You have to attack a hostile creature, which you aren't since these are NPC’s attitude toward you described as friendly, indifferent, or hostile. A Dev tweet also goes in that direction.
The RAW answer is yes - they can maintain rage by attacking themselves AND doing damage. However, you have to inflict damage on yourself. Just attacking yourself is not sufficient to continue raging. RAW doesn't appear to care where the source of damage comes from.
"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."
P.S. Resolution of such an action would be entirely in the hands of the DM. They may choose to allow it or not. They could choose to resolve it by making an attack roll or by having the character take some set or random amount of damage by attacking themselves. I don't like the concept of self-inflicted wounds to maintain a game mechanic but RAW it would appear to work.
I agree that if your turn ends and you have taken damage since your last turn, Rage will be maintained, wether it's dealt to yourself or by someone else. But merely attacking isn't sufficient.
The one time I dealt with this I gave the barb two options, One was he needed to make an attack roll. If he hit it auto Crit on himself since he was raging and didn't have the self control to lessen the blow. Two was he didn't try to dance around a rule and just kill the bad things.
My honest opinion, No you cant attack yourself. You in a rage state would not think of things like that. You are raging and think of only murdering your foes. Hurting yourself doesn't even come to your mind. Frankly pain doesn't exist in you mind your a ball of rage and hate for your enemies, turning them into piles of bloody goo is the only thing you want in that moment. Now with those thoughts in mind would you A) stab yourself with your two handed sword to keep your rage going OR B) run/jump/throw/or attack the nearest enemy to you to turn them into said pile of goo.....
I've come around on these cheese. At first I just saw a barbarian injuring themselves as nothing but a meta gaming use of the rules and a big cheese. But as I've come to consider it more, a barbarian running towards the next opponents in a rage state, clawing at their own chest, smashing their forehead into their shield or beating running the edge of a blade across some body part actually works with the thematics.
Honestly, I disagree with rage ending early for no attacks or damage taken anyway. I believe a rage should go for the full duration but the caveat beyond falling unconscious should be that it cannot be ended voluntarily. This gives barbarians the full benefit of their rage time but no control to temper the adrenaline already in their blood earlier to do something like cast spells they might have from a feat, item or multiclass.
The one time I dealt with this I gave the barb two options, One was he needed to make an attack roll. If he hit it auto Crit on himself since he was raging and didn't have the self control to lessen the blow. Two was he didn't try to dance around a rule and just kill the bad things.
My honest opinion, No you cant attack yourself. You in a rage state would not think of things like that. You are raging and think of only murdering your foes. Hurting yourself doesn't even come to your mind. Frankly pain doesn't exist in you mind your a ball of rage and hate for your enemies, turning them into piles of bloody goo is the only thing you want in that moment. Now with those thoughts in mind would you A) stab yourself with your two handed sword to keep your rage going OR B) run/jump/throw/or attack the nearest enemy to you to turn them into said pile of goo.....
I think the use case is when the barbarian has killed everyone around them and then the nearest next opponent is 45' away and you only have 40' of movement. The barbarian runs towards the enemy, raging, wanting to get in their attack, but ... sigh ... they reach 40', end their turn with the enemy standing just 10' away but they lose all the anger they had towards them since they couldn't quite reach them to hit them? Or the barbarian dashes, ends up standing within 5' of the opponent but still loses that flame of anger?
Having the barbarian take a damage penalty in such a case to keep their rage going for another turn so they can attack the enemy standing just outside their reach isn't that much of a stretch, especially if you think about it as ACEspinz suggested with the barbarian hitting themselves in anger and frustration at being unable to reach their enemy right NOW.
So damaging themselves is a RAW option, but as an alternative, I might also consider a barbarian not losing their rage as long as an enemy is within their reach. This would allow the barbarian to dash next to an enemy and still continue raging because they are just about to attack the enemy.
On the other hand, if the barbarian player wanted to stand around poking themselves and doing damage each round while surrounded by enemies then, as DM, I'd just say no and explain to the player that, in my game, the damage mechanic is just a stop gap to prevent the barbarian losing rage due to bad positioning or the enemies running away. If the barbarian decides to not attack a hostile opponent when they could do so, for whatever reason, the rage goes away.
P.S. This does mean that a barbarian (in my home game) could not choose to forgo an attack on a closer opponent they could attack in order to run next to an opponent farther away whom they couldn't attack - they would lose rage in that case (though there might be rule of cool or role play exceptions made).
I think the use case is when the barbarian has killed everyone around them and then the nearest next opponent is 45' away and you only have 40' of movement. The barbarian runs towards the enemy, raging, wanting to get in their attack, but ... sigh ... they reach 40', end their turn with the enemy standing just 10' away but they lose all the anger they had towards them since they couldn't quite reach them to hit them? Or the barbarian dashes, ends up standing within 5' of the opponent but still loses that flame of anger?
Not that I think the self-harm raging barbarian hypothetical is invalid, but this situation is also handled by the barbarian with a javelin. Or heck, even carrying a small rock or two for use as an improvised weapon in a pinch might get the job done.
Provided they're in range. Obviously, even a rock will suffice as a ranged attack for the situation mentioned of maintaining rage as the barbarian charges to within 5' of an opponent.
But if the enemy is sufficient distance the rock might not make it.
Even then, it irks me that a barbarian can't take a simple 6 seconds to use the dash action to charge into melee combat with the next hostile and maintain rage. That they might have to remain outside of combat and spend their action to hurt themselves or figure out a way to throw something instead of just running further towards the guy they want to cleave from neck to nuts.
I personally just rule a grace period of a single round; if they're behaving aggressively and in keeping with their rage, so pursuing combat and their next target with everything they've got, then their rage doesn't end. I'm not going to rob a player of the entire reason to play a barbar, or force them to game the mechanics and harm themselves, just because their character wasn't quite able to make it to the enemy in 6 seconds; but if they start dilly dallying with their movement/actions, or if they retreat, then their rage ends. If they're aggressively pursuing for more than a round without managing to engage the enemy or taking damage then their rage also fades, but so far I haven't had that occur yet.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
what are ways to maintain rage without enemies attacking?
You have to attack a hostile creature, which you aren't since these are NPC’s attitude toward you described as friendly, indifferent, or hostile. A Dev tweet also goes in that direction.
The RAW answer is yes - they can maintain rage by attacking themselves AND doing damage. However, you have to inflict damage on yourself. Just attacking yourself is not sufficient to continue raging. RAW doesn't appear to care where the source of damage comes from.
"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."
P.S. Resolution of such an action would be entirely in the hands of the DM. They may choose to allow it or not. They could choose to resolve it by making an attack roll or by having the character take some set or random amount of damage by attacking themselves. I don't like the concept of self-inflicted wounds to maintain a game mechanic but RAW it would appear to work.
I agree that if your turn ends and you have taken damage since your last turn, Rage will be maintained, wether it's dealt to yourself or by someone else. But merely attacking isn't sufficient.
The one time I dealt with this I gave the barb two options, One was he needed to make an attack roll. If he hit it auto Crit on himself since he was raging and didn't have the self control to lessen the blow. Two was he didn't try to dance around a rule and just kill the bad things.
My honest opinion, No you cant attack yourself. You in a rage state would not think of things like that. You are raging and think of only murdering your foes. Hurting yourself doesn't even come to your mind. Frankly pain doesn't exist in you mind your a ball of rage and hate for your enemies, turning them into piles of bloody goo is the only thing you want in that moment. Now with those thoughts in mind would you A) stab yourself with your two handed sword to keep your rage going OR B) run/jump/throw/or attack the nearest enemy to you to turn them into said pile of goo.....
I've come around on these cheese. At first I just saw a barbarian injuring themselves as nothing but a meta gaming use of the rules and a big cheese. But as I've come to consider it more, a barbarian running towards the next opponents in a rage state, clawing at their own chest, smashing their forehead into their shield or beating running the edge of a blade across some body part actually works with the thematics.
Honestly, I disagree with rage ending early for no attacks or damage taken anyway. I believe a rage should go for the full duration but the caveat beyond falling unconscious should be that it cannot be ended voluntarily. This gives barbarians the full benefit of their rage time but no control to temper the adrenaline already in their blood earlier to do something like cast spells they might have from a feat, item or multiclass.
I think the use case is when the barbarian has killed everyone around them and then the nearest next opponent is 45' away and you only have 40' of movement. The barbarian runs towards the enemy, raging, wanting to get in their attack, but ... sigh ... they reach 40', end their turn with the enemy standing just 10' away but they lose all the anger they had towards them since they couldn't quite reach them to hit them? Or the barbarian dashes, ends up standing within 5' of the opponent but still loses that flame of anger?
Having the barbarian take a damage penalty in such a case to keep their rage going for another turn so they can attack the enemy standing just outside their reach isn't that much of a stretch, especially if you think about it as ACEspinz suggested with the barbarian hitting themselves in anger and frustration at being unable to reach their enemy right NOW.
So damaging themselves is a RAW option, but as an alternative, I might also consider a barbarian not losing their rage as long as an enemy is within their reach. This would allow the barbarian to dash next to an enemy and still continue raging because they are just about to attack the enemy.
On the other hand, if the barbarian player wanted to stand around poking themselves and doing damage each round while surrounded by enemies then, as DM, I'd just say no and explain to the player that, in my game, the damage mechanic is just a stop gap to prevent the barbarian losing rage due to bad positioning or the enemies running away. If the barbarian decides to not attack a hostile opponent when they could do so, for whatever reason, the rage goes away.
P.S. This does mean that a barbarian (in my home game) could not choose to forgo an attack on a closer opponent they could attack in order to run next to an opponent farther away whom they couldn't attack - they would lose rage in that case (though there might be rule of cool or role play exceptions made).
Not that I think the self-harm raging barbarian hypothetical is invalid, but this situation is also handled by the barbarian with a javelin. Or heck, even carrying a small rock or two for use as an improvised weapon in a pinch might get the job done.
Grob angry! Grob throw rock!
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Provided they're in range. Obviously, even a rock will suffice as a ranged attack for the situation mentioned of maintaining rage as the barbarian charges to within 5' of an opponent.
But if the enemy is sufficient distance the rock might not make it.
Even then, it irks me that a barbarian can't take a simple 6 seconds to use the dash action to charge into melee combat with the next hostile and maintain rage. That they might have to remain outside of combat and spend their action to hurt themselves or figure out a way to throw something instead of just running further towards the guy they want to cleave from neck to nuts.
I personally just rule a grace period of a single round; if they're behaving aggressively and in keeping with their rage, so pursuing combat and their next target with everything they've got, then their rage doesn't end. I'm not going to rob a player of the entire reason to play a barbar, or force them to game the mechanics and harm themselves, just because their character wasn't quite able to make it to the enemy in 6 seconds; but if they start dilly dallying with their movement/actions, or if they retreat, then their rage ends. If they're aggressively pursuing for more than a round without managing to engage the enemy or taking damage then their rage also fades, but so far I haven't had that occur yet.