D&D General Has D&D abandoned the "martial barbarian"?

[Doug McCrae]

Regarding the arcane/divine split, the proximate source (@Northern Phoenix is right ofc that the demonic/holy split is much older) might be the novels of Randall Garrett. Jon Peterson, Playing at the World (2012):

There are fantastic worlds where the distinction between a Magic-user and a Cleric is sharper, however. In Randall Garrett's Too Many Magicians (1966), a novel Gygax favorably reviewed, there is a sharp division of wizards into Sorcerers and Healers, the latter of whom are representatives of the various religious traditions.​

In a footnote, Peterson quotes Garrett:

There was the dominating pale blue of the Sorcerers, modified by the stark black-and-white of the priestly Healers, and the additional touch of episcopal purple. The dark rabbinical dress of the occasional Jewish Healer was hardly distinguishable from that of a priest, but an occasional flash of bright color showed the presence of a very few Hakime, Healers who were part of the entourages of various Ambassadors from the Islamic countries.​

 

[EzekielRaiden]

There's no need to be strangled with the laws of physics.
The issue is that action movies and comic books can get supernatural Warriors of Physicality without farting lightning or growing claws.
In fact, the norm is for movie and comic brutes to not have overt supernatural powers.

The Juggernaut doesn't blast you with ice. The Juggernaut runs into you and bullrushes you through the wall.

Oh, I perfectly understand that other fantastic stories, like superheroes, can have characters that aren't supernatural but are able to go toe-to-toe with ones that are. The problem is that D&D players have repeatedly shown their distaste for those concepts existing in D&D. Hell, they even explicitly refer to "supers" as a mockery of editions they don't like.

Can't we just meld the 2 a bit.

Let the barbarian be powered by their ancestors and throw Mankind from the Hell in the Cell onto the announcer table in 1998?

Do not mistake me: I would love to see this. I'm not talking about my interests. (I am, after all, a fan of 4e, where pure-strength Martial characters were empowered to contribute just as much as characters with supernatural powers.)

The problem is that, whether it is a majority or simply a vocal minority, the decisive voices in the community absolutely hate even the idea of melding the two a little bit. The official designers aren't interested in offering well-made "Warrior of Physicality" options (look at how both the Berserker and the Champion, the peak "Warrior of Physicality" archetypes, are not very good), and the few times such options have been well-made, they've gotten serious backlash. There's neither internal nor external motivation for it to happen...so it won't.

You'll have to look to third-party sources for that. And third-party sources are going to want to do a variety of things, not all of which you're going to care for.

 

[AtomicPope]

What you're talking about is subclasses, and not classes. Everything you said could be applied to Fighters and Rogues as well. Making the Barbarian "less magical" is very easy, just play a Frenzied Berserker or any of the non-PHB sublcasses that have no magic. Since WotC dropped the idea of a core world, which I'm OK with, the core books and additional supplements accommodate for different campaign worlds. I like the idea that the Barbarian class is not just a shirtless Fighter with a great club.

 

[Doug McCrae]

From the perspective of a High or Late Medieval Christian thinker there could be three different kinds of magic – holy, demonic, and natural. Some would have considered only the first two to be valid. These map, not entirely comfortably, on to the D&D concepts of good divine, evil divine, and arcane magic respectively. The main difficulty is the disconnect between medieval monotheism and D&D polytheism. 1974 D&D, which has only Lawful and Chaotic (synonyms for good and evil) clerics, gets closest.

Richard Kieckhefer, Magic in the Middle Ages (1989):

What distinguished one method from another was fundamentally the source of power employed: demonic magic, virtually everyone in medieval Europe agreed, could work because it invoked demons; officially approved religion could be effective for material as well as spiritual ends by appealing to God and other beneficent spirits; natural magic, for those who recognised that category, worked because it exploited "occult virtues" or hidden powers within nature.​

 

[le Redoutable]

( with hope not to be insulting ) in medieval times ( well, that's what I got in stock ) Jewish were taken for sorcerors and so were tracked down...

 

[Tonguez]

1 We’ve gone from Martial Barbarian to Medieval Scorcery?

2 The D&D Conan is NOT based on REHs Conan (though it might have some inspiration from the Arnold Conan).

3 3e focussed on Beserker Rage powers, 5e made Rage powers uber magic

4 How do we get Beserker Rage powers sans Magic?

 

[le Redoutable]

So, the 70s, it seems.

I can't figure what lies in your mind upon that enquiry ( is it a Challenge to my Intelligence/Smartness, or did you hope to jackpot your Luck ? )

 

[Faolyn]

I can't figure what lies in your mind upon that enquiry ( is it a Challenge to my Intelligence/Smartness, or did you hope to jackpot your Luck ? )

As I pointed out, the comics printed before the 90s had very minimal available colors. They were called four-color comics for a reason. Conan likely wasn't supposed to be "red"; instead, he was more likely supposed to be tanned.

 

[le Redoutable]

As I pointed out, the comics printed before the 90s had very minimal available colors. They were called four-color comics for a reason. Conan likely wasn't supposed to be "red"; instead, he was more likely supposed to be tanned.

Hmmm! Humility

 

[Faolyn]

Hmmm! Humility

I literally have no idea what you mean here. Humility from you, from me, from Conan...?