D&D General why did they transform the Barbarian into a Raging Monster ?

Lyxen

Great Old One
I don't have my 1E material anymore - anyone know if Raging was an ability for either the Conan writeup or 1E Barbarian? If so, all Conan had to do was rage once in the source material, and Gygax would see that as justification for the ability.

No, no rage in 1e Unearthed Arcana, I'm not even sure when it popped up, maybe 3e ?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Reynard

Legend
Conan is often confused with similar fictional character, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Ahem: "With an oath the Cimmerian heaved himself up on his feet, his blue eyes blazing, his dark scarred face contorted. Rage shook his soul, but desire for the taunting figure before him hammered at his temples and drove his wild blood fiercely through his veins. Passion fierce as physical agony flooded his whole being, so that earth and sky swam red to his dizzy gaze. In the madness that swept upon him, weariness and faintness were swept away." The Frost Giant's Daughter.

It took 1 minute to find, because it isn't uncommon.
 


Lyxen

Great Old One
Ahem: "With an oath the Cimmerian heaved himself up on his feet, his blue eyes blazing, his dark scarred face contorted. Rage shook his soul, but desire for the taunting figure before him hammered at his temples and drove his wild blood fiercely through his veins. Passion fierce as physical agony flooded his whole being, so that earth and sky swam red to his dizzy gaze. In the madness that swept upon him, weariness and faintness were swept away." The Frost Giant's Daughter.

It took 1 minute to find, because it isn't uncommon.

We can argue all day about the frequence of occurence, but the fact is that you changed from "Conan went into blood rages ALL THE TIME" to "it isn't uncommon", when all I said was that it was not all the time, so... :p
 

Bayushi_seikuro

Adventurer
And how is my sentence in contradiction with that policy ? Please read: "The Romans used the term barbarus for uncivilised people, opposite to Greek or Roman, and in fact, it became a common term to refer to all foreigners among Romans after Augustus age (as, among the Greeks, after the Persian wars, the Persians), including the Germanic peoples, Persians, Gauls, Phoenicians and Carthaginians." Simple historical fact that has NOTHING to do with Dungeons and Dragons and its history.
I don't remember where I'd read it but something along the lines that, to Romans, all the foreign languages just sounded like they were saying 'bar bar bar barbarbar bar' - which always makes me imagine Muppets.
 

Hmmm, maybe you should actually read the thread, for example here or even the OP, which clearly refers to real world people, historical or not.
Thanks, I've read every post in this thread. But it looks like you and a few others have managed to successfully de-rail it from the OP. I will again re-iterate, historical context is irrelevant to what a Barbarian is in D&D.
 


Greg K

Hero
I don't have my 1E material anymore - anyone know if Raging was an ability for either the Conan writeup or 1E Barbarian? If so, all Conan had to do was rage once in the source material, and Gygax would see that as justification for the ability.
No. The original barbarian class was a magic hating warrior with athletic prowess and wilderness survival skills along with weapons and additional skills based upon their culture. Examples of cultures included were based on Northern (viking/germanic), Steppe, and Jungle based environments (maybe, desert as we well).

edit: The Berserker, officially, appeared as one of several "Barbarian" kits for the Fighter in the 2e Complete Fighter's Handbook. The 1e Barbarian became the Wilderness Warrior kit in the same book.
edit: As an aside, Mearls wrote that for, 4e, Conan was the inspiration for the Fighter class.
 
Last edited:


Rogerd1

Explorer
Sure, but that's presupposing that different job titles require different classes, which is begging the question (including your conclusion among your premises).

As D&D was originally created, rogue, barbarian, thief, soldier, knight, cavalier, champion, free lance, would all just be the same class- a Fighting Man, in the parlance of old military history, wargaming and sci-fi (e.g. Edgar Rice Burroughs' A Fighting Man of Mars), later simplified to Fighter.
All true.
But then again look at 4e, in which you could get a Champion and a Barbarian. Additionally look at Savage Worlds Beasts & Barbarians which does one of the best Conan expy's I have seen in a long while. They have pirates, as well as barbarians for class options.

Just sayin'...YMMV.
yeah I would rather do away with barbarians then keep them as the rage mechanic class
Me too.
I have taken away the rage stuff, and allowed them to pick Extraordinary Training, sort of like Gurps Martial Arts, same for all classes.

If they purchase magic, then they can cast / use magic in the normal way.
 


HammerMan

Legend
You have an issue with the entire rage mechanic?
well yes and no.

I love the "take half damage when in this state" idea and the "deal extra damage in state" idea, I just want it diviorced from the barbarian concept. I could take this a step or two father and have it be even more generic, but a rage not class related but maybe feat realted would work in my mind.
 


No: "The Romans used the term barbarus for uncivilised people, opposite to Greek or Roman." meanings changed over the ages, but I'm pretty sure that the romans never called the greeks barbarians.
I mean, Plutarch's Parallel Lives spends quite a bit of time trying to argue that Rome was the rightful inheritor of everything that Greece was.

edit: As does Cicero's Republic, now that I think of it.
 
Last edited:


The Phoenix on the Sword is an example where he does so (though of course, that was also originally a King Kull story), and there are a few other instances. But generally if Conan goes into a rage, he's cornered and in dire straits, and is seeking to sell his life at as dear a cost as possible to his foes.

While I agree that it's the original reason, I probably need to read Conan again but I don't remember him flying into blood rages that often.
 
Last edited:

Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen
Fighter/Rogue/King :)

While Conan is obviously the inspiration of the Barbarian (esp. Gygax's writeup in Dragon Magazine and 1E Unearthed Arcana, with all his magic hating and armor eschewing abilities), over time other real-world historical legends were drawn upon to be included in the class. Raging in particular was part of the Celtic and Viking traditions/lore. Also, the prestige classes/subclasses since 3.X are obviously leaning more into those "uncivilized nature warrior" tropes.

I don't have my 1E material anymore - anyone know if Raging was an ability for either the Conan writeup or 1E Barbarian? If so, all Conan had to do was rage once in the source material, and Gygax would see that as justification for the ability.

Ahem: "With an oath the Cimmerian heaved himself up on his feet, his blue eyes blazing, his dark scarred face contorted. Rage shook his soul, but desire for the taunting figure before him hammered at his temples and drove his wild blood fiercely through his veins. Passion fierce as physical agony flooded his whole being, so that earth and sky swam red to his dizzy gaze. In the madness that swept upon him, weariness and faintness were swept away." The Frost Giant's Daughter.

It took 1 minute to find, because it isn't uncommon.
Yup. But Gygax didn't include a berserk mechanic for them, despite Berserkers being a monster type with a mechanic going back all the way to OD&D, two different optional/NPC classes in Dragon (issue 3 for OD&D, issue 133 for 1E), and a troop type in Chainmail before that. Gygax apparently read those prose descriptions of battle fury as not being synonymous with berserk. I will say that Conan definitely has a lot of "fight with cunning" moments all through those stories too.

Berserkers became a regular PC option with 2E kits, and then got folded into the main Barbarian class in 3E, as folks have noted. And I think folks are right that the WHY is because WotC wanted to expand the archetype to be more than just "Conan, the Class". Norse Berserkers (and Irish, like the mythical Cuchulainn, or Slaine from 2000AD) share some definite thematic ground with barbarian warriors from uncivilized lands ala Conan and so many pulp knock-offs, and yeah, the berserk ability gives greater mechanical differentiation from Fighters.

All true.
But then again look at 4e, in which you could get a Champion and a Barbarian. Additionally look at Savage Worlds Beasts & Barbarians which does one of the best Conan expy's I have seen in a long while. They have pirates, as well as barbarians for class options.

Just sayin'...YMMV.
Sure, the "lots of classes" approach is valid too. It's just not NECESSARY to represent Conan. :)

I have taken away the rage stuff, and allowed them to pick Extraordinary Training, sort of like Gurps Martial Arts, same for all classes.

If they purchase magic, then they can cast / use magic in the normal way.
That sounds cool. In the Original Edition Delta OD&D house rules, as I recall all Fighters get a single Feat at 4th level, and one of them is a berserker rage ability.
 
Last edited:

Rogerd1

Explorer
That sounds cool. In the Original Edition Delta OD&D house rules, as I recall all Fighters get a single Feat at 4th level, and one of them is a berserker Ability.
I have also been messing around with stat values to get the comic book hero feel too.

Str 10 = Normal = 100 pounds
Str 13 = Athletic = 400 pounds
Str 15 = Olympic = 600 pounds
Str 18 = Peak = 800 pounds
Str 20 = Enhanced = 1,000 pounds

Although the above is strength, it would also go across all other attributes. So Charisma 18 would be Lex Luthor sway the masses despite4 being shown to be a total liar.

I know this is off topic, so apologies everyone.
 



Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top