D&D 5E Open Hand Monk or Bear Totem Barbarian?

[Paul Farquhar]

If you do decide to go with barbarian, I would very much suggest you look at wolf rather than bear totem at level 3 (you can mix and match your totem animals if you want), or if you have Xanathar's, Ancestor Guardian.

 

[Coroc]

The point is, he would attack the barbarian if it failed the intimidate check.

So it's better to put no points in the skill and dump charisma.

Sorry but that does absolutely make no sense.

At my table it would be like either:

The player declares: I want to make the bugbear afraid of me and use my intimidation in the sense of to scare someone with intimidation
or
The player declares: I want to provoke the bugbear to attack me by intimidating him so I make some comment about his mother / my physics in the sense of downgrading someone.

You say the right skill would be persuasion instead:

First thought on Persuasion in my point of view:
Please, dear Bugbear wont you be so nice to attack me instead of that frail guy over there? It makes you look so much more manly and the weather is nice today also.

If you want to persuade me to do something you surely won't get it by making comments on my mother,
You provoke / intimidate me then (obviously with the same desired result) but you do not persuade/appease me.

Anyway no matter of who of us two is correct on that, the DMG explicitly states that for some actions you could use different skills, bluff, deception, persuasion and intimidation can all be used to cause some mob attacking you preferably.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Persuade is used whenever you want to persuade someone to do something. That doesn't always mean "Kissass" (to borrow from Wasteland terminology). Choosing just the right insult to get someone to do what you want is a Charisma (Persuade) check - again, see Swashbuckler.

Or you could use Deception to get someone to attack you, by pretending to be vulnerable.

But the point of Intimidate is to make someone afraid of you, and if someone is afraid of you they are less likely to attack you in combat.

But most of the time the monster doesn't speak Common anyway, so you are wasting your time.

 

[BookBarbarian]

What would you play then? I can also roll paladin. My goal was to play a good Damage Dealer with a bit of Tankyness/survivability. Also simple management.

Monks in 5e are more single target controllers than Tanky damage dealers. They excel at getting past the front rank and stunning a big threat bad guy.

Barbarians are built to go toe to toe against bosses with big AC and/or bit attack bonuses. Reckless attack helps you land blows against High AC, and if the target was going to hit you anyway giving them advantage isn't a big deal.

For example I'm playing a Barb in Storm King's Thunder right now, and a Fire Giant can hit me on a flat die roll of 4 or better, so reckessly attacking to get past his AC of 18 was a no brainier. You can also turn that Reckless attack into big damage numbers against low AC hordes with GWM. I find GWM is at it's best effect when the +10 damage can help kill a foe in a single hit. I had one encounter where I raged and using GWM killed two Shadows (which were pretty close to killing our low strength warlock through their strength damage) then next round killed 3 more (killing just one triggered the Bonus action attack from GWM). Now fighters, with their extra attacks will do better with GWM than Barbarians do after level 11 but from 1-10 GWM Barbarian's are pretty nasty.

As far as Bear Totem goes, they really shine in tier 2 to early tier 3, when you encounter more elemental damage. At lower levels I find most damage is B/P/S which any Barbarian get's resistance. At level 14+ a Zealot ignoring all damage while raging is better than Bear Totem resistance.

Overall Id recommend going Ancestral Guardian for Tanky Barb, for Damage Barb go Zealot.

In regards to Paladins, they get great damage through Smite, and have control over when they want to use it and great defense with Heavy armor, shields and Auras.

 

[MonkeezOnFire]

While I haven't seen the specific subclasses you mentioned I can give perspective on how the base classes play.

Monk

1- Gameplay Mechanics (Combat, Social and Exploration)
In combat the monk is a highly mobile combatant that excels in getting to vulnerable targets and getting out of sticky situations.
Exploration wise they use their mobility to maneuver strange dungeon terrain with ease.
They have no stand out tools for social encounters beyond good role play

2- Role in party (Dmg or Tank Potential)
Both the damage and tankiness of the monk is middle of the road. In combat like I mentioned above they are more of a skirmisher that can get into the cookie jar. Stunning strike and the open hand's additional effect on flurry of blows also makes for a good secondary controller role locking down key targets.

3- DPR (How hard can they hit compared to other Classes?)
In my experience their damage is average. Not as high as the dedicated front liners but better at will damage than the casters. Flurry of blows as a nova isn't as impressive as some other options like smite or action surge.

4- "Fun" features (What motivates you to play these Classes?)
If you enjoy getting to places that the DM didn't expect you to be able to via your movement abilities (walk on water, walk up walls, slow fall, etc.) then the monk is for you. It fulfills the fantasy of having martial superpowers quite well. Stunning strike can also sometimes trivialize encounters that have a low number of tough enemies.

-------------------------------------

Barbarian

1- Gameplay Mechanics (Combat, Social and Exploration)
In combat you take a lot of hits and dish out good damage with a big weapon. While they get a bit of a speed boost as a melee oriented class they can still sometimes get bogged down or kited by ranged enemies.
Exploration wise you have some abilities to make you resilient to traps and get a few ritual spells from totem. In my experience Athletics proficiency goes a long way for climbing, swimming, jumping and in general breaking stuff.
Social pillar again not much specifically beyond role play.

2- Role in party (Dmg or Tank Potential)
The toughest class in the game and can deal out good reliable damage. Notably lacking a nova option like its melee martial peers like smite or action surge so your damage is very predicable and thus usually not exciting. But still very solid.

3- DPR (How hard can they hit compared to other Classes?)
As I mentioned above as a melee front line combatant your damage is good, solid predictable, but lacking in nova which can be really important. If you pick up great weapon master you can utilize it earlier than most via reckless attack which will make you hit like a truck.

4- "Fun" features (What motivates you to play these Classes?)
It fulfills the fantasy of being an unstoppable killing machine. You are the backbone that keeps those squishy party members alive for which they will be thankful. You just don't do it with much flash.

 

[Coroc]

Persuade is used whenever you want to persuade someone to do something. That doesn't always mean "Kissass" (to borrow from Wasteland terminology). Choosing just the right insult to get someone to do what you want is a Charisma (Persuade) check - again, see Swashbuckler.

Or you could use Deception to get someone to attack you, by pretending to be vulnerable.

But the point of Intimidate is to make someone afraid of you, and if someone is afraid of you they are less likely to attack you in combat.

But most of the time the monster doesn't speak Common anyway, so you are wasting your time.

By your logic a player wanting to taunt a monster into attacking it just has to declare "Ok i make an intimidation check, good that i got CHA as a dump stat uups i failed it (as expected) now DM has to make the mob attack me.
Excuse me but that is not as intended. You declare an action. The action could be making a handstand and waving with oyur feet. You declare an intention behind the action if it is not outright clear to the DM what you hope to accomplish. Then the DM sets a threshold whatever a DC xy skill check. DC could be fix, could be competitive
Are you agreeing up to this point?

So The DM says : "To accomplish whatever you want to do make a xy skill check. If you SUCCEED then the desired outcome might happen.

Never freakin ever have i dmd or played in a round where a play declares: "oh i want to provoke this mob into fighting me" with the DM replying: "Ok then please fail an intimidation check versus the mobs stupidity skill"

It is always roll high, the only time you can chose to fail something volunteerly would be if something is about to affect you, e.g. you choose to fail a save vs a spell or you chose to loose in a STR check vs an opponent, for whatever reasons.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If you pick up great weapon master you can utilize it earlier than most via reckless attack which will make you hit like a truck.

It might be worth noting that Reckless Attack doubles your chance of a critical, which doubles the chance GWM will proc a bonus action attack.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[MonkeezOnFire]

One thing I often think gets overlooked with monks is how they become amazingly self-sufficient. By the time an open hand monk reaches 14th level:

While you make a good argument I'm conflicted. The vast majority of PC deaths I've witnessed in 5e are due to splitting the party. Usually because a player starts to think along these lines that they can handle themselves.

So yes, the monk can go out on their own but I'm not sure they really should. I haven't seen play up to 14th level (10th is the highest I've gotten) but I don't imagine the monsters get nicer.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*