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

[Fanaelialae]

Sometimes it seems to me like folks conflate the idea of a class being the weakest with the idea that it is poorly designed, or even with "doesn't play the way I'd like it to".

A class can be badly designed without being weak. For example, here's a new 5e Super-Fighter class: it gets everything the Fighter gets and also deals ten times normal damage. My addition here is clearly poor design, but it is grossly overpowered rather than being weak.

If I don't like spell slots, I might take issue with a caster that uses slots despite the fact that this hypothetical caster may very well be competently designed and balanced. That's really just a personal preference though.

I think it's best to suss out why you don't like a particular design, before changing it. If you assume it is too weak, when the real issue is that you would rather it implemented a spell point system (or whatever), you are likely to unbalance the class. It's hard to fix an issue if you haven't clearly identified what it is.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The Frenzy mechanic is a big one to wrap your head around. Whether it's good depends on where you are in the adventure and where you'll be afterwards, as well as the type of adventure anyways.

Being exhausted even at 1st level exhaustion can be debilitating. You have disadvantage on all checks, including initiative. After you get exhausted past the first level, the number of days you have to recuperate equals the amount of times you've been exhausted.

Frenzy, though, greatly increases your attack power. If you go reckless, you're making 4 attack rolls at 3rd level, each with their ability to crit and the fact they're more likely to hit makes your damage more likely. At 5th level, you're making 6 attack rolls which makes missing unlikely and critting more likely.

Ironically, as a barbarian, you have to be tactical about how you frenzy. If you imagine you'll be fighting the next day, you'll want to frenzy only once. If you know that when the adventure's over, you get to relax with downtime, you can frenzy upwards of 3 times before things get really obnoxious but you can always reckless attack to off-balance the effects on the 4th and 5th frenzy.

The thing is that the higher levels you get as a barbarian, the better frenzy becomes due to the synergy of your other features. At 7th, the first disadvantage of initiative rolls are offset by your feral instincts. At 9th, with the 6 attack rolls per turn, you're more likely to be rolling those 3d12+8 (or 3d12 +18 if you picked up GWM) damage rolls. At 13th level, you're doing a whole 4d12+8 or (4d12+18) damage with higher likelyhood to crit.

15th level is when things get good because you never have to end your rage. Which means you'll have all the aforementioned benefits all day without having to suffer any exhaustion.

So if your campaign is a list of everyday encounters with no consecutive days of rest, Frenzy suffers. The problem is, if your campaign doesn't do random encounters during travel, those 6 day journeys between one location to another is a perfect time for the barbarian to recuperate from their overdone frenzies.

Yeah my analysis concurs with yours. And I know the pre-gen campaign we're in has relatively down-time (from what we've seen and what seems likely to unfold) or chance of "5MWD" days. Frenzy is extremely powerful - potentially a fight-winner by itself - if judged well. But all I see two likely scenarios - firstly, poor judgement, in which case the Barbarian is left with Disadvantage on virtually everything all day, secondly, just not using it most days, which case it's a non-feature.

@iserith "Trying not to make checks" is not really a valid "thing" in D&D.

Most checks you make, because you have to (for example, trying to prize open the doors of a lift as it fills with oil), or because its tactically advantageous to (for example, grappling an enemy so you can move them into some lava or the like), or because the DM demands it (initiative, for example).

It's not like PCs go around making totally unnecessary checks for no reason. Well apart from that guy who insists on continually saying "I roll Perception" when the DM hasn't even asked. But we all know he isn't playing a Barbarian.

Exhaustion absolutely is that bad unless you have tons of time to waste, too, because of the recovery time. Staggering about on half-speed when your class is designed around fast movement is a particularly bad use of your abilities, as is eliminating the Advantage you get on a bunch of stuff by getting Disadvantage on the same. It's particularly bad specifically for Barbarians as it eliminates so many of their advantages. Whereas as caster can minimize the impact by leaning hard on cantrips and save-based spells.

Speaking just for my current party, the Barbarian is the only one with high STR (next highest is 12), so we really want him to be making STR and Athletics checks and so on. If he's wandering around with Disadvantage all the time, its literally better to get the STR 12 guy and Help the STR12 guy in most cases.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Yeah I was trying to explain this to one of the other players, who is normally good at min-maxing, but looked at Frenzy and was like "Wow that's amazing, I should definitely go Berserker!", and it's like, dude, even 1 Exhaustion will make you bad at all the stuff you do (he loves to grapple and to do all sorts of crazy stunts which require athletics checks and so on), 2 Exhaustion will basically you having to be dragged by the party, and useless in most combat, and 3 Exhaustion will make you almost entirely ineffective. He's like "But I can get rid of it, right?" and I'm like "No. There isn't any way short of a long rest.", but I think he just doesn't think I've looked hard enough.

Well Greater Restoration does it, but that's like a 4th level spell with a costly material component attached.

Still though, I think the Frenzy barb is actually a lot better then people think it is, they're just looking at the wrong things.

 

[atanakar]

My group has a Fighter Cavalier and a Fighter Arcane Archer who are not Fighter Top Tier sub-classes and they deal a lot of damage. I have to watch what I do carefully.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Well Greater Restoration does it, but that's like a 4th level spell with a costly material component attached.

Still though, I think the Frenzy barb is actually a lot better then people think it is, they're just looking at the wrong things.

What do you think makes it good? I think the level 6 and 14 abilities are fantastic, but 3 is difficult to use right, and 10 is just absolutely nuclear-grade-mega-trash (esp. as it comes off CHA, not STR or CON) that is very good at wasting your Action for absolutely nothing. I feel like most groups will never see the L14 ability so I tend to discount it, personally. YMMV. If the L14 ability was the L3 or L6 one, I think they'd be pretty terrifying. L10 just needs to be replaced or re-worked (like to a Bonus Action and use STR or something - it reeks of older-edition design where for a non-magic-user to inflict a condition like Frightened was a huge deal, but that isn't how most of 5E is designed).

My group has a Fighter Cavalier and a Fighter Arcane Archer who are not Fighter Top Tier sub-classes and they deal a lot of damage. I have to watch what I do carefully.

AAs are actually pretty great damage-wise. Their issue is that they're boring to play because they rarely get to do active AA stuff, not because they can't pound people when it counts.

Cavaliers are still Fighters too, though nowhere near the menace that a Champion/BM/Samurai is going to be to the health of your NPCs.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

That seems extremely unfair.

You made this thread, and have just labelled all the answers to your question except one as "dishonest" by saying that. I was going to respond, but it seems like if you regard all answers except the one you dislike as "dishonest", then there's hardly any point.

Maybe relax...take a deep breath...and ponder on the fact that the statement you are getting upset about is just a joke in the vein of friendly banter and not some prosecution of those who have come to discuss this.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

What do you think makes it good? I think the level 6 and 14 abilities are fantastic, but 3 is difficult to use right, and 10 is just absolutely nuclear-grade-mega-trash (esp. as it comes off CHA, not STR or CON) that is very good at wasting your Action for absolutely nothing. I feel like most groups will never see the L14 ability so I tend to discount it, personally. YMMV. If the L14 ability was the L3 or L6 one, I think they'd be pretty terrifying.

Well yeah, it is Mindless Rage and Retaliation that are the stars of the show, but I think people also over state how good other barb options are cough*beartotem*cough

 

[iserith]

@iserith "Trying not to make checks" is not really a valid "thing" in D&D.

Yes it is. It's the best possible strategy to avoid failure in a game where the DM decides if there is a check or not, based on the rules for adjudication outlined in the PHB and DMG. Plenty of players ask to make or declare they are making ability checks. If the DM acquiesces, those players' characters will fail on average a great deal more than a player who looks at a situation and tries to remove the uncertainty as to the outcome and/or the meaningful consequence for failure. I see this all the time in play.

Exhaustion absolutely is that bad unless you have tons of time to waste, too, because of the recovery time. Staggering about on half-speed when your class is designed around fast movement is a particularly bad use of your abilities, as is eliminating the Advantage you get on a bunch of stuff by getting Disadvantage on the same.

Moving at 20 feet (assuming Fast Movement) instead of 30 feet like almost everyone else isn't likely to make a big difference in the outcome of a battle, unless it's all happening at great distances. If great distances are involved, yeah, it'll make a difference. But that will be adventure and campaign specific.

Speaking just for my current party, the Barbarian is the only one with high STR (next highest is 12), so we really want him to be making STR and Athletics checks and so on. If he's wandering around with Disadvantage all the time, its literally better to get the STR 12 guy and Help the STR12 guy in most cases.

So the barbarian should play accordingly because of your party composition. Just like a party without a bard, cleric, etc. shouldn't play like they have ready access to combat healing. This is just player skill in context. I don't think this an indictment of the berserker subclass.

 

[Asisreo]

What do you think makes it good? I think the level 6 and 14 abilities are fantastic, but 3 is difficult to use right, and 10 is just absolutely nuclear-grade-mega-trash (esp. as it comes off CHA, not STR or CON) that is very good at wasting your Action for absolutely nothing. I feel like most groups will never see the L14 ability so I tend to discount it, personally. YMMV. If the L14 ability was the L3 or L6 one, I think they'd be pretty terrifying. L10 just needs to be replaced or re-worked (like to a Bonus Action and use STR or something).

Level 10 ability can be decent. For the fact that it gives the enemy disadvantage on attack rolls, meaning you can reckless attack without taking advantage hits on your turn. It's an at-will thing, too so no harm-no foul using it on minions. It costs an action, though, so you, again, need to have good judgement.

What's interesting is that it does something most "tank" rolls have a problem with in 5e, and that's keeping the enemies from just ignoring you and going straight for spellcasters. If your teammates are always within 15ft of you, they're relatively safe from the melee fighter you scared. Fun fact! Most melee fighters are bad at charisma saves and since it's nonmagical, it's one of the few ways to bypass those magical resistance types like devils. Most devils also have bad charisma and aren't immune to frightened.

 

[Charlaquin]

You can say that about the Ranger class and its core features in general.

Indeed! Though I think the ranger has a slightly different problem, which is that there are several different things that different groups want out of the ranger, and many of them are incompatible. The ranger as a whole is a result of trying to satisfy all of those different desires, whereas I think there’s a bit more consensus on what an animal companion ranger ought to look like, and the beast master doesn’t really deliver that.