I was curious what other DMs think about the following scenario.
If bone naga is concentrating on Calm Emotions, would a calm emotions spell end the barbarian rage or would they just be calmly raging until either the spell ends or is interrupted? If I am reading the spell correct, when a character fails a charisma save they become either charmed or frightened. If the barbarian cannot attack for 1 round the rage ends. The spell does not affect the rage directly but preventing the barbarian from attacking via the charmed effect would bring the character out of the rage.
"If a creature fails its saving throw, choose one of the following two effects:"
"You can suppress any effect causing a target to be charmed or frightened. When this spell ends, any suppressed effect resumes, provided that its duration has not expired in the meantime."
Cool, many Barbarians while raging are immune to being charmed or frightened, so obviously this could not possibly have any effect on them, in the context in question. Even if they don't happen to be, suppressing such a charm or frighten effect would obviously not affect the Rage as well, as the Rage is not predicated on them being charmed or frightened.
"Alternatively, you can make a target indifferent about creatures of your choice that it is hostile toward. This indifference ends if the target is attacked or harmed by a spell or if it witnesses any of its friends being harmed. When the spell ends, the creature becomes hostile again, unless the DM rules otherwise."
This lacks the key qualifier in there of "by the creatures to which it was formerly hostile" after the "being harmed" line, but we can safely infer it (otherwise they could immediately end the calm emotions effect by harming themselves or one of their friends). So, you can make it so the Barbarian is not hostile towards Anyone. Great! Does that end a rage?
"Your rage lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then. You can also end your rage on your turn as a bonus action."
Well, apparently raging does not require there being hostile creatures around to keep up and running. Attacking a hostile creature is certainly one way, but the other way is the way Barbarians everywhere have been keeping rages going for as long as premature rage ending has been a thing- getting hurt. Harming themselves, either directly or indirectly, would keep it up, and at that point it's a game of chicken as to which ends first, the rage or the calm emotions effect.
This is a classic case of "what does the spell actually do" vs "what do we think it should do". It does not say it ends rage effects, so it does not. It lists two specific effects you can choose between, and neither of them is ending a rage (though the second effect May result in the rage ending if the barbarian can't find a way to get hurt or attack something). Certainly the DM can always choose for it to have additional effects beyond those listed, as is true of literally any spell, but it doing so would be 1) entirely at DM discretion the whole way through, and 2) a houserule. Hope that helps!
No, that would be cheap. Its one thing letting players do cool things, its another bastardizing a spell to take away a players ability.
If you are charmed, if you are frightened, the spell helps you out. Barbarian rage is neither.
If you are hostile, the spell makes you indifferent. I wouldn't say it removes rage per se but the barbarian does not attack, until he is attacked or friends are attacked.
It's wasted with the wrong initiative order, but with the right one as long as the spell is cast between an enemy attacking any ally and the Barbarian taking a turn, the spell should apply and prevent the Barbarian from attacking on the Barbarian's turn, ending Rage.
If any enemy attacks a visible ally or an ally gets harmed by any means between the casting and Barbarian's turn, the spell breaks and the Barbarian can keep Rage going.
If any ally attacks an enemy and doesn't receive damage while the spell is active, the spell does not break on those turns.
This keeps the spell from being an instant cancel-rage spell while offering a strategic use against Rage when used strategically.
I do not consider deliberate self-harm actions to be attacks on creatures hostile to the Barbarian. If the spell is not broken in time and the Barbarian is not able to make an attack on someone else who is hostile to the Barbarian (and "simply annoying", while funny in concept, isn't hostile in my view), the Rage ends.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I'd say the barbarian hit by Calm Emotions can keep his Rage going - but it's like bad sex, it's just not as satisfying without the ability to get really angry about it. No catharsis, see? Like, after combat, the barbarian would look around, shrug his shoulders and be like 'well, I guess we won'. Rather than the usual dominant display I consider the norm - like, 'YEA, LOOK AT YOU NOW! I LIVE, YOU DIE! I AM THE TARRASQUE, AND YOU ARE THE WORLD! GRAAAHHH!!!!' That sort of thing.
I have played just way too many barbarians.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Concentration Checks are based on Constitution because it's your ability to be resilient, to ignore pain, and so forth. I'd actually go with Charisma, which is the stat on force of personality and emotional control.
Not that it overly matters, it's homebrew anyway, so there's no right or wrong way to it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Rage does state a hostile creature must be attacked as quoted blow:
"Your rage lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then. You can also end your rage on your turn as a bonus action."
Attacking yourself wouldn't make sense as you are not a hostile c0reature to yourself. If your going to be hostile to yourself you'd attack yourself until you are defeated. In that sense, if calm emotions is used to make a raged creature/player indifferent and doesn't attack for the turn, the rage ends. So even though calm emotions doesn't immediately cancel rage it would work. (I like the homebrew saving throws though. Sounds more fun.)
You can attack anyone you want, whether they're hostile or not, and whether you're hostile to them or not. Players are basically never required to determine their own hostility. That's for NPCs. But regardless of whether you can attack yourself, I'm sure you can come up with a way to take damage on your turn, and if you take damage on your turn, you continue raging.
FYI, One D&D is going to make this argument moot, as the UA barbarian can use a bonus action to extend their rage in addition to the other options for extending it. Also, FWIW, as a millennial I'm quite skilled at being both calm and enraged, so I don't see why a barbarian couldn't manage it.
Using Calm Emotions on a Barbarian under Rage can make it indifferent about the bone naga until the Barbarian is attacked or harmed by a spell or if it witnesses any of its friends being harmed. During this time the Rage may ends if the Barbarian's turn ends without having taken damage since its last turn since it can't attack the bone naga but that means the bone naga didn't harm it or other party members. So a very fair trade considering the Barbarian can maintain Rage by damaging itself all while the bone naga isn't harming anyone.
Using Calm Emotions on a Barbarian under Rage can make it indifferent about the bone naga until the Barbarian is attacked or harmed by a spell or if it witnesses any of its friends being harmed.
Correct.
During this time the Rage may ends if the Barbarian's turn ends without having taken damage since its last turn
Correct.
since it can't attack the bone naga
Incorrect. Hostility and indifference 1) are NPC states, not player states, and 2) don't place limitations on a creature's actions. It's a little unusual to even see hostility mentioned in combat features or spells. I've never really thought about this before.
The only place where these terms are defined is the section in the DMG about social interaction.
If the naga doesn't want to be attacked by the Barbarian, it should place the charmed condition on him.
Incorrect. Hostility and indifference 1) are NPC states, not player states, and 2) don't place limitations on a creature's actions. It's a little unusual to even see hostility mentioned in combat features or spells. I've never really thought about this before.
The only place where these terms are defined is the section in the DMG about social interaction.
If the naga doesn't want to be attacked by the Barbarian, it should place the charmed condition on him.
You're right it sure can! In the shuffle i somehow mixed up the Barbarian becoming indifferent with the bone naga being not hostile for Rage requirement.
These Social Interaction are also describe in the PHB as and are NPC attitudes so it's not meant for player characters in the first place, nor really fit for combat encounter usage.
Social Interaction: In general terms, an NPC’s attitude toward you is described as friendly, indifferent, or hostile. Friendly NPCs are predisposed to help you, and hostile ones are inclined to get in your way. It’s easier to get what you want from a friendly NPC, of course.
Using Calm Emotions on a Barbarian under Rage can make it indifferent about the bone naga until the Barbarian is attacked or harmed by a spell or if it witnesses any of its friends being harmed.
Correct.
During this time the Rage may ends if the Barbarian's turn ends without having taken damage since its last turn
Correct.
since it can't attack the bone naga
Incorrect. Hostility and indifference 1) are NPC states, not player states, and 2) don't place limitations on a creature's actions. It's a little unusual to even see hostility mentioned in combat features or spells. I've never really thought about this before.
The only place where these terms are defined is the section in the DMG about social interaction.
If the naga doesn't want to be attacked by the Barbarian, it should place the charmed condition on him.
I was curious what other DMs think about the following scenario.
If bone naga is concentrating on Calm Emotions, would a calm emotions spell end the barbarian rage or would they just be calmly raging until either the spell ends or is interrupted? If I am reading the spell correct, when a character fails a charisma save they become either charmed or frightened. If the barbarian cannot attack for 1 round the rage ends. The spell does not affect the rage directly but preventing the barbarian from attacking via the charmed effect would bring the character out of the rage.
Thoughts?
Let's look at what Calm Emotions actually does:
"If a creature fails its saving throw, choose one of the following two effects:"
"You can suppress any effect causing a target to be charmed or frightened. When this spell ends, any suppressed effect resumes, provided that its duration has not expired in the meantime."
Cool, many Barbarians while raging are immune to being charmed or frightened, so obviously this could not possibly have any effect on them, in the context in question. Even if they don't happen to be, suppressing such a charm or frighten effect would obviously not affect the Rage as well, as the Rage is not predicated on them being charmed or frightened.
"Alternatively, you can make a target indifferent about creatures of your choice that it is hostile toward. This indifference ends if the target is attacked or harmed by a spell or if it witnesses any of its friends being harmed. When the spell ends, the creature becomes hostile again, unless the DM rules otherwise."
This lacks the key qualifier in there of "by the creatures to which it was formerly hostile" after the "being harmed" line, but we can safely infer it (otherwise they could immediately end the calm emotions effect by harming themselves or one of their friends). So, you can make it so the Barbarian is not hostile towards Anyone. Great! Does that end a rage?
"Your rage lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then. You can also end your rage on your turn as a bonus action."
Well, apparently raging does not require there being hostile creatures around to keep up and running. Attacking a hostile creature is certainly one way, but the other way is the way Barbarians everywhere have been keeping rages going for as long as premature rage ending has been a thing- getting hurt. Harming themselves, either directly or indirectly, would keep it up, and at that point it's a game of chicken as to which ends first, the rage or the calm emotions effect.
This is a classic case of "what does the spell actually do" vs "what do we think it should do". It does not say it ends rage effects, so it does not. It lists two specific effects you can choose between, and neither of them is ending a rage (though the second effect May result in the rage ending if the barbarian can't find a way to get hurt or attack something). Certainly the DM can always choose for it to have additional effects beyond those listed, as is true of literally any spell, but it doing so would be 1) entirely at DM discretion the whole way through, and 2) a houserule. Hope that helps!
Whether or not it's the intended use, it's cool and I'd allow it at my table.
No, that would be cheap. Its one thing letting players do cool things, its another bastardizing a spell to take away a players ability.
If you are charmed, if you are frightened, the spell helps you out. Barbarian rage is neither.
If you are hostile, the spell makes you indifferent. I wouldn't say it removes rage per se but the barbarian does not attack, until he is attacked or friends are attacked.
Timing is everything:
It's wasted with the wrong initiative order, but with the right one as long as the spell is cast between an enemy attacking any ally and the Barbarian taking a turn, the spell should apply and prevent the Barbarian from attacking on the Barbarian's turn, ending Rage.
If any enemy attacks a visible ally or an ally gets harmed by any means between the casting and Barbarian's turn, the spell breaks and the Barbarian can keep Rage going.
If any ally attacks an enemy and doesn't receive damage while the spell is active, the spell does not break on those turns.
This keeps the spell from being an instant cancel-rage spell while offering a strategic use against Rage when used strategically.
I do not consider deliberate self-harm actions to be attacks on creatures hostile to the Barbarian. If the spell is not broken in time and the Barbarian is not able to make an attack on someone else who is hostile to the Barbarian (and "simply annoying", while funny in concept, isn't hostile in my view), the Rage ends.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
The attacking themselves satisfies the taking damage part, not the attacking a hostile something part
I'd allow it, but add in a Constitution Saving Throw against the casting DC.
Why Constitution?
I'd say the barbarian hit by Calm Emotions can keep his Rage going - but it's like bad sex, it's just not as satisfying without the ability to get really angry about it. No catharsis, see? Like, after combat, the barbarian would look around, shrug his shoulders and be like 'well, I guess we won'. Rather than the usual dominant display I consider the norm - like, 'YEA, LOOK AT YOU NOW! I LIVE, YOU DIE! I AM THE TARRASQUE, AND YOU ARE THE WORLD! GRAAAHHH!!!!' That sort of thing.
I have played just way too many barbarians.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
For the same reason Concentration checks are Constitution Saving Throws.
Concentration Checks are based on Constitution because it's your ability to be resilient, to ignore pain, and so forth. I'd actually go with Charisma, which is the stat on force of personality and emotional control.
Not that it overly matters, it's homebrew anyway, so there's no right or wrong way to it.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Well now I'm more curious than before. What is that reason, in your estimation?
Rage does state a hostile creature must be attacked as quoted blow:
"Your rage lasts for 1 minute. It ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then. You can also end your rage on your turn as a bonus action."
Attacking yourself wouldn't make sense as you are not a hostile c0reature to yourself. If your going to be hostile to yourself you'd attack yourself until you are defeated. In that sense, if calm emotions is used to make a raged creature/player indifferent and doesn't attack for the turn, the rage ends. So even though calm emotions doesn't immediately cancel rage it would work. (I like the homebrew saving throws though. Sounds more fun.)
You can attack anyone you want, whether they're hostile or not, and whether you're hostile to them or not. Players are basically never required to determine their own hostility. That's for NPCs. But regardless of whether you can attack yourself, I'm sure you can come up with a way to take damage on your turn, and if you take damage on your turn, you continue raging.
FYI, One D&D is going to make this argument moot, as the UA barbarian can use a bonus action to extend their rage in addition to the other options for extending it. Also, FWIW, as a millennial I'm quite skilled at being both calm and enraged, so I don't see why a barbarian couldn't manage it.
Using Calm Emotions on a Barbarian under Rage can make it indifferent about the bone naga until the Barbarian is attacked or harmed by a spell or if it witnesses any of its friends being harmed. During this time the Rage may ends if the Barbarian's turn ends without having taken damage since its last turn since it can't attack the bone naga but that means the bone naga didn't harm it or other party members. So a very fair trade considering the Barbarian can maintain Rage by damaging itself all while the bone naga isn't harming anyone.
Correct.
Correct.
Incorrect. Hostility and indifference 1) are NPC states, not player states, and 2) don't place limitations on a creature's actions. It's a little unusual to even see hostility mentioned in combat features or spells. I've never really thought about this before.
The only place where these terms are defined is the section in the DMG about social interaction.
If the naga doesn't want to be attacked by the Barbarian, it should place the charmed condition on him.
You're right it sure can! In the shuffle i somehow mixed up the Barbarian becoming indifferent with the bone naga being not hostile for Rage requirement.
These Social Interaction are also describe in the PHB as and are NPC attitudes so it's not meant for player characters in the first place, nor really fit for combat encounter usage.
Or use Hold Person.
Obligatory "spells do what they say they do." Turning off Barbarian Rage is not on the list. (In 5e anyway - I believe it could do that in 3.5e.)
More importantly, 5e Barbarian Rage is not a simple emotion. That's been explicit even since 2014, and 2024 is doubling down on that.