D&D 5E Dwarven Battlerager Build

[the_move]

Reading comprehension for the fail on my part, but the critique still stands. Characters designed around ranged spells (Warlock with EB for example) or ranged attacks (Fighters/Rogues with Sharpshooter for example) are going to do a lot less damage.

First and foremost team optimisation isn't a one-way street either. You're the meat shield, so your're mates should be able to adapt to your style, too.

About the warlock, he isn't exclusively designed for ranged combat. A bladelock wouldn't mind anyway. A tomelock can either pick Shocking Grasp or get Shillelagh along GFB/BB, even Polearm Mastery. That does not hinder him from acquiring an Agonizing Eldritch Blast either, so he can be very effective at both melee and ranged combat. The biggest deal (for you) however is his Hex, so he can apply disadvantage on the target's Strength (or Dexterity) ability checks, so it will have an even harder time escaping you. Considering it uses his action for an escape attempt. Since it has no disadvantage when attacking you (because you are restrained yourself) it might prefer killing/stunning/paralyzing/incapacitating/whatever you in order to break free.

Yes, Fighters, Rogues and Rangers won't be able to apply Sharpshooter, although even with advantage Sharpshooter is sometimes risky. They won't do so well either when you get downed by your restraint target, because you are restrained yourself, your AC 16 is nothing to write home about, and the monster might cause damage of a type, which you do not have resistance against. You are not a bear totem barb, remember. Or worse, it applies a nasty condition on you, as mentioned above. So with you being down, no more restraint and things can get really nasty for your squishies. So better skip on that -5 to hit/+10 to damage gamble, and you stay up twice to triple the time.

Yet, your companions can still do damage reliably. Rogues can Sneak Attack, Rangers have Extra Attack among additional stuff still applicable, so do Fighters. Any of these classes can wield a rapier, same damage die as a longbow.

Do you really still believe those maybe 1 out of 20 times Grappler might work (while other tactics/measures would also apply) is worth it? Will it actually make a difference? Better take a feat, which will help 15-20 out of 20 times and be on the safe side.

 

[GrumpyGamer]

Do you really still believe those maybe 1 out of 20 times Grappler might work (while other tactics/measures would also apply) is worth it? Will it actually make a difference? Better take a feat, which will help 15-20 out of 20 times and be on the safe side.

I believe that pin is going to be useful about half the time I would want to grapple, but this is based on having multiple ranged combatants in most parties I have played in. I also think you are losing site of the fact that this thread is for a battlerager barbarian that has room for the feat in its ASI budget, and has synergy with this feat in its kit. Why limit your character by not having the option?

 

[the_move]

I believe that restraint is useful, but not at the cost of being restraint yourself. The first ability of the Grappler feat is made redundant by the second, and the third is a beta-remnant anyway.

I have ranged combatants in my party, too. A warlock and a ranger. Yet they've never fallen short of work, nor haven't been able to deal their stuff reliably. And the ranger, although a sharpshooter, is not above drawing his melee weapon, when neccessary. On a sidenote the OP's party seems to be more melee-oriented (PDK, swashbuckler, bladesinger, charming lore bard, battlerager (himself)). So is mine (bear barb, swashbuckler, open hand, hunter, tomelock, EK (myself)).

Yes, this thread is for a battlerager barbarian, but I think you are losing site of the fact, that even though restraining might be a good condition to put on your foe, that feature comes with a too big drawback to pursuit, even for a battlerager. Further I do not see any special synergy, as you can apply the damage done by your armor to a grappled target already, the bonus action attack even works anytime, so no need for a two-sided restraint. There is no special synergy grappler, respectively restraint provides to the battlerager.

I do not consider 5 ASI that big budget to waste on fancy stuff, especially since there are many other useful feats without drawbacks out there. Also you might want to get Strength and Con to 20, since your HP pool is of importance, too. That leaves you with 2 feats, maybe 3 if you're happy with 18 Con. I can think of 5 to 6 noteworthy feats to invest in, and Grappler ain't one of them.

 

[GarrettKP]

I think I have to agree with the_move here. Grappler seems like a wasted feat in the end. While restrained is a fine condition and not a bad option when fighting a single opponent, I can't see that being the case often.

I do plan on getting my strength and con up to 20 asap. 18 each at level 4, then 20 str followed by 20 con for my next two ASI.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Colder]

I would say, contrary to popular wisdom, you shouldn't take Tavern Brawler as a Battlerager. With any other grappler build, it's wonderful, but as a Battlerager, it's worth much less, especially the way you're playing it. This is completely because the level 3 Battlerager feature doesn't play well with it.

Tavern Brawler gives you proficiency in improvised weapons and unarmed strikes. That's not terribly good for you, because you're going to be using a battleaxe and no shield.

It also gives you the option of grappling your target as a bonus action, but only if you hit it with an improvised weapon or unarmed strike. You'll be doing less damage than if you just sub one of your attacks for a grapple and then use your bonus action to make a spike attack, and you're not even guaranteed a grapple attempt.

In the long run, Tavern Brawler slightly increases your damage on turns when you want to grapple but aren't raging (1d4+Str vs 3) at the cost of making grappling slightly less reliable (since you can't grapple if you miss with your unarmed strikes), and while you're raging (which you'll be doing most of the time), you wouldn't want to use Tavern Brawler at all because the spike attack bonus action, combined with the attack action grapple bonus damage, makes for more more damage and more reliable grappling.

For multiclassing, if you're going to multiclass at all, I think that 3 levels in Fighter for Battle Master's Combat Superiority is your best option. Although you could just use one of your ASIs for Martial Adept instead (maybe the one you were going to use for Shield Master or Tavern Brawler). It's not as much damage and you only get one die per short rest, but you don't want maneuvers for the damage anyway and you won't have to put off your Barbarian progression for it, either.

 

[GarrettKP]

I would say, contrary to popular wisdom, you shouldn't take Tavern Brawler as a Battlerager. With any other grappler build, it's wonderful, but as a Battlerager, it's worth much less, especially the way you're playing it. This is completely because the level 3 Battlerager feature doesn't play well with it.

Tavern Brawler gives you proficiency in improvised weapons and unarmed strikes. That's not terribly good for you, because you're going to be using a battleaxe and no shield.

It also gives you the option of grappling your target as a bonus action, but only if you hit it with an improvised weapon or unarmed strike. You'll be doing less damage than if you just sub one of your attacks for a grapple and then use your bonus action to make a spike attack, and you're not even guaranteed a grapple attempt.

In the long run, Tavern Brawler slightly increases your damage on turns when you want to grapple but aren't raging (1d4+Str vs 3) at the cost of making grappling slightly less reliable (since you can't grapple if you miss with your unarmed strikes), and while you're raging (which you'll be doing most of the time), you wouldn't want to use Tavern Brawler at all because the spike attack bonus action, combined with the attack action grapple bonus damage, makes for more more damage and more reliable grappling.

This is exactly what I was thinking in regards to Tavern Brawler. The Battlerager class features basically give me the best parts of Tavern Brawler as is.

The more I look into it the less I feel like any feats are going to be worthwhile in my build. Shield Master maybe but I'm not sure my concept fits using a shield. The only other possibility seems to be Mage Slayer.

 

[Colder]

The more I look into it the less I feel like any feats are going to be worthwhile in my build. Shield Master maybe but I'm not sure my concept fits using a shield. The only other possibility seems to be Mage Slayer.

I edited my previous post to include this but I'll say it again anyway: Martial Adept might be a good idea. You only get one d6 superiority die per short rest, but in the right situation it could be devastating.

 

[GarrettKP]

I edited my previous post to include this but I'll say it again anyway: Martial Adept might be a good idea. You only get one d6 superiority die per short rest, but in the right situation it could be devastating.

That's a consideration. Using it for Disarming attack is quite effective.

 

[Colder]

That's a consideration. Using it for Disarming attack is quite effective.

Menacing and Trip Attacks are also really good. Whichever you choose, though, remember that you can attach your maneuvers to your spike attack, as well (which can be pretty funny when you imagine it).

 

[GarrettKP]

Menacing and Trip Attacks are also really good. Whichever you choose, though, remember that you can attach your maneuvers to your spike attack, as well (which can be pretty funny when you imagine it).

I'm starting to like this idea a lot.