D&D 5E Berserker Barbarian Fix?

[hejtmane]

To me, an iconic berzerker is the Celtic warrior "skyclad" with an axe in each hand.

As I understand it, since Frenzy gives an additional attack as a bonus action, it clashes with Two Weapon Fighting, and thus you don't get full advantage of the offhand weapon.

Is that right, are people okay with that? If not, are there potential fixes?

Right now the fix would be go totem or have your DM house rule a change for a fix of some type if you want Berserk path but yes Dual weapon gets hurt with that build

 

[Mephista]

it clashes with Two Weapon Fighting, and thus you don't get full advantage of the offhand weapon.

TWF is pretty much a trap choice for the vast majority of the game. I think a Beastmaster and the Swashbuckler could pull it off. A Fighter also could, but he's better off with Polearm Msatery or Crossbow Expertise. The long and short of the matter is that, for the most part, duel wielding is just not a good option. Too many things clash for that bonus action spot to make it worthwhile. The only way I can think of to fix it is to allow two bonus actions - an offhand attack and something that's not an attack.

 

[Kithas]

Right now the fix would be go totem or have your DM house rule a change for a fix of some type if you want Berserk path but yes Dual weapon gets hurt with that build

One could also invest in the dual wielder feat, dual wield some battle-axes and use one in two hands when you go berserk for d10 goodness. Or with no feat, dual-wield handaxes and chuck them at people until you run out, pull out your greataxe and berserk some fools.
Alternatively you can just ignore your level 3 ability and look forward to the rest of your awesome subclass. Mindless Rage, and Retaliation Rock.

All in all I think twf gets a really bad rap for most classes. Even with that fighter example of rather using Polearm master or Crossbow expert. With Dual Wielder you will do more dpr than with those options(excluding sharpshooter/gwm) and have that tasty +1 to your ac. That sounds good to me...

 

[hejtmane]

TWF is pretty much a trap choice for the vast majority of the game. I think a Beastmaster and the Swashbuckler could pull it off. A Fighter also could, but he's better off with Polearm Msatery or Crossbow Expertise. The long and short of the matter is that, for the most part, duel wielding is just not a good option. Too many things clash for that bonus action spot to make it worthwhile. The only way I can think of to fix it is to allow two bonus actions - an offhand attack and something that's not an attack.

Fighter can get 3 to 4 attacks so I would skip polearm and go 2 handed gwm because they lose little because of the extra attacks starting at 11. The reason most people say it is a trap because on fighter with duelist eventually passes up twf in the math game in later levels now twf rocks early levels.

Me personally if I was going to make a dual wield barb I give up the +4 strength and +4 cons if we are talking level 20 builds and take 3 levels in fighter to leverage two weapon fighting damage boost and take champion to go with the brutal critical normally I prefer Battle master but for Barb 19-20 crit just feels right (Me I like play to high levels because I prefer the journeys instead of constantly re-running the same early levels).

Trap no trap I still like to build characters around concept and fun and still be effective at the same time.

 

[Kithas]

As far as dpr goes, you start at level 5 assuming a +3 str you get dual wielder 22.5, gs is 21, polearm is 23. at 11 with a +4 str dw=34, gs is 34.5, and polearm is 36. At 20 with a +5 str dw is 47.5, gs is 46, and polearm is 50.75.
(all math done assuming 4.5+str for dw, 7.5+str for gs, and 5.75/2.75 for polearm)
As you can see dual wielding on average out-damages using a greatsword as long as you are increasing your str which you should be anyways... Polearm mastery is higher, but you get +1 ac over them so there is still a trade-off.

 

[Mephista]

Trap no trap I still like to build characters around concept and fun and still be effective at the same time.

The point I was trying to make is that TWF is just badly implemented in 5e. It just doesn't work well, because of a few reasons - heavy competition for bonus action usage, low damage without the Fighting Style (which only two classes get), magic item attunement restrictions.

The reason I call it a trap is because its -not- effective, which you said you want as well. Even the feat is worth less than a raise to your Dexterity score for duel wielding. Yes, its a popular and evocative option that sadly is highly ineffective and exceedingly difficult to execute in many cases without house rules to fix it.

 

[jodyjohnson]

The hyperbole is strong with this one. Let's go back to -4/-8 for dual wielding.

The main problem with dual wielding is that fans of 2 weapon fighting want it to be the highest DPR when the design says 2 handed is the best DPR.

Its shtick is supposed to be extra attack but then Feats swoop in and pass bonus action attacks out like candy. Maybe the problem is the feats.

But it is still not bad for something everyone gets for free.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

TWF is a good option. For rogues. A low level barbarin with two handaxes is also not too bad. Even with a second attack and a fighting style it is not lagging far behind anything. It is just with the ranger class for example that the level 11 ability of the hunter and the command beast ability of the beastmaster don't play nice with the two-weapon fighter.
The rogue cunning action as bonus action is a nice interaction however because it offers you a real choice between mobility or get another chance to attack,

 

[jodyjohnson]

Optional Combat style: Twin Strike - when using a light melee weapon in each hand you strike as a single melee attack. Combine the dice and add modifiers once. This can be used any time you are allowed an attack. May not be combined with Two Weapon Fighting. (Dual Wielding allows the use of non-Light weapons).

Functionally the same basic DPR as Greatsword but not benefiting from TWFS, GWS, GWM, and losing the Rogue's benefit of a second shot at Sneak Attack. Primary benefit is switching between TWF and Twin Strike as needed, and creating a high damage Finesse attack. Main drawback is overhead and possible confusion about which style you are using at any moment.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

TWF is pretty much a trap choice for the vast majority of the game.

Oh, I wouldn't say its a trap (assuming a fighter with Fighting Styles). The damage starts off better than Duelist, is comparable with it for the majority of the game, and ends up a few points less at 20th level. And in exchange for the ability to use a shield, you get an extra chance to hit your opponent. For a Battle-Master that potentially means an extra maneuver in a round. If your campaign includes magical items (like the vast majority of them do) it also allows you to potentially wield two of them. Is it better? Nope. Is it objectively worse? Debatable.

If you add in the dual-wielder feat then it out-damages Duelist for the entire game, and you pick up an extra point of AC, so you're reducing that gap. This does require a feat, but Dueling style has no feat to increase its damage, so that's something right there.