Does the Wounded Rage feat allow a barbarian to Rage even while fatigued? It makes no mention of any such limitation and instead seems to simply state "you rage" regardless of other factors beyond the initiating trigger.
If the feat specificity doesn't override the general limitations of rage, then what good is it now that Quick-Tempered allows you to start every combat with Rage as a free action?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does it still have the same trigger?
Trigger: You take damage and are capable of entering a rage.
In any case, I would probably treat it as a subordinate action - which doesn't specifically call out restrictions on an action, just traits and effects. But I still consider it RAI that you can't use an action as a subordinate action if you can't use the action due to one of its restrictions.
Does it still have the same trigger?
Trigger: You take damage and are capable of entering a rage.
Yes, the trigger wording appears unchanged.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK.
So why would that not answer the question? If you are fatigued you are not able to rage. So you don't meet the requirements of the trigger for Wounded Rage.
The value of Wounded Rage has gone down noticeably with the ability to Rage as a free action at the start of battle. The remaining benefit is that you could do it before your first turn if and when you take damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK.
So why would that not answer the question? If you are fatigued you are not able to rage. So you don't meet the requirements of the trigger for Wounded Rage.
The value of Wounded Rage has gone down noticeably with the ability to Rage as a free action at the start of battle. The remaining benefit is that you could do it before your first turn if and when you take damage.
Yeah, it's of very, very dubious use. I could see people using it to cycle Furious Finish strikes, banking on creatures activating your Rage for you out of turn so you dont need to waste actions doing so. But FF makes you fatigued, so it doesn't work.
And as you pointed out, it's useless RAW for what we would assume to be its intended purpose (enter a Rage when you're lower in initiative) because you have no Reactions until you take your first turn. It's essentially a dead weight feat through and through.
As for the OP though: no, Wounded Rage doesn't let you enter a Rage when you're fatigued.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok. So why would that not answer the question?
It. Does. I simply overlooked the line. (>_<;)
(Since there isn't a master errata document anywhere, my brain is on the constant lookout for Remaster changes, and so sometimes there are false positives.)
In any case, I would probably treat it as a subordinate action - which doesn't specifically call out restrictions on an action, just traits and effects. But I still consider it RAI that you can't use an action as a subordinate action if you can't use the action due to one of its restrictions.
RAI, I also think that costs of a subordinate action should need to be spent as well.
For example, you couldn't say that since Reactive Transformation doesn't mention spending a focus point, that you don't need to spend a focus point when casting Untamed Form as its subordinate action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wounded Rage sounds like a decent option if you plan on not immediately raging, like if you're going for a weird spellcasting Barbarian that starts off more defensively in combat. I can't tell if that would ever be a better strategy than just going berserk, but it sounds kinda cool.
Do animal instinct barbarians still treat manufactured weapons as anathema when raging? If so, I can easily see such barbarians taking it so that they can open up with a couple of ranged weapon attacks before engaging, or being engaged by, the enemy.
They just straight up can't use weapons.
"Instinct Ability—Bestial Rage While raging, you gain your
chosen animal’s unarmed attack (or attacks), but you’re
unable to use weapons. The specific attack gained, the
damage it deals, and its traits are listed in the Animal
Instincts table. These attacks are in the brawling group.
Your Rage action gains the morph and primal traits"
They just straight up can't use weapons.
"Instinct Ability—Bestial Rage While raging, you gain your
chosen animal’s unarmed attack (or attacks), but you’re
unable to use weapons. The specific attack gained, the
damage it deals, and its traits are listed in the Animal
Instincts table. These attacks are in the brawling group.
Your Rage action gains the morph and primal traits"
Well that sucks. It used to be anathema, so consequences would be bad, but you could still do it in an emergency.
The change doesn't make much thematic sense to me. Do you lose your opposable thumbs or something?
Yeah, I agree. Even if that line is left out they don't get the scaling damage at 7th so it's already non-optimal. Barbarians are already limited enough in their action choices as it is.
They just straight up can't use weapons.
"Instinct Ability—Bestial Rage While raging, you gain your
chosen animal’s unarmed attack (or attacks), but you’re
unable to use weapons. The specific attack gained, the
damage it deals, and its traits are listed in the Animal
Instincts table. These attacks are in the brawling group.
Your Rage action gains the morph and primal traits"Well that sucks. It used to be anathema, so consequences would be bad, but you could still do it in an emergency.
The change doesn't make much thematic sense to me. Do you lose your opposable thumbs or something?
Yes.
At least in my game. The player playing a barbarian morphs hands into bear claws and head into bear head and bear jaws.
The way its written makes sense for him.
They just straight up can't use weapons.
"Instinct Ability—Bestial Rage While raging, you gain your
chosen animal’s unarmed attack (or attacks), but you’re
unable to use weapons. The specific attack gained, the
damage it deals, and its traits are listed in the Animal
Instincts table. These attacks are in the brawling group.
Your Rage action gains the morph and primal traits"Well that sucks. It used to be anathema, so consequences would be bad, but you could still do it in an emergency.
The change doesn't make much thematic sense to me. Do you lose your opposable thumbs or something?
it really funnels you into an ancestry with a natural ranged attack if you want that option.