D&D 5E New playtest packet available.

[Li Shenron]

So.... 4e was wrong because it had daily martial powers which broke verisimilitude...

Not a peep about how the Barbarian has x/rages per day, because 3e did it. D&D fandom is silly.

It's about the disconnected mechanic issue.

A martial power that is limited on a daily or encounter basis "just because" might be unacceptable by gamers who want mechanics connected to reasonable in-world explanations.

A martial power based on fatigue is connected enough to be acceptable by almost everyone.

"No implementation without representation" if you want

 

[Li Shenron]

I've heard a lot more complaints about nonmagical abilities that seem too magical than I ever heard about interclass balance. I only learned that primary spellcasters are supposedly "too good" by reading these boards.

In general, almost all the criticisms I've heard in person (not online) about D&D rules have been about realism/verisimilitude/plausibility/etc.

This.

I think both these two issues are very important.

There are people who play the game with little concern for balance. Whether the game is balanced or not, doesn't matter much to them. So why not making the game balanced anyway?

There are people who play the game with little concern for verisimilitude. Whether the game has verisimilitude or not, doesn't matter much to them. So why not making the game with verisimilitude anyway?

 

[Klaus]

Only downside then is players abusing this out of combat ("I rage before jumping across the pit so I resist falling damage! I rage before smashing open the chest to get advantage!" Etc.)

If there is any mechanic that could be limited to "combat only", it's a barbarian's rage.

 

[gyor]

So.... 4e was wrong because it had daily martial powers which broke verisimilitude...Not a peep about how the Barbarian has x/rages per day, because 3e did it. D&D fandom is silly.

I'd like to point out that in 4e rages were Primal Magic, not a martial power (until the,Feywild book, when you had the option for somw martial rages). Even in some pre 4e fluff there is indictations that at least for some, raging was magical for some barbarians, such as the Barbarians of Rashemen in FR and thier firewine.

 

[Klaus]

I'd like to point out that in 4e rages were Primal Magic, not a martial power (until the,Feywild book, when you had the option for somw martial rages). Even in some pre 4e fluff there is indictations that at least for some, raging was magical for some barbarians, such as the Barbarians of Rashemen in FR and thier firewine.

Even the Berserker (the barbarian build in Heroes of the Feywild) had a primal rage (in fact, when he was raging, his martial at-wills became primal powers). I think the Berserker is the perfect model for the D&D Next Barbarian, in that he fights with a certain style and effectiveness, and has the option to throw caution to the wind and enter a battle frenzy of sorts that changed that fighting style for the remainder of battle.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

There were a number of suggestions on the WotC boards about making Rage activate on a trigger. Most of these were 'when bloodied' which is obviously a poor design, given that a player has considerable control over when they are bloodied and can exploit it accordingly. I think an interesting mechanic would be a damage-based threshold though, with some optional player-chosen input to when exactly they trigger Rage. Consider as a starting point the idea of taking at least half of your maximum hitpoints in damage - the simple Barbarian would automatically Rage as soon as this happens (and neatly gain resistance in the process, making the hitpoint loss not that big a deal - indeed I would extend the resistance to all physical forms of damage including magical versions thereof - fire, cold, force, poison and so on). To give the player some control, you could define a range of hitpoints during which you can rage, and beyond which you must rage - I will call this the Rage Range. The low end is half of your maximum hitpoints minus your con modifier times by your level, and the high end is the same but plus your con modifier times by your level. A 5th level Barbarian with 14 Con and average HP has a maximum of 46 HP (12+2+(6+2)*4) and so their Rage Range is when they take between 13 and 33 damage in a single combat - they can choose to Rage as soon as they've taken 13, and must after they have taken 33. The same limitation on the ending of Rage would apply, only I would allow rounds in which you make strength checks to count towards maintaining Rage.

 

[Klaus]

There were a number of suggestions on the WotC boards about making Rage activate on a trigger. Most of these were 'when bloodied' which is obviously a poor design, given that a player has considerable control over when they are bloodied and can exploit it accordingly. I think an interesting mechanic would be a damage-based threshold though, with some optional player-chosen input to when exactly they trigger Rage. Consider as a starting point the idea of taking at least half of your maximum hitpoints in damage - the simple Barbarian would automatically Rage as soon as this happens (and neatly gain resistance in the process, making the hitpoint loss not that big a deal - indeed I would extend the resistance to all physical forms of damage including magical versions thereof - fire, cold, force, poison and so on). To give the player some control, you could define a range of hitpoints during which you can rage, and beyond which you must rage - I will call this the Rage Range. The low end is half of your maximum hitpoints minus your con modifier times by your level, and the high end is the same but plus your con modifier times by your level. A 5th level Barbarian with 14 Con and average HP has a maximum of 46 HP (12+2+(6+2)*4) and so their Rage Range is when they take between 13 and 33 damage in a single combat - they can choose to Rage as soon as they've taken 13, and must after they have taken 33. The same limitation on the ending of Rage would apply, only I would allow rounds in which you make strength checks to count towards maintaining Rage.

I prefer not to have too many mathematical thresholds (the already existing hp thresholds for spells and other effects are already emphasizing too much metagaming). The Essentials Berserker can fly into a rage by simply using a primal power (which in Next could be tied to using his MDD to fuel a certain effect), or by simply choosing to do so if he's bloodied.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I think fatigued for the rest of the encounter is a bad mechanic for ending a rage. But maybe they can still have a form of fatigued that lasts only one round after a rage.

It would be not so crippling and would be easier for the players to remember.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I prefer not to have too many mathematical thresholds (the already existing hp thresholds for spells and other effects are already emphasizing too much metagaming). The Essentials Berserker can fly into a rage by simply using a primal power (which in Next could be tied to using his MDD to fuel a certain effect), or by simply choosing to do so if he's bloodied.

Yeah, I can understand wanting to keep things simple. It's not quite clear to me whether people prefer to have control over their beserk form or would rather it be truly chaotic.

I'll simplify my suggestion. Whenever the barbarian takes damage they can choose to enter Rage, or they can try to resist with a.. Wisdom save? Rage ought to have good and bad features, more like their reckless attack suggestion - so advantage on strength checks, saves and attacks, advantage on attacks against them, and damage reduction to help with all those hits and no reactions. Rage ends when you don't attack or make a strength check on your turn and you can't do it again until you take a short rest.

 

[Klaus]

Yeah, I can understand wanting to keep things simple. It's not quite clear to me whether people prefer to have control over their beserk form or would rather it be truly chaotic.

I'll simplify my suggestion. Whenever the barbarian takes damage they can choose to enter Rage, or they can try to resist with a.. Wisdom save? Rage ought to have good and bad features, more like their reckless attack suggestion - so advantage on strength checks, saves and attacks, advantage on attacks against them, and damage reduction to help with all those hits and no reactions. Rage ends when you don't attack or make a strength check on your turn and you can't do it again until you take a short rest.

IMHO, that's still too convoluted. Just give the barbarian a special attack (let's call it a "raging strike", for the moment) that represents him focusing on entering the battle trance (it's not merely anger, it's activelly surrendering your body to an instinctive mindset). If the barbarian uses this "ranging strike", he rages for the rest of the combat, or 10 minutes (whichever comes first). Once the rage ends, he must take a rest (short or long) before he can rage again. No need for fatigue rules or anything.

If we add the bloodied value to the rules, then the barbarian simply can also enter the rage when bloodied by simply willing it, maybe even as a reaction.

When raging, the barbarian would increase his MDD used for damage by one step (to d8), and when wielding a melee weapon, he rolls two dice for the weapon damage and takes the higher result. Conversely, he has disadvantage on ranged attacks and can't use the disengage action.