Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ut-Napishtim 07-07-05, 02:00 PM	Now I'm not slamming on Barbarians. As someone who first started into D&D with 1E I was glad to see the Monk and Barbarian finally make a comeback. After the nostalgia wore off though, I've been getting an increasing feeling that the class isn't getting due consideration from a roleplaying perspective. Bluntly, it's pretty much just become a Fighter with anger management issues. This came to my attention yet again when I was reading through the DMG II and noticed that Saltmarsh (looks great BTW, I hope we see more nicely detailed cities in the future - perhaps as stand-alone supplements, and the art of the temple of Boccob on pp. 138 really sparked my imagination) has like a dozen Barbarians in the city watch. I know some folks that are pretty new to D&D are probably thinking: So? Their Rage ability and Fast Movement will help them catch bad guys. I was even thinking about having my Wizard dip a level in Barbarian so I could flee bad guys quicker without having to memorize Expeditous Retreat. I can only shake my head sadly and mourn that the spirit of the Barbarian has been eclipsed by the collection of specialized crunchy bitz he can draw on. Doesn't anyone remember Connan? Connan thought he was miserable as a slave, but he discovered the true meaning of misery when he became a King. Anyone can become familiar with the ways of the wild - they become Rangers. A Barbarian though is born in the wild, or is of a wild race. It's not something you can learn and then turn on and off like a spell or feat, it's a way of life. It's something you're born into and either you have it or you don't. No true Barbarian is going to move to the city, settle down, and get a boring job as a flatfoot pulling guard duty all day. Barbarians are free spirits, wild and untamed who live by their own rules and answer only to those who can prove they are indeed mightier. Would Connan don a lovely heraldric tunic and take up a halberd, then stand at the city gates 12 hours a day watching peasant carts full of turnips roll slowly by? Would he take lip from some sissy beaureaucrat telling him to: Stand up straight, and polish your damn helmet Soldier! just because any display of disrespect might result in the beaureaucrat docking his meager 10 gp/month salary? HA! I'd like to see that! Although I guess in 3E Barbarians are more concerned with saving up for that magic sword than living by their own rules.
the artful dodger 07-07-05, 02:07 PM	Meh. I don't see the problem. Barbarians can be free spirits and still have a sense of duty that is enough of a reason for them to help uphold the law (and nothing says they're the disciplined kind of officer that never gets into trouble with the chief constable either ;) ). Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to watch Lethal Weapon again.
Draggah 07-07-05, 02:11 PM	Amen Brother!! I'm personally in the 'Only the CAPTAIN of the guard (if even him) should have a PC class' camp myself. Why would anyone with the skills and abilites of a PC class take such a job? Especially the barbarian!!
Ussutisi 07-07-05, 02:18 PM	I agree with your first three paragraphs. However, I disagree with your idea about barbarians and civilization. The character I asked about in the thread a posted earlier was decidly a Barbarian. But he was not Chaotic the way Connan is. He is nuetral. Not lawful by any means. He when to the cities to see what 'civilized' life was like, out of curiosity. And although he would never chose it over the life he had, he stayed for a few years before becoming an adventurer. Did he get a day job watching peasents or wear nice clothes and sip tea from tiny cups? No! Of course not. But he converted to worship of Pelor and studied religion. Not enough to have the skill, but until he recovered from his lose. My point is this: A barbarian living a 'normal' life is still a barbarian at heart, and he'll be back at it before long. BTW, Kendrah (the barbarian) would most likely rip of the tunic and use the halberd as a staff on the aristocrat. :D
Ut-Napishtim 07-07-05, 02:26 PM	Oh, that wasn't directed at any Barbarian in particular. If you have a thread somewhere about your Barbarian I can garauntee I ddn't know that when I was writing this up. It's a general sort of thing about the way Barbarians are presented and used these days, not a direct bash at anyone's character. :confused:
Ussutisi 07-07-05, 02:36 PM	I didn't take it that way, I was just pointed out that a nuetral barbarian COULD lead a civilized life, but not to the extent a normal non-barbarian does. They could life in a city with a not-so-boring or none existant job. In Kendrah's case, making simple weapons for the gaurds so they wouldn't kick him out of the city for walking around looking like a celtic berserker. But weapon oppertunity calls, the barbarian will be with a group of adventures, in the wild, killing something evil and/or tasty.
SilverFoxKnows 07-07-05, 02:54 PM	who grew up on the outskirts of civilized Dwarven lands. He's in the minority and his own people view him as a hick or redneck. A "wildman". He ended up getting deputized in a small town far from home. But it wasn't for the gold. We tangled with a group of pirates and smugglers and now they're gunning for us. So to stay out of jail (the local law said they wouldn't look the other way much longer) he put an "X" on the dotted line, took the little wooden badge and is now free (for one month per the cantract) to cut them down where they stand. It's closer to bounty hunting than guard duty. But he's wild at heart and spends as much time in the wilderness as he does in the town, much to the dismay of the townsfolk. "You don't want to go out there after dark, it's not safe". Hah! But I would think it would be pretty rare for a Barbarian to be a rank and file guard/ soldier for any length of time.
DaveReaves 07-07-05, 03:09 PM	Too many people these days see classes as numbers on the paper. Classes seem to have little meaning in the eyes of a too large group of players who somehow feal that they need a need an ability to roleplay an aspect of their character. I read comments like "Its ok to be a Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 2/ Sorcerer 4/ Warlock 5/ Prestige Class X 3/ Prestige Class Y 3 because your just making an effective character". Players insit that they are roleplaying their characters, despite the fact that every time they walk into a cavern filled with slaughterables they emerge with new, unexplained abilities unlike any that had before or had been trained to do. I have a theory to explain this lack of respect for the classes. I belive that more and more people are playing using the System Referance Document instead of the actualy books. The SRD only gives the rules with none of the discription, so your never told that Barbarians are the masters of the wild, that Paladins are chapions of the cause, or the diffrences between Wizards and Sorcerers. They only see numbers, so thats what they think the game is. Its up to us to keep the Player's Handbook in the hands of the players, and keep the SRD in the hands of game developers where it belongs.
KoboldSlayer 07-07-05, 03:31 PM	I really wouldn't have a problem with seeing a barbarian among the rank and file of the city guard. People change. But having multiple barbarians among the soldiers? That's pushing it a little. Yeah, people change, but usually drastic changes like that happen to a person that has some kind of epiphany...not en masse. Maybe the barbarian is introduced to society and learns that he enjoys a little more order in his life and a little more constancy instead of relying on a good hunting season to provide for his needs with a tribe, for example. I think that would be a rare case in a campaign. Off the top of my head, I can think of precious few literary or historical examples of this, and usually it was a forced change. (For example, Quanah Parker encouraged education, farming, and such when he became chief of the Comanches. Probably not because he thought that was the way his people should ideally go, but because it was the only way TO make their way in life because the buffalo hunters had all but obliterated their source of food/shelter/clothing, and they had been forced onto limited reservation land. He encouraged them to civilize because that is what it took to survive, not because he thought their hearts would be better for it.) I imagine someone that has had any life as "free" as what you would consider a barbarian would not give it up except for a very compelling reason. On the other hand, I can think of several examples of things going on OTHER way...people abandoning civilization for a "simpler" way of life. Kevin Costner's char in Dances with Wolves , for example. Any story about someone "going native" is a good example. There are many few stories of natives "going city" because it's just not as interesting a story from the civilized reader's point of view. How many gamers do you know who sit around wanting to be more restricted by their rat-race jobs or their fast-paced schoolwork, for example? No...the idea of wind in their hair and sun on their face sounds much more appealing as an idealized way of life. Why would a barbarian give that up? (Realistically...for creature comforts! It would only take most people one winter of waning sun on their face, nigh-empty belly, and biting wind whipping at their back to decide that the rat-race in the heated office with the water cooler and snack machine looked pretty darn good! But that's not the way of things in a fantasy game!)
the artful dodger 07-07-05, 04:13 PM	Too many people these days see classes as numbers on the paper. With all due respect, that's exactly what they are. Too many people think performers should have at least one Bard level, scouts should have scout (or at least ranger) levels, priests should have Cleric levels, etc. A barbarian doesn't have to be a free spirit who gets antsy after 5 minutes inside the walls of a town with more than three houses. A fighter can be a pacifist. Rogue doesn't equal ne'er-do-well. A bard isn't always a womanizer with a girl (or guy) in every town (three in major cities). Create a concept for a character, find the best (most appropriate, not necessarily strongest) way to build that concept mechanically and then roleplay that concept. If you do that, you'll always be welcome at my table. I don't need to know the mechanical details about someone else's character and I certainly don't need to be able to dissect its class levels just by superficially looking at the character's actions. I just want my character to be able to build a rapport with the other character and have a feeling of interaction with a real, living and breathing (or possibly undead) person.
Dragonsblood 07-07-05, 04:46 PM	If you think outside of the box, you can use the rule set of a class and give them a different role in the world. Those barbarian guards could still use the same build without actually being called barbarians.
Ut-Napishtim 07-07-05, 04:55 PM	If you think outside of the box, you can use the rule set of a class and give them a different role in the world. Those barbarian guards could still use the same build without actually being called barbarians. Which makes them Fighters with anger management issues. :ayyyy!:
Dragonsblood 07-07-05, 04:57 PM	Exactly :P
DaveReaves 07-07-05, 05:01 PM	Very true, Dodger, and all good points. The problem I have is when people take the class for its benifits regardless of storyline. One person I had the misfortune of playing with insited that every character he start be a Barbarian for the 12 hit points at first level. He then proceded to advance as a wizard, cleric, mistic thurge which his background fit quite well. The level of Barbarian was forgotten. What the Barbarian was, did not matter to him. Having a level of Barbarian did not effect his character except to give him more hit points. Another player who was playing a hard nosed fighter type had a level of Bard with just enough ranks in preform to Inspire Courage, then promptly went fighter. My character receved no explanation as to why he sang a few versus of a song before he charged into battle. He never used the preform skill outside giving the himself and the group a bonus. Yes, when boiled down to the basic components a class is just a list and some numbers, but when you start using classes (as opposed to feats and skills) to let your character do things outside what his class abilities allow him to do, your not being true to the class or your character. It shows disrespect for the classes as a whole in that you dont care what they are about, just what they do when you have enough levels.
Arrowhen 07-07-05, 05:17 PM	But having multiple barbarians among the soldiers? That's pushing it a little. Maybe they're a group of barbarians who went off wandering together, became enamored of the delights of the city, and decided that busting heads for the city watch was the easiest way to pay for their ale and wenches.
KoboldSlayer 07-07-05, 05:19 PM	Maybe they're a group of barbarians who went off wandering together, became enamored of the delights of the city, and decided that busting heads for the city watch was the easiest way to pay for their ale and wenches. Haha! Perhaps so. I would have to read the details (if there are any) in the city write-up to know that. If they have short bios (even for the group, not each individual) that allude to that fact, then that would be great. If not, and it looks like they just took those classes for the crunch goodies of rage and a big hit die, then it wouldn't be enough to make me happy with the arrangement.
Arrowhen 07-07-05, 05:23 PM	Haha! Perhaps so. I would have to read the details (if there are any) in the city write-up to know that. If they have short bios (even for the group, not each individual) that allude to that fact, then that would be great. If not, and it looks like they just took those classes for the crunch goodies of rage and a big hit die, then it wouldn't be enough to make me happy with the arrangement. I haven't seen it either. I'd imagine the barbarians are there based solely on the NPC class distribution formulas from the DMG, with the DM left to fill in the whys and wherefores.
Ut-Napishtim 07-07-05, 08:20 PM	I haven't seen it either. I'd imagine the barbarians are there based solely on the NPC class distribution formulas from the DMG, with the DM left to fill in the whys and wherefores. Yeah, it's just the standard breakdown by how many folks of level/class there are. I found it odd there were a dozen Barbarians in the City Watch. None are named command positions, just rank and file guys. Having been in the military years ago I found it odd that Barbarians would take to the monotony, tedium, repetition, boredom, and discipline of life in the City Watch. Sure, you get to bust heads every now and then - but most of the time you're doing bull :censored: details or putting on your shiney's and marching around some field while slack-jawed officers gawk at you.
vivid_disorder 07-07-05, 08:49 PM	If we take Conan to be the archetypal barbarian, then he did serve in the Turanian army for a long time, honing his fighting skills and learning mounted archery (in game terms, multiclassing into fighter, I guess). Even the mighty Cimmerian must have pulled guard duty from time to time. ;) The way I see it, many barbs would do the same thing: come to the cities to improve their abilities, before returning to the tribe to fulfill their traditional role all the more effectively. Hence, many police forces/bounty hunters/military units might have a hulking half-orc meatshield to act as a living shield/battering ram.
Ut-Napishtim 07-07-05, 10:19 PM	It kind of reminds me of those Capital One commercials where the Barbarians are out of work so are now getting day jobs with comedic results. :D
Mr. Leet 07-08-05, 04:27 AM	A little off-topic. Hmmm... To me it seems as Conan started off as a rogue, and developed his barbarian skills later. I'm sure you all remember the stories from when Conan was young, and the heists he pulled and his sneaky ways. Me as a DM would rule that multiclassing from rogue to barbarian is totally ok, but barbarian to rogue needs some good RP before it can be done.
the artful dodger 07-08-05, 08:05 AM	Having been in the military years ago I found it odd that Barbarians would take to the monotony, tedium, repetition, boredom, and discipline of life in the City Watch. Sure, you get to bust heads every now and then - but most of the time you're doing bull :censored: details or putting on your shiney's and marching around some field while slack-jawed officers gawk at you. I think you're making assumptions about the city watch in D&D that are not necessarily true. Besides, who says life with a tribe isn't possibly just as monotonous and tedious 90% of the time? ;)
Ut-Napishtim 07-08-05, 10:39 AM	It's not something I browbeat my players about or anything. It just makes me sad sometimes when I hear a player say: I'm going to play a Dwarf Barbarian. The earlier poster presented a story about how this was possible for his character which is fine, but most of the ones I've met don't even have any idea why that would be unusual, or why I seem to be staring at them waiting for further background. Others freely level dip in it later on without a second thought. One poster a few months back was talking about his Rogue taking some Barbarian and I asked: How is a street rat going to suddenly go Barbarian without ever having left town? Those remarks didn't exactly get a warm reception. Seriously though, I would agree that it's possible in rare circumstances (like in the Kevin Costner example) for someone to 'go wild.' Doing it in mid-town Manhattan though? That kind of 'thinking outside the box' I can live without.
IceFractal 07-08-05, 03:30 PM	Dragon had an article about variant ways to look at the Barbarian a while back. The main gist was that Barbarians don't all have to be nature-oriented outsiders. For instance, the gang enforcer, the spoiled aristocrat that flies into violent rages, the martial artist that taps into their ki to go into a fighting trance, the gladiator, and the temple guard of Erythnul all fit the Barbarian class. Dodger got it - your class is not your character. "Barbarian" is not a character concept. "Rogue" is not a character concept. They are simply elements that you use to represent your character in the game system so as to be able to play. If you think out your character concept, then the build should follow, based on what the character actually does, not how the class is named. Let's take that build that someone posted as an example of absurdity: Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 2/ Sorcerer 4/ Warlock 5/ Prestige Class X 3/ Prestige Class Y 3 Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 2 - This is his first direction in life. He's learning the "Lion's Fury" martial arts style. Unlike the traditional styles, it focuses more on the practical elements of fighting than the mystical ones, uses a wider variety of weapons, and, in contrast to the "calm" nature of some styles, encourages the inner rage and channels it into a fighting frenzy. He studies this style for a good while, either as part of a military organization or just a freelance adventurer. Sorcerer 4/Warlock 5 - This all changes when, in desparate battle with an ogre, he is nearly killed. As his life flashes before his eyes, some spark of eldritch power, previously dormant, awakens in him. He goes on to defeat the ogre and begins to develop his arcane potential. At first, this takes the form of traditional magic, casting spells - but as he grows closer to his true potential he becomes able to channel the power directly, controlling it innately. Prestige Class X 3/ Prestige Class Y 3 - I can't really comment on this as it isn't specified what prestige classes he's taking. Perhaps he continues to focus totally on his arcane powers, or perhaps he finds a way to blend them with his old fighting techniques. A lot of things could happen. So in summary, the classes do not make the character, you make the character. The classes are simply there to help you use it in the game. Use them as you will.
vivid_disorder 07-08-05, 08:47 PM	Anybody who wants to know the ins and outs of Conan's career and his d&d stats really should check out http://enworld.org/Inzeladun/conan.htm (sorry, don't know how to hyperlink). As far as I can see, this is pretty much definitive, and ends up with level 20 Conan as Barb 11/Rogue 3/Fighter 6 (pretty low rogue levels for the self-styled "greatest thief in Shadizar" :) ) This guy really digs Conan, i suspect :D .
CryoSilver 07-08-05, 08:57 PM	Maybe these barbarians aren't rank and file members of the guard, functioning more like a brute squad that gets called in for the heavy stuff that level 1 warriors can't handle?
vivid_disorder 07-08-05, 09:07 PM	They could just be the local nutjobs - everyone's met people who totally spaz out when they get into a fight. As other posters have said, character classes are archetypes, rather than straitjackets. If a character can go from nought to ballistic in less than a second, and this gives her an edge in combat, then they are a barbarian - they have the Rage ability. They don't have to come from the wastes of Cimmeria and wear a loincloth - they're just headcases :). I also agree that Rage doesn't necessarily have to be the frenzied berserker freak out (although that just has to be the best kind). It could be some kind of battle trance, or even a physical warp, like in Slaine the King where the hero takes on a slightly larger, mildly twisted form. It could be manga flashing eyes, or "bullet time", or some kind of zen state. But it's still most fun when you just grab an axe and go totally SPARE :looloo:
Rotipher 07-08-05, 10:15 PM	First of all, there's nothing in the Saltmarsh description that describes how long the barbarians have been there. Perhaps they've only been there for a couple of months, and are getting fed up with following orders...? What'll it be, that finally sets their volatile tempers off, and what kind of trouble will they cause on their way out of town,when they quit...? Lots of potential for urban-adventure fun there! Second, we don't know why they're working for the town guard. Are they a bunch of losers, by the standards of their former clan, who took work in the town because their own people won't put up with their troublemaking/poor sportsmanship/laziness/womanizing any more...? Does their clan's leader owe a debt of honor to the Saltmarsh sheriff, which he's paying off by donating the services of some of his men...? Is working as a "city brute" in a town like Saltmarsh -- pacifying riots, kicking in doors of suspects, rousting vagrants, and (probably) delivering "messages" to corrupt councilmen's enemies fist-to-face -- really so much different from being a classic "barbarian", anyway...? Sure, a Chaotic barbarian might chafe under the strictures of guard status. I wouldn't be surprised if the turnover rate is high, for such troops. But if the Norse IRL could stomach the formalities and hierarchy of the Middle East, back when they were guarding palaces for Turkish royalty, then a handful of D&D barbarians can surely put up with the far-more-relaxed environment of Saltmarsh ... especially if they just happen to *respect* the watch-captains they serve under, on a personal level.
SilverFoxKnows 07-09-05, 04:00 AM	It's not something I browbeat my players about or anything. It just makes me sad sometimes when I hear a player say: I'm going to play a Dwarf Barbarian. The earlier poster presented a story about how this was possible for his character which is fine, but most of the ones I've met don't even have any idea why that would be unusual, or why I seem to be staring at them waiting for further background. Others freely level dip in it later on without a second thought. One poster a few months back was talking about his Rogue taking some Barbarian and I asked: How is a street rat going to suddenly go Barbarian without ever having left town? Those remarks didn't exactly get a warm reception. Seriously though, I would agree that it's possible in rare circumstances (like in the Kevin Costner example) for someone to 'go wild.' Doing it in mid-town Manhattan though? That kind of 'thinking outside the box' I can live without. I know the Dwarven Barb sounds like a munchkin character but this is, seriously, the first Dwarf I've played since high school in the 80s. A guy in our old gaming group turned me off to 'em for a good decade. I also wanted a change from my usual stealthy, skill heavy characters. The back story on Kovax, my Dwarf, is that he started off as just an unruly child. His older brother (the perfect, disciplined soldier) got all of their Father's time and attention. Eventually the dad had enough of his punk son's outbursts and told him "You want to be a wild man? Fine, go live with your Grandfather". Grandpa was an unrepentant drinker, brawler and "lunatic" (Barbarian) who was not really part of the family anymore. That's the short version of how I came up with a Dwarven Barbarian. From a roleplaying aspect there was a price to pay for it. His father and brother don't talk to him at all. And he's not really welcome in his hometown. His own people don't want him around. Even Dwarves from other regions tend to give him a cool reception. "What kind of self respecting Dwarf would let his beard get like that?"
Titan W 07-09-05, 04:45 AM	I could see a "Street Wise Barbarian" type... I would see it as somethign like a Yusuke Uramshi type... prbably a coupple levels in rogue followed by at least 6 barbarian... at least before he started his "real" fights (After over 200 matches against one opponent let alone how many against others he'd be up in level) and he was even dumb as a rock to top it all off... yah he lives in the city... but no one wants to anger him because they know they'll wind up smeared onto the pavement. (Barbarian Rage), and he's also got enough street smarts to get around town... and deliver some sneak attacks too (He feints plenty in his fights)... He's also generally faster and barbaric, and chaotic... So that's a street wise Rogue-Barbarian... I would say to allow it I would need to see a nasty temper and some heavy combat based rogue beforehand... no diplomay rogue is going barbarian.
Ut-Napishtim 07-09-05, 12:27 PM	Yeah, I'm actually starting to feel better about it now. There were a lot of good explanations offered that make sense. I think I should probably alter my perspective of the Barbarian as well. It doesn't always have to be some sort of Native American 'live off the land' archetype - it can be like White Trash too. Poorly educated (Barbarians don't start literate,) and duking it out at their kid's sports events (Rage,) running through the trailer park fleeing the cops (Fast Movement.) Although I'd also like to say I'm not slamming on Saltmarsh either, it's pretty cool. I just thought that was kind of odd when I noticed it because I had sort of a narrow 1E perspective on Barbarians. :w00t:
Otto the Bugbear 07-09-05, 05:20 PM	I think I should probably alter my perspective of the Barbarian as well. Not picking on you Ut, just using your statement as a spring-board. Plus, it's good to see you're one of the rare people that can be swayed by a good debate, rather than the bull-headedness typically found on internet message boards. I'd say this should be true for all classes, not just barbarians. Too many times I see people complain about players taking "too many" classes for their character. What eventually comes out is that poster sees these classes as 'jobs' that the character should fulfill. This thread just so happens to be about the barbarian, but it happens to all classes and prestige classes. It also tends to happen with alignments a lot too, but that's for the multitude of threads about alignment, not here. Ranger? "He lives in the wilderness doing wildernessy stuff. He doesn't like cities. He's the scout. If you deviate from my tunnel vision, I'll call you a munchkin and that'll show you the error of your ways." :rolleyes: It says a lot about the genericness of the fighter that this seldom happens to that class. Because the term 'fighter' has no preconcieved notions about how they're fighters, people get less tense when the player deviates a little from the 'class as it should be played'tm. What that really says is: It's hard to argue/complain about something that generic. It's hard to pigeon-hole characters into one specific image of fighter. Well, why can't that be true of all classes/PrCs? Take a PrC, remove the name, and just look at the abilities it grants. Now, can you say what type of character should be looking at that class? Let's use Thief Acrobat as an example. Take away the name of the class and all the related descriptive text. Now tell me what class "should" be taking this PrC. A ranger, a rogue, a scout, a monk? Now tell me what type of character should be taking this PrC. A defensive fighter, an acrobatic character, a cat burgular, a scout (type of character, not the class), a hired killer, etc.? See the difference now? To sum up, classes are not the 'job' that a character has in the game. Classes are just a generic reference to make it easier to discuss the mechanics of your character with other players/DMs. This is one of the reasons I like the generic classes (UA). I also like the class revisions done by Szatamy, which provide for several paths for each class to take. Anything which eliminates the tunnel-vision in regards to looking at classes is a good thing. Cheers Otto :)
Ogre4Hire 07-10-05, 04:13 PM	Otto the Bugbear :clap: I too dislike it when people try to stereotype classes too much. I don't even call the class "Barbarian," I call it the Berserker, and it simply refers to someone who's known to fly into destructive rages during combat, there's no wilderness association. The term barbarian IMC refers to a person from a primative society (nomadic and or lacking complex metalworking ability). Many barbarians are berserkers, but there are also many representatives of all the other classes (even Monks, Paladins, and Wizards).