Barbarian - likes and dislikes?

[Gentlegamer]

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.

Conan was often overcome by the "fighting madness of his race" in Howard's stories. Not quite "berserker rage" but a kind of uncivilized, instinctual, animal-like fighting utilizing moslty Conan's "panther-like" speed and reflexes derived from his wholesome barbarian background that spared him from the debilitating softness of civilization.

 

[Felon]

I recall Conan stories where he overcame foes by flying into a primal rage. Of course, he was no pantywaist the rest of the time. Safe to say, he had an 18 Str--not unlike many barbarians I've seen played.

 

[TheLe]

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?

So wouldn't that be more like a Wolverine/X-men ability?

`Le

 

[ruleslawyer]

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!

Except, of course, that Conan in D&D terms is part rogue, part fighter, and part "barbarian," even though he's 100% barbarian in the cultural sense.

As I see it, D&D classes are mechanical packages, not cultural exemplars (the latter role is reserved for PrCs and feat chains). Consequently, the barbarian seems to stick out like a sore thumb in this regard. I'd love to play an illiterate barbarian character (and in fact, I have) but I don't see why he'd have to be a front-line fighter with rage, x class skills, fast movement, and trap sense. A rogue, ranger, druid, or shaman works just as well for modeling a "barbarian."

 

[Question]

The barbarian would be a good class, but it has 2 very critical flaws.

Firstly the extra HP from rage should be temp HP, as otherwise it is far far too easy to kill off barbarians....just wound them enough, then after the rage wears off....OOPS.

Next is teh whole "the fight with the BBEG lasted longer than the rage, im now screwed!" syndrome, at least till something like level 18 IIRC.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So wouldn't that be more like a Wolverine/X-men ability?

Nah...it was just the most memorable example of it. (Besides, I think you're thinking of Spider-man.)

You always see the barbarians holding up their comrades because they "sense" something...right before an ambush.

But in Commando, you actually get the verbal exchange:

Army Dud(e): "You expect us to smell them?!!!"

Governator Matrix: "Why not? I did!"

 

[frankthedm]

Also, people get cocky with the con bonus and simply die.

You say that as if it is a bad thing.

Firstly the extra HP from rage should be temp HP, as otherwise it is far far too easy to kill off barbarians....just wound them enough, then after the rage wears off....OOPS.

Dying in battle is part of what the barbarian is about. That con boost is there not to have the barbarian survive combat, it is there so he can take one more swing after several vital organs have been punctured and to make sure she or he dies fighting.

Next is teh whole "the fight with the BBEG lasted longer than the rage, im now screwed!" syndrome, at least till something like level 18 IIRC.

Then don't be so quick to rage. And I give props to your DM to having a combat last more than 7 rounds

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

Everyone in this thread that has a problem with the name "barbarian" needs to read some R.E. Howard . . .

If I could find any I haven't read already, I would. OK, I can (and do, regularly) reread some of what I've already read, but that doesn't change

Conan was proud to call himself BARBARIAN!

True.

He also would have, at most, a one or two level dip in the "Barbarian" class as presented in D&D, unless he was gestalted (which he arguably should be).

Why do we need an entire class to (fairly poorly) model Conan? I suppose the ranger originally served a similar function for Aragorn, but most of the D&D classes don't even manage to be archtypical, much less come close to any character from genre fiction.

FWIW, I agree with Felon's take on the purpose of the barbarian class. It took a (fairly poor) Conan class from 1e and updated it to 3e as the easy to play 'kill things and break stuff' class the fighter used to be.

 

[Question]

A class who is geared towards dying in battle is not exactly suitables for PCs.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Gotta disagree on the AD&D class poorly modeling Conan . . .

Anyway, my post was about the "flavor" and source material for the class, not the mechanics.