Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Captain Panda" data-source="post: 7560690" data-attributes="member: 6861845">I'd say barbarians are fine. They're effective at what they do, but what they do is fairly narrow. Dexterity barbarians are generally not a thing except for niche builds because you lose out on several key barbarian features, and traditional barbarians are mostly better. In fact having a lower AC is part of the point. They soak damage very effectively, and more importantly they can actually draw attacks well. Reckless attack and a modest AC means that a DM is justified having a bunch of monsters attack the barbarian. In order to tank effectively you can't just be great at taking hits, you need things to actually take swings at you! An eldritch knight fighter who shields his AC up to 27+ or something ridiculous is just going to be ignored and the monster swarm is going to go after the wizard or bard instead, because the fighter is too hard to hit and doesn't hit hard enough to get the monster's attention. That's why you bring a barbarian. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool    :cool:"  data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></blockquote>