D&D 5E It is OK for a class to be the worst

[cmad1977]

It’s funny.
I’ve never seen anyone come into these forums and say
“I played as a frenzy barbarian and it sucked!”.

People seem to assume that every battle requires frenzy or rage. They do not. I’ve gone while adventures without using frenzy once.

 

[cmad1977]

Sorry. It was a joke, no offense intended. There was a prominent thread a bit ago PSA: You're Not Matt Mercer – largely about how we shouldn't expect players to be able to git gud at roleplaying to make up for weaker rollplaying.

What you're speaking to is great, if players can avoid skill checks when possible. That's fun at many tables, and I'd say one of the best things about 5e is that the core assumption is, if there's no chance of failure, don't roll for it. What I'm saying is that if the party needs the Barbarian to use Athletics and they have a level of exhaustion, that's pretty hard to roleplay around and still succeed at the task. It's also pretty hard to assist with an athletics check using the help action, etc. If the Barbarian needs to swim a deer carcass across a raging river rapid so that the party doesn't starve tonight, but he's got a level of exhaustion, the wizard can't really help out with that Strength check that's facing disadvantage.

I'm glad I'm not Matt Mercer, too. I do like his setting book, though.

That’s come up before in our games.
A:inspiration/teamwork make a big difference
B: that’s often the moment when a much “weaker” character pulls off the feat and gets to lord it over my barbarian a bit. It’s pretty fun.

Also, given str bonus AND proficiency in athletics?
I’ll roll at disadvantage. Made a few of those.

 

[Marandahir]

That’s come up before in our games.
A:inspiration/teamwork make a big difference
B: that’s often the moment when a much “weaker” character pulls off the feat and gets to lord it over my barbarian a bit. It’s pretty fun.

Bardic Inspiration and other spells that make up for it are good exceptions and good reasons why Iserith's argument for work-arounds that frenzy exhaustion aren't entirely off-base. I think they're smart party cohesion methods.

But I don't think they are good citations when arguing that 1 exhaustion isn't a big deal. Those are expensive resources another party member has to spend to make it work.

Sucks that the Bard player is lording over your Barbarian (or not, maybe that group dynamic is fun for your group); in my group, the Bard and Barbarian are best buddies in-game and even though their personalities are very different, they respect and rely on each other's strengths to take care of their weak-spots.

 

[cmad1977]

I think he means it's not rapid. Exhaustion is one of the very few things that carries over a long rest. So if you frenzy twice, you're still suffering exhaustion after the rest.

Exhaustion is one of the hardest things to remove in 5e, you can:

1. Rest - removes 1 level;
2. Greater restoration removes 1 level (a 5th level spell);
3, A potion of vitality - removes all exhaustion - it's a very rare magic item.

So frenzy is NOT an easy ability to use optimally!

Sidenote: I looked up exhaustion on D&D Beyond (too lazy to grab the physical phb) and it ends with this tidbit: Also, being raised from the dead reduces a creature’s exhaustion level by 1.

Is this the actual rule? This seems strange, shouldn't it be the other way around - adding a level of exhaustion?

I mean if it's correct, technically - optimal play is to kill the berserker right before a long rest and cast revivify - you then get optimal exhaustion recovery (and use a 3rd level spell, not a 5th), - (yes I recognize it's absurd).

It is easy to use optimally, it’s not easy to use habitually. Habitual use is not its design.

 

[Mort]

It’s funny.
I’ve never seen anyone come into these forums and say
“I played as a frenzy barbarian and it sucked!”.

People seem to assume that every battle requires frenzy or rage. They do not. I’ve gone while adventures without using frenzy once.

Frenzy barbarians have some very nice benefits - Mindless rage is HUGE for a barbarian as their will save is not likely to be that great and they're a disaster if turned against the party! But it's annoying when the supposed signature ability has such a large downside and can be very frustrating to a new player.

 

[cmad1977]

Bardic Inspiration and other spells that make up for it are good exceptions and good reasons why Iserith's argument for work-arounds that frenzy exhaustion aren't entirely off-base. I think they're smart party cohesion methods.

But I don't think they are good citations when arguing that 1 exhaustion isn't a big deal. Those are expensive resources another party member has to spend to make it work.

Sucks that the Bard player is lording over your Barbarian (or not, maybe that group dynamic is fun for your group); in my group, the Bard and Barbarian are best buddies in-game and even though their personalities are very different, they respect and rely on each other's strengths to take care of their weak-spots.

Oh no... my friend is teasing me a bit...

Good to hear about your guys though. I’m sure they’ve never made fun of each other once.

 

[iserith]

Sorry. It was a joke, no offense intended. There was a prominent thread a bit ago PSA: You're Not Matt Mercer – largely about how we shouldn't expect players to be able to git gud at roleplaying to make up for weaker rollplaying.

I never cared for the roleplaying/rollplaying dichotomy. If a player can make a good decision for the character, that player is good at roleplaying.

What you're speaking to is great, if players can avoid skill checks when possible. That's fun at many tables, and I'd say one of the best things about 5e is that the core assumption is, if there's no chance of failure, don't roll for it. What I'm saying is that if the party needs the Barbarian to use Athletics and they have a level of exhaustion, that's pretty hard to roleplay around and still succeed at the task. It's also pretty hard to assist with an athletics check using the help action, etc. If the Barbarian needs to swim a deer carcass across a raging river rapid so that the party doesn't starve tonight, but he's got a level of exhaustion, the wizard can't really help out with that Strength check that's facing disadvantage.

One would hope that, if the barbarian doesn't think of it, the wizard will surely suggest tying the carcass to rope and reeling it in. Or perhaps butchering the deer into smaller pieces to be flung over the river. Or just going fishing or foraging. Point being, there are often many approaches to achieving a goal, some of which may not require an ability check. And if a player can obviate the call for an ability check, that is skillful play.

 

[cmad1977]

As to the ‘rez for optimal exhaustion recovery’...
That’s silly, but my barbarians would totally volunteer.

 

[cmad1977]

I never cared for the roleplaying/rollplaying dichotomy. If a player can make a good decision for the character, that player is good at roleplaying.



One would hope that, if the barbarian doesn't think of it, the wizard will surely suggest tying the carcass to rope and reeling it in. Or perhaps butchering the deer into smaller pieces to be flung over the river. Or just going fishing or foraging. Point being, there are often many approaches to achieving a goal, some of which may not require an ability check. And if a player can obviate the call for an ability check, that is skillful play.

I’ve never been alone as a barbarian. Somehow I’ve always had a group to help me up when I’m down. I have to imagine others play them... solo?

 

[NotAYakk]

It’s funny.
I’ve never seen anyone come into these forums and say
“I played as a frenzy barbarian and it sucked!”.

People seem to assume that every battle requires frenzy or rage. They do not. I’ve gone while adventures without using frenzy once.

I guess it is the opportunity cost.

Your core subclass feature is not used.

Meanwhile, the Totem barbarian is granting advantage on all allies attacks and disadvantage on all enemy attacks except against themselves. Or has resistance to all damage.

Or the zealot is getting revivified for nothing and blasting radiant magic, or is killing an entire army before they finally die from their wounds.

I mean, "it isn't too bad, the base barbarian is good enough" is a valid argument; but when comparing subclasses, if your position is "even if I don't have a subclass I'd be ok" seems a bit off.