This is something I would ask your DM. For my players who use both weapons and magic (paladins, or multiclassers) I allow them to cast spells through their weapons, but they have to make two different attack rolls, one for the weapon and one for the spell.
This is something I would ask your DM. For my players who use both weapons and magic (paladins, or multiclassers) I allow them to cast spells through their weapons, but they have to make two different attack rolls, one for the weapon and one for the spell.
That has the potential to make spellcasters overpowered. Depending on the weapon that's up to an extra 2d6 on top of a spell.
Granted a lot depends on if the spell prevents more than one attack per round.
It does make spellcasters a bit OP. But I dont have a single player who doesnt use some type of magic. My party consists of a fighter/paladin (eldritch knight and vengeance), sorcerer rogue, warlock rogue, wizard cleric, and wizard druid. We're fans of multiclassing here. The rule has actually balanced out combat damage, at least in my games. I also don't let them use item features AND a spell at the same time. Its an attack + item spell or personal spell. And only instant casts that do not require concentration.
But remember, if they can cast and use weapons at once, so can the baddies. Combat got real bloody, real quick. Very entertaining for me, moderately traumatizing my group.
I feel like the fact that your entire party multiclassed into spellcasters and felt the need to do so is proof for how overpowered it made the spellcasters and everyone else had to multiclass to keep up.
If thats how you want to take it, thats fine. I had them start off at level 3, and no one picked a non-magic class. They multiclassed out because we needed a tank.
But this takes me back to my point of, "Ask your DM." We all do things differently. I find plain non-magic classes really boring, and most of my friends agree. We enjoy mixing things around, we enjoy experimenting, and we never play anything but custom worlds because we enjoy the experimentation and creative freedom. It depends on the group.
I also have rules for the weapon + spell thing, its not just "oh, you can cast Cold of Cone and hit him with your Life Stealer at the same time, thats ok!" The players are allowed to use magic weapons as a focus for their spells at a distance, and the warlock really enjoys shooting eldritch blast from her daggers. The only time they can hit with a weapon AND cast a spell is when the spell requires contact. I made it so that contact from the weapon counts. It also cannot be a spell that requires concentration, time to cast, or material components. The only cases where this rule has really applied so far has been Shocking Grasp, Vampiric Touch, and the Paladin smites.
And if you're interested, they were not OP at all in the beginning, and they still aren't. How it actually went down was the druid was the most overpowered of the group because he kept summoning 8 wolves every chance he got (then sat in a corner and watched), and the wizard kept falling to 0 hit points because he was a dumbass who ran right into the middle of the room because from there "I have 360 degrees I can shoot from". The rogue warlock (who multiclassed a Rogue 1, Warlock 2 right at the beginning of the game) had to pull the weight of the whole group in mele combat, and it was because of that that i made the rule on spell casting through weapons. When the other two joined us two months into the game, they started off level 7 and wanted to multiclass. Thats just how our rag-tag group works.
A lot of the touch spells do way more damage than magic weapons. You never really need a tank in D&d. A paladin, druid, and/or ranger should suffice.
Seems like the Druid was taking advantage of being able to sleep after a combat a lot so he had those spells available. Also he can still be attacked at the back, so that shouldn't be a safe spot.
Personally I would have just killed the warlock if he didn't learn his lesson.
But hey if you guys enjoy it then that's all that matters.
A barbarian is the only true tank in the game. Everyone else has roughly the same hit points and Ac.
I believe that every spellcaster can wear armor and cast spells provided they become proficient with the armor.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Add in the self healing capability of the fighter and the Cha modifier to saving throws of the paladin, and I'd say that they are far better tanks than the barbarian.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Add in the self healing capability of the fighter and the Cha modifier to saving throws of the paladin, and I'd say that they are far better tanks than the barbarian.
Potential to become a tank? Sure. But Barbarians take 1/2 damage and get a 1d12 hit points and a very good AC without the need for having to deal with the pain of not being able to stealth because of disadvantage. I'd toss fighters into the DPS category. Paladins are essentially secondary healers that I wouldn't call tanks. Yeah they get the second highest hit dice in the game, but depending on rolls the Wizard (or more likely the Druid and Ranger and Rogue) could end up with more hit points than either the fighter or the Paladin. Same with the Barbarian, its just less likely to happen. Essentially I'd only move the Barbarian into tank category because of the damage reduction and his ability to therefore take damage more so than the other classes. There isn't enough difference between a d8 and a d10 to warrant bumping up a fighter and Paladin solely because of their hit dice.
All of the classes lack any meaningful way to cause opponents to attack them and not their friends, therefore no class functions in the traditional tank role. This is partly why I only allow the Barbarian to sneak in with damage reduction capabilities.
I don't think it is meaningful to say a class is a tank if you take x, y, and z options, as those are specific builds. So maybe a fighter with x,y, and z could be considered a tank. Barbarian is the only class that without taking other options truly functions as close to a tank as D&D gets.
With disadvantage to stealth it is a horrible assumption to assume that a fighter has an AC of 19. I'm of the opinion that you are simply better off without opting for disadvantage on stealth checks than to have higher AC. IF your DM allows for group stealth checks, then maybe take the higher AC over stealth, but otherwise you probably shouldn't. The only reason you might consider the higher AC is if for some reason you simply don't/can't have a decent dex.
1) Half Damage is only when raging, and falls off if you are ever knocked unconscious or don't damage/aren't damaged by an enemy. So there are limitations to it.
2) You either use the Reckless Attack feature (thus causing you to take more damage than you otherwise would) or you ignore a class feature (paladins and fighters have full access to all their abilities, even their damage dealing ones while tanking).
3) 6.5 hitpoints vs 5.5 hit points isn't exactly game breaking: 21 total HP bonus at 20th level doesn't exactly seem groundbreaking.
4) As for a "very good AC": Barbarian's maximum AC before 20th level is 20 (with maximum Dex and Con). The likelihood of having both of those maxed out is extremely low (considering Str is the only required stat for most of the Barbarian's abilities). So, let's just say that you maxed out your Constitution and then home-brewed a Dex version of the items like Headband of Intellect or Amulet of Health that give you a 19 in Dex (that item has to be home-brewed since it doesn't exist) that leaves you at a 19 AC. A level 1 fighter with the Defense fighting style and ONLY the starting equipment has a 19 AC. If we are using the stat array system the Fighter still has a 19 AC. A Stout Halfling (oddly enough the best tank barbarian) would have a 16 Dex and a 16 Con, giving them a 16 AC. For reference sake: that is the same AC that a Life/Nature/Tempest/War Cleric, any non-defensive Fighter or Paladin build, most Monks, Rangers, and any class that has Barkskin or (for the most part) Mage Armor cast on them. Also, any cleric that decides to use a shield or ranger that decides to go Defensive will have a higher AC than that. So, the "very good AC" when looked at relative to the other classes, kinda stops being "very good" and becomes "kinda average".
5) As for lacking any meaningful way to cause opponents to attack them: Both the Paladin and Fighter can forgo 1 AC (still winding up higher than the Barbarian) to take Protection instead, which when played correctly by the DM is basically drawing the attackers to them. If that's not enough, there's the fighter's Goading Attack Maneuver. And since we're talking about Maneuvers: There's Parry which reduced the damage the fighter takes when hit, there's Evasive Footwork, which you can use to rush in and have the enemy use all of their reactions to attack you with an added 4.5 (1d8) bonus to your AC (thus lowering the likelihood of you being hit while allowing your party to move freely). There are other maneuvers that allow your party to attack for free, move freely, or have advantage (and anyone who has ever played an MMO knows that the main job of the tank is to position the enemy advantageously (and stand there and stare at a dragon/giant/whatever's crotch for 5-10 minutes while the rest of the team kills it).
6) Sure, the barbarian can take some hits (only while raging), but if we're talking about non-tanking builds, then you're looking at a typical barbarian build, then you're looking at maxing out strength first, stamina second, and that's it. You will be using a 2h weapon, meaning your AC is likely never going to go higher than 16-17 (despite proficiency with shields). Any fighter or paladin worth their salt is going to have at least an 18 AC by the time they get ahold of 1500 gold (likely 17 by the time they are done with their first or second adventure). But going back to the MMO theme: a tank is only a tank if they take the tank options. Otherwise, its just a melee damage dealer that can take a few extra hits (which btw it is more likely that the barbarian DOES get hit, based on the fact that standard point buy/stat array indicates that they'll likely have an AC closer to 14-15 for quite a few levels.).
7) Now, if you are min-maxing it and decide to point buy three 15s and three 8s, go human/stout halfling then sure, you'll have a more decent AC than you otherwise would (but even then it's only a 15-16 MAXIMUM to start). But, it's not out of the realm of possibility to say that a defensive fighter/paladin would care more about their AC than their stealthiness. There's a reason for things like Pass Without Trace and Cloak of Elvenkind to exist. As for your assumption that you are better off with better stealth checks than better AC: "Well that's just like, your opinion, man". Most of D&D is social and combat interactions. Sure, some of those can be avoided through stealth, but there's almost always a way to circumvent bad stealth checks. There's not always a way to circumvent combat. Sheer numbers-wise: I'd rather have a 10-20% lower chance of being hit than a 25% lower chance of being detected (since enemy attacks happen much more often than enemy Perception checks). Or, if you know your DM likes to put a focus on stealth, you could always just try to get Mithral Armor and have both benefits.
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
1) Limitations yes, but those limitations are most likely not going to be an every encounter thing. There is almost no time when the Barbarian isn't going to be attacking or getting attacked. I did forget about the Druid's wildshape ability, as so a Druid might be able to function as a Tank as well.
3) Assumes average hit points. If you roll, I'm not sure there is any real distinction on average between the d8s, d10s. Likewise no major difference between the d10s and d12s. I'm not sure hit points is a valid way to distinguish between the classes.
4) I don't see kinda average and very good as mutually exclusive categories. Especially if the higher AC is coming without the stealth penalty. Also remember the Barbarian can still use a shield and gain the unarmored AC.
5) Protection does not draw the attackers to attack you instead. In fact since the attack has already been declared it can't attack you instead. Certain monsters may change their target, but this isn't required. Also the act of protection might make the initial target more of a target instead of less, as it can be taken as a sign of weakness and an easy target.
6) I disagree that a Barbarian would necessarily use 2 handed weapons. That is entirely a player choice and two handed weapons don't do significantly more damage than one handed weapons.
7) Magic items not being a default and achievable only at the DMs pleasure, means its much harder to plan for their inclusion. Pass without a trace requires a druid or ranger with access to second level spells and who wants to use their spell slot to make you harder to hear. Also since it only lasts an hour, its benefit is entirely situational.
IF you had the option of an AC of 15 without stealth penalty vs AC 16 with stealth penalty, you should certainly take the AC 15. The 16 only matters if the opponent rolls a 15 on the dice. Any other number and the extra AC is irrelevant. Granted if your choice is AC 20 vs AC 15, then it would be more of a difficult choice.
Obviously if you are outside running around, stealth may not be that important. If you are trying to sneak into a building with significant gaurds/ combat means you automatically fail, then stealth is more important. (Granted you can always have extra armor specifically for these circumstances) I'm not sure if any of the classes allow for starting with Plate Armor. Maybe if you roll for gold and sink it all into armor.
I'm more inclined to say that D&D doesn't have these mmo archtypes rather than lump the Fighter and Paladin to Tank and not damage dealing.
1) Limitations yes, but those limitations are most likely not going to be an every encounter thing. There is almost no time when the Barbarian isn't going to be attacking or getting attacked. I did forget about the Druid's wildshape ability, as so a Druid might be able to function as a Tank as well.
3) Assumes average hit points. If you roll, I'm not sure there is any real distinction on average between the d8s, d10s. Likewise no major difference between the d10s and d12s. I'm not sure hit points is a valid way to distinguish between the classes.
4) I don't see kinda average and very good as mutually exclusive categories. Especially if the higher AC is coming without the stealth penalty. Also remember the Barbarian can still use a shield and gain the unarmored AC.
5) Protection does not draw the attackers to attack you instead. In fact since the attack has already been declared it can't attack you instead. Certain monsters may change their target, but this isn't required. Also the act of protection might make the initial target more of a target instead of less, as it can be taken as a sign of weakness and an easy target.
6) I disagree that a Barbarian would necessarily use 2 handed weapons. That is entirely a player choice and two handed weapons don't do significantly more damage than one handed weapons.
7) Magic items not being a default and achievable only at the DMs pleasure, means its much harder to plan for their inclusion. Pass without a trace requires a druid or ranger with access to second level spells and who wants to use their spell slot to make you harder to hear. Also since it only lasts an hour, its benefit is entirely situational.
IF you had the option of an AC of 15 without stealth penalty vs AC 16 with stealth penalty, you should certainly take the AC 15. The 16 only matters if the opponent rolls a 15 on the dice. Any other number and the extra AC is irrelevant. Granted if your choice is AC 20 vs AC 15, then it would be more of a difficult choice.
Obviously if you are outside running around, stealth may not be that important. If you are trying to sneak into a building with significant gaurds/ combat means you automatically fail, then stealth is more important. (Granted you can always have extra armor specifically for these circumstances) I'm not sure if any of the classes allow for starting with Plate Armor. Maybe if you roll for gold and sink it all into armor.
I'm more inclined to say that D&D doesn't have these mmo archtypes rather than lump the Fighter and Paladin to Tank and not damage dealing.
1) There have been plenty of times when battle scenes have shifted and the party has to hold their actions. Anytime a "Wall of <x>" spell is cast, for example. Invisibility, darkness, fear, charm person, hold person, etc... (granted the charm/fear won't work on a berserker barbarian, but most people go bear totem barbarian). Considering the mental abilities are going to be your lowest stats, it's going to be easier for those spells to affect a barbarian.
3) You have to assume average hit point rolls, otherwise the entire conversation about hit points doesn't matter. Sure, a fighter that rolls 1 every time for his hit points is gonna suck compared to a barbarian who rolls 12 every time, but by the same measure a fighter who rolls 10 every time is going to be much better than a barbarian who rolls 1 every time. That's why you use average, because you have to assume (mathematically) that for every roll, you will roll the inverse of that number (that and I always offer my players to take the average vs rolling - and they've always taken the average).
4) Average is absolutely exclusive from Very Good... like, by definition. As for the shield, the examples I gave were A) using starting equipment (which Barbarian does not have a shield offered in their starting equipment) and B) using a non-tank build. Almost every class mentioned can use a shield (with the exception of the casters and monk), AND all of those (except Ranger) have a shield as an option in their starting package. So if you are saying a barbarian can decide to use a shield, so can the rest of the classes mentioned (as well as Druids).
5) Any DM worth their salt will use this as an effective taunt-like mechanic. Perhaps the enemy will attack the target once, but after figuring out that its attacks are ineffective (or less effective) the creature will change its tactics (even beasts will go after what they perceive to be an "easier" target). Now, if the non-tank target is THAT much more dangerous or weak of a target, then a creature MIGHT continue to attack it. But, considering all the front-line fighters aren't easy targets (unless your caster is up in the mix), that's not very likely a scenario.
6) Um, aren't you the one who said that a d12 is significantly more than a d10? Considering the highest damage 1h weapons are 1d8 and a 2h weapon is 1d12 (or 2d6 if you want to go for average damage vs potential high/low damage), that's a significant difference when it's two attacks per round (+4 dpr). Unless of course you are using a versatility weapon with two hands (but that's not very barbarian-like now is it?). Again, this was you comparing non-tanks to non-tanks. Considering Barbarian doesn't get a fighting style option, there's no reason to fight with a 1h weapon unless you are also using a shield (and remember, we aren't comparing tank to tank, we're comparing non-tank to non-tank).
7) I agree that we shouldn't count magic items (though the ones I listed were both uncommon, so they should be relatively easy to find). That being said, pass without trace can be used by lore bards, trickery clerics, druids, shadow monks, rangers, and any thief rogue with a scroll/wand (though that last one requires access to a magical item, so we won't count that). However, since we're talking about ways of getting around disadvantage: any clever player can use any number of spells to distract guards, give them disadvantage, etc... Hell, if sneaking is THAT important, they can always take the armor off and stow it away (or put the fighter in the portable hole/bag of holding and THEN sneak around). And again, you're comparing a situational negative (that can be worked around) to a combat mechanic.
- And you're right, an AC of 15 vs 16 isn't that noticeable (5%), but that's just in starting equipment (not counting the shield available to fighter and paladin at first level). You'll eventually (likely very quickly) obtain at least a 17 (18 if you can find full plate makers in your campaign) by the time you get done with your first or second adventure. So, now you're comparing a 15 to a 17 and now it's 10% less likely that you will be hit (15% with full plate). Is that armor magical? Increase it by 5% for each +1. Mithral? Now you've lost the disadvantage AND have a decreased chance to be hit. These are options that simply AREN'T available to the Barbarian (and don't count towards the attunement limit - so any available option the barbarian has to increase their AC, the fighter/paladin can use IN ADDITION to the armor).
- The starting packages don't allow for plate armor, that's why I've been using the AC for chain mail in all my calculations (and then giving the stats for upgraded armor choices for when you can afford/purchase the plate armor - available probably around the same time the barbarian could buy a shield).
- D&D absolutely has the MMO archetypes (4e defined them very clearly and the 5e archetype system really made it shine), and those are based on your chosen class options. In fact, those archetypes in MMOs are actually based on the D&D classes (there's a reason the stereotypical party is Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard). You have your tanks, your damage dealers, and your healers. Like most MMOs the classes that can be tanks/healers can also be damage dealers, but (also like MMOs) your pure damage dealing classes can't be healers or as effectively tank. Paladins are the only classes that truly fit into all three (druids and clerics maybe too, because you could argue that moon druids and war clerics can perform the "tank" task somewhat well - though like barbarians I'm kinda iffy on throwing druids in because I don't like the idea of a tank that can run out of its ability to tank if you don't get to take rests).
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
1) I would say the mental abilities of fighters are roughly equal to those of a Barbarian most of the time. Of the spells listed, the Paladin is probably in the same boat. Spells are also not an every encounter thing. I'm not sure saying x class is weak against a certain set of spells makes much sense, unless you always find yourself against a mage.
3) My only issue is that by rolling hit points any class could out hp any other class and so hp are not an accurate gauge of where a specific class would fit on the scale.
4) I would say this is arbitrarily determined by what your cutoff for a good AC is. It appears mine is lower than yours.
5) I still disagree completely. The very fact that player B had to put his shield up to protect Player A is a clear signal player A is weak and can't defend himself. There is no explicit reason a monster would shift their focus to Player B. You admit that a beast would go after the easier target, which would have to be the player without the shield needing protection, not the player who has a shield and is capable of protecting someone else. I don't see the action as going one way or the other by default.
6)Over the course of a campaign in gaining hit points, yes. In terms of dealing damage no. Mainly I just don't believe it is fair to say that a Barbarian is going to use a two handed weapon. Also starting equipment is one way of starting a character, but the option exists to roll for gold. Also if you want a shield, you are going to probably find one on a dead body in the first couple of adventures. Plate Armor would be harder to come by and may be something a DM makes you wait for. (I've read discussions on when you should let your players get plate armor).
-To be honest I think 4th editions focus on the MMO archetypes is one of the reasons given why people hated 4th, at least in my experience. The Rogue doesn't fit the typical DPS position of MMOs. On average a Rogue is likely to do less damage than other classes. I think the Rogue in D&D is more of a class that shines outside of combat, something MMOs don't typically deal with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi, i have a question about my character, can a rogue make sneak attack with a ranged spell like eldritch blast?
No, Sneak attack requires that you use a weapon. The Sneak attack feature mentions this: http://www.dndbeyond.com/characters/classes/rogue#SneakAttack
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
Would a staff of fireball count as a ranged weapon?
I mean I know the answer.... I just couldn't help but ask.
You could use it as a melee weapon for sure! :P
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
Well it's definitely not a finesse weapon so melee weapon is out.
Ranged weapon. Sneak attack fireball!
For anyone curious, a weapon must actually have the ranged or finesse descriptors to actually count for a rogue's sneak attack.
At least I don't think throwing a greatsword counts lol.
This is something I would ask your DM. For my players who use both weapons and magic (paladins, or multiclassers) I allow them to cast spells through their weapons, but they have to make two different attack rolls, one for the weapon and one for the spell.
It does make spellcasters a bit OP. But I dont have a single player who doesnt use some type of magic. My party consists of a fighter/paladin (eldritch knight and vengeance), sorcerer rogue, warlock rogue, wizard cleric, and wizard druid. We're fans of multiclassing here. The rule has actually balanced out combat damage, at least in my games. I also don't let them use item features AND a spell at the same time. Its an attack + item spell or personal spell. And only instant casts that do not require concentration.
But remember, if they can cast and use weapons at once, so can the baddies. Combat got real bloody, real quick. Very entertaining for me, moderately traumatizing my group.
I feel like the fact that your entire party multiclassed into spellcasters and felt the need to do so is proof for how overpowered it made the spellcasters and everyone else had to multiclass to keep up.
If thats how you want to take it, thats fine. I had them start off at level 3, and no one picked a non-magic class. They multiclassed out because we needed a tank.
But this takes me back to my point of, "Ask your DM." We all do things differently. I find plain non-magic classes really boring, and most of my friends agree. We enjoy mixing things around, we enjoy experimenting, and we never play anything but custom worlds because we enjoy the experimentation and creative freedom. It depends on the group.
I also have rules for the weapon + spell thing, its not just "oh, you can cast Cold of Cone and hit him with your Life Stealer at the same time, thats ok!" The players are allowed to use magic weapons as a focus for their spells at a distance, and the warlock really enjoys shooting eldritch blast from her daggers. The only time they can hit with a weapon AND cast a spell is when the spell requires contact. I made it so that contact from the weapon counts. It also cannot be a spell that requires concentration, time to cast, or material components. The only cases where this rule has really applied so far has been Shocking Grasp, Vampiric Touch, and the Paladin smites.
And if you're interested, they were not OP at all in the beginning, and they still aren't. How it actually went down was the druid was the most overpowered of the group because he kept summoning 8 wolves every chance he got (then sat in a corner and watched), and the wizard kept falling to 0 hit points because he was a dumbass who ran right into the middle of the room because from there "I have 360 degrees I can shoot from". The rogue warlock (who multiclassed a Rogue 1, Warlock 2 right at the beginning of the game) had to pull the weight of the whole group in mele combat, and it was because of that that i made the rule on spell casting through weapons. When the other two joined us two months into the game, they started off level 7 and wanted to multiclass. Thats just how our rag-tag group works.
A lot of the touch spells do way more damage than magic weapons. You never really need a tank in D&d. A paladin, druid, and/or ranger should suffice.
Seems like the Druid was taking advantage of being able to sleep after a combat a lot so he had those spells available. Also he can still be attacked at the back, so that shouldn't be a safe spot.
Personally I would have just killed the warlock if he didn't learn his lesson.
But hey if you guys enjoy it then that's all that matters.
A barbarian is the only true tank in the game. Everyone else has roughly the same hit points and Ac.
I believe that every spellcaster can wear armor and cast spells provided they become proficient with the armor.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Add in the self healing capability of the fighter and the Cha modifier to saving throws of the paladin, and I'd say that they are far better tanks than the barbarian.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
1) Half Damage is only when raging, and falls off if you are ever knocked unconscious or don't damage/aren't damaged by an enemy. So there are limitations to it.
2) You either use the Reckless Attack feature (thus causing you to take more damage than you otherwise would) or you ignore a class feature (paladins and fighters have full access to all their abilities, even their damage dealing ones while tanking).
3) 6.5 hitpoints vs 5.5 hit points isn't exactly game breaking: 21 total HP bonus at 20th level doesn't exactly seem groundbreaking.
4) As for a "very good AC": Barbarian's maximum AC before 20th level is 20 (with maximum Dex and Con). The likelihood of having both of those maxed out is extremely low (considering Str is the only required stat for most of the Barbarian's abilities). So, let's just say that you maxed out your Constitution and then home-brewed a Dex version of the items like Headband of Intellect or Amulet of Health that give you a 19 in Dex (that item has to be home-brewed since it doesn't exist) that leaves you at a 19 AC. A level 1 fighter with the Defense fighting style and ONLY the starting equipment has a 19 AC. If we are using the stat array system the Fighter still has a 19 AC. A Stout Halfling (oddly enough the best tank barbarian) would have a 16 Dex and a 16 Con, giving them a 16 AC. For reference sake: that is the same AC that a Life/Nature/Tempest/War Cleric, any non-defensive Fighter or Paladin build, most Monks, Rangers, and any class that has Barkskin or (for the most part) Mage Armor cast on them. Also, any cleric that decides to use a shield or ranger that decides to go Defensive will have a higher AC than that. So, the "very good AC" when looked at relative to the other classes, kinda stops being "very good" and becomes "kinda average".
5) As for lacking any meaningful way to cause opponents to attack them: Both the Paladin and Fighter can forgo 1 AC (still winding up higher than the Barbarian) to take Protection instead, which when played correctly by the DM is basically drawing the attackers to them. If that's not enough, there's the fighter's Goading Attack Maneuver. And since we're talking about Maneuvers: There's Parry which reduced the damage the fighter takes when hit, there's Evasive Footwork, which you can use to rush in and have the enemy use all of their reactions to attack you with an added 4.5 (1d8) bonus to your AC (thus lowering the likelihood of you being hit while allowing your party to move freely). There are other maneuvers that allow your party to attack for free, move freely, or have advantage (and anyone who has ever played an MMO knows that the main job of the tank is to position the enemy advantageously (and stand there and stare at a dragon/giant/whatever's crotch for 5-10 minutes while the rest of the team kills it).
6) Sure, the barbarian can take some hits (only while raging), but if we're talking about non-tanking builds, then you're looking at a typical barbarian build, then you're looking at maxing out strength first, stamina second, and that's it. You will be using a 2h weapon, meaning your AC is likely never going to go higher than 16-17 (despite proficiency with shields). Any fighter or paladin worth their salt is going to have at least an 18 AC by the time they get ahold of 1500 gold (likely 17 by the time they are done with their first or second adventure). But going back to the MMO theme: a tank is only a tank if they take the tank options. Otherwise, its just a melee damage dealer that can take a few extra hits (which btw it is more likely that the barbarian DOES get hit, based on the fact that standard point buy/stat array indicates that they'll likely have an AC closer to 14-15 for quite a few levels.).
7) Now, if you are min-maxing it and decide to point buy three 15s and three 8s, go human/stout halfling then sure, you'll have a more decent AC than you otherwise would (but even then it's only a 15-16 MAXIMUM to start). But, it's not out of the realm of possibility to say that a defensive fighter/paladin would care more about their AC than their stealthiness. There's a reason for things like Pass Without Trace and Cloak of Elvenkind to exist. As for your assumption that you are better off with better stealth checks than better AC: "Well that's just like, your opinion, man". Most of D&D is social and combat interactions. Sure, some of those can be avoided through stealth, but there's almost always a way to circumvent bad stealth checks. There's not always a way to circumvent combat. Sheer numbers-wise: I'd rather have a 10-20% lower chance of being hit than a 25% lower chance of being detected (since enemy attacks happen much more often than enemy Perception checks). Or, if you know your DM likes to put a focus on stealth, you could always just try to get Mithral Armor and have both benefits.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
1) Limitations yes, but those limitations are most likely not going to be an every encounter thing. There is almost no time when the Barbarian isn't going to be attacking or getting attacked. I did forget about the Druid's wildshape ability, as so a Druid might be able to function as a Tank as well.
3) Assumes average hit points. If you roll, I'm not sure there is any real distinction on average between the d8s, d10s. Likewise no major difference between the d10s and d12s. I'm not sure hit points is a valid way to distinguish between the classes.
4) I don't see kinda average and very good as mutually exclusive categories. Especially if the higher AC is coming without the stealth penalty. Also remember the Barbarian can still use a shield and gain the unarmored AC.
5) Protection does not draw the attackers to attack you instead. In fact since the attack has already been declared it can't attack you instead. Certain monsters may change their target, but this isn't required. Also the act of protection might make the initial target more of a target instead of less, as it can be taken as a sign of weakness and an easy target.
6) I disagree that a Barbarian would necessarily use 2 handed weapons. That is entirely a player choice and two handed weapons don't do significantly more damage than one handed weapons.
7) Magic items not being a default and achievable only at the DMs pleasure, means its much harder to plan for their inclusion. Pass without a trace requires a druid or ranger with access to second level spells and who wants to use their spell slot to make you harder to hear. Also since it only lasts an hour, its benefit is entirely situational.
IF you had the option of an AC of 15 without stealth penalty vs AC 16 with stealth penalty, you should certainly take the AC 15. The 16 only matters if the opponent rolls a 15 on the dice. Any other number and the extra AC is irrelevant. Granted if your choice is AC 20 vs AC 15, then it would be more of a difficult choice.
Obviously if you are outside running around, stealth may not be that important. If you are trying to sneak into a building with significant gaurds/ combat means you automatically fail, then stealth is more important. (Granted you can always have extra armor specifically for these circumstances) I'm not sure if any of the classes allow for starting with Plate Armor. Maybe if you roll for gold and sink it all into armor.
I'm more inclined to say that D&D doesn't have these mmo archtypes rather than lump the Fighter and Paladin to Tank and not damage dealing.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
1) I would say the mental abilities of fighters are roughly equal to those of a Barbarian most of the time. Of the spells listed, the Paladin is probably in the same boat. Spells are also not an every encounter thing. I'm not sure saying x class is weak against a certain set of spells makes much sense, unless you always find yourself against a mage.
3) My only issue is that by rolling hit points any class could out hp any other class and so hp are not an accurate gauge of where a specific class would fit on the scale.
4) I would say this is arbitrarily determined by what your cutoff for a good AC is. It appears mine is lower than yours.
5) I still disagree completely. The very fact that player B had to put his shield up to protect Player A is a clear signal player A is weak and can't defend himself. There is no explicit reason a monster would shift their focus to Player B. You admit that a beast would go after the easier target, which would have to be the player without the shield needing protection, not the player who has a shield and is capable of protecting someone else. I don't see the action as going one way or the other by default.
6)Over the course of a campaign in gaining hit points, yes. In terms of dealing damage no. Mainly I just don't believe it is fair to say that a Barbarian is going to use a two handed weapon. Also starting equipment is one way of starting a character, but the option exists to roll for gold. Also if you want a shield, you are going to probably find one on a dead body in the first couple of adventures. Plate Armor would be harder to come by and may be something a DM makes you wait for. (I've read discussions on when you should let your players get plate armor).
-To be honest I think 4th editions focus on the MMO archetypes is one of the reasons given why people hated 4th, at least in my experience. The Rogue doesn't fit the typical DPS position of MMOs. On average a Rogue is likely to do less damage than other classes. I think the Rogue in D&D is more of a class that shines outside of combat, something MMOs don't typically deal with.