you very sarcastically said “there’s a little item called a shield”
how are you using a shield with your short bow?
another fundamental question:
there’s no “draw aggro” ability per say. Short of dominate X to force aggros at things.
just because you. The ranged barbarian, attacks something, doesn’t mean it will focus then on you. Likely, it still focuses on whatever looks easiest/weakest/closest to it. (Possibly your wizard friend)
where as the strength based barbarian. Who has ample movement to close in and move around to begin with, so movement isn’t really an issue. Can move up next to those said hostile trying to target the squishier people, and force them into combat with them by either, if urgent love opportunity attack. If they don’t move, disadvantage on ranged attacks because the barbarian is within 5 ft.
honestly: ranged Barbarians that are dex based are pointless. It’s better to just go fighter route, get more attacks, more asi, use the ASI/feat to get TOUGH to make up the hp differential, and do it that way. Additionally they get access to better stuff than any ranged barbarian build.
barbarians are already neutered enough for most of their non combat situation usefulness. Why go out of the way to neuter them in combat too?
I like the theme idea though. If you think it will be fun. Do it. Beats arguing about it anyways.
You need to take a look at my math. I said that having advantage on the Barbarian (or even just normal on the Barbarian), while having disadvantage on everyone else does make the Barbarian the best target. Which is why one enemy each turn would be very strongly encouraged to go attack the Goblin Archer. I don't know how you could have drawn the opposite conclusion.
If you're assuming 16 Dex 14 Con for the Goblin Archer at level 1, you're assuming that the two best rolls that I had were a 14 and a 13.
So yes, I will agree with you - if your two best rolls are a 14 and a 13, you're not going to be as good as most other characters. I'm done doing math with you.
You need to take a look at my math. I said that having advantage on the Barbarian (or even just normal on the Barbarian), while having disadvantage on everyone else does make the Barbarian the best target. Which is why one enemy each turn would be very strongly encouraged to go attack the Goblin Archer. I don't know how you could have drawn the opposite conclusion.
If you're assuming 16 Dex 14 Con for the Goblin Archer at level 1, you're assuming that the two best rolls that I had were a 14 and a 13.
So yes, I will agree with you - if your two best rolls are a 14 and a 13, you're not going to be as good as most other characters. I'm done doing math with you.
Enemies don’t meta and only attack a char, who isn’t the biggest threat, because of “advantage”
for one. They wouldn’t know what advantage is, since that would be meta knowledge. If you want your dm to do that. Then power word kill would only be cast on characters known to have less than 100hp only.
If anything, enemies using meta knowledge. Would be less likely to attack the goblin archer. As goblins are very notorious for 1. Being weak. 2. Running away when hurt. 3. Grouping with stronger creatures.
You need to take a look at my math. I said that having advantage on the Barbarian (or even just normal on the Barbarian), while having disadvantage on everyone else does make the Barbarian the best target. Which is why one enemy each turn would be very strongly encouraged to go attack the Goblin Archer. I don't know how you could have drawn the opposite conclusion.
If you're assuming 16 Dex 14 Con for the Goblin Archer at level 1, you're assuming that the two best rolls that I had were a 14 and a 13.
So yes, I will agree with you - if your two best rolls are a 14 and a 13, you're not going to be as good as most other characters. I'm done doing math with you.
Enemies don’t meta and only attack a char, who isn’t the biggest threat, because of “advantage”
for one. They wouldn’t know what advantage is, since that would be meta knowledge. If you want your dm to do that. Then power word kill would only be cast on characters known to have less than 100hp only.
If anything, enemies using meta knowledge. Would be less likely to attack the goblin archer. As goblins are very notorious for 1. Being weak. 2. Running away when hurt. 3. Grouping with stronger creatures.
Knowing whether you have advantage, normal, or disadvantage on an attack before you make the attack is not metagaming.
You need to take a look at my math. I said that having advantage on the Barbarian (or even just normal on the Barbarian), while having disadvantage on everyone else does make the Barbarian the best target. Which is why one enemy each turn would be very strongly encouraged to go attack the Goblin Archer. I don't know how you could have drawn the opposite conclusion.
If you're assuming 16 Dex 14 Con for the Goblin Archer at level 1, you're assuming that the two best rolls that I had were a 14 and a 13.
So yes, I will agree with you - if your two best rolls are a 14 and a 13, you're not going to be as good as most other characters. I'm done doing math with you.
Enemies don’t meta and only attack a char, who isn’t the biggest threat, because of “advantage”
for one. They wouldn’t know what advantage is, since that would be meta knowledge. If you want your dm to do that. Then power word kill would only be cast on characters known to have less than 100hp only.
If anything, enemies using meta knowledge. Would be less likely to attack the goblin archer. As goblins are very notorious for 1. Being weak. 2. Running away when hurt. 3. Grouping with stronger creatures.
Knowing whether you have advantage, normal, or disadvantage on an attack before you make the attack is not metagaming.
For YOU no.
but enemies knowing what reckless attack does.
how would they know? Are they barbarians? Do they fight barbarians enough to know that?
You need to take a look at my math. I said that having advantage on the Barbarian (or even just normal on the Barbarian), while having disadvantage on everyone else does make the Barbarian the best target. Which is why one enemy each turn would be very strongly encouraged to go attack the Goblin Archer. I don't know how you could have drawn the opposite conclusion.
If you're assuming 16 Dex 14 Con for the Goblin Archer at level 1, you're assuming that the two best rolls that I had were a 14 and a 13.
So yes, I will agree with you - if your two best rolls are a 14 and a 13, you're not going to be as good as most other characters. I'm done doing math with you.
Enemies don’t meta and only attack a char, who isn’t the biggest threat, because of “advantage”
for one. They wouldn’t know what advantage is, since that would be meta knowledge. If you want your dm to do that. Then power word kill would only be cast on characters known to have less than 100hp only.
If anything, enemies using meta knowledge. Would be less likely to attack the goblin archer. As goblins are very notorious for 1. Being weak. 2. Running away when hurt. 3. Grouping with stronger creatures.
Knowing whether you have advantage, normal, or disadvantage on an attack before you make the attack is not metagaming.
For YOU no.
but enemies knowing what reckless attack does.
how would they know? Are they barbarians? Do they fight barbarians enough to know that?
Reckless Attack makes it easier for enemies to hit you. If you're fighting somebody and they make it easier for you to hit them, would you not recognize that?
are you a bigger threat than something else I am focused on? Are you easier prey? Am I the type of enemy that only goes for the weakest or easiest thing? Am I observant? Am I stupid?
theres a crap ton of factors there. Just attacking the PC that reckless attacked, because there is a Mechanical thing to that is meta gaming. again. If you want your dm to do that. That’s fine. But I bet you get sick of it really quick. Especially once every enemy holds their action for you to recklessly attack, and then they all immediately attack you from their held actions. And you have 1-X attacks coming at you all with advantage.
simple caveat to not wasting an attack. “Hold the attack for what seems easiest to hit”
reckless attack happens. Apparently EVERYTHING and ANYONE immediately recognizes you’re easier to hit. Boom. Unloaded on. It would wear thin fast
are you a bigger threat than something else I am focused on? Are you easier prey? Am I the type of enemy that only goes for the weakest or easiest thing? Am I observant? Am I stupid?
theres a crap ton of factors there. Just attacking the PC that reckless attacked, because there is a Mechanical thing to that is meta gaming. again. If you want your dm to do that. That’s fine. But I bet you get sick of it really quick. Especially once every enemy holds their action for you to recklessly attack, and then they all immediately attack you from their held actions. And you have 1-X attacks coming at you all with advantage.
simple caveat to not wasting an attack. “Hold the attack for what seems easiest to hit”
reckless attack happens. Apparently EVERYTHING and ANYONE immediately recognizes you’re easier to hit. Boom. Unloaded on. It would wear thin fast
Bring it up with Gomani. He's the one that said he's making sure that enemies attack him by doing Reckless Attack.
He's also the one that said "there's a little item called a shield."
You seem to want to argue with me, by taking Gomani's points and attributing them to me.
And in case you haven't figured it out, I don't agree with him.
I was indeed the one stating the fact that you can use a shield. At that point however, the focus of the discussion was on AC and durability, not the threat you impose.
If you read my previous posts, you will notice that I did not at any point state to have 100% assurance of an enemy hitting the melee.
What I said, is that you can make yourself a more appealing target to hit than your party members, there is no hardcore "taunt-option". If you are looking for that, play a Paladin and go for Compelled Duel. Even then you cannot be sure. Factoring in Reckless and disadvantage on your allies, it is just plain and simple easier to hit you.
Regarding knowledge of the fact that you have advantage on an attack against said Barbarian, how would you not know that? The mechanic is only a means of translating an action that happened in battle.
On your turn, you might have done a mighty swing with your axe with all the fury you could muster and thus gaining a hit were others would not(advantage for you), while on the other hand this exact blow takes you a second to get back into a valid battle stance, maybe leaving an opening for your opponent where he otherwise wouldn't get one (advantage for the enemy). Recognizing this opportunity, he rather strikes at you than at the other guys, who are surrounded by spirits which hinder the clear vision (disadvantage for the enemy). You do not need to be a Barbarian to see an opening in battle.
@5PercentGlory: Everyone recognizes this. Even without metagaming. There is a big guy in front, going crazy with his swings. How would you not see that if he comes running at you? if they ready an action, so be it. They potentially lose an attack (in case of multiattack feature) and for certain their reaction, which gives the wizard an opportunity to move out of harms way without an attack of opportunity, effectively they might do less than if they had taken a regular turn. If the fight includes enough individuals, some that are holding their action might even be dead by the time their trigger happens.
I was indeed the one stating the fact that you can use a shield. At that point however, the focus of the discussion was on AC and durability, not the threat you impose.
If you read my previous posts, you will notice that I did not at any point state to have 100% assurance of an enemy hitting the melee.
What I said, is that you can make yourself a more appealing target to hit than your party members, there is no hardcore "taunt-option". If you are looking for that, play a Paladin and go for Compelled Duel. Even then you cannot be sure. Factoring in Reckless and disadvantage on your allies, it is just plain and simple easier to hit you.
Regarding knowledge of the fact that you have advantage on an attack against said Barbarian, how would you not know that? The mechanic is only a means of translating an action that happened in battle.
On your turn, you might have done a mighty swing with your axe with all the fury you could muster and thus gaining a hit were others would not(advantage for you), while on the other hand this exact blow takes you a second to get back into a valid battle stance, maybe leaving an opening for your opponent where he otherwise wouldn't get one (advantage for the enemy). Recognizing this opportunity, he rather strikes at you than at the other guys, who are surrounded by spirits which hinder the clear vision (disadvantage for the enemy). You do not need to be a Barbarian to see an opening in battle.
@5PercentGlory: Everyone recognizes this. Even without metagaming. There is a big guy in front, going crazy with his swings. How would you not see that if he comes running at you? if they ready an action, so be it. They potentially lose an attack (in case of multiattack feature) and for certain their reaction, which gives the wizard an opportunity to move out of harms way without an attack of opportunity, effectively they might do less than if they had taken a regular turn. If the fight includes enough individuals, some that are holding their action might even be dead by the time their trigger happens.
Edit: wording
How would you not see it...
well. First instinct. My back is turned to him. I don’t see a crazy swing. Is the guy screaming like he’s will ferrell or Jerry Lewis as he recklessly flails the weapon?
second instinct: there’s something obstructing my view of the attack since my view is not actually a 360 degree 3rd person rendering, without varying levels of geological/natural features that could make it harder.
3rd instinct. Light sources, dim light it’s hard to make out if an attack is swung recklessly vs normally, that’s some fine detail work. Would you be able to perfectly read cursive in dim light? Or would you need good bright light?
You are right, not necessarily everybody, but a direct attacker would certainly know. That is why you get to roll twice.
If they only observe and don't know when they can capitalize on an advantage, then they don't even know what the opening is.
Regarding all those factors you mentioned with the environmental circumstances (light, sound, emotions, instinctual behaviour etc...) it leads us to another conclusion concerning the reason for this post... If you are not able to perceive these things in your immediate surrounding in the midst of battle, it will be even harder for you to make out the source of that little arrow coming your way, throwing away all your momentary concerns and start chasing after someone you might not even be able to see. Instead of the things which really occupy you. As you said, there's got to be a good reason.
If I read you previous posts right, I think we can agree on the fact, that the archer Barbarian will be far less effective than its melee counterpart :-)
I think it's clear that everyone would recognize that the Barbarian is in a rage. A Barbarian's rage is quite obvious. Most NPCs that are experienced in combat should know that means that he has resistance to bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing damage. So they probably recognize that the Barbarian will take less damage when they hit him. If they don't know that just from seeing him in a rage, then seeing him take less damage when he does get hit should convince them of that. Taking less damage from attacks makes you less attractive of a target.
Whether the Barbarian is wielding a shield, or is wielding a two-handed weapon is indisputably obvious. Wielding a shield makes you less attractive of a target, wielding a two-handed weapon makes you more attractive of a target,
Reckless Attack probably gives some visible clues. Whether or not enemies pick up on it is unclear.
Ancestral Protectors indicates that spectral warriors appear and hinder the enemy's attacks. It definitely notices that its attacks are being hindered by the spectral warriors, but it may not understand who the source of the spectral warriors is, and it may not understand that there's one target that they can attack without being hindered by the spectral warriors.
Spirit Shield indicates that Guardian Spirits provide supernatural aid. Whether or not these guardian spirits are even visible is unclear, and it would take an enemy remarkably knowledgeable about Barbarians to know that there's one target that will not receive aid from these guardian spirits.
Making yourself an attractive target is difficult if the enemy sees you holding a shield and knows that you're in a rage and taking less damage on melee attacks. It definitely helps if they can recognize that you're doing reckless attack, that your Ancestral Protectors are going to hinder them if they attack anyone but you, and that your Spirit Shield will mitigate damage on anyone but you (unless they attack somebody more than 30ft away from you). But quite likely, all they know is that you're holding a shield and you're in a rage.
When the first enemy you attack chooses to attack somebody else, and has disadvantage on the attack, and your ally has resistance to the damage, that's not a bad thing. Disadvantage + Resistance causes a much lower chance to hit, and a much lower amount of damage. Even better, you can do this every turn on the most threatening enemy, while your teammates dispose of the less powerful minions. If he attacks somebody with low AC that's concentrating on a spell, that could still cause issues for your party. If he attacks a melee person with decent AC that isn't concentrating on a spell (like a Barbarian, a Fighter, a Monk, a Paladin, or a Rogue), then it's great. If he attacks a high AC melee person concentrating on a spell like a melee Cleric, it's probably not a problem because his chance to hit on a fairly tanky Cleric will be so low, and a melee Cleric probably has war caster once we get to level 4. If he goes after high dex martial ranged character like a Fighter, Ranger, or Rogue, it's still probably not a problem because they'll have decent AC although the Ranger might not like having to do a concentration check on Hunter's Mark. It's only if your target goes after a squishier Bard, Druid, Sorcerer, Warlock, or Wizard that you'll wish you were the target instead of his actual target. At least you still gave a huge boost to your squishy ally, making them less likely to be hit, decreasing the damage they take if they are hit, and possibly decreasing the DC of their concentration check.
If your party is all ranged without any melee, then you'll have a very unique setup indeed. But if your party does have at least one melee character, then being a ranged Barbarian gives you a big advantage. Most ranged damage dealers prefer to stay more than 30ft away from their melee allies. They probably don't want to be close enough to your tanky melee Barbarian to receive protection from the Spirit Shield. If you're a ranged Barbarian, you can probably be within 30ft of your ranged allies. If you're a melee Barbarian, are you going to ask your ranged allies to run up close to you where enemies only have to run 30ft to attack them? Or would your ranged allies prefer to stay 60+ feet away from you? If you're using your Javelin to attack at range to protect an ally, you'll still want to be within 30ft of your enemy to avoid getting disadvantage on your attack(s). Yes, you can run away from the guys you are fighting to go attack the enemy that split off from the group attacking you and is running towards your ranged allies. But this presents two problems: #1 you're going to give a few guys opportunity attacks on you, and #2 you're going to end up kiting a bunch of enemies towards your ranged allies. A ranged Barbarian won't have these problems. A ranged Barbarian won't have difficulty getting their Ancestral Protectors to hinder an enemy that is more than 30ft away from your melee players.
A melee Barbarian will have difficulty getting a bunch of ranged enemies to attack him, especially if these are ranged enemies using arrows with piercing damage. The ranged enemies have probably heard of fireball, shatter, lightning bolt, and other spells that will punish them if they stand close to each other. Even the dumbest of ranged enemies will know not to stand near each other. And they probably have more than 30ft range on their attacks, which means that you can't be up in their faces attacking them and using your Spirit Shield to protect your ranged allies. And they're probably smart enough to attack your squishy allies instead of attacking you. Even if they're spell casters that deal a damage that you're not resistant to during a rage, they might still go after your allies. A ranged Barbarian will have an easier time against multiple ranged enemies than a Melee barbarian will. Against a more powerful ranged enemy, that enemy will probably have developed the ability to effectively kite melee damage dealers, otherwise it's probably not a very powerful ranged damage dealer. A ranged Barbarian won't face the same difficulties in fighting a powerful ranged enemy.
You're completely missing the point of the Goblin Barbarian Archer. You're claiming that the purpose of the Barbarian is to get attacked. But we're not even sure that the enemy will be aware of the Ancestral Protectors or Spirit Shield. The purpose of a Goblin Barbarian Archer isn't to get attacked. It's purpose is to decrease the damage taken by its allies. You're correct that a Goblin Barbarian Archer will be far less effective at getting attacked than a melee Barbarian. But that's not the purpose that the Goblin Barbarian Archer is aiming for. I specifically indicated that I reject the idea that the purpose of a Barbarian is to get attacked, and showed how Ancestral Protectors make it so that mitigating damage on allies can be more effective than being attacked. But you're still trying to compare a ranged Barbarian and a melee Barbarian by looking at who is better at being attacked. I reject that goal, and you're not answering the question that I created this thread for.
Many responses, including my first one, stated, that you have a really cool concept.
We stated you should go for it if you want to and most importantly have fun. Nobody prohibits you from doing so. In fact, I would be interested in reports about how it turned out in the end, cause for me personally, I would have the fear of it being underwhelming, especially with a Shortbow.
Your central question was
["So the question is - is this a viable character build? How much am I gimping my character if I try to do a ranged Barbarian?"]
During the discussion, multiple people showed , that you simply profit more from an emphasis on using STR when using the Barbarian. The only features of this Subclass that you can really use are the defensive part of the lvl 3 feature and the damage reflection if you go 14 lvls deep. Base Features from the Barbarian would be AC calculation, movement speed and advantage on initiative and DEX Saves, plus the lvl 10 feature with augury and clairvoyance.
However, when browsing through the UA Options, I could see that the Fighter Psychic Warrior could fit your concept even better than the Ancestral Guardian. It doesn't loose anything from going DEX, you get the Fighter Core Features like Archery Fighting Style, Second Wind and Action Surge, 3 attacks if you go to lvl 11. You get a damage reduction as a reaction already at level 3, an invisible Mage Hand, a feature where you can move a creature by 15 ft. if it fails a save against a DC based on your INT. At lvl 10, you get a 10 ft. aura feature which gives everyone in it the benefits of half cover. All of that while having no downsides by going DEX. You can flavor all of that.
Maybe you have a talk with your DM, he might allow you to playtest it. Might even get some valuable feedback to post on the Forums.
So my final answer to your question is again - I think you miss out on alot of opportunities by going Barbarian, where other classes offer so much more.
Happy Easter and stay safe! Bye.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Fundamental question...
you very sarcastically said “there’s a little item called a shield”
how are you using a shield with your short bow?
another fundamental question:
there’s no “draw aggro” ability per say. Short of dominate X to force aggros at things.
just because you. The ranged barbarian, attacks something, doesn’t mean it will focus then on you. Likely, it still focuses on whatever looks easiest/weakest/closest to it. (Possibly your wizard friend)
where as the strength based barbarian. Who has ample movement to close in and move around to begin with, so movement isn’t really an issue. Can move up next to those said hostile trying to target the squishier people, and force them into combat with them by either, if urgent love opportunity attack. If they don’t move, disadvantage on ranged attacks because the barbarian is within 5 ft.
honestly: ranged Barbarians that are dex based are pointless. It’s better to just go fighter route, get more attacks, more asi, use the ASI/feat to get TOUGH to make up the hp differential, and do it that way. Additionally they get access to better stuff than any ranged barbarian build.
barbarians are already neutered enough for most of their non combat situation usefulness. Why go out of the way to neuter them in combat too?
I like the theme idea though. If you think it will be fun. Do it. Beats arguing about it anyways.
Watch me on twitch
You need to take a look at my math. I said that having advantage on the Barbarian (or even just normal on the Barbarian), while having disadvantage on everyone else does make the Barbarian the best target. Which is why one enemy each turn would be very strongly encouraged to go attack the Goblin Archer. I don't know how you could have drawn the opposite conclusion.
If you're assuming 16 Dex 14 Con for the Goblin Archer at level 1, you're assuming that the two best rolls that I had were a 14 and a 13.
So yes, I will agree with you - if your two best rolls are a 14 and a 13, you're not going to be as good as most other characters. I'm done doing math with you.
Enemies don’t meta and only attack a char, who isn’t the biggest threat, because of “advantage”
for one. They wouldn’t know what advantage is, since that would be meta knowledge. If you want your dm to do that. Then power word kill would only be cast on characters known to have less than 100hp only.
If anything, enemies using meta knowledge. Would be less likely to attack the goblin archer. As goblins are very notorious for 1. Being weak. 2. Running away when hurt. 3. Grouping with stronger creatures.
Watch me on twitch
Gomani said there's a little item called a shield. I did not say that. I did not say I was using a shield with a short bow.
Was your post addressed to me, or was it addressed to Gomani?
Knowing whether you have advantage, normal, or disadvantage on an attack before you make the attack is not metagaming.
For YOU no.
but enemies knowing what reckless attack does.
how would they know? Are they barbarians? Do they fight barbarians enough to know that?
Watch me on twitch
Reckless Attack makes it easier for enemies to hit you. If you're fighting somebody and they make it easier for you to hit them, would you not recognize that?
That would depend.
am I focused on you? If so sure.
am I not focused on you? Might miss it.
are you a bigger threat than something else I am focused on? Are you easier prey? Am I the type of enemy that only goes for the weakest or easiest thing? Am I observant? Am I stupid?
theres a crap ton of factors there. Just attacking the PC that reckless attacked, because there is a Mechanical thing to that is meta gaming. again. If you want your dm to do that. That’s fine. But I bet you get sick of it really quick. Especially once every enemy holds their action for you to recklessly attack, and then they all immediately attack you from their held actions. And you have 1-X attacks coming at you all with advantage.
simple caveat to not wasting an attack. “Hold the attack for what seems easiest to hit”
reckless attack happens. Apparently EVERYTHING and ANYONE immediately recognizes you’re easier to hit. Boom. Unloaded on. It would wear thin fast
Watch me on twitch
Bring it up with Gomani. He's the one that said he's making sure that enemies attack him by doing Reckless Attack.
He's also the one that said "there's a little item called a shield."
You seem to want to argue with me, by taking Gomani's points and attributing them to me.
And in case you haven't figured it out, I don't agree with him.
I was indeed the one stating the fact that you can use a shield. At that point however, the focus of the discussion was on AC and durability, not the threat you impose.
If you read my previous posts, you will notice that I did not at any point state to have 100% assurance of an enemy hitting the melee.
What I said, is that you can make yourself a more appealing target to hit than your party members, there is no hardcore "taunt-option". If you are looking for that, play a Paladin and go for Compelled Duel. Even then you cannot be sure. Factoring in Reckless and disadvantage on your allies, it is just plain and simple easier to hit you.
Regarding knowledge of the fact that you have advantage on an attack against said Barbarian, how would you not know that? The mechanic is only a means of translating an action that happened in battle.
On your turn, you might have done a mighty swing with your axe with all the fury you could muster and thus gaining a hit were others would not(advantage for you), while on the other hand this exact blow takes you a second to get back into a valid battle stance, maybe leaving an opening for your opponent where he otherwise wouldn't get one (advantage for the enemy). Recognizing this opportunity, he rather strikes at you than at the other guys, who are surrounded by spirits which hinder the clear vision (disadvantage for the enemy). You do not need to be a Barbarian to see an opening in battle.
@5PercentGlory: Everyone recognizes this. Even without metagaming. There is a big guy in front, going crazy with his swings. How would you not see that if he comes running at you? if they ready an action, so be it. They potentially lose an attack (in case of multiattack feature) and for certain their reaction, which gives the wizard an opportunity to move out of harms way without an attack of opportunity, effectively they might do less than if they had taken a regular turn. If the fight includes enough individuals, some that are holding their action might even be dead by the time their trigger happens.
Edit: wording
How would you not see it...
well. First instinct. My back is turned to him. I don’t see a crazy swing. Is the guy screaming like he’s will ferrell or Jerry Lewis as he recklessly flails the weapon?
second instinct: there’s something obstructing my view of the attack since my view is not actually a 360 degree 3rd person rendering, without varying levels of geological/natural features that could make it harder.
3rd instinct. Light sources, dim light it’s hard to make out if an attack is swung recklessly vs normally, that’s some fine detail work. Would you be able to perfectly read cursive in dim light? Or would you need good bright light?
Watch me on twitch
6 seconds long. X people in a bar fight doing Y attacks spells actions etc.
you won’t catch everything without a keen mind anyways.
Watch me on twitch
Exactly, so everyone holding their actions doesn't even make sense.
That’s my point.
Watch me on twitch
That’s my point in.
it makes Zero sense things would inherently know they have advantage on the reckless attacker.
theres got to be a reason. It’s not just inherent.
the holding action things “only” sense. Is they are actively looking around for most of the 6 seconds, and see/catch the opening.
still is far fetched though no?
Watch me on twitch
You are right, not necessarily everybody, but a direct attacker would certainly know. That is why you get to roll twice.
If they only observe and don't know when they can capitalize on an advantage, then they don't even know what the opening is.
Regarding all those factors you mentioned with the environmental circumstances (light, sound, emotions, instinctual behaviour etc...) it leads us to another conclusion concerning the reason for this post... If you are not able to perceive these things in your immediate surrounding in the midst of battle, it will be even harder for you to make out the source of that little arrow coming your way, throwing away all your momentary concerns and start chasing after someone you might not even be able to see. Instead of the things which really occupy you. As you said, there's got to be a good reason.
If I read you previous posts right, I think we can agree on the fact, that the archer Barbarian will be far less effective than its melee counterpart :-)
I think it's clear that everyone would recognize that the Barbarian is in a rage. A Barbarian's rage is quite obvious. Most NPCs that are experienced in combat should know that means that he has resistance to bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing damage. So they probably recognize that the Barbarian will take less damage when they hit him. If they don't know that just from seeing him in a rage, then seeing him take less damage when he does get hit should convince them of that. Taking less damage from attacks makes you less attractive of a target.
Whether the Barbarian is wielding a shield, or is wielding a two-handed weapon is indisputably obvious. Wielding a shield makes you less attractive of a target, wielding a two-handed weapon makes you more attractive of a target,
Reckless Attack probably gives some visible clues. Whether or not enemies pick up on it is unclear.
Ancestral Protectors indicates that spectral warriors appear and hinder the enemy's attacks. It definitely notices that its attacks are being hindered by the spectral warriors, but it may not understand who the source of the spectral warriors is, and it may not understand that there's one target that they can attack without being hindered by the spectral warriors.
Spirit Shield indicates that Guardian Spirits provide supernatural aid. Whether or not these guardian spirits are even visible is unclear, and it would take an enemy remarkably knowledgeable about Barbarians to know that there's one target that will not receive aid from these guardian spirits.
Making yourself an attractive target is difficult if the enemy sees you holding a shield and knows that you're in a rage and taking less damage on melee attacks. It definitely helps if they can recognize that you're doing reckless attack, that your Ancestral Protectors are going to hinder them if they attack anyone but you, and that your Spirit Shield will mitigate damage on anyone but you (unless they attack somebody more than 30ft away from you). But quite likely, all they know is that you're holding a shield and you're in a rage.
When the first enemy you attack chooses to attack somebody else, and has disadvantage on the attack, and your ally has resistance to the damage, that's not a bad thing. Disadvantage + Resistance causes a much lower chance to hit, and a much lower amount of damage. Even better, you can do this every turn on the most threatening enemy, while your teammates dispose of the less powerful minions. If he attacks somebody with low AC that's concentrating on a spell, that could still cause issues for your party. If he attacks a melee person with decent AC that isn't concentrating on a spell (like a Barbarian, a Fighter, a Monk, a Paladin, or a Rogue), then it's great. If he attacks a high AC melee person concentrating on a spell like a melee Cleric, it's probably not a problem because his chance to hit on a fairly tanky Cleric will be so low, and a melee Cleric probably has war caster once we get to level 4. If he goes after high dex martial ranged character like a Fighter, Ranger, or Rogue, it's still probably not a problem because they'll have decent AC although the Ranger might not like having to do a concentration check on Hunter's Mark. It's only if your target goes after a squishier Bard, Druid, Sorcerer, Warlock, or Wizard that you'll wish you were the target instead of his actual target. At least you still gave a huge boost to your squishy ally, making them less likely to be hit, decreasing the damage they take if they are hit, and possibly decreasing the DC of their concentration check.
If your party is all ranged without any melee, then you'll have a very unique setup indeed. But if your party does have at least one melee character, then being a ranged Barbarian gives you a big advantage. Most ranged damage dealers prefer to stay more than 30ft away from their melee allies. They probably don't want to be close enough to your tanky melee Barbarian to receive protection from the Spirit Shield. If you're a ranged Barbarian, you can probably be within 30ft of your ranged allies. If you're a melee Barbarian, are you going to ask your ranged allies to run up close to you where enemies only have to run 30ft to attack them? Or would your ranged allies prefer to stay 60+ feet away from you? If you're using your Javelin to attack at range to protect an ally, you'll still want to be within 30ft of your enemy to avoid getting disadvantage on your attack(s). Yes, you can run away from the guys you are fighting to go attack the enemy that split off from the group attacking you and is running towards your ranged allies. But this presents two problems: #1 you're going to give a few guys opportunity attacks on you, and #2 you're going to end up kiting a bunch of enemies towards your ranged allies. A ranged Barbarian won't have these problems. A ranged Barbarian won't have difficulty getting their Ancestral Protectors to hinder an enemy that is more than 30ft away from your melee players.
A melee Barbarian will have difficulty getting a bunch of ranged enemies to attack him, especially if these are ranged enemies using arrows with piercing damage. The ranged enemies have probably heard of fireball, shatter, lightning bolt, and other spells that will punish them if they stand close to each other. Even the dumbest of ranged enemies will know not to stand near each other. And they probably have more than 30ft range on their attacks, which means that you can't be up in their faces attacking them and using your Spirit Shield to protect your ranged allies. And they're probably smart enough to attack your squishy allies instead of attacking you. Even if they're spell casters that deal a damage that you're not resistant to during a rage, they might still go after your allies. A ranged Barbarian will have an easier time against multiple ranged enemies than a Melee barbarian will. Against a more powerful ranged enemy, that enemy will probably have developed the ability to effectively kite melee damage dealers, otherwise it's probably not a very powerful ranged damage dealer. A ranged Barbarian won't face the same difficulties in fighting a powerful ranged enemy.
You're completely missing the point of the Goblin Barbarian Archer. You're claiming that the purpose of the Barbarian is to get attacked. But we're not even sure that the enemy will be aware of the Ancestral Protectors or Spirit Shield. The purpose of a Goblin Barbarian Archer isn't to get attacked. It's purpose is to decrease the damage taken by its allies. You're correct that a Goblin Barbarian Archer will be far less effective at getting attacked than a melee Barbarian. But that's not the purpose that the Goblin Barbarian Archer is aiming for. I specifically indicated that I reject the idea that the purpose of a Barbarian is to get attacked, and showed how Ancestral Protectors make it so that mitigating damage on allies can be more effective than being attacked. But you're still trying to compare a ranged Barbarian and a melee Barbarian by looking at who is better at being attacked. I reject that goal, and you're not answering the question that I created this thread for.
Many responses, including my first one, stated, that you have a really cool concept.
We stated you should go for it if you want to and most importantly have fun. Nobody prohibits you from doing so. In fact, I would be interested in reports about how it turned out in the end, cause for me personally, I would have the fear of it being underwhelming, especially with a Shortbow.
Your central question was
["So the question is - is this a viable character build? How much am I gimping my character if I try to do a ranged Barbarian?"]
During the discussion, multiple people showed , that you simply profit more from an emphasis on using STR when using the Barbarian. The only features of this Subclass that you can really use are the defensive part of the lvl 3 feature and the damage reflection if you go 14 lvls deep. Base Features from the Barbarian would be AC calculation, movement speed and advantage on initiative and DEX Saves, plus the lvl 10 feature with augury and clairvoyance.
However, when browsing through the UA Options, I could see that the Fighter Psychic Warrior could fit your concept even better than the Ancestral Guardian. It doesn't loose anything from going DEX, you get the Fighter Core Features like Archery Fighting Style, Second Wind and Action Surge, 3 attacks if you go to lvl 11. You get a damage reduction as a reaction already at level 3, an invisible Mage Hand, a feature where you can move a creature by 15 ft. if it fails a save against a DC based on your INT. At lvl 10, you get a 10 ft. aura feature which gives everyone in it the benefits of half cover. All of that while having no downsides by going DEX. You can flavor all of that.
Maybe you have a talk with your DM, he might allow you to playtest it. Might even get some valuable feedback to post on the Forums.
So my final answer to your question is again - I think you miss out on alot of opportunities by going Barbarian, where other classes offer so much more.
Happy Easter and stay safe! Bye.