D&D 5E Barbarian 'Unarmored Defense'

[TwoSix]

In other words, in what way(s) would it be OP to allow a melee combatant to simply discard her armor with no loss of AC?

It isn't. AC is really normalized in 5e, most characters are going to have somewhere in the 15-19 range unless they're explicitly pursuing a backline concept, like a wizard who dumps Dex.

You could easily implement a rule giving Unarmored Defense to everyone, as 10 + Dex + max(Con, Wis, Int, Cha). Then only keep Heavy Armor for those characters who need to focus on Str and another stat for concept.

 

[jadrax]

Sorry to interrupt, but you do know you're talking about a completely different character than the one I'm talking about, right?

(Since you suggest going Barb 20 you aren't dumping Strength.

And so I gotta ask myself: why then not simply give up on "not armor" too... after all, you don't actually gain anything going without except for some outdated coolness factor. And you can't benefit from magical armor!

And while we're at it, let's switch out those blades for a big ass axe instead - at high levels, it simply is better. And with the axe, I really am better off playing a half-orc instead of an angsty elf with a bad case of sunburn...

You see my point, Jad?)

Without getting to bitchy. You started of saying you wanted to be 'dependent on only STR or DEX, not both' so I assumed that STR based was still on the table. You also said 'I am not primarily asking for charbuild tips; I am asking about how different rules mechanisms interact, where those mechanisms just happens to be the ones relevant given A+B+C above', which was the feedback I was attempting to provide.

All that said, I still think Rogue is your only real option here. Duel Wielding is there best combat choice, they only need Dex, they can only wear Light Armor anyway so you loose 2 AC. Personally I would take the Defensive Duelist feat to add some survivability, although some people do not seem to rate it much.

 

[Bumamgar]

If you had started off by stating you were trying to build Drizzt in the first place, you could have saved us all a lot of wasted time in the thread.

 

[Bryk]

This can be converted to Elf, but in Adventurer's League I designed a human variant barbarian / fighter that I feel is going to be a really awesome defensive character. Before you sigh about the defensive, I think it could be modified to meet your goals.

I took the healer feat at level 1, yes I only have 8 wisdom(medium from hermit), however I do have 12 CHA.

I went 13 STR, 16 DEX, 16 CON, 8 INT, 8 WIS, 12 CHA.

I took Barbarian 1 first, then I plan on grabbing 6 levels of Fighter (battlemaster).

Then go back to finish Barbarian 4, then Fighter 16.

I plan on going Rapier and shield, grabbing sentinel, defensive duelist, resilent DEX, Durable, and a lot of support/defensive maneuvers.

If you are looking for a good offensive/defensive build it can easily be modified. I plan on never wearing any armor, and just going shot for shot with enemies. I feel it is quite viable while yes, it is lacking in overall damage I do plan on taking at least one damage maneuver eventually(all support /defense at Fighter level 3).

This same style can be done with Barbarian Rogue, and other combos.


If you start with the same numbers (variant human +1 DEX and +1 CON), 13, 16, 16, 8, 8, 12, you can be a variant human, take the dual wielder feat, take a first level of barbarian, (then go fighter). With dual Rapiers, you'll have a starting AC of 17 (which is quite high, 15 HP), and can rage twice a day for physical damage resistance. You can then decide to max out DEX/CON ASAP, or take some of the same feats I plan on taking, that is up to you. I would recommend at least 3 levels of Barbarian, which then you have to decide to stop at Barbarian 3, 4 or 5. The next key break points are 8 or 9 which might be too high for what you are looking for.

You can reskin this to Dark Elf if that's what you want, or Wood Elf, but multiclassing early is going to cost you a feat for awhile. If you surely want higher CHA take a look at the half elf. You could easily start with 13 STR, 16 DEX, 16 CON, 8, 8, 14 CHA.
You'll still meet the 13 STR barbarian requirement for MCing, then go whatever mix you want.

Clearly as a DEX barbarian, it makes very little sense to go too far into Barbarian as a class, but it doesn't mean you can't take full advantage of their unarmored defense.

 

[Stalker0]

Building a DEX/CON/CHA character that wears no armor and still gets top notch AC (high enough to be a frontline primary melee character) is thus impossible. (Where "impossible" means "without paying a steep cost")

Dragon Sorc 1 / Fighter X. Only need a 13 cha, and you mentioned having a partially charisma based character.

You get AC 13+dex (better than any light armor). Then can pick up all the TWF stuff you need. Could even go with Eldritch Knight to get more mileage out of the sorc spells you picked up.

 

[fanboy2000]

the whole idea is based on the observation you don't need Strength to dual wield rapiers, and so I thought it cool to be able to shore up Charisma.

Both weapons need to be light, and rapiers aren't light weapons. That said...

To dual-wield rapiers you would need the Dual Wielder feat.

The only way you're getting that at first level is to go variant human which only gets you two +1 stat increases.

Anyways, back to Unarmored Defense for the Barbarian. Barbarians can use shields and still get the Unarmored Defense, so it's not that bad. A sword and shied Barbarian may sound weird, but it's a sold combo. In fact, I suspect it'll be the norm when the Barbarian isn't raging. Which should be a fair number of combats. Part of the problem for you is that you want to dual wield, so a shield is out completely. It isn't that Unarmored Defense is useless, it's that the Barbarian's version was created for a non-dual wielding class.

If you had started off by stating you were trying to build Drizzt in the first place, you could have saved us all a lot of wasted time in the thread.

Drizzt dual wields scimitars, not rapiers.

 

[jgsugden]

In general, 5E facilitates emulating iconic fantasy figures. Conan is such a figure, but prior editions did not do a great job of giving you a way to have a loin cloth barbarian that could survive in combat. If you have the right stats, 5E does via this feature.

That is the major reason that this feature exists - so that if you want to play a Conan, Red Sonja or another scantily clad barbarian clone, you're able to do so.

Until we get a better idea of how magic items are worked into the game, we will not really know how strong of an ability this is relative to the choice of putting on armor, but it is certainly a workable choice for many PCs with our current rules at lower levels.

 

[77IM]

In general, 5E facilitates emulating iconic fantasy figures. Conan is such a figure, but prior editions did not do a great job of giving you a way to have a loin cloth barbarian that could survive in combat. If you have the right stats, 5E does via this feature.

That is the major reason that this feature exists - so that if you want to play a Conan, Red Sonja or another scantily clad barbarian clone, you're able to do so.

Until we get a better idea of how magic items are worked into the game, we will not really know how strong of an ability this is relative to the choice of putting on armor, but it is certainly a workable choice for many PCs with our current rules at lower levels.

The key word here is workable. To the OP: your AC might be a point or two lower than it otherwise would be, but is that really so bad as to torpedo the whole character concept? I mean, unless there is a second barbarian in the party, one who is hyper-optimized, probably no one will notice that your AC is only a 15 and you're dealing 2 fewer points of damage when raging.

 

[Anthony Taylor]

Hi,

I'm having difficulty seeing the value of this class feature.

Obviously, it is of some assistance if you're caught nekkid, and have to fight with no armor.

But surely it is meant to be more than that? As I see it the feature should allow you to build a barbarian that walks around unarmoured, just like a monk (who has her own version of the same class feature)

But the problem I am having, which you could help explain or rationalize, is:

What is the value of the Barbarian Unarmored Defense class feature for a class that easily puts on armor? Or, perhaps more to the point: how do you build a Barbarian that gains significant benefit from Unarmored Defense?

You gain AC 16 from having Dex 14 and wearing a Breastplate.

In order to even match that you would need Dex and Con bonuses to add up to +6. While it isn't unreasonable to require two +3 modifiers in itself, neither Dex nor Con is the Barbarian's primary attribute. While a Monk can and will put his best scores in Dex and Wis, a Barbarian is - in 5E - hardwired to a high Strength, because rages only key off Strength, not Dex.

A human barbarian can start with Str 16, Con 16, Dex 16 at the cost of becoming stereotypically dull elsewhere (Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 8).

I simply find this cost too high... sure, that Dex gives you good Initiative and such, but AC-wise it simply saves you the 400 gp of a Breastplate, which in turn would have enabled you to to become a smart, wise or dazzling barbarian instead.

What I mean is Dex 16 is a high price to pay when all you're after is the coolness factor of fighting in no armor. Dex 16 is great when you're thieving around, but it's a very steep cost for a Barbarian.

So how do you make Unarmored Defense work for you?

Or is it a "trap feature" in that you really can't expect it to work in more than corner cases (night ambushes, high level play etc).

In my humble opinion, the reason for an unarmored barbarian is quite simple. When I think of a barbarian, immediately my mind pictures Conan the Barbarian. I want my Barbarian to be like him and he rarely wore any armor at all. Just a thought, but some of us like "flavor" more than #'s and we want to be the "bad-ass" barbarian from the story....

 

[Arilyn]

In my humble opinion, the reason for an unarmored barbarian is quite simple. When I think of a barbarian, immediately my mind pictures Conan the Barbarian. I want my Barbarian to be like him and he rarely wore any armor at all. Just a thought, but some of us like "flavor" more than #'s and we want to be the "bad-ass" barbarian from the story....

Not sure from your post what your stance is. I want my class features to be, well, features, and the barbarian unarmoured Def is not really working out. I don't think that it is too much to ask, to have this feature, at least be the equivalent of wearing beginning type armour. We don't tell our rogues that they have proficiency in thieves tools, and then make it a little better to pick locks with proficiency in, say, carpenter tools. I think WOTC dropped the ball on this one.