Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hastur_nz" data-source="post: 7060387" data-attributes="member: 40592">I agree that the Conan I read in REH's books, was a Fighter not a Barbarian.  The "thief" piece, as well as any "nature" affinity, is probably just from a Background, as far as 5e goes.If you go all the way back to AD&D, the Fighter there fits perfectly fine, especially the good saves Fighters got at higher levels.Just because he's known as "Conan the Barbarian", doesn't mean he fits any of the D&D Barbarian classes - whoever invented the D&D stuff didn't really have REH's Conan in mind, or if they did they probably didn't read the original (unmodified/finished by Cap et. al.) stories very closely and had someone else's version of Conan in mind...</blockquote>