D&D 5E Berserker - How does it really compare to Totem Warrior?

[CapnZapp]

The reason this is relevant, is that in my numbers the real equalizer is not Polearm Master, it is GWM. I realize that you find it OP, but it is this feat that makes the Berserker on par with the Totem Warrior. Any discussion about balance between these 2 paths needs to look at GWM.

Please give us more details on how you arrived at this conclusion. Thank you.

(Please note; nobody is contesting that the Berserker deals top-notch damage. The issue with the subclass is the cost of its main feature. So I'm having a real hard time understanding the focus on the feats.)

Unless you're talking about the "guide to enabling my bonus action to make an extra attack" optimizing discussion. In which case I would have assumed Frenzy, eating bonus actions, interferes with GWM or PM, which indicates the opposite of "equalizing the two subclasses", which is why I'm asking you for more data...

 

[CapnZapp]

So what feat do I get while you are wasting yours picking up the bonus attack I already have?

First thing first: what we're saying is that a subclass feature that gives you a bonus actions is more difficult to minmax with a feat than subclass features that gives you stuff not in the form of bonus actions.

In the top strata of minmaxing you're not short of bonus actions. If anything, you run the risk of having too many (sources of) bonus actions. Since, you know, you can only use one at a time.

But to your question, Carlson:

Why don't YOU provide an example of the feat you want to take instead of the one we're "wasting" on the bonus action?

Let's call that comparison d (to couple it with my previos post):
d1) One Totem Barb and one Berserk Barb, both with the PM feat (say)
d2) One Totem Barb and one Berserk Barb, both with the CC feat (where CC = ChrisCarlson)

This then allows you to see the comparison between the Totem Barb of d1 and the Berserk Barb of d2.

 

[Imaro]

First thing first: what we're saying is that a subclass feature that gives you a bonus actions is more difficult to minmax with a feat than subclass features that gives you stuff not in the form of bonus actions.

In the top strata of minmaxing you're not short of bonus actions. If anything, you run the risk of having too many (sources of) bonus actions. Since, you know, you can only use one at a time.

But to your question, Carlson:

Why don't YOU provide an example of the feat you want to take instead of the one we're "wasting" on the bonus action?

Let's call that comparison d (to couple it with my previos post):
d1) One Totem Barb and one Berserk Barb, both with the PM feat (say)
d2) One Totem Barb and one Berserk Barb, both with the CC feat (where CC = ChrisCarlson)

This then allows you to see the comparison between the Totem Barb of d1 and the Berserk Barb of d2.

I'm curious about how the Lucky feat would help here with the Berserker... since it's not technically advantage but instead allows you to roll an additional d20 (I'm not really a math guy so not sure how to figure this out mathematically)... after you see the result of your roll. It's only got 3 uses before a long rest recharge but the fact that you can use it after seeing the roll means it won't be wasted when it's not needed... It feels like a really good way to counteract a Berserkers exhaustion but I guess this depends on just how many ability checks the Berserker is going to be making after using Frenzy before he takes a long rest.

EDIT: To clarify I am speaking of the Berserker w Lucky vs the Totem w PM...
The Berserker is still out damaging the Totem with the PM feat since the bonus attack is only a 1d4 while the Berserker is theoretically hitting with a 2d6 weapon that's 2.5 vs. 7 average points of damage (more than double what you're doing with PM on the bonus attack... and the pole arm has a lower overall damage than a Greatsword... 1d10 vs. 2d6) average points of damage... are these damage differences also being factored into this analysis?

 

[ChrisCarlson]

I'm saying that to make an apples to apples comparison, you change ONE variable and keep everything else the same.

Sounds more like apples to pears, if ya ask me...

Your artificial hamstringing is no different than requiring a valor and lore bard to both take the Charger feat and expect a fair comparison. Not cool.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

First thing first: what we're saying is that a subclass feature that gives you a bonus actions is more difficult to minmax with a feat than subclass features that gives you stuff not in the form of bonus actions.

I don't see how that is anything more than an opinion. Certainly not defensible with any kind of hard facts. Just conjecture and assumption.

In the top strata of minmaxing you're not short of bonus actions. If anything, you run the risk of having too many (sources of) bonus actions. Since, you know, you can only use one at a time.

Bonus actions to do what, exactly? Because having more than one way to use your bonus action is not 'waste'. Its diversification. Its flexibility.

I can tell you this from experience. My assassin/shadow monk/feypact warlock has a slew of bonus action options. All great. All very useful. In varied and different ways. I'm rarely without a satisfying thing to do with my bonus action. If all I had was "hit it again," there'd be many circumstances in actual play where I would have missed out on using my bonus action effectively.

Why don't YOU provide an example of the feat you want to take instead of the one we're "wasting" on the bonus action?

How about, while you are taking whatever bonus action attack feat you need to catch up to me, I'll take Sentinel (now I'll get more opportunities to make reaction attacks!). Or Alert (Never surprised, and didn't someone just mention how devastating it is not to go first...). Or, heck, I could just take +2 CON (more HPs, +1 Con saves, +1 AC).

Let's call that comparison d (to couple it with my previos post):
d1) One Totem Barb and one Berserk Barb, both with the PM feat (say)
d2) One Totem Barb and one Berserk Barb, both with the CC feat (where CC = ChrisCarlson)

]This then allows you to see the comparison between the Totem Barb of d1 and the Berserk Barb of d2.

This infatuation with requiring two characters--built differently--to take the same feat keeps missing the point. When they reach a point to access a feat, they are each given a discrete option. No different than when they were given a choice at 3rd level to pick their path. These discrete choices are what separate characters, and even their players.

And you keep wanting to make sure these two intentionally divergent PCs make arbitrarily similar choices, in a key place designed to customize and separate from others, just so that you can prove one is better than the other? That's not how things work.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Who has more fun playing?

That choice wins.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Who has more fun playing?

Some would say, the one who is playing more correctly...

That choice wins.

Are there really ever any winners in white rooms?

 

[pkt77242]

Is that the difference between disadvantage and normal, or disadvantage and advantage?

That is the difference between disadvantage and normal.

I just went back and added the columns for advantage and advantage averaged 14 over 1000 rolls.

So for the 1000 rolls average for each
advantage: 14
Noraml: 10
Disadvantage: 7

 

[Guest 6801328]

Some would say, the one who is playing more correctly...

Are there really ever any winners in white rooms?

Isn't it kind of funny that fans of a game that is famous for not having winners and losers try so hard to win on internet forums?

'Funny' as in 'sadly ironic', not actually humorous.

 

[Eric V]

Who has more fun playing?

That choice wins.

I think the OP at the very beginning indicated that that kind of response is for a different kind of thread: "I realize that people have various preferred role-playing styles, and value different non-mechanical aspects of characters. This isn't a thread about that. This is intended to be a thread about raw, by the book, standard assumptions, subclass effectiveness comparisons."