I have a player who want to go Bardbarian but as rules states, you can't cast spells or concentrate on spells while raging. So I am trying to figure out something that could replace that rule so the player will be able to cast spells while raging. Without making it overpowered. Its most important for me for the players to have fun than follow RAWs.
Well there's a good reason for this rule so I imagine things could get unbalanced quickly if your not careful. I would probably do something like give them a magic item that allows casting through rage a set amount of times per long rest. You could further restrict it by limiting the casting type to self/others/spell schools or whatever to avoid an OP combination. Also let the player know that you might have to adjust it as you go if things get unbalanced.
What is it they want to get out of being a barbarian/caster? If it's not "I wanna be a powerhouse combat character who can also cast spells freely", then you can probably figure something else out without mucking with the mechanics.
If it's really a character-concept thing, it might be enough to help them figure out a set of spells to take that don't require concentration or casting mid-combat. (I've got a warlock/barbarian character idea I might play someday that goes this way, eventually planned to get to the point where I can cat blink at the start of combat, and then flicker around the battlefield doing murder.)
Bardbarians can be very effective but that is one of the major hurdles they need to overcome to play that particular multiclass. In my opinion, that's a feature, not a bug. There are plenty of great Bard spells that don't require concentration that add utility to the character in and out of combat but they do need to balance that with their rages. Spells like Aid or Thunderwave are great for a Bardbarian.
That said, if you and your player are invested in this concept, it may be worth playtesting a few ideas. Lathius' idea could work. It may even be worth removing the spell casting restriction but maybe not the concentration one, or vice versa. Maybe they can concentrate on Heroism or Faerie Fire but they have to cast it before they rage. A lot of that homebrewing depends on both the fantasy the player is wanting to go with and what you're willing to allow as the DM.
Remember that ultimately, all rules decisions come down to you. If you want to give them full spellcasting during rages, you go for it. Just realize that is a big power boost to a class that's already bordering on OP with certain subclasses. Unbalanced players are easy to handle as a DM but make sure the other players at your table don't start to feel overshadowed. That's the important bit. As long as everyone at the table has a good time, that's all that matters.
if this is a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde situation (but with music), then maybe work up a way to store a very limited number of spells as potions (or enchanted/infused gnomish music boxes). Mr Hyde can't cast new spells, but he could probably remember to "toss the green one like a grenade" if he needed to escape, etc. In that situation i feel like an existing homebrewed artificer sub-class would work after a little re-theming.
If they want to blast away with cantrips themed as power cords then maybe a dip in sorcerer ("thunderbolts and lightning! very, very frightning!") or warlock (ooh, how metal!) instead of bard. you might skip barbarian all together if the "rage" is more of an aura of chaos and melody (at range) from someone who just happens to have a high strength stat and wear fur underpants. customize a playtest background and, most importantly, the adjoining free level 1 feat: Choose Playtest Character Origin - Musician Feat to gain proficiency with three instruments plus every short rest you provide your group with inspiration. This sounds like exactly the sort of thing the new UA flexible character origins are made for, giving a performer's identity to someone who isn't going to use all the other bard nitty gritty.
What do you think about something where the player has to make a Concentration Check at the start of their turn while raging, regardless of whether or not they've taken any damage. Maybe it would be possible to even do something where the player has to succeed on that concentration check in order to successfully cast any spell in the first place. Rage then still largely shuts down reliable spellcasting, but the opportunity to cast spells still exists.
What do you think about something where the player has to make a Concentration Check at the start of their turn while raging, regardless of whether or not they've taken any damage. Maybe it would be possible to even do something where the player has to succeed on that concentration check in order to successfully cast any spell in the first place. Rage then still largely shuts down reliable spellcasting, but the opportunity to cast spells still exists.
rather than concentration check (which sorta undermines all the concentration spells they probably want to do), what about a performance check? i know itsClavi didn't say the rage was only while playing, but i'm having a hard time imagining a raging bard that isn't either playing furiously on an instrument or else dancing like a maniac, a maniac on the floor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
There are lots of ways around this, first and foremost the barb won’t always be raging - assuming 6 to 8 encounters per long rest. Secondly there are plenty of opportunities for out of combat spells especially rituals like detect magic, identify, Leomunds, purify food and water, the list is huge. There are also a lot of spells that have long durations but don't need concentration such as gift of alacrity, aid, spiritual weapon, alarm, comprehend languages, find familiar, floating disk, goodberry, longstrider, dark vision, mirror image. So many spells that could be cast early in the day and have lasting effects, or an hour so could last multiple encounters, or even just in the first round of a combat.
There are also spells that are useful in combat that don’t require concentration like Sleep, Unseen Servant for spreading caltrops during combat, etc.. Just use those spells right before using rage.
If you do work something out, just talk with your player about the attacking rule for raging. There's a number of spells that don't meet the RAW definition of an attack, even though they seem like they should intuitively, like magic missile and fireball. If there's no attack roll, it's not considered an "attack." Seems like you might be OK with just hand-waving that definition, so maybe it won't matter, just something to be aware of.
Otherwise, I'd +1 Transmorpher's idea of a skill check, though I'd suggest an arcana roll, Maybe DC 10+spell level. Raging barbarians are pretty tough already, letting them throw up shield or absorb elements freely while raging is going to get pretty OP pretty fast.
I don't think rage is the most unbalanced mechanic to combine with spell casting especially not in comparison to say action surge which just give an extra spell on a turn. Allot of people bring up concentration saves as a concern. The main issue there is the resistance as con proficiency and high con are achievable by every class. Resistance will reduce the DC of concentration checks by reducing damage. If that worries you, simply increase the dc, bump up the minimum dc or double the damage for the purpose of concentration. It also only applies to a limited number of spells. Very powerful spells but a limited number.
As for why combine barbarians and casters. Well spells are just optional class feature tied to the same resource pool. They may simply find something compelling in the spell list for a concept like shattering the ground with earth spells, literally burning with rage or magical physical enhancements. There's allot of compelling ideas there that the current no spell rule just kind of hard locks out.
I'm not too clued up on the bardic spell list, but you could potentially allow them to, When raging, cast spells provided that the spell involves a melee attack.
This limited ability to cast offense-only spells would generally work well for a raging barbarian - and it's fair enough to assume that someone seeing red and wanting to smash things won't suddenly forget they have spells that help them to do just that - they are much more likely to only forget their fiddly or ranged spells whilst beating people with a guitar-axe!
I have a player who want to go Bardbarian but as rules states, you can't cast spells or concentrate on spells while raging. So I am trying to figure out something that could replace that rule so the player will be able to cast spells while raging. Without making it overpowered. Its most important for me for the players to have fun than follow RAWs.
Being honest Barbarians have been the one class I've historically had the most trouble with at the table. Tabaxi Barbarians for example are a nightmare to wrap your head around and I'm still not sure I got it right when ruling on RAW for the players because they were dealing out insane levels of damage very early on.
To me it comes down to what rage is mechanically. It's literally losing control and swinging with reckless abandon at whatever lays in their way. I often see raging barbarians as barely able to talk let alone do much else. Given the different subclasses open to Barbarians as written too when reading you're looking at either instinctive effects like auras, ancestral blessings, or out and out wild magic. Because such magic and effects don't require much thought on the part of the Barbarian it works well thematically with the class.
I do understand what you're getting at in terms of choosing fun over RAW. Here's the problem I've found though unbalanced characters can throw the dynamic of an entire group out of the window. I've seen it happen before and is why I tend to limit some combinations. In the example you give I wouldn't have imagined someone who can easily fly off the handle into a rage as being very charismatic. In fact once that individual raged in front of others, whatever charisma that they did appear to have would evaporate. So I simple wouldn't allow it. The two don't mix. Let's take calm emotions for example, it just doesn't make sense for a raging barbarian to be able to cast or be able to calm other people's emotions when the entire point is that their own rage is what fuels them.
But let's say that you want to go ahead anyway...every table and every DM is different after all.
Run it past the rest of the group and see if they're okay with what could be a really odd character that is unbalanced.
Run through the spell list for a Bard and seriously consider which spells just outright can't or shouldn't be compatible with the Barbarian's rage state. I could easily see a rage filled barbarian unleashing Cloud of Daggers during combat. It just meshes well. They just aren't going to be casting Calm Emotions, Charm Person, or Charm Monster to my mind. In short I would say that yes, the barbarian could know the spells as part of their bardic class, but wouldn't be able to cast some of the spell list. Basically, I'd lean into any instinctual feeling or outright aggressive/offensive spells being allowed during rage. I might even throw in a random dice check so they don't get to choose which spell. Essentially, as the rage builds to a big enough point they unleash an offensive magical barrage but the downside is that they can't choose which spell. Could be any one of four choices based on a 1d4.
I don't feel like a Bard/Barb character falls under letting the players have fun because the nasty boring rules get in the way. To be brutally honest, depending on the story situation the rules creak at the seams as I run some sessions because in the moment I realise that RAW are downright inappropriate in that moment. That said, The limitations are often there so that no one around the table gets too jealous of anyone else during play. It's actually what worries about such a wide array of choice in the One D&D UA. Choice and flexibility aren't always great. Sometimes it comes back to bite you in ways you don't expect.
I have a player who want to go Bardbarian but as rules states, you can't cast spells or concentrate on spells while raging. So I am trying to figure out something that could replace that rule so the player will be able to cast spells while raging. Without making it overpowered. Its most important for me for the players to have fun than follow RAWs.
Being honest Barbarians have been the one class I've historically had the most trouble with at the table. Tabaxi Barbarians for example are a nightmare to wrap your head around and I'm still not sure I got it right when ruling on RAW for the players because they were dealing out insane levels of damage very early on.
To me it comes down to what rage is mechanically. It's literally losing control and swinging with reckless abandon at whatever lays in their way. I often see raging barbarians as barely able to talk let alone do much else. Given the different subclasses open to Barbarians as written too when reading you're looking at either instinctive effects like auras, ancestral blessings, or out and out wild magic. Because such magic and effects don't require much thought on the part of the Barbarian it works well thematically with the class.
I do understand what you're getting at in terms of choosing fun over RAW. Here's the problem I've found though unbalanced characters can throw the dynamic of an entire group out of the window. I've seen it happen before and is why I tend to limit some combinations. In the example you give I wouldn't have imagined someone who can easily fly off the handle into a rage as being very charismatic. In fact once that individual raged in front of others, whatever charisma that they did appear to have would evaporate. So I simple wouldn't allow it. The two don't mix. Let's take calm emotions for example, it just doesn't make sense for a raging barbarian to be able to cast or be able to calm other people's emotions when the entire point is that their own rage is what fuels them.
But let's say that you want to go ahead anyway...every table and every DM is different after all.
Run it past the rest of the group and see if they're okay with what could be a really odd character that is unbalanced.
Run through the spell list for a Bard and seriously consider which spells just outright can't or shouldn't be compatible with the Barbarian's rage state. I could easily see a rage filled barbarian unleashing Cloud of Daggers during combat. It just meshes well. They just aren't going to be casting Calm Emotions, Charm Person, or Charm Monster to my mind. In short I would say that yes, the barbarian could know the spells as part of their bardic class, but wouldn't be able to cast some of the spell list. Basically, I'd lean into any instinctual feeling or outright aggressive/offensive spells being allowed during rage. I might even throw in a random dice check so they don't get to choose which spell. Essentially, as the rage builds to a big enough point they unleash an offensive magical barrage but the downside is that they can't choose which spell. Could be any one of four choices based on a 1d4.
I don't feel like a Bard/Barb character falls under letting the players have fun because the nasty boring rules get in the way. To be brutally honest, depending on the story situation the rules creak at the seams as I run some sessions because in the moment I realise that RAW are downright inappropriate in that moment. That said, The limitations are often there so that no one around the table gets too jealous of anyone else during play. It's actually what worries about such a wide array of choice in the One D&D UA. Choice and flexibility aren't always great. Sometimes it comes back to bite you in ways you don't expect.
How is a Tabaxi Barbarian particularly bad? they have there claw attacks which are pretty insignificant at high levels and they can double there movement as long as they haven't moved (although think MMM nerfs this a bit to be based on proficiency per short rest maybe). Just intrigued because I have a player wanting to play one.
How is a Tabaxi Barbarian particularly bad? they have there claw attacks which are pretty insignificant at high levels and they can double there movement as long as they haven't moved (although think MMM nerfs this a bit to be based on proficiency per short rest maybe). Just intrigued because I have a player wanting to play one.
It came down to those darn cat claws. In practicality, they're doing slashing damage as an unarmed attack...
Now as I said earlier, maybe I just haven't got my head around them...but there were situations where players where the claws add more damage to unarmed strikes in such a way that felt like without delving into errata or ruling for your own table...could potentially stack quite quickly and quite furiously. Add in the feline agility and the barbarian often was getting into an encounter dealing huge damage well before anyone else had engaged.
Basically the crux is too many players arguing that Tabaxi Claws should count as STR weapons because they're described as 'natural weapons' or demanding that they gain the extra melee damage while raging and using their claws. If you allow for that which too many player moan if you don't let them have it...the damage becomes stupid at the low levels. I literally had a group splinter up because other players felt the tabaxi barb was OP.
Now, personally, I'm not a fan of the furries as player character options. However, I think the Tabaxi Barbarian is a solid choice for a player. It is just one of those archetypes that seems to work well together and makes sense. The problems I encountered were the other players round the table. Much like Aarakocra getting player backs up because 'oh they can fly and it's not fair'... Tabaxi players in my experience thus far seem to be the tail end of some jealousy from other players.
Take what I say with pinch of salt though. There's always room for it being me as DM at fault, or just player style mismatch/character creation regret.
How is a Tabaxi Barbarian particularly bad? they have there claw attacks which are pretty insignificant at high levels and they can double there movement as long as they haven't moved (although think MMM nerfs this a bit to be based on proficiency per short rest maybe). Just intrigued because I have a player wanting to play one.
It came down to those darn cat claws. In practicality, they're doing slashing damage as an unarmed attack...
Now as I said earlier, maybe I just haven't got my head around them...but there were situations where players where the claws add more damage to unarmed strikes in such a way that felt like without delving into errata or ruling for your own table...could potentially stack quite quickly and quite furiously. Add in the feline agility and the barbarian often was getting into an encounter dealing huge damage well before anyone else had engaged.
Basically the crux is too many players arguing that Tabaxi Claws should count as STR weapons because they're described as 'natural weapons' or demanding that they gain the extra melee damage while raging and using their claws. If you allow for that which too many player moan if you don't let them have it...the damage becomes stupid at the low levels. I literally had a group splinter up because other players felt the tabaxi barb was OP.
Now, personally, I'm not a fan of the furries as player character options. However, I think the Tabaxi Barbarian is a solid choice for a player. It is just one of those archetypes that seems to work well together and makes sense. The problems I encountered were the other players round the table. Much like Aarakocra getting player backs up because 'oh they can fly and it's not fair'... Tabaxi players in my experience thus far seem to be the tail end of some jealousy from other players.
Take what I say with pinch of salt though. There's always room for it being me as DM at fault, or just player style mismatch/character creation regret.
Tabaxi claw rules are as follows
Cat's Claws. Because of your claws, you have a climbing speed of 20 feet. In addition, your claws are natural weapons, which you can use to make unarmed strikes. If you hit with them, you deal slashing damage equal to 1d4 + your Strength modifier, instead of the bludgeoning damage normal for an unarmed strike.
So the player only gets one or the other. 1D4 plus strength or they get to make an unarmourd attack normally, the 2 don't stack. Because you add strength modifier have no issue with them taking rage damage but, a greatsword or other strength based weapon does a lot more damage than 1D4.
So the player only gets one or the other. 1D4 plus strength or they get to make an unarmourd attack normally, the 2 don't stack. Because you add strength modifier have no issue with them taking rage damage but, a greatsword or other strength based weapon does a lot more damage than 1D4.
Oh, I'm aware of Rules as Written but when you have players being petulant about it and you just want to get on with things, sometimes you end up making less than sound judgement calls...or at least I did in that previous example.
Perhaps you could allow them to cast spells with a duration of "instantaneous", but no others? Then you could balance it by restricting the spell level available while raging. I don't know exactly how you would balance this, perhaps they can't use their two highest levels of spell slots?
Spells can make balancing things really tricky, so don't give up if things have a pretty rocky start or require a ton of trial and error!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Being gender-fluid and pansexual makes roleplay a lot easier!
Heya!
I have a player who want to go Bardbarian but as rules states, you can't cast spells or concentrate on spells while raging. So I am trying to figure out something that could replace that rule so the player will be able to cast spells while raging. Without making it overpowered. Its most important for me for the players to have fun than follow RAWs.
Well there's a good reason for this rule so I imagine things could get unbalanced quickly if your not careful. I would probably do something like give them a magic item that allows casting through rage a set amount of times per long rest. You could further restrict it by limiting the casting type to self/others/spell schools or whatever to avoid an OP combination. Also let the player know that you might have to adjust it as you go if things get unbalanced.
What is it they want to get out of being a barbarian/caster? If it's not "I wanna be a powerhouse combat character who can also cast spells freely", then you can probably figure something else out without mucking with the mechanics.
If it's really a character-concept thing, it might be enough to help them figure out a set of spells to take that don't require concentration or casting mid-combat. (I've got a warlock/barbarian character idea I might play someday that goes this way, eventually planned to get to the point where I can cat blink at the start of combat, and then flicker around the battlefield doing murder.)
It's been a long-run project of mine to make a barbarian subclass designed to lift that restriction. That might be a good solution.
Bardbarians can be very effective but that is one of the major hurdles they need to overcome to play that particular multiclass. In my opinion, that's a feature, not a bug. There are plenty of great Bard spells that don't require concentration that add utility to the character in and out of combat but they do need to balance that with their rages. Spells like Aid or Thunderwave are great for a Bardbarian.
That said, if you and your player are invested in this concept, it may be worth playtesting a few ideas. Lathius' idea could work. It may even be worth removing the spell casting restriction but maybe not the concentration one, or vice versa. Maybe they can concentrate on Heroism or Faerie Fire but they have to cast it before they rage. A lot of that homebrewing depends on both the fantasy the player is wanting to go with and what you're willing to allow as the DM.
Remember that ultimately, all rules decisions come down to you. If you want to give them full spellcasting during rages, you go for it. Just realize that is a big power boost to a class that's already bordering on OP with certain subclasses. Unbalanced players are easy to handle as a DM but make sure the other players at your table don't start to feel overshadowed. That's the important bit. As long as everyone at the table has a good time, that's all that matters.
if this is a Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde situation (but with music), then maybe work up a way to store a very limited number of spells as potions (or enchanted/infused gnomish music boxes). Mr Hyde can't cast new spells, but he could probably remember to "toss the green one like a grenade" if he needed to escape, etc. In that situation i feel like an existing homebrewed artificer sub-class would work after a little re-theming.
If they want to blast away with cantrips themed as power cords then maybe a dip in sorcerer ("thunderbolts and lightning! very, very frightning!") or warlock (ooh, how metal!) instead of bard. you might skip barbarian all together if the "rage" is more of an aura of chaos and melody (at range) from someone who just happens to have a high strength stat and wear fur underpants. customize a playtest background and, most importantly, the adjoining free level 1 feat: Choose Playtest Character Origin - Musician Feat to gain proficiency with three instruments plus every short rest you provide your group with inspiration. This sounds like exactly the sort of thing the new UA flexible character origins are made for, giving a performer's identity to someone who isn't going to use all the other bard nitty gritty.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
What do you think about something where the player has to make a Concentration Check at the start of their turn while raging, regardless of whether or not they've taken any damage. Maybe it would be possible to even do something where the player has to succeed on that concentration check in order to successfully cast any spell in the first place. Rage then still largely shuts down reliable spellcasting, but the opportunity to cast spells still exists.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
rather than concentration check (which sorta undermines all the concentration spells they probably want to do), what about a performance check? i know itsClavi didn't say the rage was only while playing, but i'm having a hard time imagining a raging bard that isn't either playing furiously on an instrument or else dancing like a maniac, a maniac on the floor.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
There are lots of ways around this, first and foremost the barb won’t always be raging - assuming 6 to 8 encounters per long rest. Secondly there are plenty of opportunities for out of combat spells especially rituals like detect magic, identify, Leomunds, purify food and water, the list is huge. There are also a lot of spells that have long durations but don't need concentration such as gift of alacrity, aid, spiritual weapon, alarm, comprehend languages, find familiar, floating disk, goodberry, longstrider, dark vision, mirror image. So many spells that could be cast early in the day and have lasting effects, or an hour so could last multiple encounters, or even just in the first round of a combat.
There are also spells that are useful in combat that don’t require concentration like Sleep, Unseen Servant for spreading caltrops during combat, etc.. Just use those spells right before using rage.
Professional computer geek
If you do work something out, just talk with your player about the attacking rule for raging. There's a number of spells that don't meet the RAW definition of an attack, even though they seem like they should intuitively, like magic missile and fireball. If there's no attack roll, it's not considered an "attack." Seems like you might be OK with just hand-waving that definition, so maybe it won't matter, just something to be aware of.
Otherwise, I'd +1 Transmorpher's idea of a skill check, though I'd suggest an arcana roll, Maybe DC 10+spell level. Raging barbarians are pretty tough already, letting them throw up shield or absorb elements freely while raging is going to get pretty OP pretty fast.
I don't think rage is the most unbalanced mechanic to combine with spell casting especially not in comparison to say action surge which just give an extra spell on a turn. Allot of people bring up concentration saves as a concern. The main issue there is the resistance as con proficiency and high con are achievable by every class. Resistance will reduce the DC of concentration checks by reducing damage. If that worries you, simply increase the dc, bump up the minimum dc or double the damage for the purpose of concentration. It also only applies to a limited number of spells. Very powerful spells but a limited number.
As for why combine barbarians and casters. Well spells are just optional class feature tied to the same resource pool. They may simply find something compelling in the spell list for a concept like shattering the ground with earth spells, literally burning with rage or magical physical enhancements. There's allot of compelling ideas there that the current no spell rule just kind of hard locks out.
I'm not too clued up on the bardic spell list, but you could potentially allow them to, When raging, cast spells provided that the spell involves a melee attack.
This limited ability to cast offense-only spells would generally work well for a raging barbarian - and it's fair enough to assume that someone seeing red and wanting to smash things won't suddenly forget they have spells that help them to do just that - they are much more likely to only forget their fiddly or ranged spells whilst beating people with a guitar-axe!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Being honest Barbarians have been the one class I've historically had the most trouble with at the table. Tabaxi Barbarians for example are a nightmare to wrap your head around and I'm still not sure I got it right when ruling on RAW for the players because they were dealing out insane levels of damage very early on.
To me it comes down to what rage is mechanically. It's literally losing control and swinging with reckless abandon at whatever lays in their way. I often see raging barbarians as barely able to talk let alone do much else. Given the different subclasses open to Barbarians as written too when reading you're looking at either instinctive effects like auras, ancestral blessings, or out and out wild magic. Because such magic and effects don't require much thought on the part of the Barbarian it works well thematically with the class.
I do understand what you're getting at in terms of choosing fun over RAW. Here's the problem I've found though unbalanced characters can throw the dynamic of an entire group out of the window. I've seen it happen before and is why I tend to limit some combinations. In the example you give I wouldn't have imagined someone who can easily fly off the handle into a rage as being very charismatic. In fact once that individual raged in front of others, whatever charisma that they did appear to have would evaporate. So I simple wouldn't allow it. The two don't mix. Let's take calm emotions for example, it just doesn't make sense for a raging barbarian to be able to cast or be able to calm other people's emotions when the entire point is that their own rage is what fuels them.
But let's say that you want to go ahead anyway...every table and every DM is different after all.
I don't feel like a Bard/Barb character falls under letting the players have fun because the nasty boring rules get in the way. To be brutally honest, depending on the story situation the rules creak at the seams as I run some sessions because in the moment I realise that RAW are downright inappropriate in that moment. That said, The limitations are often there so that no one around the table gets too jealous of anyone else during play. It's actually what worries about such a wide array of choice in the One D&D UA. Choice and flexibility aren't always great. Sometimes it comes back to bite you in ways you don't expect.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
How is a Tabaxi Barbarian particularly bad? they have there claw attacks which are pretty insignificant at high levels and they can double there movement as long as they haven't moved (although think MMM nerfs this a bit to be based on proficiency per short rest maybe). Just intrigued because I have a player wanting to play one.
It came down to those darn cat claws. In practicality, they're doing slashing damage as an unarmed attack...
Now as I said earlier, maybe I just haven't got my head around them...but there were situations where players where the claws add more damage to unarmed strikes in such a way that felt like without delving into errata or ruling for your own table...could potentially stack quite quickly and quite furiously. Add in the feline agility and the barbarian often was getting into an encounter dealing huge damage well before anyone else had engaged.
Basically the crux is too many players arguing that Tabaxi Claws should count as STR weapons because they're described as 'natural weapons' or demanding that they gain the extra melee damage while raging and using their claws. If you allow for that which too many player moan if you don't let them have it...the damage becomes stupid at the low levels. I literally had a group splinter up because other players felt the tabaxi barb was OP.
Now, personally, I'm not a fan of the furries as player character options. However, I think the Tabaxi Barbarian is a solid choice for a player. It is just one of those archetypes that seems to work well together and makes sense. The problems I encountered were the other players round the table. Much like Aarakocra getting player backs up because 'oh they can fly and it's not fair'... Tabaxi players in my experience thus far seem to be the tail end of some jealousy from other players.
Take what I say with pinch of salt though. There's always room for it being me as DM at fault, or just player style mismatch/character creation regret.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Tabaxi claw rules are as follows
So the player only gets one or the other. 1D4 plus strength or they get to make an unarmourd attack normally, the 2 don't stack. Because you add strength modifier have no issue with them taking rage damage but, a greatsword or other strength based weapon does a lot more damage than 1D4.
Oh, I'm aware of Rules as Written but when you have players being petulant about it and you just want to get on with things, sometimes you end up making less than sound judgement calls...or at least I did in that previous example.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Perhaps you could allow them to cast spells with a duration of "instantaneous", but no others? Then you could balance it by restricting the spell level available while raging. I don't know exactly how you would balance this, perhaps they can't use their two highest levels of spell slots?
Spells can make balancing things really tricky, so don't give up if things have a pretty rocky start or require a ton of trial and error!
Being gender-fluid and pansexual makes roleplay a lot easier!
I'm not sure why a character wants to cast spells while raging - as a bard they can use plenty of spells when they aren't raging.
The only spells they'd want to cast are bonus action spells if they are raging, otherwise they'll lose out on weapon attacks.