Looking at the Path of the Beast Barb, I'm seeing it as behind the damage curve so I want to double-check the mechanics.
The Bite does 1D8 damage (typical battle ax or longsword) but you regain HP with one attack so I can see that balancing against doing more damage with a great ax or great sword.
The Tail is a defensive measure, adding to your AC. This uses a reaction and your hands are free to attack as normal. This looks good to me.
Claws are the problem. You do 1D6 base damage, plus your Str mod as usual, but your hands have to be empty i.e. no weapons. You gain 1 additional attack if you take an Attack Action with your claws. No offense but this sucks. A typical Barb (if there IS such a thing) will start out with 1D8 damage at a minimum and they can go to a D12 or 2D6. Having one additional attack at a D6+5 max doesn't compensate for the lower damage cap with the additional die. There is no mention of off-hand attacking for another D6 which would make sense as a Bonus Action. Barbs don't get Fighting Styles so to even GET two-weapon Fighting you have to dip 1 level of Fighter.
In short, why would ANYONE choose the Claw option? Please help me out to see if I'm missing some mechanical benefit to this class. Thanks in advance.
Conclusion, the reason to use claws is for the extra damage. Not perfect for every build (smaller crit damage and no supportive feats for example), but is better than normal weapon damage. Also, only 1 hand needs to be empty, so shield can be used for more AC than with 2-handed weapons. So 2 reasons to use it AC and damage.
Conclusion, the reason to use claws is for the extra damage. Not perfect for every build (smaller crit damage and no supportive feats for example), but is better than normal weapon damage. Also, only 1 hand needs to be empty, so shield can be used for more AC than with 2-handed weapons. So 2 reasons to use it AC and damage.
So the only drawback is that there are no Feats (like GWM or Sharpshooter) to trade to-hit for damage.
While there are no feats to increase your static damage (i.e. Great Weapon Master) you could take the Dual Weilder Feat for a +1 bonus to AC and you would be able to make 1 additional attack as a bonus action.
While there are no feats to increase your static damage (i.e. Great Weapon Master) you could take the Dual Weilder Feat for a +1 bonus to AC and you would be able to make 1 additional attack as a bonus action.
The problem with that is two-weapon fighting requires you to be "holding/weilding" 2 "different" weapons. This arguably does not meet either of those requirements.
They do at least count as martial weapons, not natural weapons, so that is 1 hurdle down. And 1 could argue (just as I did) that each claw is 1 weapon, so that is 2 hurdles. Now you just need to convince your DM that you are holding your claws.
And even if you do convince the DM, you give up 1 AC (possibly including additional magic shield AC), a feat, and a bonus action to get this 1 extra attack.
While there are no feats to increase your static damage (i.e. Great Weapon Master) you could take the Dual Weilder Feat for a +1 bonus to AC and you would be able to make 1 additional attack as a bonus action.
Dual Wielder requires you to be holding weapons-- natural weapons and martial arts do not apply, lest the lizardfolk, tabaxi, or the monk gets to run around with a permanent +1 bonus to AC and availability to offhand attack since declawing the tabaxi probably isn't going to be something to occur in the campaign and neither is beheading the lizardfolk or chopping off all of the monk's limbs, at least not with the intent that they live.
Looking at the Path of the Beast Barb, I'm seeing it as behind the damage curve so I want to double-check the mechanics.
The Bite does 1D8 damage (typical battle ax or longsword) but you regain HP with one attack so I can see that balancing against doing more damage with a great ax or great sword.
The Tail is a defensive measure, adding to your AC. This uses a reaction and your hands are free to attack as normal. This looks good to me.
Claws are the problem. You do 1D6 base damage, plus your Str mod as usual, but your hands have to be empty i.e. no weapons. You gain 1 additional attack if you take an Attack Action with your claws. No offense but this sucks. A typical Barb (if there IS such a thing) will start out with 1D8 damage at a minimum and they can go to a D12 or 2D6. Having one additional attack at a D6+5 max doesn't compensate for the lower damage cap with the additional die. There is no mention of off-hand attacking for another D6 which would make sense as a Bonus Action. Barbs don't get Fighting Styles so to even GET two-weapon Fighting you have to dip 1 level of Fighter.
In short, why would ANYONE choose the Claw option? Please help me out to see if I'm missing some mechanical benefit to this class. Thanks in advance.
IDK. Lets do the math. Lets assume you started with 16 STR and put 2 more into it at level 4.
So at level 3, 1d12 weapon while raging: 1d12+5 (11.5)
Level 3, claws (rage required): 2d6+10 (17)
Level 5 (extra attack), 1d12 weapon, raging: 2d12+12 (25)
Level 5, claws, rage: 3d6+18 (28.5)
Conclusion, the reason to use claws is for the extra damage. Not perfect for every build (smaller crit damage and no supportive feats for example), but is better than normal weapon damage. Also, only 1 hand needs to be empty, so shield can be used for more AC than with 2-handed weapons. So 2 reasons to use it AC and damage.
So the only drawback is that there are no Feats (like GWM or Sharpshooter) to trade to-hit for damage.
As far as I can see.
While there are no feats to increase your static damage (i.e. Great Weapon Master) you could take the Dual Weilder Feat for a +1 bonus to AC and you would be able to make 1 additional attack as a bonus action.
The problem with that is two-weapon fighting requires you to be "holding/weilding" 2 "different" weapons. This arguably does not meet either of those requirements.
They do at least count as martial weapons, not natural weapons, so that is 1 hurdle down. And 1 could argue (just as I did) that each claw is 1 weapon, so that is 2 hurdles. Now you just need to convince your DM that you are holding your claws.
And even if you do convince the DM, you give up 1 AC (possibly including additional magic shield AC), a feat, and a bonus action to get this 1 extra attack.
Dual Wielder requires you to be holding weapons-- natural weapons and martial arts do not apply, lest the lizardfolk, tabaxi, or the monk gets to run around with a permanent +1 bonus to AC and availability to offhand attack since declawing the tabaxi probably isn't going to be something to occur in the campaign and neither is beheading the lizardfolk or chopping off all of the monk's limbs, at least not with the intent that they live.