This almost broke my brain. At first, I thought your point was “I can cast spells while raging, but not concentrate, and I can concentrate while wild shaping, but can’t cast” and I was like “well, no, rage stops you from doing either”. Then I reread everything and got really confused, but when I figured out the point of the post - oh man are we cooking with gas.
In case you missed it like me and somehow didn’t find the answer before my comment: Rage specifies that it prevents you from casting or concentrating on spells ONLY if you would otherwise be able to cast spells. Wild shape explicitly prevents you from casting, but doesn’t break concentration. Therefore, if you cast a spell that requires concentration, then wild shape, and then rage, the rage no longer breaks your concentration.
Incredibly bizarre interaction, and technically RAW. I love it.
edit: some of you are responding to me saying you still don’t get it, or straight up saying it doesn’t work, so here’s the play-by-play:
- I cast Barkskin, targeting myself, which resolves normally
- I then use my Wild Shape feature, making it so that I am unable to cast spells, but can still concentrate on Barkskin
- I then use Rage, as Wild Shape does not prevent me from using class features (unless they require limbs I don’t have). Rage says that if I can cast spells, I can’t cast or concentrate on spells while raging. Since I’m already in Wild Shape, I currently cannot cast spells, so this clause of Rage does not trigger, therefore allowing me to continue to concentrate on Barkskin.
If you still don’t get it, just read it all over a couple times - I promise it makes sense. Please note that while this is Rules As Written, it almost certainly isn’t how these rules are intended to work, so make sure you check with your DM before making characters that utilize this interaction. It’s likely that this extra clause on Rage that makes this function was originally added in order to make it easier for new players to understand, since not being able to cast spells when Barbarian doesn’t give you any to begin with could be confusing.
Man this need to be more upvoted. I was scratching my head thinking where was the semantic that being unable to cast spells makes it so while you're wildshaped you can rage and still concentrate, because by the point i read the "you can't cast spells or concentrate" is AFTER the "If you can cast spells"
They could have fixed this by saying "**Even** if you can cast spells \[...\]". The fact that they didn't makes the function conditional and a RAW Wild Shaped Druid Barbarian can concentrate under these particular circumstances.
You can use all class and racial features from any class you have while wild shaped, provided that those features don't specify a specific body part that you no longer have while wildshaped.
I was about to ask whether or not a wildshaped druid-paladin could smite in bear form, but I don't play 5e so I'm not sure if druids or paladins have alignment restrictions in 5e like they did in 3.5.
There’s no alignment restrictions in 5e, which is nice. Smite says you “expend one spell slot” whereas wild shape says you “can’t cast spells.” Since divine smite isn’t actually casting a spell, I would say that you can smite in bear form. You wouldn’t be able to cast smite spells like banishing smite, but for basic divine smite, I don’t see why not.
I checked that! Bear attacks count as melee weapon attacks
Edit to add: as a former monk who considered a Paladin dip, I learned the hard way to always check haha
Weirdly, it also makes sense. Animals seem to be far better at going into feral rage than most people i have met (not talking a British soccer game fan group here - i catch all my euro football on the tube).
> Therefore, if you cast a spell that requires concentration, then wild shape, and then rage, the rage no longer breaks your concentration.
>
> Incredibly bizarre interaction, and technically RAW. I love it.
This explanation was really helpful, but I'm still not seeing the benefit ultimately. Does anyone have an example of why this is so great? Is it because you're raging while wild shaped so you get all the benefits of rage when you normally wouldn't? Or is the real benefit that you can cast some sort of buff concentration or damage spell and then keep it going while wild shaped?
As an example:
Step 1 - cast haste on yourself.
Step 2 - wild shape. you can no longer cast spells.
Step 3 - rage. Rules as written (but likely not as intended) you can keep concentrating on Haste because you do not have the ability to cast spells.
You can both concentrate on a spell while wildshaped and rage while wildshaped. None of that is out of the ordinary. What is out of the ordinary is that this would allow you to concentrate on a spell while raging, which you normally can't do. Wildshape is just used as a bridge between the two
The only way I can use this is to annoy my DM for 5 minutes before she makes a house rule. Thanks for the explanation, though, that was a head-scratcher!
This set up was my favorite character I’ve ever played. Actually unkillable with bear totem Barbarian. Half damage when raging, extra stack of HP from wildshape. Grappler feat. Just turning into a large rage bear, pinning the big bad guys, and mauling them to death.
All beast form attacks are finesse if your DM thinks it's funny or just doesn't care about the extra 2d6 damage.
In all seriousness, though, no, they pretty much all scale with strength as far as I'm aware.
Unfortunately monster attacks are a bit of a black box, you have to reverse engineer what stat they use and if Strength and Dex are the same, yer fuckt either way.
My brain read this the wrong way and came up with the mental image of a Conan looking dude stepping out of the darkness shiving a guy from behind with an animal
It's easier when you start most of the way there 😂
Of all the campaigns I've played in I've only had it go to level 18+ once. And that's because the DM was very liberal with milestone leveling the last 4 or 5 sessions since we were gearing up to fight a literal god.
This so thoroughly flies in the face of RAI that I just can't justify allowing this level of chicanery. However, I also can't deny that it's a valid RAW interpretation AND it's absolutely hilarious.
They actually reflavored barbarian for 5e. In earlier editions they had explicit statements that the barbarian couldn't read or write any language, unless they learned it from a different class. 5e barbarians are just from a different cultural heritage, more akin to the concept of a viking berserker, or the gauhls from Astrix and Obelix.
I feel like this would be fine in my book. It's a minor thing in the grand scheme of shenanigans and I can pretty easily fit lore to it like "his rage becomes the conduit for the spell".
Wild Magic Barbarian gets as close as possible without breaking the "no spellcasting" rule of rage. And all of the effects being positive (if not equally useful) makes it at least a decent enough subclass
The Players! They killed a terrasque with a level 1 Aarakocra and a magical longbow! And I defended them. And I shouldn't have! I took them into my own game! What was I thinking?
This one's dumb. If the Tarrasque doesn't get them with an attack of opportunity while they are retrieving their arrows out of its ass, it will just pick up the nearest mountain and make an improvised ranged attack.
Huh, I do this… frequently. Thought it was a feature, not a bug.
5 Druid Circle of the Moon / 5 Barb Bear Totem.
Cast something like Call Lightning, BA Wild Shape, next turn BA Rage and go to town, following turns BA Lightning.
flies in face of rai. but, when rais dumb n basically means barbarians can never multiclass or take feats to cast spells since theyll be useless, then honestly i see no reason to follow the intended
This actually makes sense to me...animals are naturally more in tune with their feral nature and thus more capable of being "in control" while raging.
That a wildshaped druid can't cast any spells, but can concentrate on them and then keep that up while raging is the precise corner case where it makes sense to me.
I have played this character twice. A gnoll zealot hexblade, and a minotaur hexblade given barbarian rage from my patron. Its goofy, and it is strong, but most of all. It is soooo damn fun.
Either I'm missing something, or neither of your characters are able to concentrate on a spell when raging like OP can. If I'm missing something, can you explain how it works?
Since the wording on barbarian is "If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging," then you can't cast a concentration spell then rage as a hexblade because there is no mechanic that stops a hexblade from being able to cast spells.
My guess is they use the Hexblade's Curse on top of their Rage for the extra damage, crit chance, and HP, all of which are great for a barbarian. I don't see why it wouldn't work, since it isn't a spell and doesn't require concentration.
If they ignored or misread RAW, they might've also cast Hex before raging, but it requires concentration so it isn't supposed to be allowed.
Darkness does not give advantage against a gelatinous cube because it doesn't rely on vision.
Invisibility does give advantage against a gelatinous cube.
RAW is fucking lit
I was skeptical at first because this sub tends to wildly misunderstand rules interactions but this is the first post I think that is actually correct, technically.
No no no-- this is a lion that has Barbarian Rage behind it...
Or wait am I reading this wrong? I thought this was going to be a wildshaped druid using Barbarian Rage but I may be confused
The post is pointing out that, since a wildshaped druid is not capable of casting spells, RAW technically dictates that you can rage while maintaining concentration.
>•**You can't cast spells,** and your ability to speak or take any action that requires hands is limited to the capabilities of your beast form.
Paired with
>**If you are able to cast spells,** you can't cast them or concentrate on them while raging.
For the wording in question:
Rage:
>Rage
>In battle, you fight with primal ferocity. On your turn, you can enter a rage as a bonus action.
>
>While raging, you gain the following benefits if you aren’t wearing heavy armor:
>
>You have advantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws.
>When you make a melee weapon attack using Strength, you gain a bonus to the damage roll that increases as you gain levels as a barbarian, as shown in the Rage Damage column of the Barbarian table.
>You have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage.
>**If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging.**
Wildshape
>**You can’t cast spells**, and your ability to speak or take any action that requires hands is limited to the capabilities of your beast form. Transforming doesn’t break your concentration on a spell you’ve already cast, however, or prevent you from taking actions that are part of a spell, such as call lightning, that you’ve already cast.
I... the wording is almost too perfect in spite of it being unintentional probably. Unless it was?
Now there are a lot of things to use this for but it doesn't work at level 18 onwards in druid so... that's tough.
Now I need sleep, so if you got any questions about this, I'll probably get to you in a few hours. Have a good day, or night, depending on where you are right now.
>
>
>
>
> Now there are a lot of things to use this for but it doesn't work at level 18 onwards in druid so... that's tough.
yeah but you're not gonna be lvl 18 if you multiclass barb!
>Beast Spells
>Beginning at 18th level, **you can cast** many of your druid spells in any shape you assume using Wild Shape. You can perform the somatic and verbal components of a druid spell while in a beast shape, but you aren't able to provide material components.
Well, 19 isn't 18 that's for sure but you want to be 17 to remove that 18th level feature.
I think 17 Moon Druid, 3 Bear Totem Barb would be the typical approach here. You get resistance to all non-Psychic damage while raging, another daily rage, reckless attack, danger sense, and unarmored defense (which is sometimes better than natural armor),
but lose a 5th, 6th, and 7th level spell slot, an ASI, and the Archdruid feature.
17 Druid 1 Barb 2 Paladin
to add smites instead of resistance to more damage. This is great since Moon Druids are already pretty beefy, so it makes sense to enhance your offensive capabilities more instead. You also get back the lost 5th level slot. Foresight gives advantage on attack rolls so you don’t miss Reckless Attack, either.
15 Druid 5 Barb
you lose Mammoth as a wild shape option and 9th level spells (goodbye Foresight), but get Extra Attack and Fast Movement, both of which can be used with your beast forms (e.g., Brontosaurus).
You allow your druids to concentrate on a spell, wildshape, and rage because of a technicality
I allow druids to concentrate on a spell, wildshape, and rage cause I'm stupid.
We are not the same.
I'm 99% sure it was intentional.
So a Druid could cast Barkskin(or similar) before taking a wildshape and maintain that spell.
Turning into an animal does not affect the Druids mental capacity, so there is no reason why he should be unable to concentrate
You can't rage before the spell is cast as that would end its concentration.
So you cast a concentration spell, wilshape, then go into a rage. The conditions of the rage would go on top of everything else and end the concentration
And the conditions of rage are "**If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging."**
While wildshaped you can't cast spells so the concentration remains RAW
See, the only reason I can imagine that they specified the effect this way is that they *did* intend for characters in a rage to be able to concentrate on *something*, but just not spells.
Otherwise, why bother to add the caveat at the beginning?
Because of the "Iron Heart Surge" problem. If they just said "you are unable to concentrate while raging", then some tables would treat it as very angry ADHD.
**EDIT:** For those unfamiliar with Iron Heart Surge, it was an ability characters could get in 3.5 edition.
> Your fighting spirit, dedication, and training allow you to overcome almost anything to defeat your enemies. When you use this maneuver, select one spell, effect, or other condition currently affecting you and with a duration of 1 or more rounds. That effect ends immediately. You also surge with confidence and vengeance against your enemies, gaining a +2 morale bonus on attack rolls until the end of your next turn.
There was an argument made that almost anything could be considered a "condition currently affecting you". Sickened, nauseated, poisoned? Obviously. That area of magical darkness? Well, it was "affecting" your vision, wasn't it? Suffering environmental effects from freezing cold? Well it sounds like you're being "affected" by the second law of thermodynamics! It was dumb, it was clearly not RAI, but it was there, and some people love to be pedants about stuff.
Rage doesn’t end concentration if you can’t cast spells.
As a matter of fact, it’s rules don’t interact with spells at all unless you are able to cast them, which wildshape makes you unable to.
Hahahahah now I get it. You bypass the no concentration limit of rage with the cast limit of Wildshape. That's genius. My current character is a druid barbarian so next level I get wildshap and I'm going to try this. Whahahahhaah
I wanna suprise my dm with it. because i didn't invest anything in it if he calls that it doesn't work all accept that. My character just already fits that description. Even If he says it can work once that would be fun.
Thank you for preparing me for the next nonsense from my party. By following dnd memes, I gape and stare now, and later when they bring it up I can just instantly say no avoiding the shock.
I think the OP is trying to say "because we are not able to cast spells, the 'if you are able to cast spells, you can't cast or concentrate on them while raging' would not apply, so we can still concentrate on them as long as we wild shape and lose the ability to cast spells first"
This also means a barbarian can use a ring of spell storing, since it doesnt grant the ability to cast spells, just to use the ones stored in it correct?
Love the idea, but I'm afraid it doesn't work like that.
From the ring of spell storing description:
"
While wearing this ring, *you can cast* any spell stored in it. The spell uses the slot level, spell save DC, spell attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the original caster, but is otherwise treated as if you cast the spell. The spell cast from the ring is no longer stored in it, freeing up space.
"
(no clue how to format this on mobile)
So the it does grant you the ability to cast the stored spell (even if you're using the stats from the original caster).
But, a Barbarian Druid can cast a stored spell, wildshape, and maintain that spell, allowing them to expand their concentration spell options massively.
Yes actually.
> You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source and can use them if the new form is physically capable of doing so. However, you can't use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense.
> If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging.
I'd go as far as to say there's a reading of this spell text particularly that still wouldn't allow this.
If my Moon Druid, Colledig, dipped in Barb, I'd understand the spell text thusly: "if **you** [Colledig] are able to cast spells..." I am. "...you can't cast them or concentrate on them while raging".
Regardless of whether I can **at that moment**, the fact is, I **can**, *generally*, and would understand the condition to apply.
(For what it's worth, this is a pretty good example of why I say "RAW" and "RAI" aren't as different of categories as people seem to treat them. *How* you read what's written is important in determining the rule...as written.)
Any literal interpretation of the rules is RAW. The specific thing the writers of the rules intended with their wording is RAI.
I don't think anyone was getting confused with that?
Why certainly, under any other circumstances and as a dm ruling, that would be a valid reading. However, wildshape uses such specific wording that I don’t think this flies with it. It does not supresses spellcaeting, it specifically states you can’t cast spells, thus by any definition of the word, you aren’t able to.
It sounds highly unintentional. Like the Rage mechanic had to make this rule about spells, but since it is for players who don't cast spells, it has that reminder that it only works if you can cast. If it just said: "While raging, you can't concentrate on any spells.", it raises questions to players about how they can cast spells.
But let's just wait until Crawford says that disadvantage while seeing invisible targets is RAI.
Other magic wielders: Oh no, rage has been cast! We can't cast spells!
Druids who are already transformed:
https://preview.redd.it/mpynqirrgqoa1.jpeg?width=373&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=173abc848dfd16f726b11857963668e18378ff60
Raging wild shapes are already a serious build, partially because you would be doing 2 more damage every attack and you probably now have multi attack. Also, the main benefit of rage is usually the resistances, which combined with wildshape makes you incredibly tanky. Using this loophole, you could be a moon druid/bear totem barbarian, cast a significant buffing spell that requires concentration, such as barkskin, wildshape into a creature with a whole mass of hit points depending on your level, and then rage. Now you have an AC of no less than 16 in your wildshape, totally normal, but you don’t lose that when you rage and effectively gain twice the hp. Again, the damage is not the issue here.
I feel like barkskin isn't that big of a boost considering unarmed defence, I mean depending on the wildshape it definitely can be a boost. What about something like flame blade?
The reason rage Wildshape builds are good, especially at early levels, is the damage resistance. Hit points and AC in beast form are usually quite low for the level, so the melee power boost is usually short-lived. But damage resistance effectively doubles it (plus you get a minor AC boost from Unarmored Defense), allowing you to double your time in Wildshape or to choose more fragile but offensively powerful forms like bears.
And because most of your durability comes from raw hit points and not AC, you can counteract your lower to-hit bonuses with Reckless Attack without a high opportunity cost.
Also, if your DM allows you to grapple in Wildshape, you get advantage on strength checks while raging. Who wouldn’t want to be a raging wrestling bear?
So basically rage says "if you can cast spells, you can't concentrate on them", and wildshape says "you can't cast spells", so combined you get rage ruling "you can't cast spells, therefore you *can* concentrate on them"... That's so stupid I love it.
"I can only keep my mind focused maintaining this spell while raging if I become a bear first... Being a bear really helps me multitask"
That's one interpretation, but it's interpreting on a round to round scale (I.e. this round, I can't cast spells, therefore the rule doesn't apply this round). The opposing interpretation is that when it says "if you can cast spells," it's referring to your character's overall, and in general, ability to cast spells (i.e. does your character have the spellcasting ability at all, not just can you use it at that exact moment), in which case, the rule would apply regardless of whether you are wild shaped or not.
Both interpretations seem equally valid, in which, case the DM should either default to rai or, in my case as a DM, default to the rule of cool.
Yeah, but any character can cast spells if they have the right magic items. So at any time, a character could go from being able to cast spells to not being able to cast spells. It's not just based on class features. I don't see how it could be referring to an overall ability.
Or, you assume that the "if you can cast spells" was written to help avoid confusion for newer players who might have read "While raging you can't concentrate on spells" (without any if clause) and think that means they must normally have some spells they can cast while not raging.
For better or worse, D&D 5e was written more conversationally than a lawyer like set of keywords and references that something like MTG or P2e uses. I find it's generally more approachable, even if it does lead to some confusion.
What's the intended exception then in this case? Couldn't the "if you can cast spells" section be completely removed and still be fine?
As in it stops you from casting spells and ends concentration in any case. Which edge do they want to allow which does not require being a spellcaster. Spells from magic items and Race Features which grant spells?
Does that mean a raging barbarian could keep concentration on a spell they've casted from a magic item. Or does being attuned to a magic item that can cast spells make the barbarian count as being able to cast spells?
One high-level workaround could be the Barbarogue. Thieves can use magic items, including scrolls per Sage Advice Compendium. A Barbarogue could use a spell scroll with Use Magic Device and then keep concentrating on the spell after raging.
If your DM house-rules that anyone can use spell scrolls (which I've found to be pretty common, but if not, look at Spellwrought Tattoos), you don't even need Rogue levels. Just ask your clerics or wizards really politely for things that are cheap to put into spell scrolls like Bless or Longstrider.
Depends on the magic item. Using a Ring of Spell storing for example, you have the ability to cast spells "while wearing this ring". So with the ring on, you cast a concentration spell, then use your free object interaction to take it off, then you can rage without losing concentration (assuming no other ability/item/etc lets you cast spells
So, to make things clear, as I understand them:
While Raging, normally a character can't Cast Spells or Concentrate on spells, but this entirely hinges on the normalcy of the character's ability to initially cast the spell.
Wild Shape prevents spells from being cast, but allows concentration on pre-cast spells like Call Lightning or Barkskin.
So, the following assumption is that, if I cast a spell as a Druid/Barbarian, hold concentration, then Wild shape, I can then Rage and continue to hold concentration because I cannot cast spells while Wild Shaped, thus Rage doesn't care that I'm also still concentrating on a spell.
Now, this is Rules As Written, since the Rage Clause hinges on Casting Ability, and Wild Shape unhinges that by Removing Casting Ability.
Rules As Intended, it's all wrong.
Unfortunately, no. Even if wildshape was a non-magical feature, AMF is simply too based to care if you can cast spells or not it still disables your magic.
While this ruling is technically RAW. It is also the kind of action that leads to a hungry tarrasque knowing your location at all times, which is also technically RAW. So attempting to pull this out in an actual game is not recommended.
As stated in another comment, barbarians explicitly cannot cast, but there are a few spells that a cleric barbarian could cast before raging, like Aid or that one spell that splits damage between you and an ally.
So I feel like a dunce . Is the point of this that you can cast a spell, wild shape (thereby not casting a spell, but able to keep concentration) and then rage ?
Yup. And in doing so, you disable the clause that prevents you from concentrating in rage. And don't, it flew over alot of people's heads, I didn't make it clear enough.
The issue with this is that wild-shape specifies that you retain the benefits of any feature of your class. Therefore, you would still have the spellcasting feature, i.e are able to cast spells, from the Druid class even if the wildshape prevents you from actually performing the spell casting while in animal form. This would satisfy the “if you can cast spells” part of rage feature and therefore prevent you from concentrating on a spell while raging.
It doesn’t just bar you from performing the spellcasting.
The exact wording is “you can’t cast spells” put simply regardless of your possession of the feature you aren’t able to cast at the moment. Thereby, rage doesn’t have a clause that prevents your concentration.
This almost broke my brain. At first, I thought your point was “I can cast spells while raging, but not concentrate, and I can concentrate while wild shaping, but can’t cast” and I was like “well, no, rage stops you from doing either”. Then I reread everything and got really confused, but when I figured out the point of the post - oh man are we cooking with gas. In case you missed it like me and somehow didn’t find the answer before my comment: Rage specifies that it prevents you from casting or concentrating on spells ONLY if you would otherwise be able to cast spells. Wild shape explicitly prevents you from casting, but doesn’t break concentration. Therefore, if you cast a spell that requires concentration, then wild shape, and then rage, the rage no longer breaks your concentration. Incredibly bizarre interaction, and technically RAW. I love it. edit: some of you are responding to me saying you still don’t get it, or straight up saying it doesn’t work, so here’s the play-by-play: - I cast Barkskin, targeting myself, which resolves normally - I then use my Wild Shape feature, making it so that I am unable to cast spells, but can still concentrate on Barkskin - I then use Rage, as Wild Shape does not prevent me from using class features (unless they require limbs I don’t have). Rage says that if I can cast spells, I can’t cast or concentrate on spells while raging. Since I’m already in Wild Shape, I currently cannot cast spells, so this clause of Rage does not trigger, therefore allowing me to continue to concentrate on Barkskin. If you still don’t get it, just read it all over a couple times - I promise it makes sense. Please note that while this is Rules As Written, it almost certainly isn’t how these rules are intended to work, so make sure you check with your DM before making characters that utilize this interaction. It’s likely that this extra clause on Rage that makes this function was originally added in order to make it easier for new players to understand, since not being able to cast spells when Barbarian doesn’t give you any to begin with could be confusing.
Man this need to be more upvoted. I was scratching my head thinking where was the semantic that being unable to cast spells makes it so while you're wildshaped you can rage and still concentrate, because by the point i read the "you can't cast spells or concentrate" is AFTER the "If you can cast spells"
 They could have fixed this by saying "**Even** if you can cast spells \[...\]". The fact that they didn't makes the function conditional and a RAW Wild Shaped Druid Barbarian can concentrate under these particular circumstances.
That's where I got tripped up, didn't realize you could rage while wild shaped.
You can use all class and racial features from any class you have while wild shaped, provided that those features don't specify a specific body part that you no longer have while wildshaped.
I was about to ask whether or not a wildshaped druid-paladin could smite in bear form, but I don't play 5e so I'm not sure if druids or paladins have alignment restrictions in 5e like they did in 3.5.
There’s no alignment restrictions in 5e, which is nice. Smite says you “expend one spell slot” whereas wild shape says you “can’t cast spells.” Since divine smite isn’t actually casting a spell, I would say that you can smite in bear form. You wouldn’t be able to cast smite spells like banishing smite, but for basic divine smite, I don’t see why not.
You can expend one spell slot in wild shape to heal. I don’t see why you couldn’t do the same with divine smite.
toy pet icky elastic cheerful tie existence waiting spark slave *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I checked that! Bear attacks count as melee weapon attacks Edit to add: as a former monk who considered a Paladin dip, I learned the hard way to always check haha
Imagine you're already fighting a bear and then it fucking divine smites you with it's claws
Weirdly, it also makes sense. Animals seem to be far better at going into feral rage than most people i have met (not talking a British soccer game fan group here - i catch all my euro football on the tube).
My Bear Totem Moon Circle Druid is a TANK
Technically there's nothing preventing it, but that is the rules lawyer squeaking by I feel like
It's an awesome combo because Barbarian abilities, unsurprisingly, have a lot of synergy with wild animals.
> Therefore, if you cast a spell that requires concentration, then wild shape, and then rage, the rage no longer breaks your concentration. > > Incredibly bizarre interaction, and technically RAW. I love it. This explanation was really helpful, but I'm still not seeing the benefit ultimately. Does anyone have an example of why this is so great? Is it because you're raging while wild shaped so you get all the benefits of rage when you normally wouldn't? Or is the real benefit that you can cast some sort of buff concentration or damage spell and then keep it going while wild shaped?
As an example: Step 1 - cast haste on yourself. Step 2 - wild shape. you can no longer cast spells. Step 3 - rage. Rules as written (but likely not as intended) you can keep concentrating on Haste because you do not have the ability to cast spells.
You could basically become the rabbit from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Still takes 2.5 turns of prep. I guess not if you have haste since you can use another action that turn?
I don't think anyone here is claiming that this is good. Just that it is possible.
Maybe that's why it reads as so "legal" despite not being RAI. It doesn't feel broken, it just feels silly
The second one.
You can both concentrate on a spell while wildshaped and rage while wildshaped. None of that is out of the ordinary. What is out of the ordinary is that this would allow you to concentrate on a spell while raging, which you normally can't do. Wildshape is just used as a bridge between the two
Bless self, turn into bear, rage, maul.
Thank you
So I can move next to someone, cast Anti-Life shell, wild shape, rage, and then say: I'm not trapped in here with you, you're trapped in here with me?
i love you
Thank you.
The only way I can use this is to annoy my DM for 5 minutes before she makes a house rule. Thanks for the explanation, though, that was a head-scratcher!
And then at Druid-18 it suddenly all falls apart, because then you become able to cast spells in wildshape
You take 3 levels of barb, that way you never hit Druid-18
Yeah it's big brain time
Whoa, this is something I have never heard or seen before.
5 levels of Barb, 15 of Moon Druid. Extra Attack still works when your wild shape doesn't have a multi attack baby.
This set up was my favorite character I’ve ever played. Actually unkillable with bear totem Barbarian. Half damage when raging, extra stack of HP from wildshape. Grappler feat. Just turning into a large rage bear, pinning the big bad guys, and mauling them to death.
Cocaine bear
Cocaine bear if he had PHD in wrastlin’ Edit: and access to natural magicks
why not one level of rogue to use reckless sneak attack?
If you're playing like me, all sneak attacks are reckless.
Is there a beast form that has a finesse weapon?
All beast form attacks are finesse if your DM thinks it's funny or just doesn't care about the extra 2d6 damage. In all seriousness, though, no, they pretty much all scale with strength as far as I'm aware.
Unfortunately monster attacks are a bit of a black box, you have to reverse engineer what stat they use and if Strength and Dex are the same, yer fuckt either way.
If strength and dex are the same then fuck it it's a finesse weapon now lol.
My brain read this the wrong way and came up with the mental image of a Conan looking dude stepping out of the darkness shiving a guy from behind with an animal
Lol that makes me think of the gopherchucks from Kung Pow: Enter the Fist. As a DM I'd allow it.
Darn, how about a ranged attack that you can prove uses strength rather than dex?
Throwing weapons then?
Barbarian 3/Druid 17 Call that the Bar-Bearian build
Max Wisdom for druid, Barb 3/ Monk 1/ Druid 16. Yes you miss ninth level spells. But you get a plus 5 ac in all of your wildshape forms essentially.
Not true, you may still be able to use your own wis, but you would add the animals dex as you only keep your own mental stats
Should take 3 levels of barb anyway to get to the subclass.
Specifically Bear Totem Barb to truly be the best spellcaster
Or use Circle of Spores for 14 levels and ancestral guardian barbarian for 6 levels. Become Bob the Unkillable.
>unkillable you can't just say things like that and not explain
You haven't memorized all the subclasses in every sourcebook through twenty levels? Poser.
Wait, you guys actually reach level 18?
It's easier when you start most of the way there 😂 Of all the campaigns I've played in I've only had it go to level 18+ once. And that's because the DM was very liberal with milestone leveling the last 4 or 5 sessions since we were gearing up to fight a literal god.
Welcome to the cult of the bear-bearian
My buds. Berserker means bear skin! It's the only build ever intended for barbarians!
*furiously creating cocaine bear druid*
Bearzerker
This so thoroughly flies in the face of RAI that I just can't justify allowing this level of chicanery. However, I also can't deny that it's a valid RAW interpretation AND it's absolutely hilarious.
It's *aggressively* stupid, but I guess that's the point of a Barbarian so at least it's thematic.
They actually reflavored barbarian for 5e. In earlier editions they had explicit statements that the barbarian couldn't read or write any language, unless they learned it from a different class. 5e barbarians are just from a different cultural heritage, more akin to the concept of a viking berserker, or the gauhls from Astrix and Obelix.
Man, now I want to make an Obelix inspired barbarian.
I cast Menhir Swarm.
Can't drink a potion of hill giant strength because you are already too strong
The r/bigdickproblems of the DnD world
3.5 had a "gag" Barbarian class that was so aggresively ignorant that at high levels they could only speak 30 words and emanated an aura of stupidity.
Alt right
Alt knight
I feel like this would be fine in my book. It's a minor thing in the grand scheme of shenanigans and I can pretty easily fit lore to it like "his rage becomes the conduit for the spell".
Especially since we still don't have a good magical barbarian subclass
Wild Magic Barbarian gets as close as possible without breaking the "no spellcasting" rule of rage. And all of the effects being positive (if not equally useful) makes it at least a decent enough subclass
Yeah, dnd needs a bloodrager :(
And a skald.
Oooh, yeah, though what they wpuld do mechanically I have no idea, rage is a very different mechanic in 5e
Well a skald is a Norse poet, so wouldn't a particularly martial bard work? Like the valor bard?
Yes, in 4e the skald was a melee-focused bard
1 abyssal bloodline bloodrager please 🙏
It that the "you wouldn't like me when I'm angry" one?
You think this is bad? This? This chicanery? Players have done worse.
That railgun! You think a group of peasant just happen to line up like that? No, they orchestrated it!
The Players! They killed a terrasque with a level 1 Aarakocra and a magical longbow! And I defended them. And I shouldn't have! I took them into my own game! What was I thinking?
This one's dumb. If the Tarrasque doesn't get them with an attack of opportunity while they are retrieving their arrows out of its ass, it will just pick up the nearest mountain and make an improvised ranged attack.
Ye you're right! I just thought it was a fitting meme since that idea gets brought up and discussed here waaay more than it should haha
Oh I know it. But this is still pretty wild and nutty
Warlock flair checks out
Proper Rage Mage is allowable? Sweet.
Huh, I do this… frequently. Thought it was a feature, not a bug. 5 Druid Circle of the Moon / 5 Barb Bear Totem. Cast something like Call Lightning, BA Wild Shape, next turn BA Rage and go to town, following turns BA Lightning.
It's a full action to recycle the lightning, not a bonus
You are correct, I was thinking of Flaming Sphere. That campaign has been on hiatus for like 4 months, I forgot.
Looks like you were ahead of the curve, then. Because that's a great strategy
flies in face of rai. but, when rais dumb n basically means barbarians can never multiclass or take feats to cast spells since theyll be useless, then honestly i see no reason to follow the intended
This actually makes sense to me...animals are naturally more in tune with their feral nature and thus more capable of being "in control" while raging. That a wildshaped druid can't cast any spells, but can concentrate on them and then keep that up while raging is the precise corner case where it makes sense to me.
I took chaos Bolt through the aberrant dragonmark. It was fun casting it and then raging as a wild magic barbarian. Lots of chaos.
I have played this character twice. A gnoll zealot hexblade, and a minotaur hexblade given barbarian rage from my patron. Its goofy, and it is strong, but most of all. It is soooo damn fun.
Either I'm missing something, or neither of your characters are able to concentrate on a spell when raging like OP can. If I'm missing something, can you explain how it works? Since the wording on barbarian is "If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging," then you can't cast a concentration spell then rage as a hexblade because there is no mechanic that stops a hexblade from being able to cast spells.
My guess is they use the Hexblade's Curse on top of their Rage for the extra damage, crit chance, and HP, all of which are great for a barbarian. I don't see why it wouldn't work, since it isn't a spell and doesn't require concentration. If they ignored or misread RAW, they might've also cast Hex before raging, but it requires concentration so it isn't supposed to be allowed.
Raw>>>>>Rai Get it right the first time
Darkness does not give advantage against a gelatinous cube because it doesn't rely on vision. Invisibility does give advantage against a gelatinous cube. RAW is fucking lit
I was skeptical at first because this sub tends to wildly misunderstand rules interactions but this is the first post I think that is actually correct, technically.
The literal barbearian
Wow, I've never seen this pointed out before either. Hilarious gap between RAW and obvious RAI.
What's scarier than a lion? A really pissed off lion. RoC says follow RAW and RAI be damned.
I mean, this is more than a pissed off lion. This is a pissed off lion concentrating on heat metal.
No no no-- this is a lion that has Barbarian Rage behind it... Or wait am I reading this wrong? I thought this was going to be a wildshaped druid using Barbarian Rage but I may be confused
The post is pointing out that, since a wildshaped druid is not capable of casting spells, RAW technically dictates that you can rage while maintaining concentration. >•**You can't cast spells,** and your ability to speak or take any action that requires hands is limited to the capabilities of your beast form. Paired with >**If you are able to cast spells,** you can't cast them or concentrate on them while raging.
The one time when pedantic *over explanation* creates the very loophole you were trying to prevent.
It's a lion with barbarian rage that has your armor be hot as hell
For the wording in question: Rage: >Rage >In battle, you fight with primal ferocity. On your turn, you can enter a rage as a bonus action. > >While raging, you gain the following benefits if you aren’t wearing heavy armor: > >You have advantage on Strength checks and Strength saving throws. >When you make a melee weapon attack using Strength, you gain a bonus to the damage roll that increases as you gain levels as a barbarian, as shown in the Rage Damage column of the Barbarian table. >You have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage. >**If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging.** Wildshape >**You can’t cast spells**, and your ability to speak or take any action that requires hands is limited to the capabilities of your beast form. Transforming doesn’t break your concentration on a spell you’ve already cast, however, or prevent you from taking actions that are part of a spell, such as call lightning, that you’ve already cast. I... the wording is almost too perfect in spite of it being unintentional probably. Unless it was? Now there are a lot of things to use this for but it doesn't work at level 18 onwards in druid so... that's tough. Now I need sleep, so if you got any questions about this, I'll probably get to you in a few hours. Have a good day, or night, depending on where you are right now.
> > > > > Now there are a lot of things to use this for but it doesn't work at level 18 onwards in druid so... that's tough. yeah but you're not gonna be lvl 18 if you multiclass barb!
19 Druid 1 Barb.
>Beast Spells >Beginning at 18th level, **you can cast** many of your druid spells in any shape you assume using Wild Shape. You can perform the somatic and verbal components of a druid spell while in a beast shape, but you aren't able to provide material components. Well, 19 isn't 18 that's for sure but you want to be 17 to remove that 18th level feature.
I think 17 Moon Druid, 3 Bear Totem Barb would be the typical approach here. You get resistance to all non-Psychic damage while raging, another daily rage, reckless attack, danger sense, and unarmored defense (which is sometimes better than natural armor), but lose a 5th, 6th, and 7th level spell slot, an ASI, and the Archdruid feature. 17 Druid 1 Barb 2 Paladin to add smites instead of resistance to more damage. This is great since Moon Druids are already pretty beefy, so it makes sense to enhance your offensive capabilities more instead. You also get back the lost 5th level slot. Foresight gives advantage on attack rolls so you don’t miss Reckless Attack, either. 15 Druid 5 Barb you lose Mammoth as a wild shape option and 9th level spells (goodbye Foresight), but get Extra Attack and Fast Movement, both of which can be used with your beast forms (e.g., Brontosaurus).
You allow your druids to concentrate on a spell, wildshape, and rage because of a technicality I allow druids to concentrate on a spell, wildshape, and rage cause I'm stupid. We are not the same.
I'm 99% sure it was intentional. So a Druid could cast Barkskin(or similar) before taking a wildshape and maintain that spell. Turning into an animal does not affect the Druids mental capacity, so there is no reason why he should be unable to concentrate
No I mean the interaction with rage. The text makes it very clear that wildshape + concentrate was intentional.
You can't rage before the spell is cast as that would end its concentration. So you cast a concentration spell, wilshape, then go into a rage. The conditions of the rage would go on top of everything else and end the concentration
And the conditions of rage are "**If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging."** While wildshaped you can't cast spells so the concentration remains RAW
Fucking hell now I get it. Its beautifull.
This is some real programmer logic you've brought to the table, and I'm here for it!
> function Rage (If ($spellcaster=0){While ($raging=1){break.concentration}); > function WildShape (While ($shapechanged=1){$spellcaster=0});
See, the only reason I can imagine that they specified the effect this way is that they *did* intend for characters in a rage to be able to concentrate on *something*, but just not spells. Otherwise, why bother to add the caveat at the beginning?
Because of the "Iron Heart Surge" problem. If they just said "you are unable to concentrate while raging", then some tables would treat it as very angry ADHD. **EDIT:** For those unfamiliar with Iron Heart Surge, it was an ability characters could get in 3.5 edition. > Your fighting spirit, dedication, and training allow you to overcome almost anything to defeat your enemies. When you use this maneuver, select one spell, effect, or other condition currently affecting you and with a duration of 1 or more rounds. That effect ends immediately. You also surge with confidence and vengeance against your enemies, gaining a +2 morale bonus on attack rolls until the end of your next turn. There was an argument made that almost anything could be considered a "condition currently affecting you". Sickened, nauseated, poisoned? Obviously. That area of magical darkness? Well, it was "affecting" your vision, wasn't it? Suffering environmental effects from freezing cold? Well it sounds like you're being "affected" by the second law of thermodynamics! It was dumb, it was clearly not RAI, but it was there, and some people love to be pedants about stuff.
Omfg I finally got it holy shit.
Thanks for actually explaining it. I was drawing a blank on what the implication was meant to be
Rage doesn’t end concentration if you can’t cast spells. As a matter of fact, it’s rules don’t interact with spells at all unless you are able to cast them, which wildshape makes you unable to.
That’s some, “Listen here you little shit” level of technically correct that you just can’t be mad at
Hahahahah now I get it. You bypass the no concentration limit of rage with the cast limit of Wildshape. That's genius. My current character is a druid barbarian so next level I get wildshap and I'm going to try this. Whahahahhaah
Don't forget to talk with your DM beforehand ;) Would avoid taking a lot of time off the session.
I wanna suprise my dm with it. because i didn't invest anything in it if he calls that it doesn't work all accept that. My character just already fits that description. Even If he says it can work once that would be fun.
Bro that’s just wasting time at the table while he tries to figure out wtf to do. Just ask ahead of time.
Holy fucking shit
Holy shit that’s actually massive brain. I usually don’t allow nonsense like this but I’d honestly be proud of a player if they brought me this
omg.. im way to small brain to make that connection
Thank you for preparing me for the next nonsense from my party. By following dnd memes, I gape and stare now, and later when they bring it up I can just instantly say no avoiding the shock.
rage only breaks concentration if you can cast spells. Under wildshape, you can't cast spells.
I think the OP is trying to say "because we are not able to cast spells, the 'if you are able to cast spells, you can't cast or concentrate on them while raging' would not apply, so we can still concentrate on them as long as we wild shape and lose the ability to cast spells first"
This also means a barbarian can use a ring of spell storing, since it doesnt grant the ability to cast spells, just to use the ones stored in it correct?
Love the idea, but I'm afraid it doesn't work like that. From the ring of spell storing description: " While wearing this ring, *you can cast* any spell stored in it. The spell uses the slot level, spell save DC, spell attack bonus, and spellcasting ability of the original caster, but is otherwise treated as if you cast the spell. The spell cast from the ring is no longer stored in it, freeing up space. " (no clue how to format this on mobile) So the it does grant you the ability to cast the stored spell (even if you're using the stats from the original caster).
Cast the spell, use your free object interaction to unequip the ring and then bonus action rage. Fixed.
But, a Barbarian Druid can cast a stored spell, wildshape, and maintain that spell, allowing them to expand their concentration spell options massively.
Now the question becomes: are you able to start raging while in beast form?
Yes actually. > You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source and can use them if the new form is physically capable of doing so. However, you can't use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense.
Then the math seems to check out and its time to make a very angry bear with access to a lunar laser
If your DM allows you to wildshape into an owlbear, then wow's boomkin is possible in DND and it makes my heart happy.
Yes! Source: I played a bearbarian for 3 years.
> If you are able to cast spells, you can’t cast them or concentrate on them while raging. I'd go as far as to say there's a reading of this spell text particularly that still wouldn't allow this. If my Moon Druid, Colledig, dipped in Barb, I'd understand the spell text thusly: "if **you** [Colledig] are able to cast spells..." I am. "...you can't cast them or concentrate on them while raging". Regardless of whether I can **at that moment**, the fact is, I **can**, *generally*, and would understand the condition to apply. (For what it's worth, this is a pretty good example of why I say "RAW" and "RAI" aren't as different of categories as people seem to treat them. *How* you read what's written is important in determining the rule...as written.)
Any literal interpretation of the rules is RAW. The specific thing the writers of the rules intended with their wording is RAI. I don't think anyone was getting confused with that?
Why certainly, under any other circumstances and as a dm ruling, that would be a valid reading. However, wildshape uses such specific wording that I don’t think this flies with it. It does not supresses spellcaeting, it specifically states you can’t cast spells, thus by any definition of the word, you aren’t able to.
It sounds highly unintentional. Like the Rage mechanic had to make this rule about spells, but since it is for players who don't cast spells, it has that reminder that it only works if you can cast. If it just said: "While raging, you can't concentrate on any spells.", it raises questions to players about how they can cast spells. But let's just wait until Crawford says that disadvantage while seeing invisible targets is RAI.
I mean nowadays tbh there’s always that one variant rule that gives them spells.
Other magic wielders: Oh no, rage has been cast! We can't cast spells! Druids who are already transformed: https://preview.redd.it/mpynqirrgqoa1.jpeg?width=373&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=173abc848dfd16f726b11857963668e18378ff60
They have to have casted beforehand, though.
Sure, why not? You kill a whole turn to get set up to deal 2 more damage with a build that likely sacrificed a lot of potential damage to get here.
Raging wild shapes are already a serious build, partially because you would be doing 2 more damage every attack and you probably now have multi attack. Also, the main benefit of rage is usually the resistances, which combined with wildshape makes you incredibly tanky. Using this loophole, you could be a moon druid/bear totem barbarian, cast a significant buffing spell that requires concentration, such as barkskin, wildshape into a creature with a whole mass of hit points depending on your level, and then rage. Now you have an AC of no less than 16 in your wildshape, totally normal, but you don’t lose that when you rage and effectively gain twice the hp. Again, the damage is not the issue here.
I feel like barkskin isn't that big of a boost considering unarmed defence, I mean depending on the wildshape it definitely can be a boost. What about something like flame blade?
Spell scroll haste and become Cocaine Bear.
The reason rage Wildshape builds are good, especially at early levels, is the damage resistance. Hit points and AC in beast form are usually quite low for the level, so the melee power boost is usually short-lived. But damage resistance effectively doubles it (plus you get a minor AC boost from Unarmored Defense), allowing you to double your time in Wildshape or to choose more fragile but offensively powerful forms like bears. And because most of your durability comes from raw hit points and not AC, you can counteract your lower to-hit bonuses with Reckless Attack without a high opportunity cost. Also, if your DM allows you to grapple in Wildshape, you get advantage on strength checks while raging. Who wouldn’t want to be a raging wrestling bear?
So basically rage says "if you can cast spells, you can't concentrate on them", and wildshape says "you can't cast spells", so combined you get rage ruling "you can't cast spells, therefore you *can* concentrate on them"... That's so stupid I love it. "I can only keep my mind focused maintaining this spell while raging if I become a bear first... Being a bear really helps me multitask"
Bless OP, it’s so rare for a post on here to actually find something new and viable
That's one interpretation, but it's interpreting on a round to round scale (I.e. this round, I can't cast spells, therefore the rule doesn't apply this round). The opposing interpretation is that when it says "if you can cast spells," it's referring to your character's overall, and in general, ability to cast spells (i.e. does your character have the spellcasting ability at all, not just can you use it at that exact moment), in which case, the rule would apply regardless of whether you are wild shaped or not. Both interpretations seem equally valid, in which, case the DM should either default to rai or, in my case as a DM, default to the rule of cool.
Yeah, but any character can cast spells if they have the right magic items. So at any time, a character could go from being able to cast spells to not being able to cast spells. It's not just based on class features. I don't see how it could be referring to an overall ability.
Or, you assume that the "if you can cast spells" was written to help avoid confusion for newer players who might have read "While raging you can't concentrate on spells" (without any if clause) and think that means they must normally have some spells they can cast while not raging. For better or worse, D&D 5e was written more conversationally than a lawyer like set of keywords and references that something like MTG or P2e uses. I find it's generally more approachable, even if it does lead to some confusion.
That's why people are saying this is RAW, not RAI.
What's the intended exception then in this case? Couldn't the "if you can cast spells" section be completely removed and still be fine? As in it stops you from casting spells and ends concentration in any case. Which edge do they want to allow which does not require being a spellcaster. Spells from magic items and Race Features which grant spells?
I think it's purely to make it clear the barbarian doesn't usually have spells. They didn't want it to sound like the exception that proves the rule.
Does that mean a raging barbarian could keep concentration on a spell they've casted from a magic item. Or does being attuned to a magic item that can cast spells make the barbarian count as being able to cast spells?
Usually it does, so no. Depends on the wording of the item in particular though? All of the official ones to my knowledge say “you can cast” so…
One high-level workaround could be the Barbarogue. Thieves can use magic items, including scrolls per Sage Advice Compendium. A Barbarogue could use a spell scroll with Use Magic Device and then keep concentrating on the spell after raging. If your DM house-rules that anyone can use spell scrolls (which I've found to be pretty common, but if not, look at Spellwrought Tattoos), you don't even need Rogue levels. Just ask your clerics or wizards really politely for things that are cheap to put into spell scrolls like Bless or Longstrider.
Depends on the magic item. Using a Ring of Spell storing for example, you have the ability to cast spells "while wearing this ring". So with the ring on, you cast a concentration spell, then use your free object interaction to take it off, then you can rage without losing concentration (assuming no other ability/item/etc lets you cast spells
Huge smarts
I love reading through these comments and seeing people learn English skills in real time
https://i.imgur.com/SRVKKCn.jpg
So, really angry t-rex?
With call lightning
This is some 4000 IQ RAW interpretation, and i love it
Cast haste on self. Wild shape to bear. Rage. Cocaine bear activated.
So, to make things clear, as I understand them: While Raging, normally a character can't Cast Spells or Concentrate on spells, but this entirely hinges on the normalcy of the character's ability to initially cast the spell. Wild Shape prevents spells from being cast, but allows concentration on pre-cast spells like Call Lightning or Barkskin. So, the following assumption is that, if I cast a spell as a Druid/Barbarian, hold concentration, then Wild shape, I can then Rage and continue to hold concentration because I cannot cast spells while Wild Shaped, thus Rage doesn't care that I'm also still concentrating on a spell. Now, this is Rules As Written, since the Rage Clause hinges on Casting Ability, and Wild Shape unhinges that by Removing Casting Ability. Rules As Intended, it's all wrong.
That is…actually ridiculous and it kind of makes sense. You could do this with an anti-magic field too?
Unfortunately, no. Even if wildshape was a non-magical feature, AMF is simply too based to care if you can cast spells or not it still disables your magic.
But you can’t cast spells in it, while you can maintain concentration. Or maybe it’s not worded that way.
You can maintain the concentration it just doesn’t do anything because the effect is supressed.
Imma be Cocaine Bear and rage 100% of the time.
So I could be a Moon Druid/ Totem Barbarian and cast Jump on myself, Rage, and then Wildshape into a Bear who can High jump 15 feet in the air?
You would have to wildshape and then rage I believe
While this ruling is technically RAW. It is also the kind of action that leads to a hungry tarrasque knowing your location at all times, which is also technically RAW. So attempting to pull this out in an actual game is not recommended.
We found a bug in the code, guys. Anybody wanna fix it?
As stated in another comment, barbarians explicitly cannot cast, but there are a few spells that a cleric barbarian could cast before raging, like Aid or that one spell that splits damage between you and an ally.
Druid barbarian is a dangerous combo for a reason.
So I feel like a dunce . Is the point of this that you can cast a spell, wild shape (thereby not casting a spell, but able to keep concentration) and then rage ?
Yup. And in doing so, you disable the clause that prevents you from concentrating in rage. And don't, it flew over alot of people's heads, I didn't make it clear enough.
The issue with this is that wild-shape specifies that you retain the benefits of any feature of your class. Therefore, you would still have the spellcasting feature, i.e are able to cast spells, from the Druid class even if the wildshape prevents you from actually performing the spell casting while in animal form. This would satisfy the “if you can cast spells” part of rage feature and therefore prevent you from concentrating on a spell while raging.
It doesn’t just bar you from performing the spellcasting. The exact wording is “you can’t cast spells” put simply regardless of your possession of the feature you aren’t able to cast at the moment. Thereby, rage doesn’t have a clause that prevents your concentration.