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.
Oh yeah, you're right! Your rage ends early if you don't attack anything on your turn too, so spending your action casting a spell would waste your rage.
Farling's got a good point here!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Being gender-fluid and pansexual makes roleplay a lot easier!
Yeah I really can't agree with this perception that rage is some how beyond the pail balance wise to be applied with spell casting. It's seems to actually be on it's own quite painful to use with spell casting without it straight up locking out concentration or casting.
i think I'd be more interested if the concept leaned into the downsides of raging as a caster. maybe they'd prefer to keep a clear head. what if they have to roll concentration to NOT fall into a betserker rage when they cast using an instrument as focus. cursed with a Lute of Vengeance?
True; it's probably more thematic than balance, but it's also possible they wanted to lock out concentration spells.
In 1e, barbarians were not allowed to use any magic, including magic items. Iirc, they got xp for destroying magic items. So you may be on to something.
But to me, the idea of someone so angry they physically hit things harder, doesn’t mesh with the kind of precision needed to cast a spell, as typically described.
In 1e, barbarians were not allowed to use any magic, including magic items. Iirc, they got xp for destroying magic items. So you may be on to something.
I'd totally forgotten that. (I never played with UA. (Or, really, much of 1e.))
But to me, the idea of someone so angry they physically hit things harder, doesn’t mesh with the kind of precision needed to cast a spell, as typically described.
Maybe v only spells could work?
I think that's probably what they were going for, but it only makes sense to a degree. For wizards, sure, but the some of the other spell casting classes make less sense. If you're invoking a supernatural entity for magic (cleric, warlock), or you just are magic (sorcerer), does rage blocking spellcasting make sense? I dunno. Maybe.
True; it's probably more thematic than balance, but it's also possible they wanted to lock out concentration spells.
In 1e, barbarians were not allowed to use any magic, including magic items. Iirc, they got xp for destroying magic items. So you may be on to something.
But to me, the idea of someone so angry they physically hit things harder, doesn’t mesh with the kind of precision needed to cast a spell, as typically described.
Maybe v only spells could work?
Right but not all spell casting is necessarily precision. There is allot of fiction where magic is quite emotional, intuitive or innate. Some classes also lead themselves to that kind of idea like the sorcerer. Like the idea that you can't cant have a wild magic barb sorcerer and cast spells while your magic goes with the wild magic rage is kind of insane to me.
Oh yeah, you're right! Your rage ends early if you don't attack anything on your turn too, so spending your action casting a spell would waste your rage.
Farling's got a good point here!
That’s not entirely accurate. Rage ends early if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then. The or in that statement is pretty important. If you have been attacked successfully and taken even a single point of damage then your rage won’t end. Leaving you free to do something other than attacking with your action. It is going to be mostly a waste to do anything else though I agree.
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.
Oh yeah, you're right! Your rage ends early if you don't attack anything on your turn too, so spending your action casting a spell would waste your rage.
Barbarians already have something to fill the need to do magic while raging: path of the wild magic.
Fin.
Not exactly a strong subclass option, it does a lot not very well. The one I am DMing at the moment tried running it to level 7 then asked me if he could swap subclass just because it really was becoming pretty useless in game
Barbarians already have something to fill the need to do magic while raging: path of the wild magic.
Fin.
Not exactly a strong subclass option, it does a lot not very well. The one I am DMing at the moment tried running it to level 7 then asked me if he could swap subclass just because it really was becoming pretty useless in game
I would agree with the assessment that it is not a strong subclass. In my opinion though, all the things that the wild magic barbarian can do are beneficial in many cases. Possible uses include all creatures of your choice within 30ft potentially takes extra damage, being able to teleport as a bonus action, potentially extra damage to one creature each turn, difficult terrain for all enemies around you, etc. Separate from the table is the ability to boost an ally’s hit chance or recover a spell slot for a caster at level 6. I would not say these are useless things.
The major drawback of this subclass in my opinion, is that all of these cool things are random and the ability to reroll on the table does not happen until level 10. Once that does happen though, you can reroll whenever you take damage (which should happen often as a barbarian) or fail a saving throw. Maybe if that was introduced at level 6, people would feel differently. My own experience with it was it was either really useful, or not useful at all in battles. I took mine to level 5 for the campaign I played in. For example I rolled the BA teleport for one battle, which would have been incredible, but we were fighting in heavy fog so I could not see anything! Hilarious and frustrating in the moment.
I've been playing with a Wild Magic Barbarian... an after playing for 20 or so sessions, the player asked if they could use a Homebrew version of the subclass that didn't really change the class, but it did add a much larger surge table (which has a few options that scale with level), which has made it a lot more fun for them, even though it hasn't been mechanically more impactful than the default table.
I've been playing with a Wild Magic Barbarian... an after playing for 20 or so sessions, the player asked if they could use a Homebrew version of the subclass that didn't really change the class, but it did add a much larger surge table (which has a few options that scale with level), which has made it a lot more fun for them, even though it hasn't been mechanically more impactful than the default table.
Any chance that expanded surge table is available anywhere?
It’s relatively easy to create one. I have a wild magic barb with a custom table of 20 options. I took a mix of good and bad ones from the sorc wild magic table, edited some and then did a mix and match. Because who doesn’t want to cast fireball centred on yourself- just got to remember to run toward the enemy before activating rage. Just in case.
I've been playing with a Wild Magic Barbarian... an after playing for 20 or so sessions, the player asked if they could use a Homebrew version of the subclass that didn't really change the class, but it did add a much larger surge table (which has a few options that scale with level), which has made it a lot more fun for them, even though it hasn't been mechanically more impactful than the default table.
Any chance that expanded surge table is available anywhere?
It’s relatively easy to create one. I have a wild magic barb with a custom table of 20 options. I took a mix of good and bad ones from the sorc wild magic table, edited some and then did a mix and match. Because who doesn’t want to cast fireball centred on yourself- just got to remember to run toward the enemy before activating rage. Just in case.
For the wild magic barb the surges cost resources as opposed to the wild magic sorcerer where it recharges a resources. So the barbarian need to be allot more weighted to positive than the sorcerer.
Barbarians already have something to fill the need to do magic while raging: path of the wild magic.
Fin.
Not really in my opinion but of course that depends what you mean by magic. All the subclasses have a type of magic, its more about specific types of magic and rage based characters. Your fire starters who when they get mad set things on fire, the rage mechanic and the barbarian desert fire aura would be great for that as would spells like flame blade be fun to use with it. Not necessary meta or particularly powerful to do so but a coherent character concept enhanced by barbarian features. 1 among many.
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.
The thought of a Barbarian with Mirror Image on is ... kinda scary. But yeah, it'd take one-round of set-up, but some folks are okay with that if it lets them do what they want.
Also, they could always get a ring of spell storing. It's TECHNICALLY not casting and it handles the concentration for the character. This could set up some lovely interactions between players.
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.
The thought of a Barbarian with Mirror Image on is ... kinda scary. But yeah, it'd take one-round of set-up, but some folks are okay with that if it lets them do what they want.
Also, they could always get a ring of spell storing. It's TECHNICALLY not casting and it handles the concentration for the character. This could set up some lovely interactions between players.
Yeah, I'd disagree on the Ring of Spell Storing there. In fact I've actively judged at tables before that concentration spells don't make sense to be able to be 'stored' in the ring. Granted, it's an example of items that are so poorly written that they do cause active debate...I've seen it as both a player and a DM...
Now granted if you're casting a spell into the ring where it's held until used it's not functioning like an additional spell slot (which I personally feel would be a better item) one could make the argument that a concentration spell would require you to keep up that concentration until the point you unleash it from the ring (a stupid idea but I've seen a player actively argue this!). My point, is that yes a DM could rule that a concentration spell cast into a Ring of Spell Storing only requires concentration while casting it into the ring...but I could also then see it requiring concentration to keep up the spell once unleashed too.
For example, Moonbeam. I'd suggest moonbeam is written that the concentration aspect of the spell exists so that the player has the ability to move the moonbeam from place to place, or to drop it entirely. There's some arcane connection that isn't present with for example fire bolt which for lack of a better term is point, cast, done. So, if you're not going to have that concentration on casting a moonbeam from the ring, can the caster still move it? Can they still drop the moonbeam?
Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but it's an example of ways in which D&D core content isn't always well thought through.
That said, a Barbarian with a ring of spell storing is a fun idea and certainly a great way to allow a non-traditional spellcaster class to get some spellcasting. I love that idea...lots!
Ring of Spell Storing says that it as if YOU cast the spell; the exceptions being "slot level, spell save DC, spell attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the original caster".
Thus the person wearing the ring would have to maintain concentration on the spell that was cast from the ring, so not an option for the raging barbarian to cast concentration spells before raging.
Oh yeah, you're right!
Your rage ends early if you don't attack anything on your turn too, so spending your action casting a spell would waste your rage.
Farling's got a good point here!
Being gender-fluid and pansexual makes roleplay a lot easier!
Yeah I really can't agree with this perception that rage is some how beyond the pail balance wise to be applied with spell casting. It's seems to actually be on it's own quite painful to use with spell casting without it straight up locking out concentration or casting.
True; it's probably more thematic than balance, but it's also possible they wanted to lock out concentration spells.
i think I'd be more interested if the concept leaned into the downsides of raging as a caster. maybe they'd prefer to keep a clear head. what if they have to roll concentration to NOT fall into a betserker rage when they cast using an instrument as focus. cursed with a Lute of Vengeance?
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!
In 1e, barbarians were not allowed to use any magic, including magic items. Iirc, they got xp for destroying magic items. So you may be on to something.
But to me, the idea of someone so angry they physically hit things harder, doesn’t mesh with the kind of precision needed to cast a spell, as typically described.
Maybe v only spells could work?
I'd totally forgotten that. (I never played with UA. (Or, really, much of 1e.))
I think that's probably what they were going for, but it only makes sense to a degree. For wizards, sure, but the some of the other spell casting classes make less sense. If you're invoking a supernatural entity for magic (cleric, warlock), or you just are magic (sorcerer), does rage blocking spellcasting make sense? I dunno. Maybe.
Right but not all spell casting is necessarily precision. There is allot of fiction where magic is quite emotional, intuitive or innate. Some classes also lead themselves to that kind of idea like the sorcerer. Like the idea that you can't cant have a wild magic barb sorcerer and cast spells while your magic goes with the wild magic rage is kind of insane to me.
Barbarians already have something to fill the need to do magic while raging: path of the wild magic.
Fin.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
That’s not entirely accurate. Rage ends early if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then. The or in that statement is pretty important. If you have been attacked successfully and taken even a single point of damage then your rage won’t end. Leaving you free to do something other than attacking with your action. It is going to be mostly a waste to do anything else though I agree.
What if you cast a spell that attacked something?
Not exactly a strong subclass option, it does a lot not very well. The one I am DMing at the moment tried running it to level 7 then asked me if he could swap subclass just because it really was becoming pretty useless in game
I would agree with the assessment that it is not a strong subclass. In my opinion though, all the things that the wild magic barbarian can do are beneficial in many cases. Possible uses include all creatures of your choice within 30ft potentially takes extra damage, being able to teleport as a bonus action, potentially extra damage to one creature each turn, difficult terrain for all enemies around you, etc. Separate from the table is the ability to boost an ally’s hit chance or recover a spell slot for a caster at level 6. I would not say these are useless things.
The major drawback of this subclass in my opinion, is that all of these cool things are random and the ability to reroll on the table does not happen until level 10. Once that does happen though, you can reroll whenever you take damage (which should happen often as a barbarian) or fail a saving throw. Maybe if that was introduced at level 6, people would feel differently. My own experience with it was it was either really useful, or not useful at all in battles. I took mine to level 5 for the campaign I played in. For example I rolled the BA teleport for one battle, which would have been incredible, but we were fighting in heavy fog so I could not see anything! Hilarious and frustrating in the moment.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I've been playing with a Wild Magic Barbarian... an after playing for 20 or so sessions, the player asked if they could use a Homebrew version of the subclass that didn't really change the class, but it did add a much larger surge table (which has a few options that scale with level), which has made it a lot more fun for them, even though it hasn't been mechanically more impactful than the default table.
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
It’s relatively easy to create one. I have a wild magic barb with a custom table of 20 options. I took a mix of good and bad ones from the sorc wild magic table, edited some and then did a mix and match. Because who doesn’t want to cast fireball centred on yourself- just got to remember to run toward the enemy before activating rage. Just in case.
For the wild magic barb the surges cost resources as opposed to the wild magic sorcerer where it recharges a resources. So the barbarian need to be allot more weighted to positive than the sorcerer.
Not really in my opinion but of course that depends what you mean by magic. All the subclasses have a type of magic, its more about specific types of magic and rage based characters. Your fire starters who when they get mad set things on fire, the rage mechanic and the barbarian desert fire aura would be great for that as would spells like flame blade be fun to use with it. Not necessary meta or particularly powerful to do so but a coherent character concept enhanced by barbarian features. 1 among many.
The thought of a Barbarian with Mirror Image on is ... kinda scary. But yeah, it'd take one-round of set-up, but some folks are okay with that if it lets them do what they want.
Also, they could always get a ring of spell storing. It's TECHNICALLY not casting and it handles the concentration for the character. This could set up some lovely interactions between players.
Yeah, I'd disagree on the Ring of Spell Storing there. In fact I've actively judged at tables before that concentration spells don't make sense to be able to be 'stored' in the ring. Granted, it's an example of items that are so poorly written that they do cause active debate...I've seen it as both a player and a DM...
Now granted if you're casting a spell into the ring where it's held until used it's not functioning like an additional spell slot (which I personally feel would be a better item) one could make the argument that a concentration spell would require you to keep up that concentration until the point you unleash it from the ring (a stupid idea but I've seen a player actively argue this!). My point, is that yes a DM could rule that a concentration spell cast into a Ring of Spell Storing only requires concentration while casting it into the ring...but I could also then see it requiring concentration to keep up the spell once unleashed too.
For example, Moonbeam. I'd suggest moonbeam is written that the concentration aspect of the spell exists so that the player has the ability to move the moonbeam from place to place, or to drop it entirely. There's some arcane connection that isn't present with for example fire bolt which for lack of a better term is point, cast, done. So, if you're not going to have that concentration on casting a moonbeam from the ring, can the caster still move it? Can they still drop the moonbeam?
Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but it's an example of ways in which D&D core content isn't always well thought through.
That said, a Barbarian with a ring of spell storing is a fun idea and certainly a great way to allow a non-traditional spellcaster class to get some spellcasting. I love that idea...lots!
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.
Ring of Spell Storing says that it as if YOU cast the spell; the exceptions being "slot level, spell save DC, spell attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the original caster".
Thus the person wearing the ring would have to maintain concentration on the spell that was cast from the ring, so not an option for the raging barbarian to cast concentration spells before raging.