D&D 5E Open Hand Monk or Bear Totem Barbarian?

[Vitor Bastos]

Im having a hard time picking one of those two classes: Open Hand Monk and Bear Totem Barbarian.

Could you guys tell me more about their:

1- Gameplay Mechanics (Combat, Social and Exploration)

2- Role in party (Dmg or Tank Potential)

3- DPR (How hard can they hit compared to other Classes?)

4- "Fun" features (What motivates you to play these Classes?)

Which one would you say is the "best" overall and why?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The bear totem might be a good tank, depending on you DM. It has good survivability but doesn't get a "taunt" ability until late, so it might just get ignored. It's DPR is rubbish.

Open Hand monk is a good combat-controller, but not particularly tanky or high damage.

Both are "average" in terms of out of combat stuff.

Personally, I wouldn't play either, but YMMV.

 

[Zardnaar]

Open Hand monk with the right background is a somewhat ok rogue replacement. Monks better at combat (at levels that matter) Rogue at skills.

It's the best monk in terms of damage.

Totem Barbarian is the best all round barbarian. Decent damage but not to exciting. I'm not a fan of barbarians in general but I like the totem one the best.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The trouble with the bear totem is it tends to sound a lot better on paper than it is in practice. In my experience elemental damage tends to be fairly rare at level 3, although there is more of it around later, and it tends to be AoE, so the bear isn't preventing the team taking damage. Being the last man standing isn't a win.

I prefer wolf totem - this gives your enemies a good reason to target your rather than the squishies.

 

[Coroc]

The trouble with the bear totem is it tends to sound a lot better on paper than it is in practice. In my experience elemental damage tends to be fairly rare at level 3, although there is more of it around later, and it tends to be AoE, so the bear isn't preventing the team taking damage. Being the last man standing isn't a win.

I prefer wolf totem - this gives your enemies a good reason to target your rather than the squishies.

Bear totem might be the best tank in the game, if you invest in intimidation.
For that I highly recommend that you ask your DM if you can key intimidation of strength or constitution instead of charisma. I did this for a dwarf barb of one of my players, and it is a very fair houserule imho.

If barb is in rage, enemy cannot charm him to switch sides, so that is better than a fighter in that case.

If you invest in unarmored defense you are not equipment dependant considering available armor.

 

[ad_hoc]

You're probably going to get bored with either of them if your deciding factor is which one is 'best'.

They are entirely different, there is no 'best'.

Which one do you have the coolest inspiration for a character?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Bear totem might be the best tank in the game, if you invest in intimidation.

Intimidation in 5e does not force an enemy to attack you (although swashbucklers do get a special ability that allows it to be used in that way) - indeed it's more likely to cause them not to attack you.

You get an ability at level 14 that can encourage the enemy to attack you, but since you won't reach level 14 that's not very helpful.

So: no.

If barb is in rage, enemy cannot charm him to switch sides, so that is better than a fighter in that case.

Err, no again. Only the Berserker subclass gets that ability.

If you invest in unarmored defense you are not equipment dependant considering available armor.

Or, more likely, someone else nabs the +3 breastplate because you "don't need it".

 

[Vitor Bastos]

Personally, I wouldn't play either, but YMMV.

What would you play then? I can also roll paladin. My goal was to play a good Damage Dealer with a bit of Tankyness/survivability. Also simple management.

Which one do you have the coolest inspiration for a character?

Well, I didn't have much time to think about it tbh. The campaign I was gonna play got canceled a few weeks ago and then out of nowhere one of my friends decided he wanted to DM. However, he told us he didn't want duplicate classes, so everybody rushed to get their preferred Class. I was thinking about Barbarian, Monk and Paladin. I want to roll a class that can dish out good Damage, be Tankish and have simple management (another why I didn't want to roll a full caster for example).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What would you play then? I can also roll paladin. My goal was to play a good Damage Dealer with a bit of Tankyness/survivability. Also simple management.

Paladin is miles ahead of either monk or barbarian by those measures. Some might even call it overpowered.

 

[ad_hoc]

Well, I didn't have much time to think about it tbh. The campaign I was gonna play got canceled a few weeks ago and then out of nowhere one of my friends decided he wanted to DM. However, he told us he didn't want duplicate classes, so everybody rushed to get their preferred Class. I was thinking about Barbarian, Monk and Paladin. I want to roll a class that can dish out good Damage, be Tankish and have simple management (another why I didn't want to roll a full caster for example).

If you want simple management then Monk is the wrong way to go.

Barbarian involves managing your rages per day and that's mostly it. If you go for something like Totem then you continue that trajectory of not having individual decisions.

Try to get some inspiration for characterization though. At the very least put some good effort into your traits/ideal/bond/flaw.