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

[Charlaquin]

Personally I like barbarians being low-key magical. Mystical or spiritual might be a better word.

Preternatural is, I think, the word you’re looking for here. And I agree; I think that best fits with the Berserkers that inspired the class. I do wish there was a true Wild Shape Barbarian though.

 

[mrpopstar]

As should Paladin! And Ranger!

Ranger absolutely. Paladin might be a little tricky, but is definitely possible.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Oh...
and to the topic:
I think it makes a lot of sense to have the barbarian highlight the primal aspect. This justifies the existence of the class.

 

[le Redoutable]

Hey! you all forget King Conan
effectivement Conan dans sa première aventure " Tower Of Elephant " révèle son appartenance à la CLasse de Voleur;
je sais que ( à part dans Eberron me dit-on ) il n'y a pas de Classe de Dirigeant ( Ruler ) dans D&D

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Hey! you all forget King Conan
effectivement Conan dans sa première aventure " Tower Of Elephant " révèle son appartenance à la CLasse de Voleur;
je sais que ( à part dans Eberron me dit-on ) il n'y a pas de Classe de Dirigeant ( Ruler ) dans D&D

There was a warlord in 4e and in 5e purple dragon knight (also known as banneret) and battle master fighter subclasses have some leadery features. (Also I don't think there is any sort of ruler class in Eberron...)

As Conan seems to have quite a bit of fighter levels, perhaps he changed his fighter subclass into one of these when he became the king?

 

[le Redoutable]

... et pourquoi pas un Démonologiste ?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

... et pourquoi pas un Démonologiste ?

Je ne comprends pas... Démonologiste? You mean the warlock? What that has to do with barbarians? Except that Conan often fought against such...

 

[MGibster]

What class would Conan the "Barbarian" even be?
Not really a barbarian, given none of the paths make sense. Maybe a fighter that chooses not to wear armor and has a level dip in rogue?

You're giving me flashbacks to conversations held with friends on our way to 7-11 for a Big Gulp circa 1988-1989. I think this was right around the time it started to dawn on me that AD&D was really its own thing rather than a generic fantasy. And hell, which Conan are we talking about? He's been known to wear armor from time-to-time.

You "Fly" at your movement rate (40ft or less if you're not a Tabaxi or something with a speed boost) but you have to be on the ground at the end of your turn or you fall.

Do they have to go in a straight line? Because if not, it's not really a leap.

Mike Myler here on ENWorld had him as barbarian 1/ ranger 1/ rogue (thief) 3/fighter (champion) 11, which speaks to many of the points the other posters are making: he's got a whole range of abilities that cut across classes, because he's a literary character and REH never played D&D (Seriously, he would have LOVED it.)

That's fair I think. D&D tends to pigeonhole characters into specific roles, or perhaps classes, with a narrow range of abilities.

 

[Steampunkette]

Nope, @MGibster, it doesn't have to be in a straight line. It can be a Double-Jump, Wall-Jump, various other options... But 9/10 with a 40ft leap you're pretty much going in a straight line either up to something or over a group of dudes who want to do some harm.

You also don't have to choose that option. In fact it's the only option which gives you anything remotely magical as a combat mechanic and it remains one option.

So a Fraction of Barbarians are Totem, a Fraction of those reach high level, and a Fraction of those pick Eagle. The rest go for bonus action attacks, bonus action charge with damage and knockdown, bonus action trip, or "Hit Me! Not Them!" as their 'capstone' for Totem Warrior.

 

[Laurefindel]

Has D&D more or less given upon promotion of a barbarian that doesn't have overtly supernatural or magical features?

In 4e the barbarian was firmly placed in the Primal Power source. Even the essentials berserker was martial/primal. It took a bit of finagling to avoid the powers that didn't give you claws, flight,or lightning powers.

In 5e, barbarian base doesn't have unmistakable magical abilities. However once you get passed the bad berserker, the subclasses really push the Rage Magic. 5e barbarian subclasses are straight up called "primal paths" and mostly adjust your rage by having spirits or energy spout out of your barbarian when they rage. The Totem Warrior takes along while to not be visibly magical from the outside. However WOTC has the other paths quickly run pass the barbarian having blatant supernatural feature.

Even in 3e, the prestige classes and feats that weren't patchworks to the rigid system to give barbarians options... quickly go down the "when you rage you turn into a bear" mindset.

So has the D&D designers and community given up on the martial barbarian? Or is it more that the supernatural primal barbarian is more exciting and easier to design and homebrew?

One thing I feel D&D is missing or losing is the Warrior of Physicality. The fighter, as time marches on, has become more academic in its method of fighting. Fighters have become masters of the weapon arts. Whereas traditionally the barbarian was just harder better, faster stronger and would cleave opponents in two with mostly their higher strength and speed. However there has been a shift of barbarians being more warlocky and reliant on the support of spirits, gods, or straight magic to make the axe swing faster. If the axe swings faster at all.

It seems like it, and it bugs me.

I don’t mind the magic level of the totem barbarian; I kind of like it actually. Everything that came after is too overtly magical in my opinion. I like the wild barbarian because it allows a kind of character I might not have tried to do otherwise, but I long for a new plainly martial barbarian subclass.