AC by itself isn't enough. You need to be able to bypass or block damage, and when you do get damaged, you need to have the HP to absorb those hits. A measly d8 hit die means your hp is always going to be less than a fighter, a paladin, or a barbarian. Monks dont get self heals as easily or as early as either of the three classes.
It's been mentioned earlier in the thread - they're designed more as strikers and skirmishers, not holding the front line. You can try to hold the line with a monk, in which case your party's going to have to work hard to keep you alive.
When it goes into rage it has resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. (Whether it is magical or not)
Danger Sense allows it to have advantage against situations that it can see and require a dexterity saving throw (spells, traps,
Its AC without armor is: 10 + (Dex) + (Con) + 2 (shield) = ~23
While with armor (normally it has low levels) is: 15 (Half plate) + 2 (Dex) + 2 (shield) = ~19
Using Reckless Attack not only allows it to attack with advantage, but also attracts enemies to attack it, you could say it is a kind of Taunting.
The barbarian has resistance that allows him to withstand almost any enemy, whether many weak enemies or a very strong one. Some subclasses such as Ancestral Guardian (the perfect Tank-Taunt) , Totem Warrior (Bear resistance) , Zealot (Rage Beyond Death), make it even harder to kill.
A true tank is defined by its hit points, its ability to defend itself (AC), its ability to draw enemies to itself and keep them there so as to protect its group, and its stamina to absorb the damage taken, this is because being a tank means taking a beating instead of others.
Although the monk has many defensive features they are not worth half as much. Certainly it is not impossible to make the monk a Tank (Long Death monk + at last 2 levels of Twilight cleric) , but it will never be a true tank.
Not to get off topic of this thread but it’s an old thread so here it goes.
I always hear people talk about Barbarian’s reckless attack as an incentive to get opponents to attack them. They are easier targets. I get that but, if you see someone swinging a maul like a crazy person, beating the crap out of your comrades (because of advantage), even if it seems like it would be easier to hit them, would you? Or would you try a different target so you don’t get hammered to death like your buddies?
This part is really DM dependent on how they run their encounters so I tend not to consider reckless attack as a method of tanking. The other points in Barbarians favor still stand though.
Not to get off topic of this thread but it’s an old thread so here it goes.
I always hear people talk about Barbarian’s reckless attack as an incentive to get opponents to attack them. They are easier targets. I get that but, if you see someone swinging a maul like a crazy person, beating the crap out of your comrades (because of advantage), even if it seems like it would be easier to hit them, would you? Or would you try a different target so you don’t get hammered to death like your buddies?
This part is really DM dependent on how they run their encounters so I tend not to consider reckless attack as a method of tanking. The other points in Barbarians favor still stand though.
Not to get off topic of this thread but it’s an old thread so here it goes.
I always hear people talk about Barbarian’s reckless attack as an incentive to get opponents to attack them. They are easier targets. I get that but, if you see someone swinging a maul like a crazy person, beating the crap out of your comrades (because of advantage), even if it seems like it would be easier to hit them, would you? Or would you try a different target so you don’t get hammered to death like your buddies?
This part is really DM dependent on how they run their encounters so I tend not to consider reckless attack as a method of tanking. The other points in Barbarians favor still stand though.
I agree with you, but there are also ranged attacks. Enemies using skirmishers tactics. All these attacks might end up on another comrade, but since the barbarian is in an easier position to attack it's easier prey. Then clearly if the enemy is smart, it would choose the easiest enemy to eliminate right away so as to decrease the number of opponents. But then it would become difficult for spellcasters and combatants with few hit points.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
AC by itself isn't enough. You need to be able to bypass or block damage, and when you do get damaged, you need to have the HP to absorb those hits. A measly d8 hit die means your hp is always going to be less than a fighter, a paladin, or a barbarian. Monks dont get self heals as easily or as early as either of the three classes.
It's been mentioned earlier in the thread - they're designed more as strikers and skirmishers, not holding the front line. You can try to hold the line with a monk, in which case your party's going to have to work hard to keep you alive.
>> #OpenDND
The barbarian is the perfect tank because:
The barbarian has resistance that allows him to withstand almost any enemy, whether many weak enemies or a very strong one. Some subclasses such as Ancestral Guardian (the perfect Tank-Taunt) , Totem Warrior (Bear resistance) , Zealot (Rage Beyond Death), make it even harder to kill.
A true tank is defined by its hit points, its ability to defend itself (AC), its ability to draw enemies to itself and keep them there so as to protect its group, and its stamina to absorb the damage taken, this is because being a tank means taking a beating instead of others.
Although the monk has many defensive features they are not worth half as much. Certainly it is not impossible to make the monk a Tank (Long Death monk + at last 2 levels of Twilight cleric) , but it will never be a true tank.
Not to get off topic of this thread but it’s an old thread so here it goes.
I always hear people talk about Barbarian’s reckless attack as an incentive to get opponents to attack them. They are easier targets. I get that but, if you see someone swinging a maul like a crazy person, beating the crap out of your comrades (because of advantage), even if it seems like it would be easier to hit them, would you? Or would you try a different target so you don’t get hammered to death like your buddies?
This part is really DM dependent on how they run their encounters so I tend not to consider reckless attack as a method of tanking. The other points in Barbarians favor still stand though.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
If it is me I target the casters if I can.
I agree with you, but there are also ranged attacks. Enemies using skirmishers tactics. All these attacks might end up on another comrade, but since the barbarian is in an easier position to attack it's easier prey. Then clearly if the enemy is smart, it would choose the easiest enemy to eliminate right away so as to decrease the number of opponents. But then it would become difficult for spellcasters and combatants with few hit points.