D&D 5E Barbarian wants to damage himself to keep rage going

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah but if you pull your punch too much you end up not getting through the rage damage reduction and thus don't do damage at all

If an enemy dealt 1 damage somehow, which was then reduced (say rolling a 1 on a cantrip against a bearbarian), would you not count that as taking damage for the purpose of maintaining rage?

 

[Weiley31]

The first movie was a tale about how the Government discards its soldiers after war, and the effects of PTSD on those men fitting back into society.

Then in the next movie they... sent him back into Vietnam to kill more guys on his own.

Like... wut?

Well in the original novel, they kill Rambo at the end cuz he's beyond saving at that point when he goes berserk and starts killing innocent civilians.

While it seems weird that the first movie had such a message and then all of a sudden Rambo Is an action movie series in the various sequels, remember,they pretty much sent Rambo back in because it was the only thing he knew how to do and do it good by that point, and it was a way to pretty much not to lock him away for going berserk in the first movie.a plea bargain basically from his Handler.

He was pretty much used for his killing skills alongside his prior knowledge of the land and sent into a literal suicide mission in the second movie. That was it. But John Rambo survived, saved POWs, and went off to find some kind of meaning that wasn't just killing. But then after that, whenever Rambo got involved, it was always for a reason. "Live for nothing, or die for something."

Which is why in the third movie, he's found in a village trying to reclaim some form of peace. Unless that was the fourth movie. Can remember.

 

[GlassJaw]

The barbarian rage mechanic is moronic (ending early for holding up a portcullis, etc.). Don't be surprised when it produces moronic results.

Agreed. I'm pretty much at the point where I ignore the criteria for staying in a rage. Managing when to use a rage is much more significant balancing factor for the class than maintaining the rage.

Things like this are why I wish there was a more granular feat and subclass system. Being able to customize class features without having to spend the "cost" of a feat or subclass ability would be amazing.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

(just a flesh wound)

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

So in a game I am DMing a PC wanted to stab himself (just a flesh wound) so he would take damage and not lose rage because there was no enemy in melee range. I really did not like that and made him end rage. First, was that the right ruling in your opinion?

That brought up another potential option - What if he "attacks' something else, like a chair, the door, a wall. I could see that working. It would be an action so he could not dash or do anything else that round.

 

[Seramus]

I also ignore the limitation on Rage as long as the character is doing something intense.

Chasing someone? Sure.
Hodor'ing a door? Sure.
Arm wrestling? Sure.

You know what I hate? The barbarian is in a heated battle, but can't reach someone on her turn. It's ridiculous her rage would fade early when lives are on the line.

 

[Guest 6801328]

It's ridiculous her rage would fade early when lives are on the line.

What? PCs can die in 5e? How?

 

[Dausuul]

What? PCs can die in 5e? How?

By rolling a crit when they damage themselves to sustain rage.

 

[Seramus]

What? PCs can die in 5e? How?

That last fight of the day is usually pretty dangerous.

 

[Pauln6]

I'm sure real world barbarians would slap themselves to get their rage up but I don't think there should be any way to reduce the damage. If it didn't hurt, it wouldn't work. I should imagine that taking 4-6 damage per round would be disincentive. Even with resistance, 2-3 damage to maintain is not a long term strategy.