D&D (2024) Barbarian (Playtest 7)

[OB1]

Barbarian damage resistance potential is in the gutter now. All the higher level enemies are tossing around elemental damage and even bear Barbarians can't resist most of it anymore.

I don't follow. Bears can pick 2 damage resistance types other than Force and Psychic every time they rage. Yes it's a nerf, but it's still a really powerful ability to walk into a dragon fight and be resistant to it's breath weapon, etc.

 

[Stalker0]

I don't follow. Bears can pick 2 damage resistance types other than Force and Psychic every time they rage. Yes it's a nerf, but it's still a really powerful ability to walk into a dragon fight and be resistant to it's breath weapon, etc.

I'm curious how many people don't realize its PER RAGE, not a one and done selection. I myself didn't realize that at first.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Barbarian damage resistance potential is in the gutter now. All the higher level enemies are tossing around elemental damage and even bear Barbarians can't resist most of it anymore.

Bearbarians still get to choose what they think the two most relevant damage types they might face against their opponents for that fight. The enemy doesn't doesn't know what they'll choose. It's fine. It was obviously too powerful compared to all the other abilities at that level.

 

[Amrûnril]

I agree with the view that the devs are overselling the change to the bear resistance. Against most types of enemies, the new ability will work the same as the old one, albeit with more room for player error and disputes over what constitutes metagaming.

The choice to exclude force damage from the available resistances is unsurprising, in that it conforms to a broader trend of treating force damage as de facto true damage. Personally, though, I think it's a mistake to conflate these properties. There's no intrinsic reason "magical force" should be harder to resist than necrotic or electrical damage, and making the ability to ignore resistances a function of specific spells/features gives more design flexibility and transparency than attaching it to damage type.

 

[Stalker0]

The choice to exclude force damage from the available resistances is unsurprising, in that it conforms to a broader trend of treating force damage as de facto true damage. Personally, though, I think it's a mistake to conflate these properties. There's no intrinsic reason "magical force" should be harder to resist than necrotic or electrical damage

I mean....there could be. You could easily go with the flavor of that is a part of what makes force damage force damage, there is no resistance to it. And if the mechanics back that up (aka there is no way to get force resistance) than that's a fine flavor to have.

 

[Laurefindel]

Yeah. I never watched Bravestarr, though I see others referring to it. I get the trope, and understand the potential for confusion.

All I understand is that cowboys/barbarians/knights/ninjas/pirates + « from space! » gonzo = 80s…

 

[deganawida]

Did the flavor text for barbarians in 5e always define rage as not necessarily anger but drawing on some primal force or instinct? Because, if not, then I dig the change. He-Man intensifies.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I mean....there could be. You could easily go with the flavor of that is a part of what makes force damage force damage, there is no resistance to it. And if the mechanics back that up (aka there is no way to get force resistance) than that's a fine flavor to have.

I think this tends to fall apart the moment someone in the design team casually decides to make something do Force damage because they just think it's a legit damage type, which it isn't, at that point, it's a special thing, True damage.

That needs to be an active decision WotC make that's reflected it their work - and it isn't and hasn't been. It's also not backwards-compatible.

 

[Kinematics]

So, Brutal Critical. I've heard people call it a nerf, and it sort of is relative to UA5, but it's a strict upgrade over the PHB, so calling it a nerf is a bit misleading.

PHB: Gained at level 9
UA5: Gained at level 11
UA7: Gained at level 9

PHB: Equal to your weapon damage die. Works best on the highest damage weapon available.
UA5: Based on your level. Ignores weapon damage die.
UA7: Always a d12. Ignores weapon damage die.

Average values, using a glaive for the PHB.

Level	PHB	UA5	UA7	UA7-PHB	UA7-UA5
9	5.5	0	6.5	1	6.5
10	5.5	0	6.5	1	6.5
11	5.5	11	6.5	1	-4.5
12	5.5	12	6.5	1	-5.5
13	11	13	13	2	0
14	11	14	13	2	-1
15	11	15	13	2	-2
16	11	16	13	2	-3
17	16.5	17	19.5	3	2.5
18	16.5	18	19.5	3	1.5
19	16.5	19	19.5	3	0.5
20	16.5	20	19.5	3	-0.5

UA7 is only notably weaker than UA5 at levels 11 and 12. The rest of the time it's fairly close, and of course since it comes online sooner it has a strong advantage for levels 9 and 10.

It's always better than the PHB, except when using a greataxe, where it's tied.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

As I was reading the class, I saw that Brutal Critical now specified the scaling on the level 9 feature itself, and I thought for a second they'd get other stuff on 13 and 17 as well. Alas, they don't.

I guess it's a very slight upgrade if you're not using a greataxe, but it's simply not worth 3 levels of features, or even 1 for that matter.