Barbarian - likes and dislikes?

[glass]

Everyone in this thread that has a problem with the name "barbarian" needs to read some R.E. Howard . . . Conan was proud to call himself BARBARIAN!

I didn't know that, because I haven't read any Howard (a defficiency I intend to remedy once I have finished my degree), but it occured to me that with the long histories that most D&D worlds have, there is plenty of time for an originally derogatory term to be adopted by its targets as a badge of honour. Something which is not uncommon IRL.


glass.

 

[glass]

As for the name, it does what is needed. Anyone with even a passing familiarity with Conan will have an fairly good idea of what the class is about.

A passing familiarity is, as I admitted above, about all I have, but I think of Conan as being big and tough and strong all the time: Not in short bursts a few time per day when he is reall hacked off.



glass.

 

[whydirt]

Part of the problem with the Barbarian (this goes for the Monk as well) is that the original 3e designers focused too much on just converting the 1e versions over directly instead of building the classes from the ground up. Granted, we have the benefits of hindsight to point out this problem, so I can't be too hard on the designers.

That's one of the things that makes me look forward to an eventual 4th Edition - there are a lot of neat class abilities and mechanics that have been developed that could also fit nicely in the core rules but aren't currently there.

 

[satori01]

I too like a character with well-rounded skills. However, in light of their roles in the party being more-or-less the same, a barbarian just doesn't mandate more skill points than the fighter.

I disagree with that, fundamentally. A Barbarian needs 4 skill points to fufill its Conanian mandate of being a being of pure physicality. With 4 skill points your average Barbarian is going to be able to climb, jump, take care of themselves in the wilderness, and have super keen hearing .
2 skill points just wont cut it. The fact that the Barbarian skill list has a lot of overlap with the fighter is to ensure that a Barbarian takes those physical skills and does not step on the toes of Rangers, Rogues, and Monks in the scout department.

 

[Tetsubo]

I've never understood why they have Trap Sense. RAW casts them as hulking brutes that charge into battle in a blind rage and kill things... how does the ability to sense traps fit into that...?

But my mian problem that a barbarian is a type of culture, not a character class. They should have called it Berserker or Shield-biter or some such much more appropriate term.

I think I might drop the Trap Sense for my next campaign. Maybe replace it with a Favored Enemy type of class ability... or maybe a free Endurance/Die Hard feat tree...

 

[Felon]

I disagree with that, fundamentally. A Barbarian needs 4 skill points to fufill its Conanian mandate of being a being of pure physicality.

It is certainly just as easy to argue that any number of fighter concepts require more skill points and more than 7 class skills.

But again, that's just arguing from a subjective viewpoint about what one personally thinks a class is about, rather than the objective view of balanced design.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I've never understood why they have Trap Sense. RAW casts them as hulking brutes that charge into battle in a blind rage and kill things... how does the ability to sense traps fit into that...?

That was kind of my point about "Danger Sense" earlier.

In fiction, Barbarians seem to be aware of threats that others aren't- a function of their being more aware of their surroundings...noticing the birds stopped chirping, or that a particular call belongs to an animal not native to the area, or a funny smell, etc. They do also tend to notice traps in natural surroundings...tripwires, displaced branches, leaf piles over pits, and so forth.

Remember Ahhhhhhhhhhnold in Commando smelling the incoming bad guys?

Thus, a broader "danger sense" makes sense, whereas a "trap sense" doesn't. Of course, it should probably also apply to Rangers (and Druids?) as well...possibly as an outgrowth of their Wilderness skills.

 

[Felon]

I think I might drop the Trap Sense for my next campaign. Maybe replace it with a Favored Enemy type of class ability... or maybe a free Endurance/Die Hard feat tree...

I recommend using one of the barbarian totem variants from Unearthed Arcana.

 

[Particle_Man]

Dislikes: Rage. I think a character that is meant to be simple could be simpler than having three different sets of mechanics (normal, enraged, and fatigued) for multiple stats. Also, people get cocky with the con bonus and simply die. If rage is kept I would replace the con bonus with a fort save bonus and temporary hit points.

That said, I like the variant in PHB II more. At least there are only two sets of mechanics to worry about, and no chance to die because one forgets that the hp won't last, since there is no hp gain there.

 

[Gentlegamer]

I didn't know that, because I haven't read any Howard (a defficiency I intend to remedy once I have finished my degree), but it occured to me that with the long histories that most D&D worlds have, there is plenty of time for an originally derogatory term to be adopted by its targets as a badge of honour. Something which is not uncommon IRL.


glass.

Add some Rousseau to your reading and you'll find more *positive* uses of the term "barbarian." While Rousseau himself doesn't use the term, the original articulation of the "noble savage" is found in his works.