Is the Barbarian overpowered?

[Kupursk]

Hello there,

Looking at the barbarian in 5e I was surprised by how some of his abilities work. Mainly the defensive ones.

1) Rage apparently gives you resistance (half damage) to absolutely all physical attacks, is that right?

2) Unarmored Defence allows for a better AC than a fighter in heavy armor, possibly?
In this case one could eventually hit 20 in both Dex and Con, for an AC20, and use a shield with that for a total of AC22, while losing very little damage potential if you're using a Finesse weapon.

Adding everything you could have:

• An AC22 Barbarian
• that takes 1/2 damage from all attacks
• still has +5 to hit and damage from Dex

And as a bonus:

• high Dex saves (possibly always with advantage)
• a gigantic pool of HP with 1d12 + Max Con
• possibly immunity to fear and charm, making even "mind" effects harder to stop him.

This all seems way overpowered to me at first glance. To the point that I'm wondering why bother with other melee classes (unless specifically for flavour of course), or with armour.

But since I'm not very familiar with 5e standards yet, I might be missing some crucial details, or this might not be so powerful as it seems at first glance.

Any thoughts on that?

PS: Of course you could just not min/max abilities, and a Barbarian with Finesse sounds a little ridiculous, but it's still weird that the most "optimized" Barbarian possible would be a high-Dex Finesse one, instead of your classic raging brute.

 

[André Soares]

1) physical attacks isn't the best description, you have resistance to piercing slashing and bludgeoning damage. Being from physical or magical attacks. On the same hand, you can receive normal damage from hysical attacks that involve other damage types.

2) not really, you'd have to max out DEX and CON to be the same AC as an Full plate+shield fighter, and that fighter can still have defense fighting style for a 21 AC... Even then, if you max out Dex and Con you will probably not have that high STR, making your attacks really weak. In most cases the barbarian AC stays around 14-16 in lower levels and will increase by one or two points in the game. (this without a shield, if you have a shield you have +2 AC but again your damage will go down).

The barbarian's role is to soak up damage and hit for a reasonable amount. He is really effective at that, but hardly over powered, because to do what you propose here he will have to sacrifice A LOT of damage potencial.

Ither point is that Paladins, fighters and druids can perform this role really well, so it's hard to argue that the Barbarian excells at defense. They are really tough, but balanced.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

If you use Dex to-hit with a weapon, you lose the +damage from Rage and the ability to use reckless attack for (mostly) perma-advantage.

But yeah, barbarian are really tanky in 5e. A Dex/Con Zealot build with a rock gnome for advantage on mental saves is a fun build if you dont care that much about damage

 

[André Soares]

one point I forgot to make is that you are comparing an end game barbarian (that has high DEX and CON to an regular/mid level fighter) it's REALLY hard to get to 20 in both those stats (unless you are rolling stats and get really lucky).

there are clear disavantages to DEX barbarians, as they don't get bonus damage when not using Strength in their attacks. Dex barbarians are possible, but not the norm, neither the most optmized option.

 

[Krachek]

With standard array you can have at best +3 bonus in dex and con, at level 1.
Making both go to +5 bonus require you go to level 16, where the case you describe been « business as usual ».
DnD is not fully optimization proof. There's also the case where a players roll four 18 as starting stat.
Pc are heros. They are meant to shine.

 

[André Soares]

With standard array you can have at best +3 bonus in dex and con, at level 1.
Making both go to +5 bonus require you go to level 16, where the case you describe been « business as usual ».
DnD is not fully optimization proof. There's also the case where a players roll four 18 as starting stat.
Pc are heros. They are meant to shine.

and at lvl 16 a moon druid soaks up damage waaaay more effectvely than a barbarian.

 

[aco175]

This must tie in with the finesse weapons threads and that there should not be 1d8 finesse weapons. Although a 1d8 rapier barbarian with shield to keep the AC might work compared to damage from duel rapiers.

 

[5ekyu]

Yes, a level 16 barbarian can have high values and output but so will a cleric, a druid, a wizard, etc and q fighter and a rogue.

 

[Satyrn]

1) Rage apparently gives you resistance (half damage) to absolutely all physical attacks, is that right?

2) Unarmored Defence allows for a better AC than a fighter in heavy armor, possibly?
In this case one could eventually hit 20 in both Dex and Con, for an AC20, and use a shield with that for a total of AC22, while losing very little damage potential if you're using a Finesse weapon.

The things you're concerned about are available to other characters at much earlier levels than the barbarian realistically gets them.
1) Wait till you see how the moon druid soaks up damage. Wildshaping into a giant constrictor can get them an extra 120 hp between short rests. And that's at 5th or 6th level.

2) Again, around 5th level (whenever plate becomes affordable) a dwarf fighter with 10 Strength can get himself an AC of 21 (plate, shield, fighting style)

 

[BookBarbarian]

I love Barbarians. It's my favorite class. They take a beating and dish out a beating. They are however not overpowered.

For the most part they get all their best stuff early on, anything new just tweaks what they can already do. Contrasting that to Wizards or Druids and you'll see that other classes grow more in power and utility getting lots more new things at high levels.

Heck you could make a Barbarian 3/ Fiend Bladelock X that will have utility casting and ranged blasting power plus loads of damage reduction from rage and Temp HP so you can still hulk out and feel like a barbarian. Though to me it wouldn't be a Barbarian.

Because I dislike playing spellcasters. I play Barbarians, because I think they are fun.