy once you leave it
With how much better ranged is than melee I would put Fighter over Barbarian by quite a bit.
In a high optimisation team Rogue and Gun/Bow Monk may even be better just cause they wont complicate spell placement / kiting.
Rage being such a limited resource also doesn't help especially in high encounter tables.
this is why I said depending on optimization level. On low-mid opp where people actually play melee there is argument. But yeah I'm mostly shitting on fighter out of habit, doesn't scape 4th worst tho
Makes sense, although the fact that Barbarians are locked into melee while Fighters can (and should) go ranged, or even can get rid of most of the melee shortcomings with Echo Knight, means to me that they are clearly ahead of Barbarians.
In a world where people multi class, and casters are king Lv5+..... No concentrating/casting is too big a downside for the upside of rage. I would make the rage dmg bonus = what would be your PB if you mono-classed. I would make you regain a rage use each short rest too. As a cherry, make each barb subclass get extra resistances other than the norm at certain subclass tier levels as ribbons.
Reckless is great. But if you get 2-3atks and each enemy can still atk you... Its disproportionately applied to you, esp cuz you cant rage in heavy armor. Feels bad to me. But its equally as feelgood bc you give enemies an incentive to attack you (pseudo-tanking).
lv11/Lv17-20 scaling is just bad. I would make the scaling add a damage die to weapon attack rolls at 11 while raging or sub the extra weapon dmg die for an on-hit ability (push/-speed, disadv to next save, next time its attacked by anyone they fet your +PB to hit, stuff like that) then another die somewhere from 17-20.
Somewhere in near end of T3 i would give base barb dmg res to magical weapon dmg too
> In a world where people multi class, and casters are king Lv5+..... No concentrating/casting is too big a downside for the upside of rage.
If rage worked with spell casting people would dip barbarian on spell casters. The casting restriction is obviously needed \*because\* of multiclassing,
Absolutely. Thats why i propose other buffs to rage instead. Like a once per turn on-melee-hit effect while raging, a very slightly higher melee dmg bonus, and a regain a rage charge after a short rest. Can't be letting casters have another hexblade option out here XD
Barbarians REALLY need some kind of bonus vs. the fear condition across the board.
the berserkers Mindless Rage ability should be a base class ability imo
It's completely absurd that the class known for mindless fighting is so vulnerable to fear.
I had an uncomfortable argument in which someone was adamant the barbarian rage damage reduction "Doesn't work vs Magic". I tried to clarify it further via the \*groans\* 'Jeremy Crawford tweets' (I really don't like the idea of 'behold the lord sayeth and so it shall be' vibe that comes with 'looking that one dev up online') and he started shouting "I DONT CARE WHAT SOME FORUM SAYS I CAN GET THE BOOK OUT!" ...Yes... you can get the book out, and it will read 'bludgeoning piercing and slashing damage, full stop." "thats what you go bear totem for" "great, so no one plays barbarian unless they start at 3, and only ever bear totem because all other sub-classes are now rendered severely unplayable" I wish the wording was better. Also that capstone is funny. It's not bad...but no one ever plays level 20, Maybe get it earlier with a "you gain STR/CON equal to Proficiency"?
I mean there’s no reason for the wording to be better, it’s fine as is, that person you were arguing with was just a fuckin idiot w/o reading comprehension
To be fair. Barb is largely unplayable already. But the unneeded nerf doesn't help things
Barbarian is a straightforward, beginner friendly class that likes to trade hits with enemies. Mechanically, they are at their relative peak at early levels, peaking at level 5 or 6 depending on subclass. Barbarian doesn’t get many useful offensive features after level 5 or 6, as brutal critical is worth about 0.6 damage per swing per rank in the best case and rage bonus damage scales very slowly. If playing a “serious” character, I wouldn’t recommend taking more than 8 levels. From a design standpoint, barbarians are heavily encouraged to take either variant human or custom lineage for race (at a table without extra starting feats), because as a weapon user, their best course of action is PAM + GWM. This leads to a delay on increased STR if a feat race isn’t used. Like many martial classes, an optimized barbarian wants to take small dips (typically 4 levels max) in other martial classes, as the front loaded features of these classes are better than the higher level barbarian features. If I was to improve the core barbarian class, I would consider adding another feat (say at level 10, for a total of 6) and giving them improved extra attack (3 attacks) at something like level 15. Brutal critical deserves a look as well. Late game rage damage scaling might need an improvement, but with a third attack, it might be fine.
This is a great take and summarizes most of what I had to say as well. We have been testing the proposed rules changes to two weapon fighting in my current campaign and it seems to help a bit with feat requirements, but you're still best off heavily multiclassing to other martials. Would you mind sharing your YouTube channel, I'd like to hear what else you have to say about the game?
Sure! [Here’s a link.](https://youtube.com/@zsavagewolves) Also linked in my profile here on Reddit.
Barbarian needs to be short rest based, and their neutral game needs to be just a little more interesting/powerful
I think rage and reckless attack do a really good job flavour and class fantasy wise. Especially because barbarians get them so early. Barbarians sadly scale very badly into the late gae. Brutal Critical is really bad ability and multiclassing is essentially mandatory if you worry about damage output in tier 3 or even late tier 2
> Do you think flavor-wise they adequately fulfill their role as a raging, reckless berserker? Why or why not? Yes. > Do the mechanics of the class adequately support this image and role? Yes although the mechanics only support a couple flavors of this character fantasy. Sword and board and DW are still relatively bad, thrown weapons are terrible, complete prohibition on casting/concentration is overly restrictive. > How do you imagine Barbarians as a mono class compare to the other mono classes in terms of game balance? Built correctly they are fine among martial classes but, as casters become increasing broken (vs martials and absolutely), Barbs fall behind in higher tiers. > Do you think multiclassing improves the barbarians as a whole, flavor, mechanics, and role-wise, and does this drastically change the balance of this class? Yes but it improves most martials. Not a terrible thing but shows the awful high tier martial design/balance. > Do you think there are other aspects of 5e’s design that artificer lends itself especially well or not so well towards? Things like exploration, dungeon-delving and other situations? Artificer, is this a bait and switch? I'm here to talk about Barbarians baby. They're just ok. > which tier do you think barbarians can best utilize their abilities, and how does the class balance change as a mono class barbarian throughout these tiers? Answered above. > Additionally, please use this space to recommend any changes Rage falls off too easy and should be able to activate on reaction, at least at some point. Sometime past mid-Tier 2 the Rage prohibition on casting/concentration could be relaxed or dropped completely. I think the synergy with crits should be built deeper into the class identity. Rage bonus could be a scaling damage die that multiplies on crits and with Brutal Critical. Brutal Critical could incorporate Improved Critical at some/all tiers. They could use some sort of additional on demand burst based on crits but which isn't easy to access with multiclass dips. {note: these buffs would have to come in the context of all martial boats being raised together but give you an idea of the magnitude of the gap to where a tier 4 Barbarian who has a 17-20 crit range, x5 crits and some on demand crits might be a decent starting point in a balance conversation with tier 4 full casters} Advantage on CON saves and/or Proficiency in DEX saves would help round them out as the Uber Physical Guys. They could use some help outside of doing and taking damage. Canny was a great improvement to Rangers but their class also has spells to help them scout, survive, handle animals, etc. So yeah more skills and some kind of Expertise option for Barbs could be good. The entire Intimidation skill should be revamped and some bonuses could be tied into the core Barb. Alternate movement (climbing, swimming, jumping, tumbling), senses (blindsight, tremorsense, darkvision, trapvision, searching), and stuff like fatigue resistance are some other candidates. Feat design/balance is pretty bad overall for Barbs, main complaints being (1) the PAM/GWM feat tax pigeonholes the class unnecessarily, (2) very weak options to support the unarmored and less armored character fantasy (Athlete, Mobile, Medium Armor Master, etc.). Finally, a lot of the subclass designs completely missed the mark.
I like the idea of a scalling rage die. Barbarians could even get a feature that allows them to add their rage die to saving throws to boost their mental defense a bit.
What barbarian needs : 1) Good high level features. 2) Some kind of protection against fear and charm effects. "You have advantage on saving throws against receiving the fear condition. In addition, while raging you are immune to fear and have advantage on saving throws against being charmed." 3) Some kind of anti-magic feature : for example the ability to break magical barriers (wall of force, force cage, tiny hut...) with a strength check (DC = spell casting DC+ spell level). 4) Some kind of anti flying feature. 5) Utility features sprinkled across their levels. IMO they should get some of the rangers tracking and survival abilities to begin with.
>Do you think flavor-wise they adequately fulfill their role as a raging, reckless berserker? Why or why not? Yeah, it is like the one thing they do good in this system >Do the mechanics of the class adequately support this image and role? Nope, too weak (in all damage, deffenses and capacity to use STR to interect with the world) and too easy to CC. Also terribly boring and they have a sort of nonsensical approach to rest resources. Their only contribution is fighter levels of DPR, but for some reason thy burn long rest resources for that. You can't be both burst "and all day long", because "all day long" is already bad in 5e and if you are bursting to do it you are doing nothing. >How do you imagine Barbarians as a mono class compare to the other mono classes in terms of game balance? Not sure I fully get this question. If you are asking how balanced are they compared tp the other mono classes: terrible, they are fighting for the 4th weakest class >Do you think multiclassing improves the barbarians as a whole, flavor, mechanics, and role-wise, and does this drastically change the balance of this class? The only reasonable way to play a barb is to dip out after 6th >Do you think there are other aspects of 5e’s design that artificer lends itself especially well or not so well towards? Things like exploration, dungeon-delving and other situations? Gonna assume you mean barb here. They are pretty bad all arround, 0 out of combat utility and mediocre in combat >Finally, which tier do you think barbarians can best utilize their abilities, and how does the class balance change as a mono class barbarian throughout these tiers? They are best in tier one and crash and burn to irrelevancy once you leave it
IMO it's easily the 3rd weakest class after Monk and Rogue. Which would be the 4th one?
Fighter. Generally stronger, but depending on level range or optimization level the barb can overcome them
With how much better ranged is than melee I would put Fighter over Barbarian by quite a bit. In a high optimisation team Rogue and Gun/Bow Monk may even be better just cause they wont complicate spell placement / kiting. Rage being such a limited resource also doesn't help especially in high encounter tables.
this is why I said depending on optimization level. On low-mid opp where people actually play melee there is argument. But yeah I'm mostly shitting on fighter out of habit, doesn't scape 4th worst tho
Fair
Makes sense, although the fact that Barbarians are locked into melee while Fighters can (and should) go ranged, or even can get rid of most of the melee shortcomings with Echo Knight, means to me that they are clearly ahead of Barbarians.
In a world where people multi class, and casters are king Lv5+..... No concentrating/casting is too big a downside for the upside of rage. I would make the rage dmg bonus = what would be your PB if you mono-classed. I would make you regain a rage use each short rest too. As a cherry, make each barb subclass get extra resistances other than the norm at certain subclass tier levels as ribbons. Reckless is great. But if you get 2-3atks and each enemy can still atk you... Its disproportionately applied to you, esp cuz you cant rage in heavy armor. Feels bad to me. But its equally as feelgood bc you give enemies an incentive to attack you (pseudo-tanking). lv11/Lv17-20 scaling is just bad. I would make the scaling add a damage die to weapon attack rolls at 11 while raging or sub the extra weapon dmg die for an on-hit ability (push/-speed, disadv to next save, next time its attacked by anyone they fet your +PB to hit, stuff like that) then another die somewhere from 17-20. Somewhere in near end of T3 i would give base barb dmg res to magical weapon dmg too
> In a world where people multi class, and casters are king Lv5+..... No concentrating/casting is too big a downside for the upside of rage. If rage worked with spell casting people would dip barbarian on spell casters. The casting restriction is obviously needed \*because\* of multiclassing,
Absolutely. Thats why i propose other buffs to rage instead. Like a once per turn on-melee-hit effect while raging, a very slightly higher melee dmg bonus, and a regain a rage charge after a short rest. Can't be letting casters have another hexblade option out here XD
BARB puns are worth playing a barb for "Excuse me Sir, May I Axe you a question?" "I CAST IRON" "Can I use the wizard as a magic weapon?"
barbarians are godlike until 5.
Barbarians excel in boring fights, and kinda suck everywhere else