D&D General Naming the Barbarian? [added battlerager]

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

It reinforce the idea that they are really hard to knock out. I'm not a big fan of ''Rage'' as the term used for their main feature, since it seems to indicate an increased level of aggression, but the 5e rage isnt really about the damage buff, which is kinda minimal when compared to the defensive bonus it gives.

So, what do you recommend changing it too? Berserk?

 

[Laurefindel]

So, what do you recommend changing it too? Berserk?

Battle stance?

 

[CleverNickName]

Battle stance?

That's pretty brilliant, actually. Or "Defensive stance," since it's more of a defensive buff than an offensive one.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

So, what do you recommend changing it too? Berserk?

Could be if the fluff made it evident that its the norse-like ''berserk'' which is more of a deep trance than the more commonly used ''berserk'' as a mean to say ''mindless aggression'', which is no way better than ''rage''.

I'd go with terms that reinforce the sheer act of will and toughness that ''rage'' represents. I'm looking for something that goes with the positive themes of relentlessness, will to live, survival instinct, freedom, courage and pride.

''Unbreakable'' ? ''Unbound''?

That is, if we still go with the non-necessarily Primal barbarians.

Should we go back all-in on the Primal theme like 4e did, I'd just take back the the name used for the barbarian's (and other Primal classes) powers: ''Evocation''. So the ''rage'' feature would be ''Evoke'', or ''Primal Might''.

 

[Tonguez]

I think Warlock might be the most accurate class name in D&D at least within the context of a belief in witches during the early modern period of Europe. The who idea of diabolism, that witches gain their power by making a deal with the devil, is pretty much the core concept of the Warlock class.

Warlock comes from old English mraning to Deny+Covenant, a traitor or scoundrel and eventually someone who Denies The Covenant by making a pact with the Devil

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

That's pretty brilliant, actually. Or "Defensive stance," since it's more of a defensive buff than an offensive one.

I went back and looked at the 4e's Berserker class which had a Defender feature Vengeful Guardian, and I think '' Guardian's Stance'' sounds about right.

Also, I took this little excerpt from the Berserker definition of their ''fury"", which I think is more interesting that just ''get angry'':

 

[Shardstone]

JUGGERNAUT! OF COURSE! Once again Enworld comes through.

 

[glass]

The name "Barbarian" tells you that this is the class you pick if you want to play a character like "Conan the barbarian".

As other have noted, this is bad because it is really not the class to play if you want to be like Conan, especially not in its recent incarnations.

Warden Forms

(Interesting ideas snipped). Is Warden Form's a version of the 4e Warden's Guardian Forms?

---

Anyway, I will not quote any individual posters because I do not want to further an argument about whether the thread should even exist. But I will note that there is a lot of talk about "offence" as if that is ever the thing that matters. Offence should never be the metric, harm shoud be.

Now I do not believe that the term Barbarian causes any real-world harm (although of course I would be open to well-reasoned arguments to the contrary). So the worst thing about it is that it is misleading, as noted above. For that reason alone, it would be worth changing it in a hypothetical sixth edition (unless they changed the class to be more like Conan, of course). But OTOH, I would not be too upset if it stayed.

For what it should be changed too, I would support it's being changed to any of the options in the poll except "Rager" - it lacks gravitas, being a term for parties used by soap-opera characters, and is also only one letter away from Ranger.

Battlerager OTOH is fine, as long as there are not too many other "noun-verbers" making a pattern. Obviously, if you renamed the class berserker you would need to also rename the Berserker subclass. Ravager is fine too, but in the end I voted for Battlerager.

_
glass.

 

[MarkB]

I didn't really need a deep-dive into history, literature, or etymology to decide that I prefer the name "berserker" to "barbarian." Opinions are funny like that.

The barbarian's Rage ability might be its trademark, but its high hit points, damage reduction, and other defensive abilities are nothing to sneeze at. They can take huge amounts of punishment and still keep on fighting. So maybe another good name to consider would be "Stalwart." Or "Juggernaut," even.

Tank?

That's pretty brilliant, actually. Or "Defensive stance," since it's more of a defensive buff than an offensive one.

One RPG actual play show that I watch includes a warforged barbarian. His equivalent of "I would like to rage" is "Engaging combat mode".

 

[Minigiant]

Interesting ideas snipped). Is Warden Form's a version of the 4e Warden's Guardian Forms?

Yes.
I think barbarians and barbaric rangers should be able to channel spirits with emotional states other than rage. That's what makes them barbarians and not alternative fighters.