Unearthed Arcana New Barbarian Primal Paths in November 7th Unearthed Arcana

The new paths are

• Path of the Ancestral Guardian
• Path of the Storm Herald
• Path of the Zealot

 

[Marandahir]

I realize that for others your solution would be better, but man, I really like the way multiclassing works in 5e. My answer to "what is the mechanical equivalent of rage?" would be, take a level of barbarian(beserker!, zen martial artist!, temporarily blessed with power cleric!).

If we could pick and choose parts, IMHO, it would take away from the elegance of the multiclassing system.

For folks who want to attempt this, follow the Unearthed Arcana that gave us the Favored Soul Sorcerer and the Magic-less Ranger. Those are the best guidelines we have for 5e on this front.

But for those who don't want to do that work, Path of the Zealot makes a lot of sense too.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Briefly, it means that comparing real-world people to fictional archetypes in a game about magical elves is a deeply flawed enterprise. And I think I can leave the rest of your comment alone with the same principle: I don't think the class is meant to model Crusaders or Boko Haram or Israeli settlers or Manifest Destiny-fueled expansionists or Puritan settlers or Jerry Falwell or Nichiren buddhists or Hindu nationalists. If it somehow is meant to do that, it fails catastrophically in it's attempts to do something of seriously questionable value.

So basically you just wanted to ignore the rest of my post and seized upone one line to do that, with a patronizing animal sound to boot, got it.

Why are you so obsessed with making sure that every religious zealot receives a proper theological education?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

This question of using the Barbarian chassis for a Zealot-type character brings up something that I'd actually LIKE to see them do in their Big Book O' Mechanics... which is in addition to your standard list of 2-4 additional subclasses for every class, they also include a bit of "Skills & Powers"-like mechanics equivalency for Class Feature Swaps. *snip* And WotC's help on that to keep things sane would be greatly appreciated.

Judging by the DMG monster construction rules, WotC's help would only make things worse. The only reason monster construction isn't broken in 5E is because sane DMs do not deliberately exploit the flaws in the system to kill their player characters with chump CR monsters. If WotC invents some kind of a system for swapping abilities freely between classes and then gives players direct or indirect access to that system, you'd see worse abuse than if the DM just eyeballed his inventions.

WotC has already done their best to allow power-swapping in a very constrained way via the Multiclassing rules. They didn't do anywhere near a perfect job, but they did the best they could. Any other system they create is just going to exacerbate any imbalances even worse, so you're better off constructing your new classes out of existing classes. If you want a raging holy warrior, just write up a Barbarian 3/Paladin 9/War Cleric 8 build, give it a fixed progression (which levels to take when), copy that progression onto a chart listing levels 1-20 (including the new ASI levels), and give that chart to your players. Voila! Holy Warrior class, balanced as well as WotC knows how to balance it.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Well, your second and third sentences are true, but your first is not. The difference is that you don't choose to become a Zealot at 1st level when you choose to become an Acolyte. Thus, you can't go back at 3rd level and say, "I'm learning Religion as a Zealot now, so I'm going to swap out the Acolyte Religion skill for Nature." If you get skills later on, you can't swap them out unless the wording allows as such. So Acolytes-Barbarian-Zealots would be penalized if they weren't planning ahead for 3 levels.

Whoops! Good catch!

 

[I'm A Banana]

We change the stories for classes right and left all the time, why would we have to leave the barbarian story alone (if thats what you mean)

To sum up (and avoid the tangent) I think you have missed the mark on this one by imposing a specific view of barbarian, to the exclusion of others.

The word barbarian is very similar to the "story" you mention. Outsiders, tribes, etc. But here is the catch....I have barbarians that are fighters, rogues, etc etc. Perhaps the class should have been called beserker (re: other thread discussions) to avoid what we are experiencing.

So, I think the zealot makes a fantastic beserker!

But I see the point you are trying to make, and respect it. I just don't think its as integral to the class as you perceive.

That sounds pretty similar to the point that [MENTION=1288]Mouseferatu[/MENTION] was making.

And my counterpoint is basically the same: the purpose of the Barbarian class (or any class) is first and foremost to be a story, a fictional archetype, a kind of character. That's the major reason you even HAVE classes in your game - to create packages of mechanics to support a particular character type.

So if your new barbarian subclass isn't first and foremost a barbarian, it's not supporting that narrative. It needs to find a different home. If it needs to bring Rage with it, that's fine.

This is distinct from multiclass barbarians or barbarians with a specific background or something - even a barbarian that bends the narrative still uses the narrative. This version of the Zealot doesn't use the barbarian narrative. It does use some other narratives, though...

 

[I'm A Banana]

Why are you so obsessed with making sure that every religious zealot receives a proper theological education?

It's not the religion skill per se that I'm obsessed with. You can be a Cleric and not have Religion if you want.

It's the idea of cramming a subclass for religious berserkers into the Barbarian's story (possibly "because Rage") that I'm not a fan of.

The only thing the missing Religion skill did was point the direction to that bigger problem of narrative mismatch.

 

[SkidAce]

Judging by the DMG monster construction rules, WotC's help would only make things worse. The only reason monster construction isn't broken in 5E is because sane DMs do not deliberately exploit the flaws in the system to kill their player characters with chump CR monsters. If WotC invents some kind of a system for swapping abilities freely between classes and then gives players direct or indirect access to that system, you'd see worse abuse than if the DM just eyeballed his inventions.

WotC has already done their best to allow power-swapping in a very constrained way via the Multiclassing rules. They didn't do anywhere near a perfect job, but they did the best they could. Any other system they create is just going to exacerbate any imbalances even worse, so you're better off constructing your new classes out of existing classes. If you want a raging holy warrior, just write up a Barbarian 3/Paladin 9/War Cleric 8 build, give it a fixed progression (which levels to take when), copy that progression onto a chart listing levels 1-20 (including the new ASI levels), and give that chart to your players. Voila! Holy Warrior class, balanced as well as WotC knows how to balance it.

I endorse this idea, would like to sign up for the newsletter, and gladly welcome our multiclassing overlords.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

It's not the religion skill per se that I'm obsessed with. You can be a Cleric and not have Religion if you want.

It's the idea of cramming a subclass for religious berserkers into the Barbarian's story (possibly "because Rage") that I'm not a fan of.

The only thing the missing Religion skill did was point the direction to that bigger problem of narrative mismatch.

I think you might be the only one experiencing this particular "problem".

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think you might be the only one experiencing this particular "problem".

It's entirely possible. I'm a well-known outcast and madman, whose manic scratchings foretell, in rambling fragments, only doom and chaos for all right-thinking people of civilization. I'm actually quite a silly person.

But that doesn't make me any less interested in offering my commentary on this article!

 

[Xeviat]

I think Zealot is a perfect fit for the barbarian. Civilized folks, both literally and socially, who become holy warriors become paladins. It's formal. Trained. But in tribes from harsh lands, some warriors are still chosen by their war god.

Odin imbues the berserkers with their frenzy. He allows them to be called back to life with a simple ritual and a prayer.

I'm reminded of "Sons of Odin" by Manowar:

(Onward into the heart of battle
Fought the sons of Odin
Outnumbered many times
Still - they fought on
Blood poured forth from their wounds
Deep into the earth
Vultures waited for the broken shells
That once were bodies
Thus Odin alone would choose the day
They would enter Valhalla
And in their hour of need
He sent forth onto them The Berserker Rage
Now gods embed
They rose up from the ground
Screaming like wild animals
Such is the gift of absolute power
No blade or weapon would hurt them
They killed them and horses alike
And all who stood before them died that day
Hail Gods Of War)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk